OCR Text |
Show Dozens of Fed Projects Store Unwanted Water NiV Lake Powe11 in utah-i'ellowbiiRVir utah-i'ellowbiiRVir in CoIo'-ado and the lVVot)li ""Reservoir on the Montana-.border Montana-.border have in common: of lhe dozens of federal :ean i Cls in tne West storing 'obod'y wans Waler lhat' fr nW' I tTelfeMVfely' more than 15 million f :oderal d 01 wa'er lies waiting behind barter3!!?!.'" enough water t0 cover il m State of wyming one 'J Mailable f f the water has been r decade decades- wi" s't unused federal mre' and-to tne chagrin regulators, will add up to 4 millions of dollars in lost revenues Tn a reDort released this tan, me General Accounting Office took federal dam builders to task for not eudcCcreassfuIly marketing jlhc ter -nd for not charging enough once iney f(7ndfbaTsome users have paid the Army Corps o E, g, e,s .y Peak reservoir in Wane , dUSl'-ial 0T,eRrecSionsP Glendo Bureau of .L as having paid Sorrtenance costs (which often exceed initial construction con-struction costs within a few years of operation). Other users have not been charged interest, although it is required by law. The agencies in many cases have also reshuffled water payments to cover only construction costs, leaving the operation expenses lo federal taxpayers. The investigators at GAO further found that once attracted, a buyer was not regularly charged fees lhat reflected the accumulated operaling expenses, but rather lower prices (hat took effect Ihe day of delivery. Much of Ihe problem -- a startling paradox in the arid West -- is due lo inconsistent Corps' and Bureau policies in Ihe regional offices, charged the GAO, which reports lo Congress. Nol so, said Willis Ervin, supervisor for waler operations in lhe Bureau's Lower Missouri Region, "based in Denver. Ervin acknowledged he's having marketing problems, but he blames Congress. "To a large extent, those (policy) inconsistencies are mandated by the legislation authorizing a project," he said. Many projects have special legislative quirks, he said, such as exemptions of some users from costs, such as irrigators from interst charges. Our mandate for 75 years has been to build some projects in anlicipatin of a future demand," he added. "And if lhat demand is not forthcoming -like irrigation in the Dakotas - well, you have a problem. But it's not our doing." Ed Clyde, a Salt Lake City-based water lawyer who has negotiated contracts for the Central Utah Project and several other Utah developments, agreed that Congress Continued on Page A-2 Unused Water Continued from Front Page was more; to blame. "The 1939 Reclamation Act prohibits the secretary from building a dam without first lining up users to reimburse the government," he said. "But there have been some - I can't say how many -- special exemptions." Members of Congress feeling particularly par-ticularly friendly toward constituent irrigators or a local industry can traditionally lap the pork barrel for any number of cost- cutting provisions in a project's authorizing legislation, he said. The Bureau's Steve Wade, spokesman for the Pacific Northwest region based in Boise, said regional variations in repayment policy were necessary to "reflect local conditions." con-ditions." Both Wade and Ervin said they were also still bound by a general federal policy to charge water users only what they can af ford, and no more. When the demand is high and Ihe buyer is rich, that policy can pay off. In western Colorado, for example, ERvin said he was able to charge Exxon Corporation "what the market would bear" for some 6,000 acre feet of the still unsold 49,500 acre feet of water stored by the Ruedi Reservoir near Aspen. The GAO, in short, recommended that the agencies charge more for their water, and include a full cost recovery plan, interest expenses (a hidden factor that can surpass operating costs), and a retroactive pricing scale that covers all maintenance main-tenance costs from the project's birth. Copyright 1981 High Country News BoxK Lander, Wyoming 82520 Reprinted by Permission |