| OCR Text |
Show (a) Plans for the comprehensive development of all phases of water resource development should be pre- pared for river basins where not now available. (6) The plan should present a comprehensive out- line of physical development possibilities which will meet anticipated regional and local needs. (c) The plan need be in detail sufficient only (1) to provide working understandings of the interrelation- ships between projects in the plan and their possible alternates; (2) to isolate superior individual projects; and (3) to establish desirable priorities for earlier development. (d) The plan should be periodically reviewed and revised as required in the light of changing needs, and the adaptability to them of existing and potential struc- tures and program schedules. (e) Regional and local needs should determine the character and schedule of basin development so long as not in conflict with national objectives. (/) Early and continuing participation in develop- ment of the plan at the field level by all Federal, State, private, and local agencies concerned should be en- couraged to assure the requisite coordination of interests. Illustrative of the indicated need for consideration of all phases of water resource development is the experience in the Rio Grande Valley where reservoir siltation and stream bed aggradation have increased by overgrazing of range lands in the watershed. The desirability of adjusting the basin plan so as to meet indicated minimum requirements, to provide for periodic review, and thereby to maintain flexibility is illustrated in the Columbia River Basin. Bonneville Dam and Grand Coulee Dam are structures which, it was in- dicated by a basin plan, would meet regional and local needs, would constitute nonconflicting elements of a rational basin development, and were superior individual undertakings. Accordingly, they were selected from the possibilities indicated by the plan, investigated in detail and constructed. Subsequent to their completion, the flood of June 1948 in the Columbia River Basin demon- strated the desirability of providing more fully for flood control. The plan was accordingly revised with sub- stantial additions of storage to upstream potential projects. The projects selected from the revised plan were then investigated and designed to meet the new modified needs. The Bonneville Dam, which, practically, can serve only the major purposes of navigation and power under any form of basin development, accordingly fits in with the revised plan. The situation at Grand Coulee is different. Here a large volume of storage was practicable and had been provided for power and irrigation. It is now recom- mended that the outlet works be modified to permit more effective use of reservoir space for flood control in con- junction with the other purposes. A workable flexibility in the plan thus has been attained. Further, effort and funds have not been pointlessly expended on detailed studies of projects in the initial plan which were not required for earlier development. Active participation by Federal, State, private and local agencies concerned in developing a basin plan which will meet regional and local needs to the fullest possible extent has been demonstrated. Procedures have been established for achieving this, but experience has indicated that en- couragement of more active participation at the field level should be sought in the interests of most effective co- ordination. 2. The following recommendations stem from experi- ence in the execution of basin plans: (a) Coordinated programming and budgetary actions should be obtained for all elements of a basin plan. The objectives of coordinated comprehensive planning ob- viously cannot be fully met if a corresponding degree of coordination is not achieved in the execution of the plan. A major difficulty in the latter connection, experienced re- cently in proposed actions on a comprehensive plan for the Columbia River Basin, is the fact that traditional methods of authorization and appropriation preclude single action on a joint program involving projects of two different departments. Congressional arrangements to permit such actions are needed. (&) Execution of the plan should keep pace with the expanding national economy, both present and future. Individual projects discussed above clearly illustrate that the addition of productive capacities through water re- source development has created benefits to a growing pop- ulation and economy far in excess of expectations, even during a period when opportunities and achievements in such developments by private initiative were far greater than those now in, prospect. (c) There should be a clearer line of demarcation as to authority of the Federal Government, States, private, and local agencies with reference to undertaking elements of a basin plan. Examples include proposals by non- Federal interests for construction of power developments which fit into a comprehensive plan; proposals by non- Federal interests for a contribution from the Federal Government to cover the cost of flood control storage and storage for purposes other than those allocable to power, as in the case of the Pensacola project; proposals for the operation of generation and transmission facilities of Federal power plants by private companies and other public agencies as in the case of the Boulder Dam project; the utilization of existing transmission systems; the extent of construction of new transmission lines to deliver power from Federal power plants; and power market studies. Project Development 1. Formulation of project plans.-All Federal water resource projects (and related land programs) should be formulated on the following principles: (a) The need for each purpose of a project should be established. This usually involves determination of objectives in quantitative terms such as protection against a "standard project flood" of a certain magni- tude, market for the power generated from the project, or provision of a specific amount of storage for irrigation or water supply. (6) All uses of a project site should be considered in order that the most efficient use may be made of its possibilities toward meeting the established needs or objectives. (c) The scope of the project should be established at the point where the excess of benefits over costs is at a maximum. Exceptions may be advisable when in- tangible factors are of sufficient importance. (d) The type of project and its details should be the most economical available method of accomplishing the specific purpose involved. 409 |
