Water Resources Development us Army corps in 1993 of Engineers Louisville District River Basins in Indiana

Legend

DETROIT DISTRICT, NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION

1. Basin 2. Upper River Basin i CHICAGO DISTRICT, NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION 3. Great Lakes Basin

LOUISVILLE DISTRICT, RIVER DIVISION

4. Upper Basin 5. Lower Wabash River Basin 6. Whitewater River Basin 7. and Minor Tributaries

This publication is authorized by Cover Photo the Secretary of the Army Patoka Lake as required by PL 99-662 Water Resources Development By the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in Indiana

Within the boundaries of the State of Indiana, two Divisions and four Districts are responsible for the projects and activities of the Corps of Engineers described in this booklet. These projects and activities are defined by river basins rather than by political boundaries. Thus, the work within the State may be under the jurisdiction of more than one District and Division as shown on the map on the opposite page. Additional information on particular projects and activities discussed herein may be obtained by addressing the appropriate office listed below:

Division Engineer Division Engineer U.S. Army Engineer Division, Ohio River U.S. Army Engineer Division North Central Corps of Engineers Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 1159 111 N. Canal Street, 12th Floor , Ohio 45201-1159 Chicago, Illinois 60606-7205

District Engineer District Engineer U.S. Army Engineer District, Louisville U.S. Army Engineer District, Chicago Corps of Engineers Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 59 111 N. Canal Street, Suite 600 Louisville, 40201-0059 Chicago, Illinois 60606-7206

District Engineer U.S. Army Engineer District, Detroit Corps of Engineers P.O. Box 1027 Detroit, 48231-1027 Letter from the Chief of Engineers

To Our Readers:

The Corps of Engineers was formed some 218 years ago to be responsible to the needs of a young nation. And while the nature of our work has changed with time, our basic purpose remains — to be responsive to America’s needs.

Clearly, the Nation’s concern for the environment has permeated the Corps. Our environmental commitment has never been greater. Authority granted by the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 puts focus on the environment as a mission and promises restoration of wetlands and habitats for fish and wildlife. The 1992 legislation calls for the improvement and protection of our Nation’s water resources infrastructure.

Responding to the recent outbreak of natural disasters has provided the Corps an outstanding opportunity to serve. From precise measures in controlling the precarious Chicago Flood, to the massive aid provided for the victims of Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki and Typhoon Omar, Corps people showed their courage, commitment and tenacity.

We continue responding to our customer’s desires to be more involved with projects on a day-to- day basis. The Corps has achieved a major cultural shift with project management. It has resulted in greater accountability to our customers and ultimately projects which better reflect the needs of the community.

Partnering is yet another positive cultural shift in the Corps’ business practices, particularly in civil works construction. A local sponsorship kit walks customers through the complexities of Corps projects. Under the Coastal America program, six federal agencies work together to solve environmental problems along the Nation’s shoreline. A technique related to partnering, alternate dispute resolution, creates an atmosphere in which the clash of differing viewpoints can grow into creative solutions and prevent costly legal disputes.

And of course, we still respond to the needs of American families. As one of the Nation’s largest providers of outdoor recreation, the Corps operates 461 lakes and other water resources projects. It’s a responsibility we take seriously, using the opportunity to help others appreciate our valuable and delicate natural resources.

This booklet is one in a series detailing water resource programs in the 50 states and U.S. possessions. I hope you will find it interesting and feel some pride in ownership.

Arthur E. Williams Lieutenant General, USA Chief of Engineers

ii Letter from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works

To Our Readers:

The Army Corps of Engineers has a long and proud history of applying its expertise in engineering and related disciplines. Over the years, its activities have evolved; however, the central focus of its civil mission has always been the development of the Nation’s water resources. With an annual program of almost $4 billion for civil projects, the Corps is the Federal Government’s largest water resources development agency. The projects the Corps develops, in partnership with State and local interests, have proven to be wise investments. They return to the public benefits, such as low-cost waterborne transportation and prevention of flood damages, that far outweigh their costs.

Corps civil works activities reflect partnership. All Corps projects begin when non-Federal interests see a water-related problem and petition Congress for a solution. Under provisions of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, once the Corps conducts a reconnaissance study to determine whether a feasible project is likely, these sponsors provide a share of the funding for the feasibility study upon which a project will be based. They also share the cost of the project’s design and construction once Congress has authorized the project and provided construction funds. During the period 1986-1992, non-Federal sponsors signed 205 project cooperative agreements with the Department of the Army for cost sharing of project construction.

The Corps engineering expertise and responsiveness has stood the Nation in good stead. In 1992, the Corps put this expertise to good use in Chicago, where it was called upon to respond to the tunnel flood; in , Chicago, , and Guam, where it played a major role in recovery efforts after Hurricanes Andrew and Iniki and Typhoon Omar; in Kuwait, where it played a major role in repairing that nation’s war-torn infrastructure; and in dozens of other locations.

Whatever challenges arise in the future decades, I have no d t Jhat the Army Corps of Engineers will be equal to the task. U — < uCl G. EDWARD DICKEY Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works)

iii Foreword C. The Wabash River Basin includes a drainage area of 33,100 square miles, of which 24,218 are in Indiana comprising two-thirds of This booklet contains information on the scope of the state. water-resource projects and studies by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers within the State of 1) The Upper Wabash River Basin Indiana. It describes briefly the role of the Corps includes the drainage area of the Wabash of Engineers in the planning, construction, and River from its headwaters to above the operation of water-resource improvements, and mouth of the White River, and is located in includes an explanation of the procedure for the north-central portion of the state. initiating studies leading to authorization of projects. Information is given on the status of 2) The Lower Wabash River Basin projects, whether the construction has been includes the drainage area of the two completed, is underway, or not started, together major tributaries, the White and Patoka with data on the purpose and schedule of studies. Rivers, and is located in the south-central portion of the state. In arranging the material in the booklet, the State has been divided into 13 sections, three major a) The White River Subbasin drainage basins, and six subdivisions of these includes the drainage area of the major basins. Because of its size, the Wabash White River, excluding that of the East River Basin has been further divided into two Fork White River. parts with the lower portion subdivided into three sections. The projects located within each of the b) The East Fork White River basins are described beginning with projects Subbasin includes the drainage area located in the headwaters so that the cumulative of the East Fork White River, and is in effects of sedimentation and flood control on the mid-portion of the Lower Wabash projects above any given location can be readily River Basin. apparent. Maps for each section are included. c) The Patoka River Subbasin lies in The 13 sections of the State, as defined for this the southernmost portion of the booklet, are: Wabash River Basin, and includes both the drainage area of the Patoka 1. The Ohio River Basin includes the tributary River, and the left bank portion of the area of the Ohio River, which flows 981 miles Wabash River to below New Harmony. from the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers at Pittsburgh, , 2. The Great Lake Basin within the United States to the near Cairo, Illinois. The is defined as the drainage areas of Lakes Superior, Indiana portion of the basin consists of the Michigan, Huron, Erie, Ontario, and those streams watersheds of the right bank tributaries between entering the St. Lawrence River. mile 491.3, the Indiana—Ohio state line, and the confluence of the Wabash River with the Ohio A. The Subbasin includes the River. A section on Ohio River navigation is given drainage area of Lake Erie, and is located in specific treatment following the basin treatise. northeastern Indiana.

A. The Ohio River and Minor Tributaries B. The Lake Michigan Subbasin includes include the area along the main stem of the the drainage area of Lake Michigan, and is Ohio River, and all minor right bank tributaries located in northwestern Indiana. within the limits of Indiana. 3. The Upper Mississippi River Basin includes B. The Whitewater River Basin includes the the Kankakee River, which rises near South Bend drainage area of the Whitewater River, which and flows southwest, draining 3,125 square miles is located in southeastern Indiana. in Indiana.

IV Contents Introduction 17 Ohio River Dredging Maintenance...... 18

Foreword...... iv Projects...... 18

List of Illustrations and Maps...... viii Markland Locks and , Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio, Louisville District...... 18 Civil Works Overview...... 1 McAlpine Locks and Dam, Indiana and Introduction...... 1 Kentucky, Louisville District...... 19

Authorization and Planning of Water Resources Falls of the Ohio National Wildlife Projects...... 1 Conservation Area, Louisville District...... 20

Navigation ...... 2 , Indiana and Kentucky, Louisville District...... 20 Flood Control and Flood Plain Management. 2 Newburgh Locks and Dam, Indiana and Shore and Hurricane Protection ...... 3 Kentucky, Louisville District...... 20

Hydropower...... 3 Uniontown Locks and Dam, Indiana and Kentucky, Louisville District...... 21 Water Supply...... 4

Recreation...... 4 Newburgh Bank Protection...... 21

Environmental Quality...... 4 Ohio River and Minor Tributaries...... 23

Regulatory Programs...... 4 Ohio River and Minor Tributaries (Map)...... 24

Emergency Response and Recovery...... 5 Introduction ...... 25

Indiana...... 7 Projects...... 25

State Summary...... 7 Lawrenceburg Local Protection Project, Louisville District...... 25 Ohio River Basin...... 9 Jeffersonville—Clarksville Local Protection Ohio River Basin (Map)...... 10 Project, Louisville District...... 25

Introduction ...... 11 New Albany Local Protection Project, Louisville District...... 26 Operations and Emergency Flood Control... 11 Cannelton Local Protection Project, Regulatory Functions Program...... 11 Louisville District...... 26

Work in Waters of the United States Tell City Local Protection Project, (Section 10, Rivers and Harbors Louisville District...... 26 Act of 1899)...... 12 Evansville Local Protection Project, Permits for Dredged or Fill Material (Under Construction) Louisville District...... 27 (Section 404, Clean Water Act of 1972)...... 12 Continuing Authorities...... 27 Emergency Repairs and Operations...... 12 Emergency Bank Protection Projects...... 27 Planning Assistance to States...... 13 Madison, Louisville District...... 27 Inactive Authorized Projects...... 13 Madison City Garage, Louisville District...... 28 Deauthorized Projects...... 14 Madison, City Park, Louisville District...... 28 Ohio River Navigation...... 15 Troy, Louisville District...... 28 Ohio River Navigation Project Plan and Profile (Map)...... 16 Rockport, Louisville District...... 28

v Newburgh, Louisville District...... 28 Mississinewa Lake, Louisville District...... 42 Evansville, Ohio Street, Louisville District.... 28 Delphi Local Protection Project, Mount Vernon Water Works, Louisville District...... 43 Louisville District...... 28 Lafayette Lake (Authorized), Rockport Landing, Louisville District...... 28 Louisville District...... 43 Cannelton, State Road 66, Louisville District...... 29 Big Pine Lake (Authorized), Louisville District...... 43 Sellersburg, Louisville District...... 29 Cecil M. Harden (Mansfield) Lake, Vanderburgh County, Louisville District...... 29 Louisville District...... 44

Small Flood Control Projects...... 29 Lyford Levee Local Protection Project, Lancassange Creek, Clark County, Indiana, Louisville District...... 44 Louisville District...... 29 Terre Haute (Conover Levee) Local Corydon, Louisville District...... 29 Protection Project, Louisville District...... 45 English, Louisville District...... 29 West Terre Haute Local Protection Project, Louisville District...... 45 Surveys...... 30 Greenfield Bayou Levee (Authorized), Whitewater River Basin...... 31 Louisville District...... 45 Whitewater River Basin (Map)...... 32 Island Levee (Authorized), Introduction ...... 33 Louisville District...... 45 Projects...... 33 Gill Township Levee Local Protection Project, Louisville Dist Brookville Lake, Louisville District...... 33 Local Protection Project, Louisville District ..46

Continuing Authorities...... 33 Mason J. Niblack Levee, Louisville District.. 46 Emergency Bank Protection Projects...... 33 Vincennes Local Protection Project, Whitewater River, Levee Road, Louisville District...... 46 Louisville District...... 33 Brevoort Levee Local Protection Project, Small Flood Control Projects...... 34 Louisville District...... 47

Hagerstown, Louisville District...... 34 Continuing Authorities...... 47

Studies...... 34 Snagging and Clearing Projects...... 47

Wabash River Basin...... 35 Wabash River Logjam (Adams County), Wabash River Basin (Map)...... 36 Louisville District...... 47 Introduction ...... 37 Salamonie Logjams, Louisville District...... 48

Surveys...... 37 Salamonie River (Jay and Blackford Counties), Louisville District...... 48 Upper Wabash River Basin...... 39 Hartford City, Louisville District...... 48 Upper Wabash River Basin (Map)...... 40 Emergency Bank Protection Projects...... 48 Introduction...... 41

Projects...... 41 Merom Caving Bank, Louisville District...... 48 Huntington Lake, Terre Haute, Wabash River, Louisville District...... 41 Louisville District...... 48

Salamonie Lake, Vigo County, County Road 83W, Louisville District...... 41 Louisville District...... 48 vi Vigo County, Little Road, Louisville District. 48 Pike County, White River, Louisville District...... 57 Southfork Wildcat Creek, Tippecanoe County, Louisville District...... 49 Morgan County, White River, Louisville District s ...... 57 Nameless Creek, Warren County, Indiana, Louisville District...... 49 Snagging and Clearing Projects ...... 57 Small Flood Control Projects...... 49 Muscatatuck River, Louisville District...... 58 Portland, Louisville District...... 49 Patoka River Subbasin...... 58 Lower Wabash River Basin...... 51 Introduction ...... 58 Lower Wabash River Basin (Map)...... 52 Projects...... 58 Introduction ...... 53 Patoka Lake, Louisville District...... 58 White River Subbasin...... 53 Levee Unit 5, Wabash River, Introduction ...... 53 Louisville District...... 58 Projects...... 53 New Harmony Bridge Bank Stabilization Muncie Local Protection Project, Project, Indiana and Illinois, Louisville District...... 53 Louisville District...... 59

Big Walnut Lake (Authorized) Continuing Authorities...... 59 Louisville District...... 54 Emergency Bank Protection Project...... 59 Local Protection Project, Louisville District...... 54 Jasper, Louisville District...... 59

Cagles Mill Lake, Louisville District...... 55 Winslow, Patoka River, Louisville District.... 59 Levee Unit 8, White River Local Protection Project, Louisville District...... 55 Great Lakes Basin...... 61 Continuing Authorities...... 55 Great Lakes Basin (Map)...... 62 Snagging and Clearing Projects ...... 55 Introduction Studies...... 63

Eel River, Clay County, Louisville District.... 55 Great Lakes Region...... 63

Edwardsport, Louisville District...... 55 Great Lakes Basin Framework Study Emergency Bank Protection Projects...... 56 Comprehensive Study - Completed North Central Division...... 63 Brazil Water Supply Facilities, Louisville District...... 56 Great Lakes Connecting Channels and Harbors Commercial Navigation Study, Petersburg, Louisville District...... 56 Detroit District...... 63

East Fork White River Subbasin...... 56 International Water Studies Introduction ...... 56 (General Investigations), North Central Division...... 64 Projects...... 56 Projects...... 64 Monroe Lake, Louisville District...... 56 Great Lakes Connecting Channels Continuing Authorities...... 57 Commercial Navigation Project Small Flood Control Projects...... 57 (Underway) Detroit District...... 64 Grassy Creek, Louisville District...... 57 Continuing Authorities - Detroit District...... 65 Emergency Bank Protection Project...... 57 Emergency Streambank Protection Project, Section 14, Elkhart River, Elkhart...... 65 Brownstown, White River, Louisville District...... 57 Small Flood Control Projects...... 65 vii LaPorte - Pine Lake Flood Control Study, Lake George, Hobart, Lake Restoration, Section 205 (Underway) ...... 65 Indiana, Chicago District...... 70

Cedar Creek, Auburn Flood Control Study, Indiana Shoreline Erosion...... 70 Section 205 (Underway) ...... 65 Little Calumet Lake Erie Subbasin...... 65 (Flood Control and Recreation)...... 71

Introduction ...... 65 Duneland Beach...... 71

Emergency Repairs and Operations...... 65 Continuing Authorities...... 71

Fort Wayne - Levee Rehabilitation, Emergency Bank Protection Project...... 71 Detroit District...... 66 Dune Acres, Chicago District...... 71 - Levee Rehabilitation, Detroit District...... 66 Surveys...... 72

Surveys...... 66 Upper Mississippi River Basin...... 73

Lake Michigan Subbasin...... 67 Upper Mississippi River Basin (Map)...... 74

Introduction ...... 67 Introduction ...... 75

Projects...... 67 Emergency Repairs and Operations...... 75

Burns Waterway Harbor, Indiana, Kankakee River Levees, Chicago District...... 67 Chicago District...... 75

Calumet Harbor and River, Illinois and Glossary...... 77 Indiana, Chicago District...... 67

Indiana Harbor, Chicago District...... 67 MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Completion Status...... 68 Cannelton Locks and Dam...... 9 Ohio River Drainage Basins...... 10 Project Cost for the Illinois Waterway...... 68 Uniontown Locks and Dam...... 15 Traffic...... 68 Ohio River Navigation Project Plan and Profile in Indiana...... 16 Mt. Baldy, Indiana Dunes National Jeffersonville Waterfront...... 23 Lakeshore, Chicago District...... 68 Ohio River and Minor Tributaries...... 24 Illinois Waterway 9-Foot Navigation Project, Brookville Lake...... 31 Indiana and Illinois, Chicago District...... 68 Whitewater River Basin...... 32 The Channel from Grafton to Chicago...... 69 Indianapolis on the White River...... 35 Wabash River Basin...... 36 The Calumet-Sag Modification...... 69 Huntington Lake...... 39 Further Investigation...... 69 Upper Wabash River Basin...... 40 Cagles Mill Lake...... 51 Michigan City Harbor...... 69 Lower Wabash River Basin...... 52 Indiana Dunes Lake Shore Bank Burns International Harbor...... 61 Protection, Beverly Shores, IN...... 70 Great Lakes Basin...... 62 Burns Waterway Small-Boat Harbor, IN Upper Mississippi River Basin...... 74 (Completed)...... 70

viii Civil Works Overview

Introduction Today's Corps of Engineers carries out missions in three broad areas: military construction and From 1775 to the present, the U.S. Army Corps engineering support to military installations; of Engineers has served the nation in peace and reimbursable support to other federal agencies war. The Corps traces its history to June 1775, (such as the Environmental Protection Agency's when the Continental Congress appointed "Superfund" program to clean up hazardous and Colonel Richard Gridley as Chief of Engineers of toxic waste sites); and the Civil Works mission, the Continental Army, under General George centered around navigation, flood control and - Washington. The original Corps was the Army's under the Water Resources Development Acts of engineering and construction arm until it 1986, 1988, 1990 and 1992 -- a growing role in mustered out of service at the close of the environmental restoration. Revolutionary War. Authorization and Planning of In 1802, Congress reestablished a separate Water Resources Projects Corps of Engineers within the Army. At the same time, it established the U.S. Military Academy at Corps of Engineers water resources activities are West Point, the country's first - and for 20 years normally initiated by non-federal interests, its only - engineering school. With the Army authorized by Congress, funded by a combination having the nation's most readily available of federal and non-federal sources, constructed by engineering talent, successive Congresses and the Corps under the Civil Works Program, and administrations established a role for the Corps operated and maintained either by the Corps or by as an organization to carry out both military a non-federal sponsoring agency. construction and works "of a civil nature." The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 Throughout the nineteenth century, the Corps made numerous changes in the way potential new supervised the construction of coastal water resources projects are studied, evaluated fortifications, lighthouses, several early railroads, and funded. The major change is that the law now and many of the public buildings in Washington, specifies greater non-federal cost sharing for most D.C. and elsewhere. Meanwhile, the Corps of Corps water resources projects. Topographical Engineers, which enjoyed a separate existence for 25 years (1838-1863) When local interests feel that a need exists for mapped much of the American West. Army improved navigation, flood protection, or other Engineers served with distinction in war, with water resources development, they may petition many engineer officers rising to prominence their representatives in Congress. A during the Civil War. Congressional committee resolution or an act of Congress may then authorize the Corps of In its civil role, the Corps of Engineers became Engineers to investigate the problems and submit increasingly involved with river and harbor a report. Water resources studies, except studies improvements, carrying out its first harbor and of the inland waterway navigation system, are jetty work in the first quarter of the nineteenth conducted in partnership with a non-federal century. The Corps' ongoing responsibility for sponsor, with the Corps and the sponsor jointly federal river and harbor improvements dates from funding and managing the study. 1824, when Congress passed two acts authorizing the Corps to survey roads and canals For inland navigation and waterway projects, and to remove obstacles on the Ohio and which are by their nature not "local", Congress, in Mississippi Rivers. Over the years since, the the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, expertise gained by the Crops in navigation established an Inland Waterway Users Board, projects led succeeding administrations and comprised of waterway transportation companies Congresses to assign new water-related missions and shippers of major commodities. This board to the Corps in such areas as flood control, shore advises the Secretary of the Army and makes and hurricane protection, hydropower, recreation, recommendations on priorities for new navigation water supply and quality, and wetland protection. projects such as locks and . Such projects

1 are funded in part from the Inland Waterway Trust Navigation Fund, which in turn is funded by waterway fuel taxes. Corps of Engineers involvement in navigation projects dates to the early days of the United Normally, the planning process for a water States, when rivers and coastal harbors were the resource problem starts with a brief primary paths of commerce in the new country. reconnaissance study to determine whether a Without its great rivers and coastal harbors were project falls within the Corps' statutory authority the primary paths of commerce in the new and meet national priorities. Should that be the country. Without its great rivers, the vast, thickly- case, the Corps districts where the project is forested, region west of the Appalachians would located will carry out a full feasibility study to have remained impenetrable to all but the most develop alternatives and select the best possible resourceful early pioneers. Consequently, solution. This process normally includes public western politicians such as Henry Clay agitated meetings to determine the views of local interests for federal assistance to improve rivers. At the on the extent and type of improvements desired. same time, the War of 1812 showed the The federal, state, and other agencies with importance of a reliable inland navigation system interests in a project are partners in the planning to national defense. process. There was, however, a question as to whether In making recommendations to Congress for transportation was, under the Constitution, a project authorization, the Corps determines that legitimate federal activity. This question was the proposed project's benefits will exceed costs, resolved when the Supreme Court ruled that the its engineering design is sound, the project best Commerce Clause of the Constitution granted the serves the needs of the people concerned, and federal government the authority, not only to that it makes the wisest possible use of the natural regulate navigation and commerce, but also toe resources involved and adequately protects the make necessary navigation improvements. environment. The system of harbors and waterways maintained Once the Corps of Engineers district completes its by the Corps of Engineers remains one of the feasibility study, it submits a report, along with a most important parts of the nation's transportation final environmental impact statement, to higher system. The Corps maintains the nation's authority for review and recommendations. After waterways as a safe, reliable and economically review and coordination with all interested federal efficient navigation system. The 12,000 miles of agencies and the governors of affected states, the inland waterways maintained by the Corps carry Chief of Engineers forwards the report and one sixth of the nation's intercity cargo. The environmental statement to the Secretary of the importance of the Corps mission in maintaining Army, who obtains the views of the Office of depths at more than 500 harbors, meanwhile, is Management and Budget before transmitting these underscored by an estimated one job in five in the documents to Congress. United States being dependent, to some extent, on the commerce handled by these ports. If Congress includes the project in an authorization bill, enactment of the ill constitutes authorization of Flood Control and Flood Plain the project. Before construction can get underway, however, both the federal government Management and the project sponsor must provide funds. A federal budget recommendation for a project is Federal interest in flood control began in the based on evidence of support by the state and the alluvial valley of the Mississippi River in the mid- ability and willingness of a non-federal sponsor to 19th century. As the relationship of flood control provide its share of the project cost. and navigation became apparent, Congress called on the Corps of Engineers to use its navigational Appropriation of money to build a particular project expertise to devise solutions to flooding problems is usually included in the annual Energy and Water along the river. Development Appropriation Act, which must be passes by both Houses of Congress and signed by After a series of disastrous floods affecting wide the President. areas in the 1920s and 30s, Congress

2 determined, in the Flood Control Act of 1936, and the Great Lakes. Hurricane protection work that the federal government would participate in was added to the erosion control mission in the solution of flooding problems affecting the 1955, when Congress directed the Corps to public interest that were too large or complex to conduct investigations along the Atlantic and be handled by states or localities. Corps Gulf Coasts to identify problem areas and authority for flood control work was thus determine the feasibility of protection. extended to embrace the entire country. The Corps turns most of the flood control projects it While each situation the Corps studies involves builds over to non-federal authorities for different considerations, Corps engineers operation and maintenance once construction is always consider engineering feasibility and completed. economic efficiency along with the environmental and social impacts. Federal The purpose of flood control work is to prevent participation in a shore protection project varies, damage through regulation of the flow of water depending on shore ownership, use and type and other means. Prevention of flood-related and frequency of benefits. (If there is no public damages can be accomplished with structural use or benefit, the Corps will not recommend measures, such as reservoirs, levees, channels, federal participation.) Once the project is and floodwalls that modify the characteristics of complete, non-Federal interests assume floods; or non-structural measures, such as flood responsibility for its operation and maintenance. plain evacuation, floodproofing and floodway acquisition, that alter the way people use these One shore protection method popular in seaside areas and reduce the susceptibility of human communities is beach nourishment - the activities to flood risk. periodic replenishment of sand along the shoreline to replace that lost to storms and Corps flood control reservoirs are often designed erosion. Authorized nourishment projects and built for multiple-purpose uses, such as usually have a nourishment period of 50 years. municipal and industrial water supply, navigation, In addition, Section 145 of the Water Resources irrigation, hydroelectric power, conservation of Development Act of 1976 authorizes placement fish and wildlife, and recreation. of beach quality sand from Corps dredging projects on nearby beaches. Under Section 933 The Corps fights the nation's flood problems not of the Water Resources Development Act of only by constructing and maintaining structures, 1986, local sponsors pay the federal but also by providing detailed technical government 50 percent of the additional costs of information on flood hazards. Under the Flood this placement of sand. Plain Management Services Program, the Corps provides, on request, flood hazard information, Hydropower technical assistance and planning guidance to other federal agencies, states, local governments The Corps has played a significant role in and private citizens. Once community officials meeting the nation's electric power generation know the flood-prone areas in their communities needs by building and operating hydropower and how often floods would be likely to occur, plants in connection with its large multiple- they can take necessary action to prevent or purpose dams. The Corps' involvement in minimize damages to existing and to new hydropower generation began with the Rivers buildings and facilities, such as adopting and Harbors Acts of 1890 and 1899, which enforcing zoning ordinances, building codes, and required the Secretary of War and the Corps of subdivision regulations. The Flood Plain Engineers to approve the sites and plans for all Management Services Program provides dams and to issue permits for their construction. assistance to other Federal and State agencies The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1909 directed in the same manner. the Corps to consider various water used, including water power, when submitting Shore and Hurricane Protection preliminary reports on potential projects.

Corps work in shore protection began in 1930, The Corps continues to consider the potential when Congress directed the Corps to study for hydroelectric power development during the ways to reduce erosion along U.S. seacoasts planning process for all water resources projects

3 involving dams and reservoirs. In most Environmental Quality instances today, it is non-federal interests who develop hydropower facilities at Corps projects The Corps carries out the Civil Works Program without federal assistance. The Corps, however, in consistency with many environmental laws, can plan, build and operate hydropower projects executive orders and regulations. Perhaps when it is impractical for non-federal interests to primary among these is the National do so. Today, the more than 20,000 megawatts Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. This of capacity at Corps-operated power plants law requires Federal agencies to study and provide approximately 30 percent of the nation's consider the environmental impacts of their hydroelectric power, or three percent of its total proposed actions. Consideration of the electric energy supply. environmental impact of a Corps project begins in the early stages, and continues through Water Supply design, construction and operation of the project. The Corps must also comply with Corps involvement in water supply dates back to these environmental laws and regulations in 1853, when it began building the Washington conducting its regulatory programs. Aqueduct, which provides water to the nation's capital city and some of its suburbs to this day. NEPA procedures ensure that public officials and private citizens may obtain and provide Elsewhere in the nation, the Water Supply Act of environmental information before federal 1958 authorized the Corps to provide additional agencies make decisions concerning the storage units reservoirs for municipal and environment. In selecting alternative project industrial water supply at the request of local designs. The Corps strives to choose with interests, who must agree to pay the cost. The minimum environmental impact. Corps also supplies water for irrigation, under terms of the Flood Control Act of 1944. This act The Water Resources Development Act of provided that the Secretary of War, upon the 1986 authorized the Corps to propose recommendation of the Secretary of the Interior, modifications of its existing projects - many of could allow use of Corps reservoirs for irrigation, them built before current environmental provided that users agree to repay the requirements were in effect - for environmental government for the water. improvement. Proposals the Corps has made under this authority range from use of dredged Recreation material to create nesting sites for waterfowl to modification of water control structures to improve downstream water quality for fish. The Flood Control Act of 1944, the Federal Water Project Recreation Act of 1965, and In recent years the Corps of Engineers has language in specific project authorization acts planned and recommended environmental authorize the Corps to construct, maintain, and restoration actions at federal projects to restore operate public park and recreational facilities at environmental conditions. its projects, and to permit others to build, maintain, and operate such facilities. The water areas of Corps projects are open to public use Regulatory Programs for boating, fishing, and other recreational purposes. The Corps of Engineers regulates construction and other work in navigable waterways under The Corps of Engineers today is one of the Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of federal government's largest providers of 1899, and has authority over the discharge of outdoor recreational opportunities, operating dredged or fill material into the "waters of the more than 2,000 sites at its lakes and other United States" -- a term which includes water resource projects. More than 600 million wetlands and all other aquatic areas - under visits per year are recorded at these sites. State Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution and local park authorities and private interests Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500, operate nearly 2,000 areas at Corps projects. the "Clean Water Act"). Under these laws,

4 those who seek to carry out such work must first Emergency Response and receive a permit from the Corps. Recovery The "Section 404" program is the principal way The Corps provides emergency response to by which the federal government protects wetlands and other aqautic environments. The natural disasters under Public Law 84-99, which program's goal is to ensure protection of the covers flood control and coastal emergencies. It aquatic environment while allowing for necessary also provides emergency support to other agencies, particularly the Federal Emergency economic development. Management Agency (FEMA), under Public Law 93-288 (the Stafford Act) as amended. The permit evaluation process includes a public notice and a public comment period. Under P.L. 84-99, the Chief of Engineers, acting Applications for complex projects may also for the Secretary of the Army, is authorized to require a public hearing before the Corps makes carry out disaster preparedness work; advance a permit decision. In its evaluation of measures; emergency operations such as flood applications, the Corps is required by law to fighting, rescue and emergency relief activities; consider all factors involving the public interest. rehabilitation of flood control works threatened or These may include economics, environmental destroyed by flood; and protection or repair of concerns, historic values, fish and wildlife, federally authorized shore protection works aesthetics, flood damage prevention, land use classifications, navigations, recreation, water threatened or damaged by coastal storms. This act also authorized the Corps to provide supply, water quality, energy needs, food emergency supplies of clean water in cases of productions and the general welfare of the public. drought or contaminated water supply. After the immediate flooding has passed, the Corps The Corps of Engineers has issued a number of provides temporary construction and repairs to nationwide general permits, mostly for minor essential public utilities and facilities and activities which have little or not environmental emergency access for a 10-day period, at the impact. Individual Corps districts have also request of the governor. issued regional permits for certain types of minor work in specific areas. Individuals who propose Linder the Stafford Act and the Federal Disaster work that falls under one of these general or Response Plan, the Corps of Engineers has a regional permits need not go through the permit standing mission assignment to provide public process. Corps districts have also issued State works and engineering support in response to a Program General Permits for work in states that major disaster or catastrophic earthquake. Under have comprehensive wetland protection this plan, the Corps will work directly with state programs. These permits allow applicants to do authorities in providing temporary repair and work for which they have received a permit under construction of roads, bridges, and utilities, the state program. These general permits temporary shelter, debris removal and demolition, reduce delays and paperwork for applicants and water supply, etc.. The Corps is one of the allow the Corps to devote its resources to the federal agencies tasked by FEMA to provide most significant cases while maintaining the engineering, design, construction and contract environmental safeguards of the Clean Water management in support of recovery operations. Act.

5

protect farms from the floodwaters of the Wabash Indiana River and its tributaries. During the 1830’s the states of Indiana and Ohio joined together to build one of the most ambitious water resources projects State Summary in the midwest, the . The waterway, completed In 1853, was 469 miles long The drainage pattern in Indiana is dominated by the and connected Toledo, Ohio, on the shores of Lake Wabash River, which drains about two-thirds of the Erie with Evansville, Indiana, on the Ohio River. state. The northern part of the state drains into The canal was used for commerce until 1865 when Lakes Michigan and Erie, the Wabash River drains railroads proved to be a much more efficient means the entire central section into the Ohio River, and of transporting freight, and the canal venture fell small tributaries of the Ohio drain the southern part. into financial ruin. The Kankakee River drains a portion of Indiana into the Illinois River which empties into the Mississippi The Federal Government’s early responsibilities in River. The St. Joseph River, flowing into Lake water resources development were concerned with Michigan, and the , flowing into Lake navigation, primarily on the Ohio River along the Erie, are the other principal rivers in northern southern border of the state. The first broad Indiana. Major tributaries entering the Wabash Federal approach to flood control came in 1927, along its 475 mile length are the Salamonie, when the Corps of Engineers was authorized to Mississinewa, Eel, Tippecanoe, White and Patoka survey the rivers of the Nation. One of the resulting Rivers in Indiana. The Wabash River is the reports, popularly referred to as “308 Reports,” was principal tributaries entering the Ohio River in made on the Wabash River in 1932 and provided . The Whitewater River basin the stepping stone in present water resources drains a significant portion of southeast Indiana. development efforts. The Whitewater River enters the Miami River near its confluence with the Ohio River in southwest Between 1910 and 1929, the Corps of Engineers Ohio. completed a navigation system on the Ohio River consisting of 50 locks and dams, 10 of which lay in Although the topography of Indiana is not severe, it the 350-mile reach forming the southern boundary is diverse. In the north, there are sand dunes, of Indiana. A modernization program was started in numerous lakes, and the streambeds have 1952, and five new locks and dams have been relatively little slope and shallow banks. The central completed replacing ten original structures along portion has a flat to a generally rolling character the Indiana boundary. At the northern end of the with slightly more streambed entrenchment. Many state, three harbor projects on Lake Michigan have portions of the Wabash River and its tributaries flow been completed and two are under construction. through flat country with poor natural drainage. The Along the shore of Lake Michigan, there are two southern part is generally hilly and drains very completed bank protection projects maintained by rapidly. The central and northern parts of the state the Corps of Engineers. are primarily agricultural while the southern part is extensively forested. Nineteen local flood control projects within Indiana have been completed and one is under Indiana is heavily industrialized, yet it also ranks construction. Two local flood control projects and high among the states in agricultural output and three multiple-purpose lakes are authorized but are ranks near the top in production of both steel and in an inactive status. Thirty-seven projects were corn. It quarries much of the building limestone deauthorized by Congress in 1977, and nine since used in the United States and is a large producer of then. Eight multiple-purpose lakes have been . It is criss-crossed by railroads, airlines, completed. There are 41 Continuing Authority highways, and numerous energy supply lines. projects, either completed or authorized, six are small flood control projects (Section 205), seven The interest of Indiana people in water and land are snagging and clearing projects (Section 208), resources is long-standing. In the past, many and twenty-eight are erosionprotection projects studies and projects have been completed by both (Section 14). Federal and non-Federal entities in various aspects of resource development. The earliest efforts to Many planning studies are authorized and some develop and utilize water resources date back to are underway. These studies deal with a wide 1808 when landowners built private levees to range of water and related land resource problems.

7

■ B l

Cannelton Locks and Dam AU¡ a D i t # a i * D q c ì n Ohio River Mile 720.8 U l l I O f l I V e i D c l o l l l

9 Ohio River Drainage Basins

Legend

Wabash River Basin c d r D Big Sandy & Guyandotte River Basin Miami & Little Miami River Basin CD CD Licking River Basin CD Scioto River Basin j 12 [ Minor Tributaries in the Ohio River Basin

Muskingum River Basin CD 1 13 1 Kentucky River Basin

CD Beaver River Basin 1 14 | Salt River Basin

Allegheny River Basin CD CD Green River Basin CD Monongahela River Basin I ’ 6 I Cumberland River Basin NY Kanawha & Little Kanawha r D I ’ 7 ! Tennessee River Basin River Basin CD Hocking River Basin I r

10 A comprehensive survey of the Ohio River Basin, Ohio River Basin exclusive of the Tennessee River Basin, has been completed and the report was published in Introduction 1969. This study is a general appraisal of the existing plan of development and of the water and related land resources needs of the basin now, The Ohio River Basin has a drainage area of along with projected needs through the year 204.000 square miles extending over parts of 14 2020. A continuing study program investigates states in the middle eastern portion of the United critical problem areas and recommends additions States. The topography of the basin varies from of economically feasible and acceptable projects rugged mountains to flat plains. The eastern to the existing plan. portion is dominated by the rugged terrain of the Appalachian Mountains extending from The Ohio River Basin Commission was southwestern New York to North Carolina. West established in 1971 to coordinate the activities of of the Appalachian Mountains and south of the Federal, state, interstate, local, and Ohio River there is considerable local relief which nongovernmental agencies involved in the gradually modifies to rolling plains through central planning and development of water and related and western Kentucky and Tennessee. North of land resources in the Ohio River Basin, exclusive the Ohio River there are broad valleys with minor of the Tennessee River Basin. relief in central and southwestern Ohio, central and southern Indiana and southeastern Illinois. All of the central and southern Indiana is in the Ohio River Basin, and there are many multiple- The climate is temperate. Summers are warm purpose and local protection projects completed, and humid and winters range from moderately underway, and authorized, but not yet started in cold in the southwest to severe in the extreme this part of the state. Navigation structures northeast. Precipitation averages about 45 inches completed are located in southern Indiana along annually and is usually greatest in June and July the Ohio River. While the completed projects and least in October. Runoff varies considerably; contribute many benefits to this part of the state, nevertheless, flood flows may occur during any there are multiple purpose projects on Ohio River season. Major basin-wide floods have generally tributaries in other parts of the basin which benefit occurred between January and March, but the Indiana by reducing flood heights and increasing maximum runoff from small drainage areas has low flows on streams in and adjacent to Indiana. often resulted from intense thunderstorms during Storage projects in Indiana have similar beneficial the spring and summer. Often during late summer effects on downstream areas in other states. and early fall, stream flow from precipitation is Detailed descriptions of Corps projects and negligible. activities in the Ohio River Basin portion of Indiana are contained in this publication. A system of reservoirs and local protection projects throughout the basin is capable of reducing natural average annual flood damages Operations and more than 50 percent. During the drought of 1988 there was sufficient reservoir storage to Emergency Flood substantially increase the Ohio River flows. Storage is also available in some projects for Control water supply. The Corps of Engineers has 914.000 kilowatts of hydroelectric generating capacity in operation in the basin, and private Regulatory Functions Program power companies produce additional power at several projects by license agreements The Corps of Engineers Districts with administered by the Federal Energy Regulatory jurisdictional responsibility in Indiana receive and Commission. Commercial navigation on canalized process applications for all work in navigable basin streams amounts to about one-quarter of waters and for discharges of dredged or fill the total inland waterway freight tonnage in the material into waters within the state. The United States. Water surfaces and adjacent proposed work includes, but is not limited to: developed project lands attract millions of docks (both commercial and private), pipelines, recreation visitors each year. aerial transmission lines, dredging, and fill. Public

11 notices are issued which allow 30 days for except as relates to plans contained in a permit comment and are mailed to all known Interested that has been Issued by the Corps of Engineers. parties. A field inspection is made of the It is also illegal to excavate fill, or in any manner proposed work site for the purposes of to alter or modify the course, location, condition, determining the possible effects on the or capacity of, any port, roadstead, haven, environment. harbor, canal, lake, harbor of refuge, or enclosure within the limits of any breakwater, or On routine work, the impact on the environment the channel of any navigable water of the United and the public interest is assessed and States, unless a permit for work has been documented for review by the public and higher issued by the Army Corps of Engineers. authority. For more complex projects, environmental data is requested of the applicant Permits for Dredged or Fill which could ultimately lead to the preparation of Material (Section 404, Clean an Environmental Impact Statement. Water Act of 1972). When a determination is made that the overall project is in the public interest and after the This Act states that the Secretary of the Army, applicant accepts the permit with the terms and through the Army Corps of Engineers, may conditions set forth by the Federal and state issue permits to allow the discharge or fill agencies involved, the permit is issued. materials into rivers and streams. Inspection of the work is made during and after construction to ensure compliance with the The discharge of dredged or fill material means terms and conditions of the permit. any addition of dredged or fill materials into waters of the United States. This includes, Districts monitor the waters of the state to without limitation, the addition of dredged ensure compliance with the law by means of material to a specified disposal site located in field crews on the land and water, aerial waters of United States, and the runoff or photography, and reports from other agencies overflow from a land or water disposal area into and concerned citizens. Investigations of waters of the United States. The term generally violations of Federal laws are coordinated with includes, without limitation, the following appropriate Federal, state and local agencies. activities: Placement of fill necessary for the Penalties and remedial actions are determined construction of any structure in a water of the by the nature and severity of the violation. The United States; the building of any structure or Districts also review pending permit actions from impoundment requiring rock, sand, dirt, or other the Federal or state Environmental Protection material necessary for its construction; Agency to ensure that the proposed discharges causeways or road fills; dams and dikes; of effluent or liquid wastes will not impair property protection and/or reclamation devices anchorage and navigation on the navigable such as riprap, revetments, and levees. waters within the state. Water quality violations created by existing discharges are inspected Emergency Repairs and and the investigation report is forwarded to the appropriate Federal or state agency for action. Operations

Work in Waters of the United As provided by Public Law 99, 84th Congress, the Corps of Engineers is authorized to assist States (Section 10, Rivers and local interests in fighting floods and the repair - Harbors Act of 1899) and restoration of flood control works threatened or destroyed by floods. Flood fights are This Act authorizes the Corps of Engineers to undertaken as the need develops. Personnel, issue permits for work in navigable waters and boats, construction equipment, sandbags, and the tributaries of navigable waters of the United pumps are typical of the type of assistance States. In accordance with Section 10, it is rendered. In addition, local interests are illegal to build a wharf, pier, dolphin, boom, weir, provided technical advice concerning actions to breakwater, bulkhead, jetty, or other structures be taken. In recent years, flood fights were in a navigable water of the United States, waged in cooperation with other agencies in

12 1960 and 1969, at and below the confluence of the preparation of plans for the development, the White and Wabash Rivers; in 1961, 1969, utilization, and conservation of water and related and 1983, in middle and lower reaches of the land resources of drainage basins located within Wabash; in March and April 1964 and 1969 at the boundaries of the state. Assistance is many points in the Wabash Basin. Damages provided on the basis of state requests. The prevented by such action greatly exceed the cost Louisville District has been assigned the lead role of flood fights. in the development of Section 22 studies for Indiana. The Water Resources Development Act During the past 30 years, the Corps of Engineers of 1990 mandated that this program be cost has completed restoration and repair of many shared. Therefore, FY 91 required 10 percent, agricultural levees and other flood control works FY 92 30 percent, and FY 93 and beyond, 50 which had been damaged by floods. Most of this percent non-Federal contribution. work has been done in the Wabash River Basin. There are two active Section 22 studies Planning Assistance underway in Indiana. One is a floodway determination study for a 13 mile reach of Pigeon to States Creek in Evansville and Vanderburgh County (Louisville District). The non-federal sponsor is the Evansville-Vanderburgh County Area Plan This program is carried out in accordance with Commission. The other is a study to assist the the provisions of Section 22, PL 93-251. The law city of Auburn (Steuben County) in the authorizes the Chief of Engineers to cooperate development of a flood emergency plan (Detroit with States (Commonwealths, territories, etc.) in District).

Inactive Authorized Projects

The following tabulation lists the authroized water resource projects that have been placed in the “inactive” category by the Chief of Engineers.

Estimated Cost

Type of Date of Location Construction Federal Non-Federal Total Estimate

Louisville District Big Pine Lake Multipurpose $46,201,000 $4,999,000 $46,688,000 (1976) Big Walnut Lake Multipurpose 81,800,000 45,069,000 126,869,000 (1979) Greenfield Bayou Levee 4,600,000 1,087,000 5,687,000 (1978) Indianapolis (Warfleigh) Levee 13,245,000 7,768,000 2,1013,000 (1969) Island Levee Levee 4,630,000 528,000 5,158,000 (1978) Lafayette Lake Multipurpose 104,968,000 13,565,000 118,533,000 (1976)

13 Deauthorized Projects The following tabulation lists the water resource projects that have been deauthorized by Congress. Estimated Cost

Type of Date of Location Construction Federal Non-Federal Total Estimate

Louisville District Adams Levee (Wabash River)*** Levee $292,000 $14,000 $306,000 (I960) Alton* Levee 255,000 40,000 295,000 (1954) Anderson Levee 554,000 24,000 578,000 (1954) Aurora** Wall & Levee 4,300,000 1,190,000 5,490,000 (1954) Big Blue Lake**** Multipurpose 87,200,000 53,836,000 141,036,000 (1979) Clifty Creek Lake**** Multipurpose 40,961,000 4,833,000 45,794,000 (1978) Clinton (Wabash River)* Levee 77,000 9,000 86,000 (1954) Deer Creek Prairie* Levee 213,000 10,000 223,000 (1960) Derby* Wall & Levee 553,000 67,000 620,000 (1954) Downsville Lake+ Multipurpose 74,200,000 64,448,000 138,648,000 (1984) Evansville, Howell Unit 2+ Wall & Levee 8,300,000 Not Available 8,300,000 (1977) Fletcher and Sunshine Levee 548,000 26,000 574,000 (1960) Garden Levee* Grandview* Levee 580,000 133,000 713,000 (1954) Honey Creek Levee Levee 653,000 32,000 685,000 (1954) (Wabash River)* Leavenworth* Wall & Levee 1,470,000 266,000 1,736,000 (1954) Levee Unit 1, Eel River* Levee 204,000 40,000 244,000 (1954) Levee Unit 2, Eel River* Levee 2,090,000 715,000 2,805,000 (1954) Levee Unit 2, East Fork Levee 724,000 73,000 797,000 (1961) White River* Levee Unit 3, East Fork Levee 3,660,000 180,000 3,840,000 (1961) White River* Levee Unit 2, Wabash Levee 2,020,000 99,000 2,119,000 (1968) and Ohio Rivers* Levee Unit 1, White River* Levee 2,180,000 116,000 2,296,000 (1961) Levee Unit 7, White River* Levee 1,490,000 88,000 1,578,000 (1961) Levee Unit 9, White River* Levee 27,000 8,000 35,000 (1957) Levee Unit 10, White River* Levee 182,000 19,000 201,000 (1957) Levee Unit 17, Wabash River Levee 1,580,000 118,000 1,698,000 (1973) Madison* Wall & Levee 3,820,000 360,000 4,180,000 (1954) Marion+ Levee 3,900,000 854,000 4,754,000 (1977) Mauckport* Levee 506,000 105,000 611,000 (1954) Metamora Lake* Multipurpose 35,300,000 -- 35,300,000 (1954) McGinnis Levee* Levee 1,820,000 104,000 1,924,000 (1954) New Amsterdam* Levee 476,000 13,000 489,000 (1954) New Harmony* Levee 616,000 25,000 641,000 (1954) Orleans* Channel 270,000 395,000 665,000 (1970) Patriot* Levee 753,000 372,000 1,125,000 (1954) Raccoon Creek Levee* Levee 426,000 37,000 463,000 (1960) Rising Sun Wall & Levee 896,000 280,000 1,176,000 (1954) Rockport* Wall & Levee 466,000 133,000 599,000 (1954) Rome* Levee 359,000 67,000 426,000 (1954) Shoals* Levee 543,000 29,000 572,000 (1954) Shufflebarger Levee* Levee 2,380,000 90,000 2,470,000 (1954) Sugar Creek Levee Levee 418,000 29,000 447,000 (1960) (Wabash River)* Troy* Wall & Levee 502,000 133,000 635,000 (1954) Utica*** Levee 1,570,000 120,000 1,690,000 (1954) Vevay* Levee 1,170,000 146,000 1,316,000 (1954) Vincennes++ Levee 3,340,000 -- 3,340,000 (1973)

‘ Projects deauthorized by Congress under Section 12, Public Law 93-251, as amended, effective dates of *5 August 1977, **6 November 1977, ***3 October 1978, ****29 December 1981. -(-Projects deauthorized by Congress under Section 1001 (B)(2) of Public Law 99-662, effective 19 July 1992. ++Uncompleted portion deauthroized by Congress under Section 1002 of Public Law 99-662, effective 17 Nov 1986.

14 Uniontown Locks and Dam OlllO RlVGf NäViCIBtiOil Ohio River Mile 845.9 O

15 OHIO

MARKLAND ELEVATION IN FEET (M S FEET IN L) ELEVATION

LEGEND Ohio River Navigation Project Existing Structure and Pool Plan and Profile Replaced Structure In Indiana

16 shipment and receipt of commodities over the far- Ohio River Navigation flung inland navigation system, as well as connection with the Great Lakes system and the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. In conjunction with Introduction tributaries improved for navigation, the Ohio River is an important part of the Mississippi River The Ohio River flows 981 miles from the junction navigation system. of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, to the Mississippi River Approximately 64 percent of the freight traffic is near Cairo, Illinois. The entire river has been bulk forms of energy: coal, crude oil, and improved by construction of locks and dams to products. Other major commodities provide a minimum channel depth of 9 feet, and transported are sand and gravel, iron and steel, by open channel work to remove obstructions and chemicals, and grain. Annual traffic on the Ohio assure adequate channel widths. River in 1990 (the latest available) was 226 million tons. The Ohio River navigation project began in 1825 with channel improvements, followed in 1830 by a The Ohio River also provides a 981-mile long canal with a set of three locks to pass the “Falls recreational pool. The stable summer pools above of the Ohio” at Louisville, Kentucky. Until 1885, the dams have substantial private shorefront when the first dam and lock was built near recreational development. Federally developed Pittsburgh, river improvement consisted of water access points attract several million clearing wrecks and snags, channel dredging and recreational visitors annually. A bridge across building training dikes and jetties. Markland Dam, linking Indiana State Highway 156 with U.S. Highway 42 in Kentucky, was completed Because the Ohio was too shallow almost every in August 1978. Development of hydroelectric summer and fall for navigation, Congress power under Federal license has been authorized construction of a series of locks and investigated at several locations, and power is dams. Twelve were built before 1910 and now being produced at two dams. canalization of the river was completed in 1929. By then, 50 lock and dam structures had been The Ohio River carries an ever-increasing amount constructed to assure a year-round depth of 9 of freight. During the period 1935-1990, annual feet from the Mississippi River to Pittsburgh. The tonnage increased from 22 million tons to 226 dams were built with wooden wickets that were million tons. The annual ton-mile figure increased raised to hold back water during periods of low 25 times its 1935 value of 2.25 billion to 56.4 flow and dropped to the river bottom during high billion recorded for 1991. There has also been a water, permitting open river navigation without rapid development in towing equipment making need of locking. By 1937, the partially tows and barges larger and longer. To gain reconstructed and improved Montgomery and efficiency, meet new needs, and allow additional Gallipolis units were in operation, reducing the growth, a navigation replacement and system to 46 locks and dams that were used for modernization program was started in the early many years. With a few exceptions, the dams 1950’s. The modern high dams each eliminated were of the movable type, with a navigable pass two to five of the older structures so that tows varying from 600 to 1,248 feet and one or more have longer distances between lockages. Since regulating weirs. At each dam, a lock with usable the modernization program began in 1955, the dimensions of 110 feet by 600 feet was provided. number of dams in operation has been reduced from 46 to 20. The open channel work originally provided channels for steamboats, 400 to 600 feet wide at The benefits achieved by the new system are shallow points and crossing bars, and ice piers for numerous. The 1,200-foot long lock chambers shelter from ice floes. A 300-foot wide minimum enable tows to pass in one operation instead of width channel is now maintained for the more having to break up and pass through the old 600- powerful modern towboats. foot locks in two sections. Faster lockages are also achieved because the new locks have floating About 350 miles of the improvement (five lock mooring bits and can be filled or emptied quicker and dam projects) are contiguous to the southern than the old locks. Reduced travel time results boundary of Indiana and afford direct access for because of the faster lockages and the fewer

17 number of lockages required. Annual costs for revising pool reach maps, and limited surveys operation and maintenance are reduced because for the purpose of revising navigation charts. of the fewer number of structures and also because the channel maintenance dredging required in wider, deeper, more stable pools allow Projects greater maneuverability and more efficient operation of towboats, thereby also enhancing the , efficiency of terminal operations. Total cost of the Ohio River navigation project to 1992 is $1,577 Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio, million for new construction, excluding $88 million Louisville District for old structures which have been replaced, and $764 million for operation, maintenance, and The replacement plan for Ohio river Locks and rehabilitation. Dams No. 35 through 39 by the Markland Locks and Dam was approved in March 1953 in The Ohio River navigation system has been a accordance with the Rivers and Harbors Act of major factor in the industrial and urban March 1909. development of many areas in Indiana. Continuing modernization of navigation structures to facilitate Markland Locks and Dam is on the Ohio River the ever-increasing freight movement will enhance near Markland, Indiana, and the project the future economic vitality of the state. replaced five obsolete locks and dams. The dam provides a pool with a minimum channel Ohio River Dredging Maintenance depth of 9 feet, extending about 95 miles upstream to the Captain Anthony Meldahl Locks Maintenance dredging on the Ohio River and Dam near Chilo, Ohio. The project provides navigation system is performed by contract a deeper and more stable pool in the important dredge. An average of 1.5 million cubic yards of metropolitan Cincinnati harbor area. Navigation material is removed annually, providing a minimum through this busy reach of the river is now 9-foot channel depth for commercial navigation. possible with only one lockage instead of the The Corps of Engineers uses survey boats to five formerly required. In 1992, 54.1 million tons conduct channel condition surveys and of commerce was transported through the locks. hydrographic surveys for a variety of purposes and A substantial saving in transportation costs official inspections of the Ohio River and improved results, as well as a reduction in the cost of navigable tributaries. operating and maintaining the navigation facilities. Each spring, toward the end of the annual highwater season, a reconnaissance survey is Markland Dam is a non-navigable gated made, taking lines of soundings at all critical bars structure. There are two parallel lock chambers, and lock approaches. Soundings, converted to one 110 by 1,200 feet and the other 110 by 600 depths at normal pool stage, foretell future trouble feet, located on the Kentucky side of the river. spots and establish priorities for the start of the The lift of the locks between the normal upper channel maintenance dredging season. However, and lower pools is 35 feet. additional scouring and deposition continue until the river approaches pool stage. For this reason Construction started at Markland in March 1956, and because of the effects of wheel wash of the and traffic movement through the new locks many high horsepower towboats, the bar began in May 1959. The upper pool was raised conditions and dredging priorities are subject to in stages according to a predetermined change. As channel and river conditions change schedule late in 1962 and reached the new and the dredging work progresses, additional normal level in 1963. The dam was completed sounding trips are made. in June 1964.

Principal operations of the survey boats after the The total Federal cost of the Markland project dredging season include hydrographic surveys was $63,019,403. In addition, $33,000 was above and below each of the high-lift dam contributed by the States of Indiana and the structures to determine foundation conditions and Commonwealth of Kentucky for modification to bottom scour, pool-length hydrographic surveys for the dam to permit construction of a highway

18 bridge. Construction of the bridge began in Further improvements were made from 1911 to 1976 and was completed in August 1978. The 1930. The existing 110-foot by 600-foot lock Public Service Company of Indiana, which was completed in 1921 , and the old two-flight received a license from the Federal Energy lock was modified in 1930, resulting in the Regulatory Commission to build a hydroelectric existing single lift 56-foot by 360-foot lock. power plant at the site, contributed $162,000 for Between 1925 and 1927, a movable weir dam work done to facilitate construction of the plant. with a navigable pass was built in conjunction Construction of the 81,000 KVA power plant with a hydroelectric power project of the was completed in January 1967. Construction Louisville Gas and Electric Company. This dam of nine boat launching ramps and two overlook raised the normal pool elevationfrom 412.0 to areas along the 95-mile pool reach was 420.0 and provided a minimum channel depth of completed in 1966. Four of the boat ramps lie 9.0 feet from Louisville to Markland, Indiana, along the Indiana boundary. In 1993, 308,428 eliminating any need for construction of the visitors were recorded at the project facilities. proposed Dam No. 40 at Madison.

McAlpine Locks and Dam, In June 1958, a program of modernization of Lock and Dam No. 41 was begun. On 24 May Indiana and Kentucky, Louisville 1960 Locks and Dam 41 was renamed McAlpine District Locks and Dam in honor of W.H. McAlpine, District Engineer in 1917-1918. The new 1,200- Structural improvement on the Ohio River foot lock was placed in operation in November began at the present site of the McAlpine Locks 1961, and the entire modernization work was and Dam in 1830 where the falls in the River completed in October 1965. A major portion of hindered navigation during low water. The falls the old dam was retained and modified as fixed of the Ohio at Louisville is the result of a rock weir, and new tainter gate sections were added reef which extended across the river and at the upper and lower ends of the dam. The formed a rapids about 3 miles long. The river two existing locks, one 56 by 360 feet and the dropped 26 feet through the course of the other 110 by 600 feet, were retained and rapids, and navigation was sporadic and renovated. The 56-foot by 360-foot auxiliary lock dangerous even at high water stages, and has been inoperative since the failure of the impossible at low stage. downstream lock gates in December 1972. The lift of the locks between normal upper and lower The first navigation improvement was a canal pools is 37 feet. The Louisville and Portland and lock built by a private stock company, with Canal, which is 2 miles long and forms the upper Federal government investment, which opened approach to the locks, was widened to provide in December 1830. The canal was 1.9 miles an unrestricted approach. long with a minimum depth of 3 feet. At the lower end was a three-flight lock, each chamber In 1992, 57.7 million tons of commerce moved having a lift of 8-2/3 feet, width of 50 feet, and through the project. available length of 185 feet. By 1854, the United States had acquired practically all stock Construction of five boat ramps and public in the company and from 1868 to 1872 widened access facilities along the McAlpine pool was the canal and replaced the old lock with a larger started in August 1967 and has been completed. two-flight lock. The Corps of Engineers The total Federal cost to 1 October 1992 of the assumed supervision of navigation in June McAlpine project was $45,762,189. In 1993, 1874. In 1879, a timber dam was built, there were 201,629 visitors at the project. The increasing depth in the canal to about 6 feet at Water Resources Development Act of 1990 low water but allowing navigation through an authorized the removal of the existing 360-foot open pass when sufficient depth existed in the and 600-foot lock chambers. Replacement of Indiana Chute. In 1909, a movable weir dam these two older locks with a new 1,200-foot by was built, impounding a pool at elevation 412.0 110-foot single lift lock is scheduled for and providing a minimum channel depth of 6.0 completion in the year 2001. The result of this feet on the lower gate sill of Lock No. 1, modernization effort will provide two parallel Kentucky River. The project at Louisville was 1,200-foot locks. This project is being jointly designated Lock and Dam No. 41 in 1914. funded by the Inland Waterways Trust Fund and

19 the U.S. Government. The current lock The locks at this project consist of two parallel replacement effort is anticipated to reduce lock chambers on the Indiana side of the river bottlenecks in the channel, improve lock-through with the main chamber 110 feet by 1,200 feet and safety and handle anticipated commercial barge the auxiliary chamber 110 feet by 600 feet in traffic through 2050. The project for navigation usable dimensions. The larger lock improvements at McAlpine is presently in the accommodates in one lockage a large Ohio River Preconstruction Engineering and Design phase. tow, which under previous conditions required breaking at the old locks and reassembly after Falls of the Ohio National Wildlife locking through. In 1992, 60.3 tons of traffic moved through the locks. The dam is a non- Conservation Area, Louisville navigable gated structure. The estimated total District project cost (October 1993) was $99,032,866. Construction of the locks was started in June The Wildlife Conservation Area, authorized by 1963 and completed in April 1967. Title II of Public Law 97-137 (December 1981), is located on the Ohio River at Louisville, Kentucky, Traffic movement through the new locks began in adjacent to McAlpine Locks and Dam. Its December 1966. Construction of the dam started purposes are protection of wildlife populations in 1965 and was completed in 1974. The and habitats in their natural diversity, Cannelton dam creates a “pool” 114 miles long, conservation of fish populations in their natural stretching from Cannelton, Indiana, to Louisville, diversity, assurance of water quality within the Kentucky. This uninterrupted stretch of water area, protection of a fossilized coral reef, and provides some of the most beautiful scenery provision of opportunities for scientific, along the Ohio River for recreational boaters. environmental and recreational uses within the Construction of seven boat ramps and public conservation area. The project involves access facilities along the Cannelton pool has approximately 1,400 acres of land and water area been completed. An overlook and picnicking and operational structures. The original master facilities at the lock and dam on the Indiana side plan and real estate plan were completed in are also complete. In 1993, 72,853 visitors were 1984. The estimated Federal cost through 1 recorded at the project. October. The Indiana Department of Natural Resources has leased 60.14 acres of the project Newburgh Locks and Dam, to operate as the Falls of the Ohio State Park. Indiana and Kentucky, Facilities include an interpretive center, parking, overlook, hiking trails, and boat launching ramp. Louisville District The interpretive center was completed in 1993 and is scheduled for opening in early 1994. The Newburgh Locks and Dam was authorized as a launching ramp is complete and in operation. replacement for Locks and Dams 46 and 47 by the Rivers and Harbors Act, March 1909. Cannelton Locks and Dam, This project is located on the Ohio River near Indiana and Kentucky, Newburgh, Indiana, and provides a minimum Louisville District channel depth of 9 feet, extending from its site some 55 miles upstream to the Cannelton Locks Located on the Ohio River near Cannelton, and Dam. It allows navigation through this reach Indiana, this project replaced obsolete Locks and of the river with only one lockage in lieu of two Dams No. 43, 44, and 45, and provides a formerly required, and has resulted in substantial minimum channel depth of 9 feet, extending from savings in transportation costs as well as its site some 114 miles upstream to McAlpine reduction in the cost of maintaining and operating Locks and Dam. Navigation through this reach of the facilities. the river requires one lockage in lieu of three formerly required. A substantial savings in The locks at this project consist of two parallel transportation costs has resulted, and a reduction lock chambers on the Indiana side of the river in the cost of maintaining and operating the with the main chamber measuring 110 feet by existing facilities has been realized. 1,200 feet and the auxiliary chamber 110 feet by

20 600 feet. The larger lock accommodates, In one parallel lock chambers on the Indiana side of the lockage, a large Ohio River tow of the type that is river, with the main chamber measuring 110 feet commonly used on the river. In 1992, a total of by 1,200 feet and the auxiliary chamber 110 feet 70.8 million tons of commerce moved through the by 600 feet. A total of 77.6 million tons of locks. The dam consists of a non-navigable commerce moved through the locks in 1992. The gated section and a fixed weir section over which dam consists of non-navigable gated section and navigation can pass when the locks are closed a fixed weir section over which navigation can during high water. The estimated Federal cost pass when the locks are closed because of high was $104,497,665 (October 1993). Construction water. The estimated total project cost is was initiated April 1965. The locks were $100,326,529 (October 1993). Construction was completed in June 1969, and construction of the started in 1965 and completed in 1975. In 1993, dam was completed in 1977. In 1993, 566,434 180,693 visitors were recorded at the project visitors were recorded at the project. facilities.

Uniontown Locks and Dam, Newburgh Bank Protection Indiana and Kentucky, The authorized (Flood Control Act of 1970, Public Louisville District Law 91-611) Newburgh Bank Protection project has been consolidated with the Newburgh Locks The Uniontown Locks and Dam was authorized and Dam project in accordance with the Water as a replacement for Locks and Dams 48 and 49 Resources Development Act of 1974. The under authority of Section 6 of the Rivers and problem area is located on the right bank of the Harbors Act, March 1909. Ohio River at Newburgh in Warrick County about 2 miles downstream from the dam. Public and The project is located on the Ohio River about 3- private property and facilities were threatened by 1/2 miles downstream from Uniontown, Kentucky. bank caving and erosion along 1.1 miles of the It provides a minimum channel depth of 9 feet river. Construction of bank revetment to provide extending from its site upstream some 70 miles to a permanent solution to the problem was started the Newburgh Locks and Dam. It provides for in July 1975 and completed in July 1976. The navigation through this reach of the river with only cost of the work was $1,612,000, including one lockage in lieu of two formerly required, and $1,000 cost to local interests for relocation has resulted in a substantial savings in assistance. Lands and rights-of-way required for transportation costs, as well as a reduction in the construction were donated by the owners. cost of maintaining and operating the existing Maintenance of the completed work is the facilities. The locks at the project consist of two responsibility of the town of Newburgh.

21

Jeffersonville Waterfront, On The Ohio River Ohio River and Minor Tributaries

23 Ohio River and Minor Tributaries

PROJECT LEGEND

1 - Lock and Dam Projects A Continuing Authority Projects

600 Cannelton Locks and Dam (Completed) 901 Corydon (Completed) 601 Markland Locks and Dam (Completed) 905 English (Completed) 602 McAlpine Locks and Dam (Completed) 909 Mt. Vernon (Completed) 603 Newburgh Locks and Dam (Completed) 911 Newburgh (Completed) 914 Rockport (Completed) 916 Troy (Completed) / V y Local Protection Projects 917 Evansville Ohio Street (Completed) 918 Madison (Completed) 801 Cannelton (Completed) 921 Rockport Landing (Completed) 802 Clarksville (Completed) 922 S.R. 6 6 , Cannelton (Completed) 806 Jeffersonville (Completed) 923 Sellersburg (Completed) 807 Lawrenceburg (Completed) 924 Vanderburgh County (Completed) 812 New Albany (Completed) 932 Lancassange Creek (Authorized) 815 Tell City (Completed) 935 Madison, City Gagage (Completed) 819 Evansville (Under Construction) 936 Madison, City Park (Completed)

24 Ohio River Basin contained in the Flood Control Ohio River and Minor Act of 1938.

Tributaries The project comprises a system of earth levee and concrete wall, with pumping facilities to Introduction dispose of sewage and drainage from the protected area during floods. It also Includes an extensive system of relief wells and collector This portion of the Ohio River Basin includes the drains which relieve the pressure of underground area along the main stem of the River, and all seepage water in the protected area during floods right bank tributaries within the limits of Indiana. and collect and carry the excess seepage to the The topography of the southern boundary of pumps for disposal. The project contains ramps Indiana lying adjacent to the Ohio ranges from and openings to permit traffic movement during gently undulating land forms with little relief in the nonflood periods; openings are closed by west, through areas of rugged, angular terrain movable gate structures during floods. The characterized by narrow flat divides bordered by protected area contains about 460 acres, and the steep valley slopes in the central area, to nearly project was completed in 1944. level, rolling lowland physiography, giving way to a dissected upland on a glacial drift to the east. The Local Interests fulfilled the requirements of local major urban areas are Jeffersonville, New Albany, cooperation and have maintained and operated and Evansville. The water resource development the project since its completion. Operation of the system in this area consists of six local protection protection works during the 1945 and 1948 floods projects, a bank protection project, and under indicated the necessity for modifying and continuing authorities, three small flood control augmenting the relief well and collector drain projects and twelve bank protection projects. system. This work was completed by the United Flows of the Ohio River along its 350-mile States in June 1952. Cost of the completed traverse of the southern Indiana boundary are project, including the additional relief well and substantially modulated by controls afforded by collector drain work, was $2,758,414, of which the upstream system of reservoirs. These $285,000 was the share of local interests. controls reduce flood flows and augment natural flows during periods of drought. The project, acting alone, affords protection to the city of Lawrenceburg against a flood equal in Projects magnitude to that of January 1937, the maximum flood of record. Projects for storage of flood flows constructed on Ohio River tributaries above Lawrenceburg Local Protection Lawrenceburg enhance somewhat the protection Project, Louisville District provided by the local project. It is estimated that flood damages amounting to $99.1 million have been prevented (through 1993) by the The project is located at Lawrenceburg on the Lawrenceburg project since its completion in right bank of the Ohio River in Dearborn County. 1944. More than 50 years before a Federal project was authorized, local interests initiated a long range program of construction, maintenance, and Jeffersonville—Clarksville operation of protective works for the city. When Local Protection Project, these works were found to be inadequate during the 1913 flood, local interests extended their Louisville District efforts to provide protection against recurrence of a flood of that magnitude. In this latter effort, they The project is located on the right bank of the were aided by Federal work relief agencies during Ohio River at the contiguous cities of the depression years. Jeffersonville and Clarksville in Clark County. It comprises a system of earth levee and concrete Following the 1937 flood, which overtopped the wall with pumping facilities to dispose of sewage existing levees by about 8 feet, the Federal project and drainage from the protected area during for local protection at Lawrenceburg was floods. The protection works contain ramps and undertaken under the general authorization for the openings to permit flow of traffic during nonflood

25 periods; openings are closed by movable gate The project protects the city of New Albany structures during floods. The protected area against a flood equal in magnitude to that of contains about 4,190 acres, and the project was January-February 1937, the maximum flood of completed in May 1949 at a total cost of record. Completed projects for storage of flood $4,817,000, of which $4,226,000 was Federal cost. flows on Ohio River tributaries above New Albany The remaining $591,000 was cost to local interests enhance the protection. It is estimated that flood who had met the requirements of local cooperation damages amounting to $6.1 million have been prescribed by existing laws, and who have prevented by the project through 1993. maintained and operated the completed project. Cannelton Local Protection The project, acting alone, affords protection to the cities of Jeffersonville and Clarksville, the Project, Louisville District community of Claysburg and contiguous suburban and agricultural areas against a flood equal in The project is located on the Ohio River at magnitude to that of January 1937, the maximum Cannelton in Perry County, and consists of a flood of record. A system of projects for storage of system of earth levee and concrete wall with flood flows on Ohio River tributaries upstream from pumping facilities to dispose of sewage and Jeffersonville serves to reduce floods of even drainage from the protected area during floods. greater magnitude, thereby enhancing the The protection works contain ramps and openings protection provided by the local project. to permit traffic movement during nonflood Completed portions of the protection work, periods; the openings are closed by movable gate combined with emergency measures, provided structures during floods. The protected area partial protection for the Jeffersonville—Clarksville contains about 400 acres, and the project was area during floods occurring prior to completion of completed in January 1952. Total Federal cost the project in 1949. It is estimated that flood was about $3,068,000, plus $29,000 cost to local damages amounting to about $32 million have interests. It was transferred to local interests for been prevented by the project through 1993. maintenance and operation in 1950, at which time it was sufficiently complete for use. The project affords protection to the city of Cannelton against New Albany Local Protection a flood equal in magnitude to that of January Project, Louisville District 1937, the maximum flood of record. Projects for storage of flood flows on the Ohio River tributaries The project is located on the right bank of the Ohio above Cannelton enhance the protection provided River at New Albany in Floyd County. It comprises by the local project. Although the project was not a system of 2.8 miles of earth levee, 0.7 mile of fully completed until January 1952, the partially concrete walls, and six pumping plants to dispose completed project, supplemented by emergency of drainage from the protected area during floods. measures, afforded significant protection to Ramps and openings, which are closed by Cannelton during the January 1950 flood. It is movable gate structures during floods, are estimated that tlood damages amounting to about provided to maintain the flow of traffic during $2.8 million have been prevented through 1993 by nonflood periods. The area protected contains the protective works. During the 1962 flood, a about 1,500 acres. Local interests have seepage problem developed under a section of maintained and operated the completed works the works, and remedial work was completed. since July 1954. Tell City Local Protection Project, The Federal cost of the completed work was about Louisville District $5,375,000. Total cost of the project was $6,239,000, of which $740,000 is the estimated share contributed by local interests. In addition, The project is located on the right bank of the local interests contributed $32,000 for modification Ohio at Tell City in Perry County. It comprises a of sewers in connection with floodwall construction, system of earth levee and a concrete wall with and $92,000 was paid by the Southern Railway pumping facilities to dispose of sewage and Company for provision of additional embankment drainage from the protected area during floods. along the downstream portion of the levee for track Ramps and openings have been provided in the relocation. This work was beyond the scope of the protection works to permit traffic movement during authorized Federal project. normal nonflood periods. The openings are

26 closed by movable gate structures during floods. The levee portion of Unit 2 Part 3 (from just east The protected area contains about 200 acres, and of Springtown Road to U.S. Highway 41) was the project was completed in 1943. Local completed in 1989 with the pumping plant interests have maintained and operated the completed in 1991. The remaining portion of the project since completion. The total cost of the local protection project, Unit 2 Part 4, (from U.S. project was $965,000, of which $33,000 was the Highway 41 to Diamond Avenue) under estimated share of local interests. construction since September 1992, is scheduled for completion in February 1994. Howell Section The project protects Tell City against a flood equal Unit 2 was deauthorized by Congress under in magnitude to that of January-February 1937, authority of Public Law 99-662, effective 19 July the maximum flood of record. Completed projects 1992. for storage of flood flows on Ohio River tributaries above Tell City enhance the protection provided The estimated cost (October 1992) of the by the local project. It is estimated that the project Evansville project is $50,154,000, of which has prevented flood damages at Tell City in the $44,654,000 will be Federal share and amount of about $10 million since completion. $5,500,000 the estimated local share. Maintenance and operation of the entire project, when completed, will be the responsibility of local Evansville Local Protection interests. The project, when completed and acting Project, (Under Construction) alone, will afford protection to vulnerable sections of the city of Evansville, containing an area of Louisville District about 6,470 acres against a flood equal in magnitude to that of January and February 1937. The project is located on the right bank of the Ohio Reservoirs on Ohio River tributaries above the River and both banks of Pigeon Creek in project area will enhance the protection. Vanderburgh County. It includes a system of Completed portions of the project have prevented earth levee, concrete wall, pumping facilities, and flood damages amounting to about $20.5 million provision for passing traffic during nonflood through 1993. periods. For construction purposes, the project was divided into three sections, identified as the Knight Township Section, the Pigeon Creek Continuing Authorities Section (Unit 1 and 2), and the Howell Section (Unit 1 and 2). The Knight Township Section and Unit 1 of the Howell Section have been completed Emergency Bank Protection since 1948, and the responsibility for maintenance Projects and operation of these completed portions of the project has been assumed by local interests. Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 provides authority for construction of emergency In June 1962, the State of Indiana, city of bank protection works to prevent flood damage to Evansville, and the Corps of Engineers agreed on highways, bridge approaches, and public works. construction of a combination highway and Local interests are responsible for cost sharing in floodwall for Pigeon Creek Unit 1, Dress Plaza the project construction cost and for operation area. This construction was completed in 1964. and maintenance of the completed project. Construction of the remainder of Pigeon Creek Unit 1 floodwall by the Corps of Engineers was completed in October 1965. Construction of Madison, Louisville District Sycamore Street and Ohio Street pumping stations with related sewer alterations, which was This streambank protection project was started in October 1965, is complete. constructed in December 1980 to protect two Construction of Pigeon Creek Section Unit 2 Part municipally owned water wells from erosion 1 (from Seventh Avenue and Pennsylvania Street caused by the Ohio River. The project is located to high ground at Cedar Street) was completed in at stream mile 557.0 (right bank) and consists of 1982. The levee/wall portion of Unit 2 Part 2 (from quarry stone placed over granular fill for a high ground at Keller Street to just east of distance of 600 feet. The total Federal cost of Springtown Road) was completed in 1986. The the project was $72,965. The completed project three pumping stations were completed in 1992. was transferred to the city of Madison.

27 Madison City Garage, Louisville Water Street near State Street. Subsequent to receipt of local cooperation, the remedial work was District completed in July 1957 at a Federal cost of $18,216. Additional work in May 1970 was limited Located on the left bank of Crooked Creek at the to locations where inspection indicated the bank Madison City Garage property in Jefferson condition was most critical. This work cost County, the project repaired a segment of the $49,000. In 1972, a 250-linear foot section of streambank which endangered two small public caving bank near the intersection of Monroe and buidling. The project was completed in October Water Streets was reshaped and riprapped at a 1993 at a total Federal construction cost of cost of $33,483. $6,000. Evansville, Ohio Street, Louisville Madison, City Park, Louisville District District This streambank protection project was Located on the left bank of Crooked Creek at constructed in March 1981 to protect the Ohio John Paul Park in Madison, Jefferson County, the Street Bridge over Pigeon Creek, and a section of project repaired a segment of the stream bank the street from erosion caused by the Ohio River. which endangered John Paul Park. The project The project is located at stream mile 792.9 (right was completed in October 1993 at a total Federal bank) and consists of quarry stone placed over construction cost of $17,000. Additional work to granular fill for a distance of 500 feet. Federal cost extend the project about 75 feet upstream at a of the project was $139,830, and the completed total Federal construction cost of $8,000 is project was transferred to the city of Evansville. pending. Mount Vernon Water Works, Troy, Louisville District Louisville District This project protects the municipal water supply wells at Troy, located on the right bank of the Located on the right bank of the Ohio River at Ohio River in Perry County. A reconnaissance Mount Vernon in Posey County, the project study under authority of Section 14 of the 1946 comprised revetment of the riverbank to protect Flood Control Act was completed in 1975. The the local water works building. The work was protection work consists of crushed rock placed completed in 1952 at a total Federal cost of over the riverbank in the area of the pumping $6,816. station. This protects the wells and precludes any need to relocate them further back on the bank. The Mount Vernon Waterworks protection was The work was completed in 1978 at a total subsequently removed by expansion of the Federal cost of $63,640. Waterworks site. The new site, nearby railroad embankment, and loading facilities are protected Rockport, Louisville District by a Corps of Engineers streambank erosion control demonstration project. Located on the right bank of the Ohio River at Rockport, in Spencer County, the project provides Rockport Landing, Louisville for repair of a segment of a city street which lies District between a rock bluff and the river. After receipt of assurances of local cooperation on the project, This streambank protection project was the work was completed in September 1960 at a constructed in January 1984 to protect a portion of Federal cost of $24,606. a public street from erosion caused by the Ohio River. The project is located at stream mile 747.2 Newburgh, Louisville District (right bank) and consists of quarry stone placed over granular fill for a distance of 240 feet. The Located on the right bank of the Ohio River at total cost of the project was $62,200, of which the Newburgh in Warrick County, the project repaired Federal portion was $52,200. The completed a segment of caving riverbank which endangered project was transferred to the city of Rockport.

28 Cannelton, State Road 66, limitations prescribed by law, provided each project is complete within itself and economically Louisville District justified. Local interests are responsible for cost sharing in the construction feasibility study and for This streambank protection project was operation and maintenance of the completed constructed in December 1983 to protect State project. Highway 66 from erosion caused by the Ohio River. The project is located at stream mile Lancassange Creek, Clark 719.0 (right bank) and consists of quarry stone placed over granular fill for a distance of 2,500 County, Indiana, feet. The total cost of the project was $169,174, Louisville District of which the Federal portion was $112,170. The completed project was transferred to the Indiana This project will provide flood damage reductions State Highway Commission. to Clark County, Indiana from flood stages along Lancassange Creek. The project will consist of Sellersburg, Louisville District 1.73 miles of channel improvement and 1.56 miles of channel clearing of debris and fallen trees on This streambank protection project in Clark Lancassange Creek. The total estimated Federal County was constructed in January 1984 to cost in $920,336. Construction is expected to be protect a water supply well from erosion caused initiated in mid 1994. by the Ohio River. The project is located at stream mile 599.3 (right bank) and consists of Corydon, Louisville District quarry stone placed over granular fill for a distance of 250 feet. The total cost of the project The project is located in Harrison County and was $50,586, of which the Federal portion was consists of channel improvement extending above $30,700. The completed project was transferred Corydon on Indian and Little Indian Creeks and to the town of Sellersburg. below their junction some 2.5 miles. The work provides for enlargement of about 3.3 miles of Vanderburgh County, Indian Creek channel and about 1.1 mile of Little Indian Creek channel in areas at and in the vicinity Louisville District of Corydon. Replacement of a temporary bridge over Indian Creek with a permanent structure and This streambank protection project was modifications of utilities, railroad bridges, and fords constructed in January 1984 to protect Old were also required. The work was begun in Henderson Road from erosion caused by the August 1962 and completed in October 1963. The Ohio River. The project is located at stream mile Federal cost was $300,143. 799.5 (right bank) and consists of quarry stone placed over granular fill for a distance of 360 feet. English, Louisville District The total cost of the project was $57,440, of which the Federal portion was $55,600. The A project for flood relief for English and Crawford completed project was transferred to County agricultural land in the vicinity was Vanderburgh County. constructed between October 1963 and November 1964. The Federal work consisted of improvement Small Flood Control Projects of 3.4 miles of the Little Blue River channel at and downstream from English. The rights-of-way and Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 alterations to bridges and utilities were the provides authority for the Corps of Engineers to responsibility of the town of English. The Federal develop and construct small flood control projects cost of the work was $372,352.

29 Surveys

Name of Investigation Purpose Status

Pigeon Creek Watershed in Review of prior reports to The study is awaiting funding vicinity of Evansville, Indiana determine the advisability of (Louisville District) providing improvements for flood control and allied purposes in the Pigeon Watershed

Ohio River, Greenway Corridor, FY 93 Congressional add to study A conceptual Master Plan and Indiana (Louisville District) a Greenway Corridor parallel and Budgetary Cost Estimate for the adjacent to the Ohio River on the Ohio River Greenway Corridor is shoreline of Jeffersonville, currently being developed. The Clarksville, and New Albany, study is scheduled for completion Indiana. in May 1994.

Ohio River, Indiana Shoreline To investigate the condition of six Reconnaissance stage underway Flood Protection Works Study existing Ohio River flood in 1994; Scheduled for completion protection projects built by the in March 1995. Corps of Engineers from 1943 to 1954, and operated and maintained by the cities of Evansville, Tell City, Cannelton, New Albany, Lawrenceburg and Jeffersonville-Clarksville, Indiana. The study will evaluate remedial measures to assure the continued functioning of these projects.

30 BrookviiieLake Whitewater River Basin

31 Whitewater River Basin

SCALE IN MILES PROJECT LEGEND 10______0_____ 10 20 Multiple-Purpose Projects

700 BrOOkville Lake (Completed)

A Continuing Authority Projects

925 Levee Road (Completed) 931 Hagerstown (Under Construction)

32 siltation reserve and conservation and for a Whitewater River higher seasonal pool for recreation and flow regulation. The State of Indiana has contracted Basin for the inclusion of storage for water supply as a purpose of the project. The total cost of Introduction Brookville Lake was $45,402,865, of which $37,804,367 was Federal cost and $7,598,198 is non-Federal contribution for water supply storage. The Whitewater River, a tributary of the Miami River, drains 1,493 square miles in southeastern Brookville Lake is operated for flood control in the Indiana and southwestern Ohio, with the majority Whitewater Valley and also contributes to the in Indiana. It is formed by the confluence of the reduction of flood flows in the Ohio River. In East and West Forks at Brookville, Indiana. The addition, the lake was developed for general and East Fork drains 340 square miles and the West fish and wildlife recreational use and for municipal Fork drains 840 square miles in Indiana. and industrial water supply. Advanced Topography in the basin ranges from gently engineering and design for the project began in rolling to hilly, and the land use is predominantly 1963. Construction was started in November rural. 1965 and completed in January 1974. Completed recreation facilities include boat launching ramps, The major water project in the basin is the camping, picnic units, a swimming beach, a multipurpose Brookville Lake on the East Fork of change house, a tailwater fishing area, and Whitewater River in Franklin and Union Counties. associated roads and parking areas. These It controls runoff from a drainage area of 379 facilities were completed for use during the square miles, reduces flood stages at agricultural summer of 1975. Visitors to the project in FY 93 lands below the dam, at the towns of Brookville, totaled over 1.9 million. Flood damages Cedar Grove, and West Harrison, and contributes prevented since project completion are estimated to a reduction of flood damages along the Ohio to be $3.9 million through 1993. River. There are two continuing authority projects in the basin authorized under Section 205. One is completed, and the other is Continuing Authorities underway. Emergency Bank Protection Projects Projects

Brookville Lake, Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 provides authority for construction of emergency Louisville District bank protection works to prevent flood damage to highways, bridge approaches, and public works. Brookville Lake was authorized under the general Local interests are responsible for cost sharing in authorization for the Ohio River basin contained the project construction cost and for operation in the Flood Control Act approved 28 June 1938 and maintenance of the completed project. (Public Law 761,75th Congress, 3rd Session). This lake is located in Franklin and Union Whitewater River, Levee Road, Counties on the East Fork of the Whitewater River. The dam is about 0.5 miles above Louisville District Brookville and controls the runoff from a drainage area of 379 square miles. The dam is an earth This streambank protection project was and rock fill structure, 181 feet in height and constructed in November 1984 to protect a 2,900 feet long, with gate controlled outlet works county road from erosion caused by the West and an uncontrolled open cut spillway around the Fork Whitewater River. The project is located at right abutment. At full flood control pool level, stream mile 32.9 (right bank) and consists of elevation 775, the lake has a surface area of quarry stone placed over granular fill for a 7,790 acres and a flood control storage capacity distance of 850 feet. The total Federal cost of of 214,700 acre-feet. In addition to storage for the project was $102,659. The completed project flood control, allocations of storage are made for was transferred to Franklin County.

33 Small Flood Control Projects Hagerstown, Louisville District

Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948, as This project will afford flood damage reductions to amended, provides authority for the Chief of the city of Hagerstown from flood stages along Engineers to develop and construct small flood the Whitewater River. The project is composed control projects, within cost limitations prescribed of 0.3 mile of channel diversion, 1.0 mile of by law, provided each project is complete itself channel improvement, 0.9 mile of clearing and and economically justified. Local interests are snagging, and construction of 530 linear feet of responsible for cost sharing in the construction earth levee. The total project cost is estimated at cost and feasibility study costs and for operation $567,400, of which $525,100 is the Federal cost. and maintenance of the completed project. The project is currently under construction.

Studies

Name of Investigation Purpose Status

Whitewater River and Tributaries, Review of Prior reports to This study has been placed in Indiana and Ohio determine whether an inactive category. (Louisville District) improvements for flood control and allied purposes are advisable.

34 Indianapolis on the White River W a b S S h R Ì V C f B a S Ì l l

35 Wabash River Basin

ILLINOIS INDIANA OHIO

2 EAST FORK WHITE RIVER SUB-BASIN

3 PATOKA RIVER SUB-BASIN

36 lying flat lands along the main stem of the Wabash Wabash River Basin River in the southwest. Major floods generally occur in the winter and spring, sometimes causing Introduction devastating economic losses and human suffering. Some of the Wabash Basin above the mouth of the Patoka River consists of broad flat The Wabash River has played an important role in lowlands; consequently, annual flooding is a the history of the nation. It was used extensively perennial problem. The major tributaries of the as a trade route by native Americans; by the Wabash River are the Salamonie, Mississinewa, French and English explorers and traders; by the Eel, Tippecanoe, White, and Patoka Rivers. early settlers of the area; and today, it still is a vital resource. The headwaters of the Wabash Traditionally, the has been River begin in Mercer County, Ohio, and the river oriented around agriculture because of the rich flows 475 miles to its confluence with the Ohio soils, abundant water, and favorable climate; but River. The Wabash is the second largest tributary there is considerable industrialization in the major of the Ohio River with a total drainage area of urban centers of Indianapolis, Muncie, Anderson, 33,100 square miles, of which 24,218 are in and Terre Haute. Indiana—about two-thirds of the entire state. Hence, the water resource development in the For the purpose of this publication, the Wabash basin is as important to the heart of the state as is River Basin has been divided into two parts, the that of the Ohio River to the southern area. The Upper Basin and the Lower Basin. The Lower topography of the basin is extremely diverse with Basin has been further divided into three a relief of flat to generally rolling character in the subbasins, the White River, the East Fork of north, hilly to rugged terrain in the south, and low White River, and the Patoka River.

SURVEYS

Name of Investigation Purpose Status

Wabash River Basin To determine the advisability of The reconnaissance report was Comprehensive-Middle Reaches providing flood protection for completed in March 1991 and Interim Study about 10,000 acres of agricultural recommended further study for land in southern Vigo County, an agricultural levee and Indiana and to determine the environmental restoration in the advisability of implementing an Greenfield Bayou area of environmental restoration project southern Vigo County. The for the area. Vigo County and cost-shared feasibility study was Indiana Department of Natural initiated in April 1993. Resources are partners with the Corps on this feasibility study effort.

Wabash River Basin To provide detailed mapping, The study was initiated in FY 1990 Comprehensive Study, surveys and design work to assist with emphasis on mapping and Wabash Scenic Corridor the state and area planning plans for a scenic corridor in the agencies in developing a scenic Lafayette area. The study area corridor along the Wabash River has been expanded to include in Tippecanoe and Fountain West Lafayette and the river Counties, Indiana. corridor through Fountain County.

Indianapolis, Marion County Flood control feasibility study Study was initiated in March 1993 North, Indiana investigating flood problems and with a scheduled completion in solutions along the White River in April 1996. northern Indianapolis. Solutions being considered include rehabilitating and/or improving existing levees as well as new levees. The study is being cost shared by the City of Indianapolis. 37 SURVEYS (Continued)

Name of Investigation Purpose Status

Indianapolis, Indiana, Marion Flood control reconnaissance Reconnaissance report completed County South study investigated flooding in September 1993. Section 205 problems and needs along the feasibility studies to be initiated in White River and tributaries in 1994. southern Indianapolis. Focus of the study was on improving existing levees and constructing new levees, in some cases supplemented with pump plants and detention basins. The study recommended additional feasibility levee studies (under the Continuing Authorities Program) of two projects along Lick Creek.

Indianapolis Central Waterfront, Reconnaissance study completed Planning and preparation of plans White River, Indiana. in October 1994 investigated and specs for one area of interest traditional flood control identified in the master plan is improvements along the White ongoing in fiscal year 1994. River in central improvements along the White River in central Indianapolis, while also developing a conceptual master plan for waterfront improvements in central Indianapolis. With the exception of additional studies recommended for lower Pogues Run the flood control findings were negative. Of ten areas of interest identified in the master plan, one is being further developed with funding appropriated in fiscal year 1994.

Grange County Indiana, Lost To determine Federal interest in Reconnaissance study underway River flood control improvements for the with a scheduled completion due Lost River Basin, in particular the in June 1994. communities of Orleans, Paoli, French Lick and West Baden Springs to investigate the unique environmental features and assets of the Lost River Basin within Orange County.

Upper Tippecanoe River Basin To determine whether flood control Reconnaissance study will be measures in Koscuisko, Whitely initiated in the spring of 1994. and Noble counties are advisable at this time. Flooding occurs along the Upper Tippecanoe River, tributary streams and to properties located adjacent to several lakes in the area.

38 Huntington Lake Upper Wabash River Basin

39 Upper Wabash River Basin

Continuing Authority Projects

Merom (Completed) Portland (Completed) Salamonie River Logjams (Completed) Wabash River Logjams (Completed) Hartford City, Licking Creek (Authorized) Salamonie River, Jay & Blackford Counties (Completed) Wabash River, Tippecanoe Creek (Completed) Nameless Creek, Warren County (Completed) Brevoort (Completed) South Fork Wildcat Creek, Tippecanoe Delphi (Completed) County (Completed) Gill Township (Completed) Terre Haute, Wabash River (Completed) Lyford (Completed) Niblack (Completed) Terre Haute (Conover Levee) (Completed) Vincennes (Partially Completed) West Terre Haute (Completed) Greenfield Bayou (Authorized-Inactive) Island levee (Authorized-Inactive) Marion (Authorized-Inactive)

SCALE IN M ILES

40 During most of the year a small pool covering Upper Wabash River 500 acres is maintained. However, at the end of each flood season, the pool level is raised so Basin that 900 acres are covered, thereby providing a seasonal recreation pool. During the flood season, 149,000 acre-feet of storage is available Introduction for temporary retention of flood flows. At full flood control pool, the lake has an area of 7,900 acres. The Upper Wabash River Basin includes the The city of Markle, Indiana, is provided with local drainage area of the river from its headwaters to protection against encroachment by the flood above the mouth of the White River, and is located water storage. The project there consists of a in the north central portion of the state. The major diversion channel, levee, drainage facilities, and tributaries of the Wabash in the upper portion are a pumping plant. the Eel, Mississinewa, Salamonie, and Tippecanoe Rivers, and Raccoon Creek in mid-basin. The The lake operates for three purposes: as a unit general topography is gently rolling with shallow with the Mississinewa and Salamonie Lakes to relief and many natural lakes in the north, to low- reduce flood states in the Upper Wabash River lying plains in the south where floods are common. Basin, and with other lakes downstream in Grain farming is an important sector of the total reduction of Lower Wabash and Ohio River economy because of the fertile plains within the floods; to supplement low flows during dry basin. The major urban centers in the basin are seasons; and to provide recreational Terre Haute, Lafayette, Kokomo, and Marion. opportunities. Recreation facilities are located at the Kilsoquah camping area, the Little Turtle The water resources development system in this State Recreation area, the Arrowhead fishing area consists of six lakes, 10 local protection area, and three boat launching ramps. The projects, and eleven continuing authority projects. recreation facilities are maintained and operated Thousands of acres of bottom land are protected by the State of Indiana, Department of Natural against flooding by levees along the Wabash River. Resources, under a lease agreement with the Corps of Engineers. Visitors to Huntington Lake Projects in 1993 totaled 477,577. The project was authorized by the Flood Control Huntington Lake, Act of 1958. Construction began in June 1963 and was completed in October 1968. The total Louisville District cost was $19,621,777, of which $349,166 was non-Federal contributed by the State of Indiana. Huntington Dam is located in the headwaters of the It is estimated that the project has prevented Wabash River in Huntington County about 2 miles flood damages amounting to $73.3 million south of the town of Huntington. It is approximately through 1993. 60 air miles northeast of Indianapolis. The dam is on the Wabash River, 411.4 miles above the mouth; Salamonie Lake, the lake controls runoff from a drainage area of 707 square miles and extends into Wells County. Louisville District

The Huntington Lake dam consists of a combination Salamonie Dam is located in Wabash County, of a combination 4,800-foot long earth filled about 10 miles east of Wabash, 15 miles north of embankment with a height of 104 feet, and a 532- Marion, and approximately 50 air miles northeast foot long concrete gravity outlet section (including a of Indianapolis. The dam is at mile 3.1 on the 155-foot wide grated spillway) in the center of the Salamc lie River, a tributary of the Wabash. The dam. The dam embankment consists of compacted lake, which controls runoff from a drainage area impervious and random earth fill. The concrete of 553 square miles, extends into Huntington overflow spillway has three 45-foot wide by 35-foot County. The dam is 133 feet high, 6,100 feet high tainter gates. The outlet works consists of six long and constructed with impervious and 6-by 6-foot vertical lift sluice gates and one 30-inch random earth. The spillway is an uncontrolled low flow bypass valve discharging to a 155-by 154- earth channel 575 feet wide and approximately foot stilling basin. 3,600 feet upstream through the right abutment.

41 The gate controlled outlet works provide a Mississinewa Lake, flexible regulation of flows into a 16-foot diameter circular concrete conduit which augments the Louisville District spillway in passing the maximum probable flow. Operational flexibility is achieved using three Mississinewa Dam is located in north central service gates and two bypass valves provided in Indiana in Miami County about 7 miles southeast the outlet works. The bypass valves are used to of Peru, about 19 miles northwest of Marion, and pass small flows when maintaining pool approximately 65 air miles north and east of elevations. The service gates are used to Indianapolis. The dam is at mile 7.1 on the regulate releases of stored floodwater and to Mississinewa River, a tributary of the Wabash pass releases that are greater than the capacity River. The lake, which controls runoff from a of the bypasses. drainage area of 809 square miles, lies in Wabash, Miami, and Grant counties. The dam is 140 feet The lake is operated for three purposes: as a unit high, 8,000 feet long, and is constructed of earth with Huntington and Mississinewa Lakes to fill. reduce flood stages in the Upper Wabash River Basin, with other lakes downstream in reduction The spillway is an uncontrolled earth channel of Lower Wabash and Ohio River floods; to 1,550 feet wide and approximately 7,500 feet long increase low streamflows on the Salamonie through the right abutment. The gate controlled River; and to increase recreational opportunities. outlet works provide a flexible regulation of flows into a 16-foot diameter circular concrete conduit For seasonal flow regulation a storage capacity which augments the spillway in passing the of 47,600 acre-feet provided between elevations maximum probable flow. Operational flexibility is 730 and 755. At elevation 755, the lake has an achieved using three service gates and two bypass area of 2,665 acres. A storage capacity of valves provided in the outlet works. The bypass 250,500 acre-feet between elevations 730 and valves are used to pass small flows when 793 is available for temporary retention of flood maintaining pool elevations. The service gates are flows. At full flood control pool, the lake has a used to regulate releases of stored floodwater and surface area of 9,340 acres with a total storage to pass releases that are greater than the capacity capacity of 263,600 acre-feet. of the bypasses.

The project was authorized by the Flood Control The lake is operated for three purposes: as a unit Act of July 1958. Construction began in with Huntington and Salamonie Lakes to reduce December 1961 and the project was completed flood stages in the Upper Wabash River Basin and in September 1966. The total cost was with other lakes downstream in reduction of Lower $17,046,151, of which $16,559,905 was Federal Wabash and Ohio River floods; to increase low cost and $486,246 was non-Federal contributed streamflows on the Mississinewa River; and to by the State of Indiana. It is estimated that the provide recreation opportunities. Visitors to project has prevented flood damages in the Mississinewa Lake in 1990 totaled 729,427. amount of $110.5 million through 1993. For seasonal flow regulation, a storage capacity of Project lands and waters have been leased to 51,900 acre-feet is provided between elevations the State of Indiana for operation and 712 and 737. At elevation 737, the lake has an administration. Recreation facilities at six sites area of 3,180 acres. The lake is maintained at include picnic tables, shelter houses, parking elevation 737 except when drawdown is necessary areas, water fountains, nature trail, boat ramps, to meet downstream flow requirements. A storage restrooms, beach, marina, boat rentals, and capacity of 345,100 acre-feet between elevations modern, primitive and group camping areas. The 712 and 779 is available for temporary retention of facilities are maintained and operated by the flood flows during the winter. At full flood control State of Indiana, Department of Natural pool, the lake has a surface area of 12,830 acres Resources, under a lease arrangement with the with a total storage capacity of 368,400 acre-feet. Corps of Engineers. In addition, the Salamonie River State Forest, the Dora Covered Bridge, The project was authorized by the Flood Control and the Hanging Rock are places of interest Act of July 1958. Construction began in April 1962 located near the dam. Visitors to Salamonie and was completed in October 1967. The cost was Lake totaled 526,226 in 1993. $23,834,000 of which $23,596,000 was Federal

42 cost and $238,000 was non-Federal contributed stilling basin. Two small multiple stage outlets by the State of Indiana. It is estimated that the with facilities for reoxygenation would be provided project has prevented flood damages along the for low flow control. An earth levee about 2,000 Wabash and Ohio Rivers downstream from the feet long with pumping and drainage facilities dam in the amount of about $102 million through would provide flood protection to the low portion of 1989. the cemetery at Dayton by the lake storage.

Delphi Local Protection Project, The lake would serve the purposes of flood control, general recreation, and fish and wildlife Louisville District recreation. A permanent pool covering 3,220 acres would be maintained at elevation 600. It The project is located on the Wabash River at would have a storage capacity of 64,520 acre-feet Delphi in Carroll County. It comprises a system of and form a pool 11 miles long. Above this earth levees and drainage structures. The project permanent pool, a storage capacity of 267,360 includes four separated short lengths of earth acre-feet would be reserved for the temporary levee having an aggregate length of about 0.6 storage of flood flows. At full pool, elevation 645, mile, manholes and gates for two highway the lake would have an area of 9,580 acres. The drainage structures, and the provision of additional October 1976 estimated total cost of the project is drainage facilities. The protected area contains $118,533,000, which includes a non-Federal about 310 acres. contribution of $13,565,000. Detailed advanced engineering and design studies were started in The project was completed in January 1952 at a 1966 and were nearing completion in 1976 when cost of $162,727 of which $144,563 was provided the withdrew state support of by the Federal Government. It was transferred to the project. All work on the project was stopped at local interests for maintenance and operation in that time. Federal costs through 1979 were 1951, at which time the project could be operated $1,201,000 for advanced engineering and design. effectively for flood control. It was approved under The project was placed in the inactive category in the authorization for the Ohio River Basin January 1977. contained in the Flood Control Act of 1946. Big Pine Lake (Authorized), The project affords protection for Delphi against a flood equal in magnitude to that of March 1913, Louisville District the maximum flood of record in that area. To some extent, operation of upstream storage The lake would be located in Warren County on projects enhances protection. It is estimated that Big Pine Creek, a tributary of Wabash River, with the project has prevented flood damages the dam located 2.7 miles upstream from the amounting to $398,000 through 1993. junction of the two streams. It would control runoff from a 326-square-mile drainage area above the Lafayette Lake (Authorized), dam. The dam would consist of a concrete section 670 feet long with rolled earth fill sections of 30- Louisville District foot top width on each abutment. The dam would have a maximum height of 154 feet and a total The lake would be located in Tippecanoe, Clinton, length of 6,500 feet at top elevation 462 feet mean and Carroll Counties on Wildcat Creek, a tributary sea level. The concrete gravity spillway with a of Wabash River, with the dam located 7.2 miles crest elevation of 629 feet mean sea level would above the mouth of the stream. It would control be equipped with three tainter gates 40 feet wide runoff from a 791 square mile drainage area by 40 feet high with a crest at elevation 636, top above the dam. The dam would be an earth of flood control pool. Non-overflow concrete embankment having a length of 3,540 feet, a sections flank the spillway and tie into the earth fill maximum height of 130 feet, and top elevation of of each abutment. Four sluices through the 645 feet above mean sea level. The spillway spillway section, 4 feet by 7 feet with a slide gate would be an uncontrolled open channel with a near the upstream end of each would provide 530-foot bottom width through the right abutment. means for regulation of normal outflows from the The outlet works would consist of a control tower lake. To enhance fishing, two small multiple flow with two gates discharging into an oblong concrete outlets with reoxygenating facilities would be conduit along the right abutment leading to the provided downstream of the dam.

43 The lake would serve the purposes of flood control, $6,987,807, of which $6,260,134 was the Federal general recreation, and fish and wildlife recreation. cost. The lake is being operated for flood control A seasonal pool covering 1,422 acres would be and seasonal flow regulation in the Raccoon maintained at elevation 570. It would have a Creek and Wabash River Valleys and as a unit of storage capacity of 29,000 acre-feet and would the coordinated lake system for flood protection in form a pool about 8 miles long. Above the the Ohio River Basin. To the extent consistent minimum pool (elevation 543), a storage capacity with primary purposes of the project, the lake of 199,400 acre-feet would be reserved for the area is being developed for the beneficial use of temporary storage of flood flows. At full p* ol, agricultural lands, forests, and fish and wildlife elevation 629, the lake would have an area of resources and for recreational activities. The 4,070 acres. The October 1976 estimated cost of State of Indiana has undertaken the development the project is $51,200,000 which includes a non- and management of recreation facilities under a Federal contribution of $4,999,000. Funds lease granted by the Secretary of the Army. appropriated for advanced engineering and design Visitors to Cecil M. Harden Lake, in FY 93 totaled total $1,270,600 through 1979. Advanced 915,456. Flood damages prevented since the engineering and design studies indicated lake has been in operation are estimated to be questionable feasibility of the project and all work about $54.1 million through 1993. Originally has been stopped. The project was placed In the named Mansfield Lake, the project was renamed inactive category in April 1977. by the U.S. Congress in 1974 in recognition of Mrs. Cecil Murray Harden for her role in obtaining Cecil M. Harden funds for the project. Mrs. Harden was recognized as one of the most active members of (Mansfield) Lake, the community, serving in positions on the local, Louisville District state, and national levels. Mrs. Harden served five terms in the U.S. Congress beginning in This lake is in Parke and Putnam Counties on 1949. Raccoon Creek, a tributary of Wabash River. The dam is near Ferndale, some 33 miles above the Lyford Levee mouth of the creek. The project controls runoff Local Protection Project, from a drainage area of 216 square miles by means of an earth dam 1,960 feet long and 119 Louisville District feet in maximum height and a 1600 foot long, 18 foot high earth dike. An uncontrolled spillway The Lyford Levee project is located on the left through the left abutment prevents overtopping the bank of the Wabash River in Parke County. Local dam structure. The minimum pool in the lake is not interests constructed the original levee in 1889 to constant, as it is established at elevation 640 afford protection to the area. It was overtopped during flood season and at elevation 661 during the and breached in the 1913 and 1922 floods, and dry season. Thus, the lake storage capacity varies was repaired and restored after each flood. between 33,100 acre-feet for temporary storage of Successive failures, repairs, or restorations flood flows during the summer season to 116,600 occurred again in 1930 and 1933. acre-feet during the season when floods are most likely to occur. Near the close of the flood season, The Flood Control Act of June 1936 authorized a the pool is raised to elevation 661 which provides a Federal project for the Lyford area. However, surface area of 2,060 acres. Water stored in this before the work could be accomplished, the pool is available for release during the dry summer original levee was breached again during the flood months to augment low flows in the Wabash River. of 1939. Construction of the Federal project was This lake project was selected for construction initiated following that flood. The project under the general authorization for the Ohio River comprised complete reconstruction of the original Basin contained in an act of Congress (Public Law levee to a higher grade and with a heavier levee No. 761,75th Congress, 3rd Session) approved in section, with outlets to dispose of drainage from 1938 (generally referred to as the Flood Control the protected area, and with ramps over the levee Act of 1938). to permit traffic flow during non-flood periods. The project was essentially completed in 1941. Construction was started in October 1956 and the The flood of May 1943 again overtopped the project has been in operation for flood control since levee causing failures, and it was restored by the August 1960. Cost of the completed project was United States.

44 The total cost of the completed Federal project, the City of West Terre Haute against a flood that including the cost of repairs following the 1943 may be expected to occur on an average of once in flood, was $291,000, of which $267,391 was 100 years. It consists of about 2.8 miles of Federal cost. Local interests have maintained and protection works, primarily earth levee, with traffic operated the project since November 1943. ramps, highway and railroad closures, and internal drainage disposal facilities. The Lyford Levee project affords protection to about 3,500 acres of agricultural land against a flood equal The total project cost is $1,245,000, of which in magnitude to one which can be expected to occur $1,095,704 is cost to the United States. Local on an average of seven times during a 100-year assurances were received, all rights-of-way were period. It is estimated that the project has acquired, and construction started in 1970. prevented flood damages in the amount of about Construction was completed in January 1972. It is $7.9 million through 1993. Operation of the estimated that the project has prevented flood completed Cecil M. Harden Lake as well as other damages totaling $6.2 million since completion. upstream lakes in the Wabash River Basin above the project enhances the protection afforded by the Greenfield Bayou Levee Lyford project. (Authorized), Louisville District

Terre Haute (Conover Levee) Local The project was authorized by the Flood control Act Protection Project, Louisville of July 1946. Improvement and extension of an District existing levee and provision of internal drainage and traffic facilities constitute the authorized project which would be located on the left bank of the The Terre Haute project was authorized by the Wabash River in southern Vigo County, Flood Control Act of 1936 and originally consisted of downstream from Terre Haute. It would afford raising and enlarging Conover Levee, which protection to an agricultural area on about 11,400 protected about 130 acres of partially developed acres against a flood which would be expected to land at the northern edge of the city. The cost of occur on an average of seven times in 100 years. this project was estimated in 1954 to be $199,000. The total project cost is estimated (October 1978) Before the work was undertaken, U.S. Highway 41 to be $5,687,000. It is estimated that division of the was relocated on a high fill slightly landward of the total cost would be $4.6 million to the United States levee. Since the roadway was higher than the and $1,087,000 to local interests. Detailed grade proposed for the levee, the highway fill was advanced engineering and design studies are used as a levee. At a Federal cost of $14,913, a complete. Due to the failure of local interests to concrete headwall and floodgates were added to the provide updated assurances, the project was 36-inch culvert under the highway. placed in the inactive category in June 1979. Completed in October 1964, the modified project protects, with ample freeboard, 110 acres of land Island Levee (Authorized), against a Wabash River flood having an expected Louisville District frequency of once in 100 years. It is estimated that the project has prevented flood damages at Terre The project was authorized by the Flood Control Haute in the amount of about $102,000 since Act of July 1946. It would protect about 5,300 completion. acres of agricultural land in Sullivan County, across the Wabash River from York and Hutsonville, West Terre Haute Illinois. The area is between the left bank of the Local Protection Project, Wabash River and the right bank of Truman Creek, a tribute ry. The project would include enlargement, Louisville District realignment, reconstruction and extension of the existing levee system, and necessary traffic ramps The project was contained in the general and interior drainage outlets. Protection would be authorization for the Ohio River Basin contained in provided against a Wabash River flood which can the Flood Control Act of June 1938. It is located on be expected to occur on an average of seven times the right bank of the Wabash River in Vigo County, in a 100-year period. The cost of this project was and affords protection with adequate freeboard to estimated in October 1978 to be $5,158,000, of

45 which the Federal share would be $4,630,000 and Mason J. Niblack Levee, $528,000 would be the cost to local interests. Advanced engineering and design studies Louisville District indicated the project was not economically feasible. The project was placed in the inactive The project was authorized by the Flood Control category in July 1979. Act of July 1946. The Niblack Levee project is located on the left bank of the Wabash River in Gill Township Levee Knox and Sullivan Counties in . The original levee was erected in 1909 Local Protection Project, and improved in 1930 by local interests. The levee Louisville District was damaged by floods occurring in 1942 and 1944 and was subsequently repaired by the The Gill Township project is located on the left Federal Government in 1943 and 1944. Damages bank of the Wabash River in Sullivan County. It caused by floods of 1949 and 1950 were repaired comprises a system of earth levees with pumps to by the Federal Government in 1950 and 1951, dispose of drainage from the protected area respectively. during flood periods. The protective works contain ramps and one opening to permit passage Construction of 18 miles of earth levee consisting of traffic during non-flood periods. The opening is of 5.8 miles of new levee, 1.3 miles of levee closed by a movable gate structure. enlargement, 7.2 miles of levee setback, 3.7 miles of levee enlargement, 7.2 miles of levee setback, Prior to authorization of a Federal project for this 3.7 miles of levee turn-over, and appurtenant area by the Flood Control Act of June 1936, local drainage structures, was started in March 1962. interests had developed the basic levee system This work was completed in April 1965 and and drainage disposal facilities. This was found to transferred to local interests for operation and be inadequate to withstand the 1913 flood which maintenance. Construction of pumping facilities overtopped the levee. Local interests restored the authorized by Section 211 of the 1968 Flood project following that flood. At the time the Control Act was started in 1975 and completed in Federal project was authorized, local interests had 1976. The Federal cost of the project was expended $172,600 on the protection works. $4,337,617 and the cost to local interests was $109,000. The Gill Township project affords protection to an agricultural area of about 12,000 acres and the The Niblack Levee project affords protection to small community of Riverton; however, it does not approximately 15,900 acres of agricultural land afford protection from a flood of 1913 magnitude. against a flood equal in magnitude to one which It is estimated that the project has prevented flood can be expected to occur on an average of seven damages amounting to about $45.1 million since times in 100 years with 1 foot of freeboard. It is 1941. Protection afforded by this project is estimated that the project has prevented flood enhanced somewhat by operation of the Cecil M. damages amounting to about $27.6 million through Harden Lake as well as the other upstream lakes 1993. in the Wabash River Basin. Vincennes The Federal project provided enlargement of the Local Protection Project, levee in section and height, increased pumping facilities, and appurtenant works. However, the Louisville District flood of May 1943 damaged the levee, although no failure occurred, and indicated the need for The project is located on the left bank of the additional drainage measures. Repairs of the Wabash River at Vincennes in Knox County. Be­ damaged areas and additional drainage facilities tween 1929 and 1940 local interests, with Federal were completed following the 1943 flood. The Emergency Relief Administration assistance, pro­ Federal project was completed in June 1946 at a vided a protective system to alleviate the city’s total cost of $581,200, of which $561,200 was flood problem. However, this system did not afford cost to the United States and $20,000 to others. the degree of protection desired. Local interests have met the requirements prescribed by law, including maintenance and The Federal project, authorized by the Flood operation of the project since its completion. Control Act of July 1946, comprises a system of

46 levees and concrete walls, including new the levee section along the Wabash River have construction and enlargement of some existing been deferred until the need is demonstrated, and works, alteration of three railroad bridges, and alteration of the railroad bridge has not been necessary facilities. Ramps and openings are scheduled. The estimated cost (October 1978) of provided in the works to permit unobstructed the authorized project is $3,785,000, of which traffic movement during non-flood periods. $3.51 million is Federal and $275,000 local. Construction of the Federal project (Section A Federal costs to date total $1.24 million. and part of Section B) was completed in June 1962. Work on the remaining sections of levee The Brevoort project affords protection to about had been placed in an inactive category and was 50,000 acres of agricultural land and the deauthorized by PL 99-662 in November 1986. communities of Cathlinette, Zigville, St. Thomas, The estimated total cost (October 1978) of the and Brevoort against a flood equal in magnitude entire authorized project is $7,034,000, of which to one which could be expected to occur on the $285,000 is the estimated share of local interests. average of about seven times in 100 years. The The degree of protection at the present time is degree of protection afforded by the project is limited to that provided by the adjoining Brevoort enhanced by operation of flood control lakes in Levee. Flood damages prevented by the partially the Wabash River Basin upstream from the completed project approximate $223.8 million project area. It is estimated that from 1943 to through 1993. 1993 the project has prevented flood damages amounting to about $131.2 million. Brevoort Levee Local Protection Project, Continuing Authorities Louisville District Snagging and Clearing Projects The Brevoort Levee project is located in Knox County, between the Wabash and White Rivers Section 3 of the River and Harbor Act of 1945 at their confluence. The project includes a and Section 208 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 system of earth levees extending from Vincennes provide authority for the Chief of Engineers to downstream along the east bank of the Wabash snag and clear streams in the interest of and upstream along the west bank of the White. navigation and flood control. Local interests are Pumping facilities are provided to dispose of responsible for cost sharing in the construction drainage from the protected area. Prior to costs and for operation and maintenance of the authorization of the Federal project by the Flood completed project. Control Act of June 1936, local interests had constructed a levee system with drainage facilities. However, the protective works were Wabash River Logjam inadequate to provide the degree of protection (Adams County), desired. The Federal project comprises construction or reconstruction of 8.2 miles of Louisville District levee, enlargement of 28.9 miles of existing levee, modification and enlargement of interior The project includes removal of approximately 20 drainage facilities, and construction of other logjams of various sizes along an 8-mile reach of necessary appurtenances, including alteration of the Wabash River in Adams County. It also a railroad bridge affected by the project. Ramps includes channel enlargement to remove small and openings which are closed by sandbag trees and sediment in a 300-foot long section. barriers during floods permit normal flow of traffic The project serves to reduce flooding on 3,600 during non-flood periods. acres, reduce flood damage to crops, roads, and property, eliminate health hazards associated The project was completed for beneficial use in with flooded sanitary facilities, and improve 1947 and has been maintained and operated by access to the Wabash River. An investigation of local interests since 1949. A portion of the levee the logjams and channel congestion affecting failed during the flood of May 1943 and the streamflow of the Wabash River between New protected area was partially inundated. The levee Corydon and Geneva was completed in 1976. was restored by the United States. The project Construction was completed in May 1981 at a has not been fully completed; certain features to total Federal cost of $161,000.

47 Salamonie Logjams, bank protection works to prevent flood damage to highways, bridge approaches, and public works. Louisville District Local interests are responsible for cost sharing in the construction costs and for operation and The project is located at the 600 West Road maintenance of the completed project. bridge over the Salamonie River in Wells County. Two separate logjams caused flooding of roads Merom Caving Bank, and farmland and threatened to wash out the highway bridge. The logjam near the bridge was Louisville District removed in December 1973; the other in 1 F5. Total cost of the project was $31,198 in Federal The problem was a caving and sliding area on the funds. left bank of the Wabash River at Merom, Sullivan County. The landslide had cut off roadway access Salamonie River to the water well serving the town. The project consisted of riprap protection along about 300 feet (Jay and Blackford Counties), of Wabash River bank. It was completed in 1976 Louisville District at a total cost of $28,490.

The Salamonie River causes flooding to Terre Haute, Wabash River, agricultural areas of Blackford and Jay Counties. The study area extends from the mouth of Stoney Louisville District Creek in Blackford County to the mouth of Two Mile Creek in Jay County, total distance of 4.5 This stream bank protection project was miles. The project constructed consists of constructed in September 1993 to protect Terre removing sandbars, logjams, and other debris. Haut’s sanitary sewer outfall from erosion caused The total project cost is $297,000, of which by the Wabash River. The project is located at $215,518 is the Federal cost. Construction was stream mile 209.5 (left bank) and consists of 205 completed in June 1990. The local sponsors are pound maximum size stone over a minimum Blackford and JayCounties. thickness of 6 inches of bedding placed on the bank for a distance of 150 feet. The total Federal Hartford City, cost of this project was $119,116. Louisville District Vigo County, County Road 83W,

This project concerns problems on Big and Little Louisville District Lick Creeks in Blackford County, where flood damages affect urban and agriculture areas. The The project consists of placement of quarry run study area extends from the mouth of Big Lick stone along a 450-foot reach of the left bank along Creek to the Jefferson Street Bridge in Hartford the Wabash River in south-central Vigo County. City. The plan recommended in the detailed The project was completed in July 1990 at a cost project report consists of partially clearing the of $127,278 of which $103,000 was the Federal creek channel and removing a collapsed bridge share. The project was turned over to the Vigo and significant logjams. The total project cost County Commissioners for operation and was estimated to be $202,231, of which $182,231 maintenance. was the Federal cost. Flood damages would be reduced by 41 percent over the life of the project Vigo County, Little Road, under the recommended plan. Blackford County is the local sponsor. The project was completed Louisville District in 1988. The project consists of placement of protective Emergency Bank Protection stone along a 410-foot reach of the left bank of the Wabash River in south-central Vigo County. The Projects project was completed in July 1990 at a cost of $110,409 of which $89,300 was the Federal share. Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 The project was turned over to the Vigo County provides authority for construction of emergency Commissioners for operation and maintenance.

48 Southfork Wildcat Creek, project was $71,576. The project was completed in August 1993. Tippecanoe County, Louisville District Small Flood Control Projects

This streambbank erosion project was Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 constructed in 1991 to protect County Road 7E provides authority for the Chief of Engineers to about 5 miles east of Dayton. The project develop and construct small flood control consists of placing about 2000 cubic yards of projects within cost limitations prescribed by law, riprap for a distance of 310 feet. The total cost provided each project is complete within itself was $64,452 of which $46,751 was Federal cost. and economically justified. The completed project was transferred to Tippecanoe County. Portland, Nameless Creek, Louisville District Warren County, Indiana, The project is located in the headwaters of the Louisville District Salamonie River in Jay County and comprises channel improvement along 4.35 miles of the This streambank protection project is located in River at and downstream from Portland. The Warren County, Indiana approximately 5 miles work, consisting of channel enlargement and north of Carbondale. This project consists of necessary modifications of existing utilities and placing 500 linear feet of stone bank protection bridges, was completed in August 1961. The along the right bank of Nameless Creek at two Federal cost of the completed work was locations to protect County Road 850 North. Site $237,657. Local interests have accepted the 1 is 0.3 mile west and site 2 if 0.9 mile west of specified requirements of operation and U.S. Highway 41. The total Federal cost of the maintenance.

49

mm 51 Lower Wabash River Basin

PROJECT LEGEND

Multiple-Purpose Projects

701 Cagles Mill Lake (Completed) 705 Monroe Lake (Completed) 707 Patoka Lake (Completed) 710 Big Walnut Lake (Authorized)

Local Protection Projects

805 Indianapolis (Completed) 808 Levee Unit 5 (Completed) 809 Levee Unit 8 (Completed) 811 Muncie (Completed) 813 New Harmony Bridge (Completed)

Continuing Authority Projects

900 Brazil (Completed) 903 Edwardsport (Completed) 904 Eel River (Completed) 906 Grassy Creek (Completed) 907 Jasper (Completed) 910 Mascatatuck (Completed) 912 Petersburg (Compiled) 920 Brownstown (Completed) 926 Pike County (Completed) 927 Winslow (Completed) 934 Morgan Co. (Completed)

SCALE IN MILES 0 20 40

52 The water resources development system in this Lower Wabash River area consists of two multipurpose reservoirs, three local protection projects, and four Basin continuing authority projects. Cagles Mill Lake affords protection to communities and rural areas along the Eel, White, and Wabash Rivers. The Introduction level of protection would be increased with construction of the authorized Big Walnut Lake. The Lower Wabash River Basin includes the drainage areas of two major tributaries, the White and Patoka Rivers, and is located in the Projects south central portion of the state. There is a variety of form and diversity of relief within the basin. The White River and East Fork of the Muncie White River originate in flat upland plain areas, Local Protection Project, then flow generally southwesterly, traversing the unglaciated portion of southcentral Indiana Louisville District through deeply entrenched stream valleys, and then enters the broad, gently rolling lowlands The project is located on both banks of the White near the junction with the Wabash. The Patoka River at Muncie in Delaware County. Following River flows through a rugged terrain with short, the devastating 1913 flood at Muncie, local irregular and broken slopes to generally rolling interests undertook a protection project which land with fairly long even slopes. The lower would confine the 1913 flood flow in an improved portion of the basin, where the White and floodway channel between walls and levees. A Patoka Rivers flow into the Wabash is typified major portion of the local project was completed by low flat bottom land with annual flooding prior to initiation of the Federal project, authorized problems. For convenience in describing the by the Flood Control Act of June 1936. The projects located in this area, the Lower Wabash Federal project consisted of construction of 3.6 River Basin is further divided into three miles of earth levee, 0.9 mile of earth levee sections: the White River, East Fork White enlargement, 0.7 mile of concrete wall, 3.8 miles River, and Patoka River. of channel improvement, pumping facilities to dispose of sewage and drainage from the protected area during floods, and other White River Subbasin appurtenances. The project also includes the repair and rehabilitation of 0.22 mile of existing concrete wall. The protection work contains Introduction ramps and openings to permit normal traffic movement during non-flood periods. The This subbasin includes the drainage area of the openings are closed by movable gate structures White River, excluding that of the East Fork during floods. The protected area contains about White River. The White River subbasin is the 580 acres. Channel improvement and levee and most populous of all the Wabash River wall construction were completed in 1942, but subbasins, due to the presence of urban construction of pumping facilities and other work centers at Indianapolis, Anderson, and Muncie was deferred until after World War II, and were within its boundaries. The total drainage area is completed in 1950. 6,503 square miles, and the major tributaries are the Eel River and Fall Creek. The The cost of the authorized project was $908,000 topography of the area varies from broad, flat of which $888,000 was Federal and $20,000 uplands, and high hills with uneven ridges, and local. F'equirements of local cooperation, in the upstream part of the basin, canyon-like including maintenance and operation have be gorges, to flat-bottom valleys in the central fulfilled by local authorities since May 1950. section, and to wide meandering flood plain bottom lands in the lower section. Major The Federal project affords protection to the city contributors to the regional economy are of Muncie against a flood equal in magnitude to agriculture and industry. that of March 1913. Although pumping facilities

53 were not available during the 1943 flood in the Indianapolis Wabash River Basin, the completed channel improvement and levees and walls afforded partial Local Protection Project, protection for the city during that flood. It Is Louisville District estimated that the project has prevented flood damages at Muncie in the amount of about $9.6 The project is located on the White River and its million during the period 1943 through 1993. tributary, Fall Creek, at Indianapolis in Marion County. Subsequent to the 1913 flood in the Big Walnut Lake (Authorized) Wabash River Basin, local interests developed a comprehensive plan of improvement to protect Louisville District the city of Indianapolis against a flood similar in magnitude. Implementation of the plan began in Big Walnut Lake, authorized by the Flood Control 1915 by the city of Indianapolis and later by the Act of August 1968, would be located in Putnam Works Progress Administration, and all work County on Big Walnut Creek, a tributary of the Eel accomplished since has been in general River, 22.4 miles above the mouth of Big Walnut accordance with the adopted plan, which Creek, northeast of Greencastle. The dam would included channel improvement, reconstruction or control runoff from 210 square miles and the lake alteration of existing bridges, and construction of would be 12.5 miles long. The dam would be 112 levees, walls and appurtenant works. Local feet high and 17,000 feet long. The spillway would interests had accomplished a considerable be a concrete gravity overflow section through the portion of the plan by the time the Federal dam. Operational flexibility would be achieved by project was authorized. The Flood Control Act using two service gates, 3.5 feet wide by 8 feet of June 1936 authorized Federal participation in high, in the outlet works to augment the spillway in accomplishing two integral parts of the city’s passing the maximum probable flow. Two comprehensive plan, identified as the Fall Creek multistage outlets with facilities for reoxygenation and Warfleigh Sections. would be provided for low flow control. The Federal project included channel The lake would operate primarily to reduce Eel improvement with attendant earth levees and River and White River flood stages and concrete walls and reconstruction or alteration of secondarily with other lakes in reduction of lower bridges as required for the improved channel. Wabash River floods. It would be multipurpose in The portion of Fall Creek Section extending from use serving as a flood control recreation, water Washington Street upstream to 10th Street has quality control, and water supply lake. Total been completed. The Board of Flood Control storage capacity is 218,000 acre-feet. Flood Commissioners for the city of Indianapolis, control capacity is 112,000 acre-feet with an area which represents local interests, assumed of 6,300 acres. Conservation pool capacity is responsibility for maintenance and operation of 105,000 acre-feet. the completed portion of the Fall Creek Section. The estimated total cost of the Federal project is The cost of the project is estimated (October $13.63 million, of which $11.6 million is Federal 1979) at $81.8 million Federal and $45,069,000 and $2,030,000 is non-Federal cost. The non-Federal, for a total of $126,869,000. A Federal cost of the completed work was about special study of alternatives to the authorized site $1.94 million. A project of comprehensive scope and of impacts on natural values in the upper affording a high degree of protection will be regions of the lake was completed in February provided when the city’s entire plan is 1972. It recommended an alternate site just completed. Further progress toward this end upstream from Greencastle. Advanced has been made by the city, which undertook engineering and design Phase I studies for the much additional flood control construction, using alternate site were completed in 1976. The project where available, planning work previously was placed in the inactive category in May 1980 accomplished by the Corps of Engineers. due to withdrawal of local support. Average annual Unaccomplished portions of the Federal project benefits of the Big Walnut Lake project were are in an inactive status. It is estimated that the estimated at $11,239,000 (October 1979) from completed work has prevented flood damages flood control, general recreation, fish and wildlife amounting to $12.8 million during the period of enhancement, and water supply. 1943 through 1993.

54 Cagles Mill Lake, protection to an agricultural area of about 13,400 acres and part of the town of Plainville against a Louisville District flood equal in magnitude to one which can be expected to occur on an average of about seven Authorization for Cagles Mill project was times in 100 years. During the period 1943 to contained in the Flood Control Act of 1938. It is 1993, it is estimated that the project has prevented located on Mill Creek in Putnam and Owen flood damages amounting to about $22.3 million. Counties, and controls runoff from a 295 square Protection afforded by this project is enhanced to mile drainage area. Mill Creek is a tributary of some extent by operation of Cagles Mill Lake in the Eel River in the White River Basin. The dam the White River Basin upstream from the project. is located about 2.8 miles above the mouth of the creek and 7 miles west of Cloverdale, Indiana. It The total cost of the project was $816,000, of is an earth and rock fill structure, 900 feet long which $701,000 was assumed by the United and 150 feet high, with an uncontrolled spillway States, while $115,000 is the estimated local cost. channel through the left abutment. The project Local interests have maintained and operated the provides a permanent conservation pool with an project since January 1947. area of 1,400 acres at elevation 636 feet above mean sea level. Above this pool to the spillway crest elevation of 704 feet, a capacity of 201,000 Continuing Authorities acre-feet is provided to store flood runoff. The area of the flood storage at spillway crest is about 4,840 acres. The project has been in Snagging and Clearing Projects operation for flood control purposes since June 1953. The cost of the Cagles Mill Lake project is Section 3 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1945 $4,369,997 which includes $106,813 non-Federal and Section 208 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 funds for construction of recreation facilities. provide authority for the Chief of Engineers to snag and clear streams in the interest of Cagles Mill Lake is operated to alleviate flood navigation and flood control. Local interests are damages in the Eel, White, and Wabash River responsible for cost sharing in the construction valleys below the dam. It is also operated as an costs and feasibility study costs and for operation integral unit in the coordinated system of lakes in and maintenance of the completed project. the Ohio River Basin for flood reductions on the Ohio River. The estimated flood damages Eel River, Clay County, prevented since completion of the lake is $85.5 million, through 1993. Louisville District

The State of Indiana has undertaken the The project consists of removal of drift and snags development and management of recreation in the Eel River at mile 14, southwest of Clay City. facilities for use by the public in the lake area in The work was designed to alleviate a recurring accordance with license granted by the Secretary condition of driftwood accumulation at the head of of the Army. Visitors to Cagles Mill Lake in FY a small island. The project was completed in 1964 93 totaled 329,145. at a Federal cost of $3,000 and transferred to the Clay County Board of Commissioners. Levee Unit 8, White River Local Edwardsport, Protection Project, Louisville District Louisville District The project consists of construction of a pilot This project was authorized by the Flood Control channel through a narrow neck in the West Fork Act of June 1936, and is located on the left bank White River so that diversion of the stream of White River in Daviess County, near Plainville. isolates caving banks at Levee Unit 8 from erosive The upper end of the project is located opposite current. After receipt of required assurances of the lower end of the McGinnis Levee, which had local cooperation in the project, the work was previously been constructed by local interests on completed in June 1950 at a total Federal cost of the right bank of the river. Levee Unit 8 affords $10,300.

55 Emergency lowlands to its juncture with White River near Petersburg. The basin area is drained by the two Bank Protection principal headwater tributaries of East Fork White Projects River - Driftwood and Flatrock Rivers. The other major tributaries, Muscatatuck and Lost Rivers Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 and Clifty and Salt Creeks also comprise the provides authority for construction of emergency 5,746 square miles of drainage area. The main bank protection works to prevent flood damage to urban areas of the basin are Bloomington and highways, bridge approaches, and public \ 'orks. Columbus. Local interests are responsible for cost sharing In the construction costs and for operation ar.d The water resources development in this area maintenance of the completed project. consists of one lake and five continuing authority projects, which have helped to satisfy regional needs for flood control, water supply, water Brazil Water Supply Facilities, quality, and recreation. Louisville District

This project is located on the Eel River in Putnam Projects County. It consists of channel realignment and bank stabilization measures to protect the City of Monroe Lake, Louisville District Brazil water supply facilities from damage by caving banks. The project was constructed in 1962 at a Federal cost of $41,000. Monroe Lake was authorized by the Flood Control Act of July 1958, which modified the comprehensive plan for flood control in the Ohio Petersburg. River Basin contained in the Flood Control Act of Louisville District June 1938. It is located in Monroe County, about 3 miles east of Harrodsburg and 26 miles above This project is located on the left bank of the the mouth of Salt Creek, a tributary of the White White River downstream from State Route 61 River. The lake, which controls runoff from a bridge near Petersburg. The project consisted of drainage area of 441 square miles, extends into removal of car bodies and assorted junk, Brown and Jackson counties. The dam is 93 feet minimum shaping to the top of bank, and high and 1,350 feet long, and has an impervious placement of riprap along 250 linear feet of earth core and rock shell. caving bank. It protects a county road and farmland lying lower than the bank. Gate controlled outlet works regulate the lake and an uncontrolled open spillway through the left Construction was accomplished in September abutment prevents the dam from being 1973 at a cost of $34,000, and the project was overtopped. The lake operates for the purposes transferred to the Pike County Commissioners. of recreation, flood control, water supply, and augmentation of low stream flows on the White River. Capacity of the lake below elevation 515 is East Fork White River reserved for siltation. A storage capacity of 159,900 acre-feet is provided between elevations Subbasin 515 and 538 for low flow augmentation. At 538, the lake has an area of 10,750 acres. A storage capacity of 258,800 acre-feet between elevations Introduction 538 and 556 is available for temporary retention of flood flows. At full flood control pool the lake This subbasin includes the drainage area of the has a surface area of 18,450 acres and a total East Fork White River. The river is deeply storage capacity of 441,000 acre-feet. entrenched amid rolling hills, and provides scenic beauty as it winds through the rugged Southern Construction began in November 1960 and the Indiana Knobs. Continuing westward, the river project was placed in operation in February 1965. emerges from a deeply dissected plateau area, Costs were $7,032,484 in Federal funds and and flows through the undulating Wabash $8,667,947 in state funds plus $870,343 non-

56 federal contribution in-kind for recreational bank protection works to prevent flood damage to facilities. (By agreement with the Federal highways, bridge approaches, and public works. government, the State of Indiana paid 54.1 Local interests are responsible for cost sharing in percent of the project cost.) Most of the project’s the construction costs and for the operation and land and water area has been leased to the State maintenance of the completed project. of Indiana for operation and administration of the recreational opportunities. Some of the land has Brownstown, White River, been transferred to the U.S. Forest Service for use in connection with the National Louisville District Forest. Visitors to Monroe Lake totaled 1,283,098 in FY 93. This streambank protection project was constructed in April 1982 to protect a county road Monroe Lake, though operated primarily for flood from erosion caused by the East Fork White River. control and augmentation of low flows in the lower The project is located at Shields, Indiana (right White and Wabash River Basins, also contributes bank) and consists of quarry stone placed over to reduction of flood flows on the Ohio River. It is granular fill for a distance of 735 feet. The total cost of the project was $141,574, of which the estimated that the project has prevented damages amounting to $30.3 million through Federal portion was $139,894. The completed project was transferred to Jackson County. 1993. Pike County, White River, Continuing Authorities Louisville District

Small Flood Control Projects This streambank protection project was construction in December 1983 to protect a county Section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948, as road from erosion caused by the East Fork White amended, provides authority for the Chief of River. The project is located at stream mile 47.0 Engineers to develop and construct small flood (left bank) and consists of quarry stone placed control projects, within cost limitations prescribed over granular fill for a distance of 250 feet. The by law, provided each project is complete within total cost of the project was $56,371, of which the itself and economically justified. Federal portion was $55,300. The completed project was transferred to Pike County. Grassy Creek, Morgan County, White River, Louisville District Louisville District The project is located in Jackson County, Indiana, This streambank protection project was and comprises channel improvement of the constructed in 1991 to protect Blue Bluff Road Muscatatuck River in the White River Basin. The about four miles north of Martinsbille. The project work, consisting of clearing, cleaning, and consists of placing about 5000 cubic yards of straightening the channel over a length of 24,150 riprap for a distance of 630 feet. The total cost of feet, with a resultant reduction of about 0.6 mile in the project was $179,000 of which the Federal length of the creek channel, was completed in share was $137,418. The completed project was February 1952. The Federal Cost of the transferred to Morgan County. completed work was $70,304. Local interests have accepted the specified requirements of local cooperation, including operation and Snagging and Clearing Projects maintenance. Section 3 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1945 Emergency Bank Protection and Section 208 of the Flood Control Act of 1954 provide authority for the Chief of Engineers to Project snag and clear streams in the interest of navigation and flood control. Local interests are Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 responsible for the operation and maintenance of provides authority for construction of emergency the completed project.

57 Muscatatuck River, height of 85 feet. An earth and rock-fill dike about 1,500 feet long with a maximum height of Louisville District 33 feet is located across a low saddle in the left abutment approximately 3,000 feet southwest of The project consisted of removal of drift and the dam. debris from a section of Muscatatuck River on the border between Jennings and Scott counties The spillway is an uncontrolled open channel near Tobias bridge. The work was completed in with a 370-foot bottom width through the left 1968 at a Federal cost of $29,863. The project abutment. The outlet works located at the toe of was transferred to the Jennings County and the right abutment includes a control tower with Scott County Boards of Commissioners in two control gates 7 feet wide by 12 feet high, an January 1969. 8-by-12 foot oblong concrete conduit and stilling basin. Two small multistage outlets and facilities for reoxgenation are provided for low flow Patoka River Subbasin control.

Introduction The lake serves the purposes of flood control, general recreation, fish and wildlife recreation, water supply and water quality control. A The Patoka River Subbasin lies in the permanent pool covering 2,010 acres is southernmost portion of the Wabash River maintained at elevation 506 and extends 11 Basin, and includes the drainage area of the miles. Between elevations 506 and 536, there Patoka River, and the left bank portion of the are 167,290 acre-feet of storage for water Wabash River to below New Harmony. The supply. Above the water supply pool, a storage Patoka River flows almost due west throughout capacity of 121,100 acre-feet is reserved for its course across Southern Indiana. The temporary storage of flood flows. At full pool topography of the watershed varies from rugged elevation 548 the lake has an area of 11,300 terrain with short, irregular and broken slopes acres. The water supply/water quality pool at near the headwaters to a generally rolling area elevation 536 provides 8,800 acres of surface with fairly long even slopes in the western water. portion. The (October 1992) estimated total cost of the The water resources development system in this project was $73,664,159 which included a non- area consists of one multipurpose reservoir, two Federal contribution of $20,568,369. completed local protection projects, and two Construction and impoundment were completed continuing authority projects. Periodic flooding is in February 1978. common in the basin, and substantial flood protection has been provided with the completion The estimated flood damages prevented since of Patoka Lake. the lake has been in operation is $29.1 million through 1993. Vistors to Patoka Lake in FY 93 Projects totaled 738,047. Levee Unit 5, Wabash River, Patoka Lake, Louisville District Louisville District The project is bounded, generally, on the north Patoka Lake was authorized by the Flood by the Patoka River, a tributary of the Wabash Control Act of October 1965. It is located in River; on the west and south by the Wabash Dubois, Orange and Crawford counties on River; and on the east by the Black River, an­ Patoka River, a tributary of the Wabash River. other tributary of the Wabash. Located opposite The dam is located 118.3 miles above the mouth and below Mt. Carmel, Illinois, in Gibson and and 3/4 mile northeast of Ellsworth, and controls Posey counties, Indiana, the project includes a runoff from a drainage area of 168 square miles. system of earth levees with traffic ramps and in­ The dam is a rolled earth and rock fill structure ternal drainage facilities with pumping plants, and with a total length of 1,500 feet, and a maximum alteration to a railroad bridge.

58 The estimated total project cost (October 1992) Continuing Authorities is $8,446,487 with $7,540,987 as the Federal share and $905,500 the local share. The project affords protection to 44,000 acres of agricultural Emergency Bank Protection area and the communities of Griffin, Skelton and Lyles, against a flood which could be expected Project to occur on an average of seven times in a 100- year period. Construction was started in July Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 1963 and all sections were completed for provides authority for construction of emergency beneficial use by 1970. Construction of the bank protection works to prevent flood damages to Emerson Ditch pumping plant was completed in highways, bridge approaches, and public works. 1976. Construction of the Coffee Bayou Local interests are responsible for cost sharing in pumping plant was completed in 1985. Flood the construction costs and for the operation and damages prevented through 1993 are $45.0 maintenance of the completed project. million. Jasper, Louisville District New Harmony Bridge Bank Stabilization Project, A streambank protection project was constructed in 1979 to protect Clay Street from erosion caused Indiana and Illinois, by the Patoka River. The project is located in the Louisville District southwestern portion of the community between stream miles 85.4 and 85.5, and consists of quarry The Flood Control Act of May 1950 authorized stone placed over granular fill a distance of about this project, located on the Wabash River at and 700 feet. above the New Harmony Bridge in Posey County, Indiana and White County, Illinois. The Construction was completed in December 1979 at work consisted of enlarging the existing cutoff a Federal cost of $79,100. The completed project channel above the bridge along with construction was transferred to the city of Jasper. of a dike to close the old river channel. This arrested the bank caving conditions which were Winslow, Patoka River, endangering the bridge structure and its western Louisville District approach. Between 1941, when the White County Bridge Commission acquired the bridge, The streambank protection project was and 1955, large expenditures were made on constructed in December 1983 to protect a county river maintenance by local interests and lesser road and appurtenances from erosion caused by amounts by the Federal government to prevent the Patoka River. The project is located at stream loss of this important river crossing. The bridge mile 43.4 (left bank) and consists of quarry stone carries U.S. Highway 460 across the Wabash placed over granular fill for a distance of 900 feet. River and provides the only highway crossing for The total cost of the project was $58,940, of which a distance of 70 river miles below Mount Carmel, the Federal portion was $57,100. The completed Illinois. Federal cost of the project was project was transferred to Pike County. approximately $297,624.

59

Bums International Hart», G r e a t L a l t e S B a S i l l

61 Great Lakes Basin

1001 Indiana Harbor (Completed) A Continuing Authority Projects 1002 Michigan City Harbor (Completed) 1004 Burns Waterway Small-Boat Harbor 902 Dune Acres (Com plete-I ana II) (Under Construction) 928 Elkhart (Completed) # Other Improvement Projects •■w Local Protection Projects 1100 Calumet-Sag Channel (Under Construction) 823 Mt. Baldy, Indiana Dunes National 1101 Great Lakes Connecting Channels Lakeshore (Completed) (Under Construction) 824 Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore, 1102 Illinois Waterway (Under Construction) Beverly Shores (Completed)

SCALE IN MILES 20 0 20 40

62 created a gradually enlarging body of lake waters Great Lakes Basin at levels hundreds of feet above present lake levels, with overflow outlets across present Introduction Studies watershed divides. As the ice border receded, the pattern and levels of the lakes repeatedly changed as new lower outlets were uncovered. Great Lakes Region The effect of these gracial lakes on present shorelines is illustrated by such features as the The Great Lakes Region in the United States and perched wave-cut cliffs of Mackinac Island, the Canada comprises 299,000 square miles— lake-deposited clay flats of Chicago and Toledo, 95.000 in water surface area and 204,000 in land. the variable stratified sands and silts constituting It covers northeastern Minnesota, essentially all or overlying the bluffs along the shores of lakes of Michigan, and parts of six other states, with Erie, Huron, and Michigan, and the sand tracts of 4.000 miles of mainland shores and 1,500 miles the dune areas. of island shores. Great Lakes Basin Framework The Great Lakes are connected by the following rivers and waterways: the St. Marys River, Lake Study Comprehensive Study - Superior to Lake Huron; the Straits of Mackinac, (Completed) Lake Michigan to Lake Huron; the St. Clair River, North Central Division Lake Huron to Lake St. Clair; the Detroit River, Lake St. Clair to Lake Erie; the Niagara River and Under Section 201 of the Water Resources the Welland Canal, Lake Erie to Lake Ontario; Planning Act of 1965, the President, by Executive and the St. Lawrence River, Lake Ontario to the Order 11345, established the Great Lakes Basin Atlantic Ocean. Four of the five Great Lakes are Commission. The commission began a program United States—Canadian boundary waters; the of framework planning in 1968 which was international boundary passes through these completed in 1977, resulting in publication of a lakes and their connecting channels. Lake Main Report, 25 Appendicies, and an Michigan, however, lies wholly within the United Environmental Impact Statement. States. The region was created largely by glaciation, and its formation, in terms of geologic The study area, which includes that portion of the time, was only recently completed. The region drainage area within the continental United has been free from the direct influence of glacial States, has a water and land area of ice for approximately 9,500 years. The five Great approximately 189,000 square miles. The Lakes, with their outlets and approximate lake- international boundary defines the region’s levels as they are today, probably date back less northern limit. The area includes portions of eight than 3,000 years. The processes of stream and states: Minnesota, , Illinois, Indiana, shoreline erosion have made only slight changes Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York. in the original topography. The eight states, eleven federal agencies, and the Great Lakes Commission participated in the The Great Lakes came into existence during the planning. Pleistocene or Ice Age. At that time the area contained well-drained valleys and divides of several large rivers. The continental ice cap then Great Lakes Connecting developed to a thickness of several thousand feet Channels and Harbors over much of Canada, and spread southward covering what is now the Great Lakes region, Commercial Navigation Study, drastically altering the topography. Parts of the Detroit District preglacial valleys were deepened by scouring, while other parts were filled by deposits, thus The purpose of this study (authorized by creating the basins of five lakes. resolution of the Senate Committee on Public Works, June 1969 and April 1976), is to While the ice front was receding northward, determine the advisability of modifying the Great gradual thawing left waters ponded between the Lakes Connecting Channels and Harbors in the ice and the exposed glacial deposits. This interest of present and future deep-draft

63 commerce, with a view to the advisability of Lawrence River Basin. The Corps of Engineers providing additional lockage facilities and provided technical support to the IJC for this increased capacity at the St. Marys Falls Canal. study.

Both an interim feasibility report and a final The magnitude of the Water Level Reference feasibility report have been completed under this Study requires that it be addressed in two study authority. As of September 1990, the phases. Phase I, which was completed in May interim report is under review at the Office of the 1989, identified the major types of measures Chief of Engineers, and the final report is mder which address the problems brought on by lake review by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for level fluctuations and developed the basis for a Civil Works. comprehensive framework for the systematic evaluation of these measures. The IJC issued The interim report contains a recommendation for their Phase I progress report, titled “Living With construction of a replacement lock at the St. the Lakes: Challenges and Opportunities,” in July Marys Falls Canal on the site of the existing 1989. Phase II will apply several evaluation Davis and Sabin Locks. Replacement lock procedures, including a further development of dimensions would be 1,294 feet in length, 115 the evaluation framework conceptualized in feet in width, and 32 feet in depth over the sills at Phase I, to both structural and non-structural low water datum. Dredged material from measures. The measures evaluated in Phase II construction of the lock would be disposed of in will include shoreline management and full and an environmentally acceptable manner by placing partial lake regulations. it on the Northwest Pier adjacent to the construction site. The project was authorized for The Phase II report was presented to the IJC on construction by Congress in November 1986. March 31, 1993. This report contains 42 The final report recommends deepening portions recommendations for improving the response to of the upper St. Marys River and Duluth-Superior fluctuating water levels. The IJC has yet to Harbor by one foot so that downbound vessels provide its report to the Governments. can take advantage of long-term mean lake levels that are much above low water datum on Lakes Michigan, Huron, and Erie. Other plans Projects investigated in the final report included deepening Indiana Harbor for the iron ore trade Great Lakes Connecting on Lake Michigan, and modifications at Ashtabula and Conneaut Harbors on Lake Erie to Channels Commercial Navigation improve operating conditions for vessels 1,000 Project (Underway) Detroit feet in length. During the course of this study, system-wide deepening of connecting channels District and harbors was determined to be economically infeasible. Modifications to service vessels larger The Connecting Channels system includes the than those currently operating were also not waterways between lakes Superior and Huron, warranted. Huron and Michigan, and Huron and Erie. These vital links provide for deep-draft navigation International Water Studies between the upper and lower Great Lakes and associated deep-draft harbors serving the (General Investigations), tributary area. The St. Marys River, Straits of North Central Division Mackinac, St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair, and Detroit River constitute the connecting channels. Deep-draft vessels plying these channels carry As a result of the record high Great Lakes levels bulk and general cargo essential to the nation’s in 1985-86, and the prospects of even higher economy at far less cost than that of alternative levels in 1987, the governments of the U.S. and Canada issued the IJC a Reference, on August modes of transportation. 1, 1986. Under this Reference, the IJC was asked to examine and report upon methods of Presently, improvements authorized by the 1946 alleviating the adverse consequences of and 1956 Rivers and Harbors Acts are complete fluctuating water levels in the Great Lakes-St. and provide generally for a minimum project

64 depth of 27 feet in the connecting channels. This on the FCSA. The City of LaPorte withdrew from provides a safe draft of 25.5 feet for Great Lakes the Study on September 1, 1992 due to freighters when the level is at low water datum. unavailability of funds. The Study was terminated The difference between project depth and safe on September 22, 1992 at a cost of $65,000 in draft allows for squat of a vessel when underway Federal funds. and clearance due to exposure to wave action. These project depths have been available through Cedar Creek, Auburn Flood the connecting channels since June 1962. Control Study, Section 205 Construction costs of channel improvements have (Underway) amounted to over $262.4 million. Cost of maintenance through fiscal 1986 totaled about In response to a June 3, 1985, request from the $317 million. city of Auburn concerning the prevention of flood damages on Cedar Creek, in Auburn, a Continuing Authorities - reconnaissance report was completed and approved. The findings of the report indicate that Detroit District there is a Federal interest in participation in a flood control project and that there is a potential solution (levees and floodwalls), which is both Emergency Streambank economically justified, and environmentally and Protection Project, Section 14, socially feasible. A draft Feasibility Cost Sharing Elkhart River, Elkhart Agreement (FCSA) was provided to the local sponsor for review prior to negotiation and consumation of the agreement. However, by The emergency streambank protection is located letter dated January 15, 1991, the local sponsor along the south bank of the Elkhart River adjacent declined to enter into the FCSA due to an to Waterfall Drive extending from Elkhart Avenue unavailability of funds. The Study was terminated to the city’s fire station entrance within the city of on July 9, 1992 at a cost of $64,000 in Federal Elkhart. The project, which consisted of funds. placement of a 550-foot riprap stone revetment to protect municipal facilities and Waterfall Drive from adverse effects of shore erosion, was Lake Erie Subbasin completed in May 1985, at a cost of $243,000. Introduction Small Flood Control Projects The Lake Erie subbasin includes the drainage LaPorte - Pine Lake Flood area of Lake Erie, and is located in northeastern Control Study, Section 205 Indiana. The St. Joseph’s and St. Marys Rivers are the headwaters of the major Lake Erie (Underway) tributary, the Maumee River. The confluence of these two rivers is within the limits of metropolitan A reconnaissance report was completed in Ft. Wayne. The general topography is smooth to response to the city of LaPorte’s February 9, irregular plains with gentle slopes in the west 1988, letter requesting that the Corps reopen the central area to gently rolling with shallow relief in Section 205 study terminated in October 1983, to the eastern section. Farming is important to the determine if there is Federal interest in a flood basin economy due to the fertile plains. damage reduction project for the LaPorte area. Several structural and non-structural alternatives were evaluated. The completed reconnaissance Emergency Repairs and report was approved on July 24, 1991 and Operations provided the basis for preparation of the Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement (FCSA) with As provided by Public Law 99, 84th Congress, an Initial Project Management Plan (IPMP). The the Corps of Engineers is authorized to assist IPMP was furnished to the City of LaPorte on July local interests in fighting floods and in the repair 2, 1992 for review prior to initiating negotiations and restoration of flood control works threatened

65 or destroyed by floods. Fort Wayne - Mechanic River in the vicinity of Fort Wayne, Indiana, were Street Dike, Detroit District Emergency repair rehabilitated in 1982 at a total cost of $288,495. work on damages caused by the 1959 St. Marys The local contributed funds were $180,021 and the flood consisted of restoration and repair of the Federal cost was $108,474. Mechanic Street Dike in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The work was completed in 1960 at a Federal Fort Wayne - Levee Rehabilitation, cost of $57,162. Detroit District Fort Wayne - Levee The flood-damaged levees along the St. Joseph Rehabilitation, Detroit District River, Maumee River, and St. Marys River, Fairfield Ditch, and Spy Run Creek in the vicinity The flood-damaged levees along the St. Joseph of Fort Wayne, Indiana, were rehabilitated in 1985 River, the Maumee River, and the St. Marys at a total cost of $235,000.

Surveys

Name of Investigation Purpose Status

Fort Wayne and vicinity, Flood To determine the advisability of A Feasibility Report was completed in Control Study providing improvement for flood August 1987, as a cost-shared study, (Detroit District) control and allied purposes at and with the project co-sponsors, the City in the vicinity of Fort Wayne. of Fort Wayne and Allen County. The report recommends levee and floodwall rehabilitation for flood protection within the city. As of September 1990, the report was under review by the Office of the Chief of Engineers.

St. Joseph River Basin, Michigan To investigate water resources A final Reconnaissance Report was and Indiana (Detroit District) problems of the basin, with completed in February 1989. Flood particular reference to the Elkart damage reduction measures were River and tributaries. investigated but found to lack economic justification. As of September 1990, the report was under review by the Washington Level Review Center.

St. Joseph River Basin, To determine the feasibility of Indefinite. Further study deferred. Navigation, Michigan and Indiana providing navigation improvements Future progress dependent upon (Detroit District) below South Bend. Presently, the availability of funds and expression study area is limited to the lower of local support. (approximately) six miles of the river above Lake Michigan which is located entirely in the State of Michigan.

St. Joseph River, South Bend, To investigate flooding, erosion, A reconnaissance level study was initi­ Indiana (Detroit District) and environmental problems along ated in June 1993 to identify and evalu­ the St. Joseph River in South ate flooding, erosion and environmental Bend, Indiana, and determine the problems, formulate alternatives, deter­ feasibility of providing mine if further Federal interest in pursu­ economically, environmentally, and ing more detailed studies is warranted, engineeringly sound solutions to and identify a local sponsor willing to such problems. cost-share further detailed studies. The President’s Fiscal Year 1994 budget proposal provides funds to complete the reconnaissance study.

66 $13,599,900 was for new work ($13,504,000 Lake Michigan Federal and $15,900 non-Federal), and Subbasin $6,850,100 for maintenance. Calumet Harbor and River, Introduction Illinois and Indiana, Chicago District The entire Lake Michigan Basin lies wholly within the United States. The limits of the Lake This project is located primarily within the Michigan subbasin for this report include the corporate limits of the city of Chicago; however, drainage area of Lake Michigan for the portion most of the breakwaters, the entrance channel, located in northwestern Indiana and a portion of the anchorage area, and approach channel of northeastern Illinois. The Little Calumet River is Calumet Harbor and River are in Indiana. This the major tributary of the subbasin. The general project provides for a stone filled timber crib topography varies from level plains to rolling low breakwater 6,714 feet long; a stone filled double hills. The economy of the area is based on the row steel sheet pile detached breakwater 5,007 highly industrialized area located around the feet long; a north pier 2,450 feet long; an shoreline of Lake Michigan. The major cities of approach channel 29 feet deep and 3,200 feet the area are Chicago, Hammond, Gary, and wide; an outer harbor anchorage area 28 feet Michigan City. deep and 3,000 feet wide; an entrance channel 27 feet deep and 230 to 290 feet wide; a channel in the Calumet River 27 feet deep and at least Projects 200 feet wide to the north side of 130th street; three turning basins designated as numbers 1, 3, and 5; and a channel extending into Lake Burns Waterway Harbor, Calumet at a width of about 1,000 feet. Indiana, Chicago District The project also includes a 1.3 million cubic yard The Burns Waterway Harbor is located in Porter combined disposal facility (CDF) for polluted County, Indiana, on the south shore of Lake material dredged from the harbor. Located on Michigan, 19 miles southeast of Calumet the Illinois side of the lllinois-lndiana state line, Harbor. The existing project provides for a the CDF was completed in 1984. rubblemound north breakwater 5,850 feet long; a rubblemound west bulkhead 1,200 feet long; a Of the 36 docks, wharves, and terminals stone filled steel sheet pile cell, west bulkhead available, the Chicago Regional Port District shore connection 22,400 feet long; an approach owns one dock, four wharves, and one terminal. channel 30 feet deep and 400 feet wide; an The United States Government owns one stone outer harbor 28 feet deep; an east harbor arm dock. 27 feet deep and 620 feet wide; and a west harbor arm 27 feet deep and 620 feet wide. The total cost of the existing project to September 30, 1993 was $57,815,976 of which Seven berths and docks are available; three on $22,578,567 was for new work, $28,972,741 the west harbor arm; one on the harbor basin; regular funds for maintenance, $836,667 non- and three on the east harbor arm. One dock on Federal for maintenance, and $5,428,001 regular the west harbor arm is used for shipment and funds for rehabilitation. receipt of steel products. One dock on the east harbor arm is used for receipt of iron ore pellets Indiana Harbor, Chicago District and limestone and shipment of steel products. Five facilities are administered by the Indiana Indiana Harbor is located in Lake County, Port Commission and are used for handling Indiana, on the southwest shore of Lake general cargo. Michigan, 18 miles southeast of Chicago Harbor.

The total costs of the existing project to The project consists of a northerly rubblemound September 30, 1993, was $20,450,000 of which breakwater 1,120 feet long; an easterly concrete

67 capped concrete caisson breakwater 201 feet long for new work by the State of Illinois. The cost to the with a rubblemound extension 2,324 feet long; a Federal government included $126,707,745 for new lake approach channel 29 feet deep and 800 feet work, $140,039,102 for maintenance, operation, and wide; an anchorage and maneuver basin 28 feet care of locks and dams; and $11,566,095 for deep; a canal entrance channel 27 feet deep and rehabilitation by the United States. 280 feet wide; a main canal 22 feet deep; a turning basin 22 feet deep; the forks turning basin 22 feet The work remaining for Part I of the Calumet-Sag deep; the Lake George Branch 22 feet deep; and Junction to Lake Calumet in Illinois is physically the Calumet River Branch 22 feet deep. complete. Real estate acquisition is still in progress.

Fifteen docks and wharves are available; six docks Traffic for handling iron ore and limestone; six docks for handling petroleum products; and three docks for The principal commodities moved on the Illinois handling gypsum, scrap metal and steel, and bulk Waterway are bituminous coal, petroleum products, products. Total cost of existing project to grain, soybeans, sand and gravel, sulphur and other September 30, 1992, was $14,535,098 of which chemicals, and iron and steel manufactures. In $4,909,648 was for new work and $9,625,450 was 1933, the commercial traffic on the waterway for maintenance. No dredging has taken place in amounted to 41.7 million ton-miles, but by 1970 it recent years because of the presence of had climbed progressively to a record-breaking 7.64 contaminated sediments. However, work is billion ton-miles. Tows now consist of as many as 14 presently being odne to address this issue. or more barges. As the seven locks from New LaGrange to Lockport are capable of handling in a Completion Status single lockage a tow of eight barges and a towboat, this means that the larger tows must be handled in The project is essentially completed, except for the time consuming double lockages. Congress in 1962 Calumet-Sag modification. Part I of the Calumet- authorized duplicate locks to provide the needed Sag is approximately 99 percent complete. The capacity. work completed on the Calumet-Sag modification includes 16.2 miles of channel widening from Sag Mt. Baldy, Indiana Dunes National Junction through Blue Island, channel walls Lakeshore, Chicago District immediately east of that city, and widening of Acme Bend in the Little Calumet River. Fourteen The Mt. Baldy project is located on the southeastern railroad bridges have been altered and 15 highway shore of Lake Michigan in LaPorte County. It was bridges have been constructed or modified. The constructed in 1973-1974 with a transfer of funds former Blue Island Lock at the eastern end of the from the National Park Service, and with funds from old canal has been removed and has been the Energy and Water Development Appropriation replaced by the new Thomas J. O’Brien Lock and Act of 1981. The 1973-1974 work cost $3.1 million; Dam in the Calumet River. Measuring 110 feet in the 1981 work, $1.5 million. In 1973-1974, about width and 1,000 feet in length, the new lock 70.000 tons of stone of various size was placed permits the ready movement of barge tows along 13,000 feet of Lake Michigan shoreline to comprising eight barges and towboats without the protect Lake Front Drive from Derby Avenue to 1900 necessity of rearrangement before entering the feet east of Drake Avenue in Beverly Shores. About lock chamber. Together, the lock and dam are 340.000 tons of sand also was placed at the toe of designed to prevent polluted water in the Little Mt. Baldy to protect the dune. In 1981, about Calumet and Grand Rivers from flowing into Lake 120.000 tons of sand-gravel was placed at Mt. Baldy Michigan. This also permits control of the water for emergency bank protection. levels landward of the lock and dam. Illinois Waterway 9-Foot Navigation Project Cost for the Illinois Project, Indiana and Illinois, Waterway Chicago District The total cost to both the Federal government and the State of Illinois as of 30 September 1979 was The Illinois Waterway comprises the Illinois River $278,312,942. Of this sum, $20 million was spent from its mouth at Grafton, the confluence of the

68 Kankakee and Des Plaines Rivers, and Des The Calumet-Sag Modification Plaines River to Lockport, the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal and the South Branch of Chicago This project was authorized by the River and River to Lake Street, Chicago, the Calumet-Sag Harbor Act of 1946 and consists of three parts. Channel and the Little Calumet and Calumet Rivers to turning basin five, near the entrance to Lake Calumet, and the Grand Calumet River from Part 1 calls for the construction of a channel 225 its mouth to the head of deep draft navigation in feet wide and 9 feet deep in the Calumet-Sag the Indiana Harbor Canal and to Clark Street in Channel to its junction with the Little Calumet Gary. The waterway is the connecting link River; maintaining a channel 300 feet wide and 9 between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi feet deep in the Little Calumet and Calumet River system. Rivers to Lake Calumet; construction of a lock and dam in the Calumet River and removal of the The Federal government has been responsible old Blue Island controlling lock; and the for the entire Illinois Waterway since 1930 when it replacement or alteration of 14 railroad bridges assumed responsibility for the uncompleted and 17 highway bridges crossing the Calumet- canalization of the Des Plaines and Illinois rivers Sag Channel and Little Calumet and Calumet from Lockport to Utica, a project in which the Rivers, and the removal of six small highway State of Illinois had been engaged since 1921, bridges without replacement, to conform to the and for maintenance of the Chicago Sanitary and horizontal and vertical requirements of the Ship Canal and the South Branch of the Chicago improved channel. River. Prior to 1930, Federal responsibility consisted of maintaining the channel from Grafton Part II authorized the construction of a lock and to LaSalle. The Illinois Waterway was opened to controlling works, a channel, 225 feet wide and 9 navigation for its entire length of 327 miles in feet deep, along the general route of the Grand 1933. The project adopted in 1930, together with Calumet River from its junction with the Little subsequent modifications, has provided a Calumet River to the Indiana Harbor Canal, and guaranteed depth of 9 feet for barge traffic. thence 160 feet wide to a proposed terminal in Gary, Indiana; a channel 225 feet wide and 9 feet The Calumet-Sag Channel, originally only 60 feet deep in the Indiana Harbor Canal from the Grand wide with many restrictive bridges, was a Calumet River to the head of deep draft bottleneck for many years. Tows through this navigation, and the alteration and rebuilding of channel were limited to two or three barges and nine railroad and eight highway bridges to required special towboats with telescoping pilot conform to the new horizontal and vertical houses. The Calumet-Sag modifications will clearance requirements. Planning on this portion make it possible for full sized tows to operate on was initiated in Fiscal Year 1970. However, this this channel. The project as now authorized is portion was deauthorized by the Water Resource discussed for convenience in two sections which Development Act of 1986. consist of the channel from Grafton to Chicago and the Calumet-Sag modification. Further Investigation

The Channel from Grafton to Further Investigation of the Illinois Waterway has Chicago been authorized. (See section on “Surveys.”)

The project provides for the construction of seven Michigan City Harbor locks and six dams, with the locks to be 600 feet long and 110 feet wide, and dredging a navigation The Michigan City Harbor District project, located channel to a minimum depth of 9 feet at widths of in Lapo. le County on the southeastern shore of 300 feet from Grafton to Lockport; 200 to 300 feet Lake Michigan, 38 miles southeast of Chicago, to the controlling works; 160 feet to the junction was completed in 1968. with the Calumet-Sag Channel; and 175 to 300 feet to Lake Street in Chicago. The project also The project consists of a stone filled timber crib provides for the construction of a small boat detached breakwater 1,304 feet long; a pile and harbor at Peoria. This section is essentially steel sheeting west pier 835 feet long; and stone complete. filled timber crib, pile and steel sheeting east pier

69 2,276 feet long; a stone filled timber crib east The project was authorized for construction under breakwater 1,000 feet long; an entrance channel the authority of Section 107 of the 1960 River and 18 feet deep, and 425 feet wide; a turning basin Harbor Act, as amended. The project was 18 deep; a channel in Trail Creek 18 feet deep; constructed as a recreational boating harbor and an outer basin 12 feet deep; an outer basin 8 feet to provide a safe entrance for boaters to and from deep; and a channel in Trail Creek 6 feet deep Lake Michigan and Burns Waterway. The total and 50 feet wide. cost of existing project to September 30, 1993 was $3,972,676 of which $3,766,593 was for new There are several marinas in the lower mile of work, ($1,999,921 Federal and $1,766,672 non- Trail Creek. The commodity handled from this Federal), and $206,083 for maintenance. harbor is fresh fish. Lake George, Hobart, Lake The existing project is complete. Total costs to September 30, 1993 were $13,226,000 of which Restoration, Indiana, Chicago $1,543,000 was for new work, $10,065,000 for District maintenance, and $1,618,000 for rehabilitation. The 1986 Water Resources Develpment Act Indiana Dunes Lake Shore Bank authorized a project for Lake George located in Hobart, Indiana and the parts of Deep River Protection, watershed upstream of the levee through Lake Beverly Shores, IN Station, Indiana.

Located in northwestern Indiana, on the The project consists of the removal of southeast shore of Lake Michigan in Porter approximately 500,000 cubic yards of silt, aquatic County, Beverly Shores is approximately 35 miles growth and other material and the construction of southeast of Chicago Harbor. silt traps or other devices to prevent and abate the deposition of sediment. Estimated cost for Authorized under Section 14 of Public Law 79- new work is $7.56 million Federal and $1.89 526, the project provides for 13,000 feet of stone million contributed by local interests. revetment and periodic repair of riprap to maintain the full length of beach front. Preconstruction planning is in progress. Total costs of the existing project to September 30, Project management cost associated with an FY 1993 were $400,000 for the preconstruction 88 contract for emergency repairs of the existing planning. revetment was $1,679. Total costs of the existing project to September 30, 1993 were $1,086,585, Indiana Shoreline Erosion of which $660,000 was for new work and $426,000 was for maintenance. Indiana Shoreline is located on the south end of Lake Michigan along a two mile reach of shore Burns Waterway west of Michigan City Harbor, Indiana. Small-Boat Harbor, IN The project consists of approximately two miles (Completed) of beach nourishment between Michigan City Harbor and Beverly Shores, Indiana requiring The Burns Waterway Small-Boat Harbor project placement of 264,500 cubic yards of sand. It is is located in Porter County, Indiana, on the south designed to mitigate for erosion caused by a shore of Lake Michigan, 28 miles southeast of Federal harbor and would require replenishment Chicago Harbor. of 64,500 cubic yards of sand at five year intervals throughout the life of the project. The project provides for a rubblemound west breakwater 1,003 feet long; a rubblemound north The project was authorized for construction by breakwater 678 feet long; channel improvement Section 501 of the Water Resources of 5,200 linear feet involving 145,000 cubic feet of Development Act of 1986. It was amended by dredge material used for beach nourishment. the 1988 WRDA which clarified the project as 100

70 percent Federally funded. Advance engineering The project consists of riprap on plastic filter and design has been completed, at a cost of fabric along an existing bluff. A portion of the $318,000. Total project cost is estimated at road was protected with steel sheet piling. $28.9 million at 1993 price levels. Shaping of the bluff along with placing fill lakeside of the steel sheet piling was partially provided by Little Calumet (Flood Control the sponsor. and Recreation) The project protects the existing shoreline and bluff from further erosion which could result in The Little Calumet River project, designed to loss of roadway and damage to public water lines. protect over 9500 structures from flooding, is Construction was completed on December 30, located in between Illinois- 1988 at a cost of $255,452. Indiana state line and the Conrail Railroad in Gary, Indiana. The project was authorized by Section 401 of the 1986 WRDA and consists of Continuing Authorities replacing existing spoilbank levees with 10.2 miles of new levees and 1.4 miles of floodwalls between the lllinois-lndiana state line and Cline Emergency Bank Protection Avenue; constructing 9.7 miles of levees in Gary; Project a diversion structure at Hart Ditch; permanent evacuation of 29 structures in the Black Oak Section 14 of the Flood Control Act of 1946 area of Gary; flood proofing 38 residential provides authority for construction of emergency structures in Gary; modifying 7 miles of channel; bank protection works to prevent flood damage to modifying 4 highway bridges; constructing 17 highways, bridge approaches, and public works. miles of hiking trails and accompanying Local interests are responsible for operation and recreation support facilities, and preserving 788 maintenance of the completed project. acres of wetlands with wildlife enhancement measures. Dune Acres, Chicago District Estimated Federal cost (1993) for new work is $122.0 million with $31.5 million to be Dune Acres is located along the south shore of contributed by local interests. Project Lake Michigan at the Town of Dune Acres, Porter construction is underway in several sections and County, Indiana, approximately 29 miles of preconstruction engineering and design southeast of downtown Chicago 16 miles progresses for other sections. southwest of Michigan City, Indiana.

The project was authorized under Section 14 of Duneland Beach Public Law 79-526 for the purpose of preventing shore erosion at two noncontinuous sites along Duneland Beach is located along the south shore the shore of Lake Michigan. At site 1, the water of Lake Michigan approximately 46 miles intake structure consists of 220 feet of stone southeast of downtown Chicago at the town of revetment placed on plastic filter fabric, bedding Duneland Beach, La Porte County, Indiana. It is stone, and stone riprap along the shoreline and in bordered on the north by the Indiana-Michigan front of the steel sheet piling. state line and on the south by the community of Long Beach. At site 2, Beach Drive consists of 120 feet of stone revetment with a splash apron placed on The Emergency Bank Protection project at filter fabric, bedding stone and stone riprap along Duneland Beach was authorized under Section the shoreline connecting with steel sheet piling. 14 of Public Law 79-526 for the purpose of preventing shore erosion threatening a The project was operational upon completion of continuous area of roadway located along 1,275 construction in November 1988 at a cost of linear feet of Lake Michigan shoreline. $93,865.

71 Surveys

Name of Investigation Purpose Status

Michigan City Harbor, Indiana Harbor for recreational craft. The study is inactive because of (Chicago District) lack of funding to continue feasibility phase studies.

Little Calumet River Basin, To deiarmine the feasibility of A final feasibility report was Indiana-Cady Marsh Ditch providing flood control in Griffith, completed January 1984. The (Chicago District) Indiana recommended plan consists of a diversion structure estimated to cost $10.2 million and protect 2500 residential structures from flooding. The benefit/cost ratio is 1.3. The project was authorized by the 1986 WRDA but does not meet the 800 cfs criteria for Corps participation in urban flood control. However, PGD work is continuing.

Little Calumet River Basin, Dyer, To determine the feasibility of flood Work on the reconnaissance study Indiana control in the vicinity of Dyer, will be initiated in FY 94. (NCC) Indiana.

72 Upper Mississippi River Basin

73 Upper Mississippi River Basin

SCALE IN MILES

74 There are no completed or active authorized Upper Mississippi projects located in the Indiana portion of this basin. However, there is one authorized project River Basin which is presently in an inactive category. It would consist of a flood control levee in the Introduction vicinity of Shelby Bridge and Baums Bridge over the Kankakee River. It would cost about The Kankakee River Basin in Indiana is part of $1,130,000 (1954 prices). The Upper the Upper Mississippi River Basin. The source of Mississippi River Comprehensive Basin Study the Kankakee River is near South Bend, Indiana. identified the following Kankakee River Basin The river flows southwesterly to Kankakee, problems: Water quality, flood and sediment Illinois, and then northwesterly to its confluence damage, recreational opportunity, and with the Des Plaines River, a total distance of 130 environmental preservation. miles. At the confluence of the Des Plaines and Kankakee Rivers, the Illinois River is formed about nine miles from Morris, Illinois. Emergency Repairs Of the Illinois River Basin’s total drainage area of and Operations 29,559 square miles, 5,280 comprise the Kankakee River Basin. The Kankakee River drains 3,125 square miles in Indiana and 2,155 in Kankakee River Levees, Illinois. The Kankakee River, with an average discharge of 4,400 cubic feet per second, is the Chicago District largest contributor to the Lower Illinois River flow. Vast wetland areas along the Kankakee River Emergency repair work on the Kankakee River portion of the Illinois River Basin have been Levees consisted of restoration and repair of ditched and drained to allow agricultural use. the R. J. Reid Levee in the vicinity of Shelby, Little nesting cover remains and most waterfowl Indiana, and of the levee protecting Sumava are migrants. White-tailed deer are the only big Resorts, Indiana, both of which were damaged game species within the Kankakee River. by record floods on the Kankakee River in Pheasant, Hungarian partridge, and bobwhite 1950. These emergency repairs were quail can be found in some areas. completed at a total cost of $28,000.

75

Glossary Crest Length: The length of a wave along its crest. Dam: A barrier constructed across a valley for impounding water or creating a reservoir. Acre-Foot: An area of one acre covered with water to a depth of one foot. One acre-foot is 43,560 cubic Damages Prevented: The difference between feet or 325,951 gallons. Advance Engineering and damages that would occur without the project and Design Work: Work done by the Corps of Engineers the damages that occur with the project in place. offices in preparation of a project for construction. Agricultural Levee: A levee that protects agricultural Degree of Protection: The amount of protection areas where the degree of protection is usually less that a flood control measure is designed for, as than that of a flood control levee. determined by engineering feasibility, economic criteria, social, environmental, and other Air Bubbler: A device which uses air bubbles to considerations. entrain warmer bottom water and pump it to the surface to retard ice formation. Dike: An embankment to confine or control water.

Appropriation: The setting aside of money by Diversion Channel: (1) An artificial channel Congress, through legislation, for specific use. constructed around a town or other point of high potential flood damages to divert flood water from Authorization: House and Senate Public Works the main channel to minimize flood damages. (2) A Committee resolutions or specific legislation which channel carrying water from a diversion dam. provides the legal basis for conducting studies or constructing projects. The money necessary for Downstream: In the direction of the flow of a accomplishing the work is not a part of the stream. Draft: The vertical distance from the authorization, but must come from an appropriation waterline to the bottom of a floating vessel. by Congress. Drainage Structure: A closed culvert carrying Bank and Channel Stabilization: The process of water. preventing bank erosion and channel degradation. Basin: (1) Drainage area of a lake or stream as: Earth-Fill Dam: A dam the main section of which river basin. (2) A naturally or artificially enclosed is composed principally of earth, gravel, sand, silt, harbor for small craft such as: yacht basin. Beam: and clay. The maximum port-to-starboard width of a ship, Flank Levee: A levee constructed nearly boat, or other vessel. perpendicular to the stream flow.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand: The amount of Flat Pool: The pool on the upstream side of a dissolved oxygen in parts per million required by navigation lock and dam where the water surface organisms for the aerobic biochemical level is nearly horizontal or has a very mild slope. decomposition of organic matter present in water. Flood Capacity: The flow carried by a stream or By-Channel: A channel formed around the side of floodway at bank full water level. Also, the storage a reservoir past the end of the dam to convey flood capacity of the flood pool at a reservoir. discharge from the stream above the reservoir into the stream below the dam. Flood Crest: The highest or peak elevation of the water level during a flood in a stream. Closure Structure: A structure built along low points of a levee or floodwall such as a street or Flood ['lain: Valley land along the course of a railroad intersection to prevent flood waters from stream which is subject to inundation during periods flooding the area protected by the levee or floodwall. of high v aterthat exceed normal bank full elevation.

Confluence: The place where streams meet. Floodproofing: Techniques for preventing flood damage to the structure and contents of buildings in Control Dam: A dam or structure with gates to a flood-hazard area. control the discharge from the upstream reservoir Floodwall: Wall, usually built of reinforced concrete, or lake. to confine stream to prevent flooding.

77 Freeboard: (1) Vertical distance between the Life Span Bridge: A type of drawbridge; the normal maximum level of the surface of the liquid in movable span remains horizontal while being lifted a conduit, reservoir, tank, canal, etc., and the top of vertically by cables at both ends. the sides of the conduit, reservoir, canal, etc. (2) An allowance in protection above the design water Lift Station: A small wastewater pumping station surface level. Gate Bay Walls: The gate bay walls that lifts the wastewater to a higher elevation when include those portions of the lock in which the gate the continuance of the sewer at reasonable slopes recesses, gate anchorages, gate machinery, and would involve excessive depths of trench. sometimes where culvert valves and culvert bulkheads are located. Light-Draft Craft: Asmallboat, usually recreational, having a draft of about 10 feet or less. Gravity Drainage Outlets: (1) Outlets for gravity drains such as tiles, perforated conduits, etc., serving Littoral Drift: Material such as sand that is swept an agricultural area and discharging to a drainage along the littoral zone by waves and current. ditch. (2) Pipe, culvert, etc., used for dewatering pond water by gravity. Littoral Zone: The narrow area, including the land and water, bordering the shoreline. Guide Pier: A structure which extends from the entrance to a lock, used to guide vessels safely into Lock: An enclosed part of a canal; waterway, etc., the lock. equipped with gates so that the level of the water can be changed to raise or lower boats from one Habitat: The total of the environmental conditions level to another. which affect the life of plants and animals. Lock Operation: Locks fill and empty by gravity, Headwaters: (1) The upper reaches of a stream with no pumps required to raise or lower the water near its source. (2) The region where groundwaters level. To raise the water level, valves are opened emerge to form a surface stream. (3) The water above the upper gates and water flows into the lock upstream from a structure. through tunnels under both lock walls. This process is reversed to lower water in the lock. Valves are Impoundment: The collection or confinement of opened below the lower gates and water drains out water, as in a lake. of the lock through the tunnels. Gates at both ends of the lock open and close electrically after the Intercepting Sewer: A sewer that receives dry- proper water level has been reached. weather flow from a number of transverse sewers or outlets and conducts such waters to a point for Low Water Datum: Astandard reference elevation, treatment or disposal. unique for each Great Lake, to which all depths on hydrographic charts are referred. Low Flow Left or Right Bank of River: The left hand or right Augmentation: The increase of stream flow. Miter hand bank of a stream when the observer faces Gates: The type of gate used to trap the water in a downstream. lock chamber.

Levee: A dike or embankment, generally constructed Mouth of River: The exit or point of discharge of a close to the banks of the stream, lake, or other body stream into another stream, a lake, or the sea. of water, intended to protect the landside from inundation or to confine the stream flow to its regular Navigable: A river deep enough and wide enough channel. to afford passage to river traffic.

Lift: The difference in elevation between the Ox-Bow Lake: A lake formed in the meander of a upstream and downstream watersurface elevations stream, resulting from the abandonment of the in a lock and dam. meandering course due to the formation of a new channel course. Lift Lock: A canal lock serving to lift a vessel from one reach of water to another such as from the Pier: A structure which extends from the shore out downstream side to the upstream side of a navigation into the lake and serves primarily for mooring and lock and dam. landing of boats.

78 Pile Dike: A dike constructed of posts or similar Sediment Load: The total sediment composed of piling driven into the soil. suspended load and bed load transported by a stream. The suspended load is composed of fine sediment Ponding Area: An area reserved for collecting transported in suspension while bed load is composed excess runoff preparatory to being discharged either of relatively coarse material trapped along or near the by gravity or by pumping. Pool: A small and rather bottom. deep body of quiet water as: water behind a dam. Self-Liquidating Facilities: Facilities provided by Preconstruction Planning: Planning before local interests at a project site in addition to facilities construction, usually done during the which are part of the Federally cost-shared project postauthorization stage. features. These features are considered to be self- liquidating in that they can be paid for through user Reach: A length, distance, or leg of a channel or fees charged the public. These facilities might include other watercourse. such things as a public wharf, mooring facilities, parking areas, etc. Recurrence Interval: The average time interval between actual occurrences of a flood of a qiven Shoal Area: Patches of sand, gravel, or other hard size. bottom lying at shallow depths.

Rehabilitation: Amajorrepairjob. Usually involves Sill: (1) A horizontal beam forming the bottom of the considerable reconstruction of already existing entrance to a lock. (2) Also, a low, submerged structures. damlike structure built to control riverbed scour and current speeds. Reservoir: A pond, lake, tank, basin, or other space, either natural or created in whole or in part, Slackwater Area: (1) In tidal waters, the area where by the building of a structure such as a dam, which tidal current velocity is at a minimum; especially the is used for storage, regulation, and control of water. moment when a reversing current changes direction and its velocity is zero. (2) In streams, a place where Retarding Dam: A dam used to reduce the flood there is very little current. flows of a stream through temporary storage. Slough: (1) A small muddy marshland or tidal Revetment: (1) A facing of stone, concrete, waterway, which usually connects other tidal areas. sandbags, etc., to protect a bank of earth from (2) A tideland or bottomland creek. A side channel or erosion. (2) A retaining wall. Riprap: A layer, inlet, as from a river or bayou, may be connected at facing, or protective mound of randomly placed both ends to a parent body of water. stones to prevent erosion, scour, or sloughing of a structure or embankment. Also the stone so used. Spillway: A waterway or a dam or other hydraulic structure used to discharge excess water to avoid River Tow: An assemblage of one or more barges overtopping of a dam. Spoil material: The material propelled by a towboat in a riverine waterway. removed in excavation of dredging in access channels, boat or navigation channels, drainage ditches, and Rock Dike: An embankment built principally of lakes. rock. Squat: The vertical downward displacement of a Sandbag Closure: A closure structure consisting craft under power with respect to its position in the of sandbags. This closure may be found where a water when not underway. levee or a floodwall has a sudden break in grade such as in a street crossing. Sandbags are used to Stage: The elevation of the water surface above or close the streets in times of high water to prevent below an arbitrary datum. flooding. Standard Project Flood: A flood that may be Sedimentation Basin: A basin or tank in which expected from the most severe combination of water or wastewater containing settleable solids is meteorological and hydrological conditions that are retained for removal of a part of the suspended reasonably characteristic of the geographical region matter by gravity. involved, excluding extremely rare combinations.

79 Stop-Log Closure: Logs, plants, cut timber, or Turning Basin: A widened area in a navigation steel or concrete beams fitting into end guides channel intended to allow vessels to turn around. between walls or piers to close an opening in a dam or conduit to the passage of water. The logs are Uncontrolled Spillway: An overflow spillway usually placed one at a time. having no control gates.

Streambed: A channel occupied or formerly Upstream: At or toward the source of a stream. occupied by a stream. Vertical Lift Gate: A gate that moves vertically in Swale: (1) A light depression, often wet and covered slots formed in masonry piers and consists of a with vegetation. (2) A wide, shallow ditch, usually skin plate and horizontal girders which transmit grassed or paved. the water load into the piers.

Swing Span Bridge: This is the span of a bridge Watershed: The whole surface drainage area across a navigable stream that rotates to allow tall that contributes water to the area. ships to pass through the bridge. Wave-Absorbing Breakwater: A breakwater is Thalweg: The flow line of a channel following the a structure protecting a shore area, harbor, lowest part of a stream. anchorage, or basin from waves. A wave­ absorbing breakwater protects by absorbing, not reflecting, the waves. Thermal Discharge: The heated water coming from nuclear plants. Weir: A dam in a stream to raise the water level or divert its flow. Tributary: A stream or other body of water that contributes its water to another stream or body of Wing Dam: A wall, crib, row of pilings, stone jetty, water. or other barrier projecting from the bank into a stream for protecting the bank from erosion, Truss Span: A structure made up of a number of arresting sand movement, or for concentrating bars, hinged together at their ends to form a rigid the low flow of a stream into a smaller channel. framework.

\

80