| OCR Text |
Show Water project cost-sharing B) HeleiieC. Monberg ,5Shington-Cost-sharing is the new "word these days in water ictant Army Secretary William R. Ji emphasized that to Western f & Wrap-up (WRW) in an in-I in-I :;iei"on June 5. He and Assistant i r'rior Secretary Carrey E. Lhers discussed cost -sharing at a of the Senate Water Sub- I'Jtee chaired by Sen. James s 4r R-S.D., on June 8. Gianelli ?ht up supplemental financing of ;J projects at his confirmation ;.L before the Senate Armed ces Committee on June 3. )!, with such diverse interests in erasJ W. (Pat) O'Meara of the onal Water Resources Association " Guv R- Martin, former Assistant Vry of Interior, have told states N Laer districts they had better be I'-ared to pick up a larger share of t'cost if they want to participate in a Vally constructed water project in v future. . legislation has been introduced .-entry for user changes to recover the Jl cost" of contruction and operation f inland waterways, and to require sharing in the dredging and ning of major harbors. Hearings ;'e been scheduled in the Senate 'vironment and Public Works ! iimittee on June 12 relative to cost-I5J cost-I5J : tring on harbor development (S 809, i' pndment 31) and on June 16 on 4 waterway development and user friS 810, amendment 32). , J the Administration is reported to be "wnng another acreage limitation bill tts;':; tether which will allow for leasing c require much higher payment for ser supplied by the Bureau of mc: tarnation to leased land. Once such ? C-lation is introduced, the House 'Jpsmor Committee will consider mage limitation measures already (roduced and the water pricing bill i R 2606) by Rep. George Miller, D- Y: ail., on irrigation water. The Interior ""tpartment is taking a hard line on : aer costs in working out a long-term rtract with Westlands Water District J" California, and in requiring an 0FE-' tended contract increasing the cost municipal and industrial water on 'kl Bonneville Unit of Central Utah " ' v J.. mi ' ' l STATES PROBLEMS 9lte: AND PRIORITIES .Ms: batik' Slates and water districts have been MS inding off higher cost-sharing raft: iDposaJs for years. One of the reasons orenc ispelled out in an unpublished study of ling i" Bl-sharing done by the Water Moij-: sources Council in 1975. It found that in! afederal cost-sharing for both water 'Warns and projects ranged from 64 ent for hydro-electric power, aicioal and industrial water suddIv point source management for J'.er quality, to less than 10 percent ' aquacultural production, rl ligation, natural areas, non-point wee management for water quality, 'tmo for historic and cultural sites. "Issues relating to cost-sharing are itremely sensitive because of 'rams and fiscal impacts. As an , , aiple, a 1 percentage point change 1 01 j cost-sharing for all federally-Th federally-Th T. ;inced water and related resources "?', ::8rams results in an annual 1 Ir '!ement. UP or down, of $100 en'l";'. -Son form non-federal sources, "the S isncil cost-sharing study said, g Mother reason was given by Clair P. Jr., chairman of the Interstate , Ilerence on Water Problems, before HK se Water and Power Resources ' fwroittee on June 4. He was !'S iter '""ling the cutback in state water lM" :ts by the Reagan Administration. yji1? Said: "Water is so en for ' ttW-by so many states including M ' 51em stales that management by e!3: 'iUles is simP'y not funded at levels 'm 10 do kind of planning and ". foment which will assure that Jffle an adequate suPPlv in tne fwf: '?etinanaces are so overwhelmed 1 J); . le burdens of education, prisons, ' hi'! '?yS' mental health and Public sow ;4 programs that there is little left Source management," said ;- fffii: who is director of the South " ''""a water Resources Commission "wM f allfetirne of experience in dealing ?',w Problems. it th,s Administration has budget thet f ft f its own' and il is insistinS L r' , estates Put water planning and for (ifl i?ment h'gher on their agenda. !i IlK nSecretary James G. Watt told 'li! ?dnor Subcommittee on April 21, ons to pending water problems ,i (6 " reciuire a more positive in- A t'Vnt f 511 the StateS- tHe EaSt a Wt ' both in planning and 2 01 p" and by par" u"s ;C on m project financing. We ent kl-8 move t0 jint state-federal " yettf -j 6 f water projects and a V1 V empnasis on non-structural r f tlesto enhance water quality and ?Wn.mana6nent." V $i in K h rane"i, who is chairman of the U K tvifup that assists the uamnet V- !0nNalural Resources and the LWC1011. and Carruthers also Ztft red e importance of state Self 3nd local backing for water " B at recent hearings. WATER PROJECT PRIORITIES Gianelli told the Abdnor Subcommittee Sub-committee on June 8, "There are a number of ways by which priorities could be established among various types of water projects. One very effective ef-fective way would be to establish some priority on the basis of local contribution, con-tribution, either in terms of financial participation or services-in-kind It has been my experience that many needed water projects which involve local beneficiaries can be prioritized by the willingness of local government to participate. "Another measure of determining priorities would be to emphasize those projects producing high national priority outputs such as hydro-power as a substitute for other forms of electrical elec-trical energy generation, of commercial com-mercial navigation necessary to assist in the development of the energy resources of the nation. Within those national priority uses, preferential treatment could be given to those projects which have the highest benefit-cost ratios, the greatest net benefits or the highest rate of return on the investment," Gianelli testified. He also endorsed the policy that has been followed by recent administrations: to try to complete projects under construction. con-struction. If their completion can be speeded up, Gianelli pointed out, project benefits can be realized faster. This not 'only maximizes the benefits but speeds up repayment, he noted. When WRW asked how states can provide the amount of cost-sharing that the Administration wants, Gianelli did not think cost-sharing up to, say, a 50-50 basis, would be difficult for most states, particularly in the West. "Many of the Western states have the potential for energy developments, so they will have the money to help pay for water projects. All of the cost-sharing need not be in dollars. I have talked to Sen. Abdnor about that. If we plug in state participation at an early date, we can get people to help formulate water projects from the states with expertise in various fields, such as land use," Gianelli told WRW. Furthermore, planning new water projects in the future should not be as difficult as it has been in recent years because the prospects are that "we are - going to .replace the principles and. standards for- water projects- with-guidelines with-guidelines which people can understand," un-derstand," Gianelli said. The Cabinet Council and the working group headed by Gianelli are working on both a re-evaluation re-evaluation of the latest set of principles and standards put by the Water Council in 1979 as criteria to evaluate new water projects out-and on cost sharing. Among the types of cost-sharing under review are full-cost pricing, user charges in general, and some interest charge in irrigation project repayment, Interior informed the Subcommittee June 8. COST-SHARING MESSAGE CARRIED BY OTHERS O'Meara notified the membership of the National Water Resources Association on May 17 that the traditional methods by which water projects will be financed in the future are in for "substantive changes." Administration proposals and legislation "all point to a unified conclusion: con-clusion: increased state participation in planning and financing water projects " O'Meara said. So he advised state associations to start working with their state legislatures now, so that their states can "immediately participate par-ticipate in the cost-sharing policy for project construction as soon as it becomes law...States that are in a position to participate in cost-sharing will find they have high priority consideration con-sideration for their projects," O'Meara adFormer Assistant Interior Secretary Martin has come to a similar conclusion, con-clusion, he told a Montana water symposium held in Missoula on April 3. He said it is the Reagan Administration's Ad-ministration's philosophy to minimize the federal government. As a result local water districts.. .mus start Sing for really new ideas for fun-X fun-X " Martin, now a Washington attorney, at-torney, advised his Montana audnc. lames Fish of the Great Lakes CommTssion told a House Water Resources Subcommittee on May 6 "We will have to look at cost-sharing wUh the states and local governments, Md I we have to look at users paying. SStSarlng is nothing new ; that s ho satSerprojwa:ebui.tfroml S by a combination of tideland o evenues and two types of state bonds Gianelli testified on June 8. KEY CHANGES AT BUREAU OF RECLAMATION wnVJ) - The Bureau o Bureau. fnHicate Interio The changes indicate i missioner of Reclamation this spring, he told Bureau personnel in Washington, Denver and Boulder City that he was appointing Clifford I. Barrett as his deputy. Broadbent is a second-generation career Bureau of Rec. man, an engineer who has been the Assistant Commissioner for Planning and Operations for the past four years. During that time he has been involved in all of the top Bureau decisions. But Watt overruled Broadbent. Barrett has been notified in recent days that instead of being Broadbent's acting ac-ting deputy, he is being assigned to the field. He will become regional director of the Upper Colorado Region with headquarters in Salt Lake City. "Politics" is given as the reason for Barrett's fall from favor in the front office. Barrett is highly regarded here. A Capitol Hill source who works with Bureau regularly told Western Resources Wrap-up (WRW) on June 5, "Cliff Barrett has kept the lights on at the Bureau for the past four years." Other changes to be announced: N.W. (Bill) Plummer, who has been the regional director at Salt Lake City, is being transferred to Amarillo, Tex., to become regional director of the Southwest Region. Robert H. Weimer, who has been the regional director in Amarillo, is being transferred to Billings, Mont., to become regional director of the Upper Missouri Region. Other personnel changes are said to be in the works. The Bureau has also been notified not to enter into any new construction contracts on the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah project until a new repayment contract is worked out for the Bonneville Unit. This means most of the work on this project will be stopped, pending the signing of an amended and updated repayment contract. |
