OCR Text |
Show objections to which preceding bills gave rise. I congratulate Congressman McKinnon on the inclusion in H. R. 5102 of Section 6 which provides, in effect, that all works constructed thereunder shall be subject to and controlled by the Colorado River Compact, the Boulder Canyon Project Act and the California Limitation Act and that no right or claim of right to the use of the waters of the Colorado River shall be aided or prejudiced thereby. Some such assurance is needed in the light of the statement contained in the 1948 report of the San Diego County Water Authority on the ". . . need and feasibility of increasing the capacity of the San Diego aqueduct" that "In the meanwhile, the Metropolitan Water District's water rights can either be strengthened by a policy of diverting and using increasing amounts of Colorado River water in communities where the need exists, or such rights may be weakened by pursuing a policy of restricting further use of Colorado River water until the decision of the (Supreme) court has been received." I understand that the foregoing statement from the 1948 report of the San Diego County Water Authority no longer represents the official position of that body. Nevertheless, the fears engendered by that statement remained. Section 6 of H. R. 5102 will tend to dispel them. A few additional amendments upon which, I understand, agreement has been reached will complete the job. The project proposed to be authorized by H. R. 5102 is soundly conceived and badly needed. It would make a good project for authorization and construction under the Federal Reclamation Laws. In purpose, for instance, it is similar to a little project in Colorado, known as the "Collbran project," upon which hearings were recently held before the Irrigation Sub-committee of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Procedures called for in connection with the authorization of flood control and Federal reclamation projects are admittedly somewhat burdensome. Reports on such projects are required to be circularized among affected states for 90 days, and the comments of such states, received within that time, must be transmitted to the Congress along with the report on the project. In the case of the Collbran project that procedure was adhered to strictly, notwithstanding the fact that one of the principal purposes of the project is to provide an additional municipal water supply to a city which is becoming known as the uranium capital of the world and in which vital national defense activities are centered. That procedure has not been followed in the case of the project proposed to be authorized by H. R. 5102. In view of the need of San Diego and San Diego County and their environs, and in view of the lapse of time, it has been -28- |