Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00034; <br /> <br />28 <br /> <br />projects. These are 40- or 50-year projects, and a high discount <br />rate simply means that the 10- or IS-year project is given <br />preference. 11 <br /> <br />**t,(:::~* <br /> <br />liThe matter of discounting is itself somewhat controversial. <br />Many Federal Government programs are not discounted at <br />all. . . . II <br /> <br />***** <br /> <br />II .. When approved in advance, regional development can <br />be considered as an objective in planning future water programs. <br />Approved by whom? This should be spelled out so as to remove <br />any possibility for future misunderstanding. 11 <br /> <br />***** <br /> <br />II Social Well-Being. . . . Admittedly, it is difficult to <br />define the Nation I s social goals and an even more demanding task <br />to show the beneficial and adverse effects of specific water <br />projects in meeting these objectives. <br /> <br />"But such objectives are very real and, in this day and time, <br />more significant than ever. Consideration of social well-being <br />should be a vital part, therefore, of the process of laying out <br />various alternative plans involving water resource conservation <br />and utilization. If the multi-objective planning approach is to <br />have real meaning and relevance, social well-being should be <br />restored as a full-fledged objective. II <br /> <br />r" <br /> <br />t. <br /> <br />***** <br /> <br />". . . Efforts to make local beneficiaries pay more of the <br />cost of river programs are not desirable. Such programs are <br />supposed to be undertaken to provide broad public benefits. This <br />is why we are 80 concerned about realistic evaluation: to deter- <br />mine the real benefits to the public. II <br /> <br />* * * * * <br /> <br />". . . Some cost-sharing is in order, but I believe the gov- <br />ernment should move slowly in changing the present procedures. II <br /> <br />* * * * * <br />