| OCR Text |
Show to Federal investment in a water resource development. Such contracts should cover the total of the project costs which equitably should be carried by all benefited groups in the State. The distribution of cost and the collection should be the responsibility of the State. Some States have agencies enabled to respond in part to such negotiations. The California State Water Resources Board is empowered to underwrite the local contribution required under the terms of the Federal Flood Control Acts. In many States, however, some agency or officer would have to be empowered to represent the State, through proper legislation. Such a policy would immediately stimulate the greater interest and responsibility of the States in water resource development which experience has indicated to be de- sirable. That interest would be continuous and active from the initiation of studies through the whole life of the project. Such a policy also would provide a means of securing appropriate returns from indirect local and State beneficiaries which it is difficult if not impossible for the Federal Government to secure by direct arrangements with the groups involved. The projects or services for collection would be made to include irrigation, flood control, navigation, watershed management, recreation, pollution abatement, and fish and wildlife. Present methods of collecting costs for power and for municipal water supplies should be retained. In instances where benefits of a development involved more than one State, an equitable distribution of cost among States and agreements with all States affected would be required. Consider Areas Contiguous to Project In any study of a land or water resource development program for an area, consideration should be given to all contiguous areas, and the plans and program integrated with the best use of the combined area to provide the maximum over-all benefits. In many irrigation areas, the irrigable land may well serve as a supplement to the adjoining range land. Often the value of the range land can be greatly increased by even a small amount of irri- gated land. The Belle Fourche project in South Dakota is an example of a project that has enhanced the economy of the adjoining grazing lands. In the Bartholomew- Boeuf-Tensas Basin, in Arkansas and Louisiana, the dis- charge from one drainage canal flooded the land below, and was endangered by the discharge from the area above. Assistance to States and Individuals Each Federal agency with responsibilities for the devel- opment and protection of land and water resources should be specifically empowered to cooperate with States, local agencies, or individuals, to give advice and counsel in the study, design, construction, and operation of works and programs, in line with such agencies' responsibilities. No Federal funds should be expended either directly or in- directly in assisting in such development or program with- out the approval of such agency as to the adequacy of the plans and programs and assurance that the proposed works or practices are consistent with an accepted basin plan. If those responsible for the work had had adequate advice, many non-Federal irrigation and drainage projects would be in a much sounder condition, had compliance with such advice been mandatory. Agency Cooperation Cooperation among the agencies interested in water development has in general been excellent at the field level. A few cases of lack of cooperation have resulted from in- adequate appropriations, or inadequate coordination with- in an agency. Each agency should be alert to take necessary steps so that it is in a position to participate both as regards personnel and funds in planning and construction activities within its sphere. Uniform Authorization Procedure It appears both necessary and desirable to have uni- formity among all Federal agencies in authorization pro- cedures. Each agency operates under different legislation and under different procedures in obtaining authorization, even when comparable functions are involved. Projects involving different functions in a basin plan are considered by separate congressional committees. Thus, separate elements in a basin plan may not receive uniform con- sideration, and programs may not be authorized as a unit nor projects be constructed with a maximum of integration. Basin plans are worthy of coordinated consideration. It, therefore, appears desirable that arrangements be made to proceed legislatively in the most effective and practical manner with uniform authorization. Uniform Policy Throughout Different Agencies The objectives of each phase of water resource develop- ment should be clearly set forth in statements of policy, together with a clear statement of the responsibility of each agency in accomplishing the objectives. At present, agencies in two or more departments have programs which have different and sometimes conflicting procedures. For example, there are various methods of selling power from federally constructed dams. It seems that a single power policy should be applicable to all Federal agencies. Some of the existing differences are listed below: (a) At the Saint Marys River project, Michigan, the Secretary of the Army sells power and any excess water under such terms and conditions as he may determine. (b) At Hoover Dam the purchasers pay a rental for water and the head created by the dam. The purchasers own the generators and transmit the electricity through their own facilities. The Secretary of the Interior ad- ministers the sales at contract rates negotiated prior to the construction of the dam. The rates are subject to the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior under the provisions of the Boulder Canyon Act. (c) At the Marmet, London, and Winfield Federal navigation dams on the Kanawha River, W. Va., power plants were constructed and operated by a private utility under Federal Power Commission licenses. The licensee pays annual charges for recompensing the United States for the use of these Government dams and for the occu- pancy of lands of the United States adjoining the dams. The rates for the sale of power are subject to regulation by the State regulatory commission. (d) Tennesssee Valley Authority generates power at its own hydroelectric and steam-electric power plants and 911609-5C 415 |
