WSP09219 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

002783 -22- cimmediate massive action programs but you don't have to apologize for this. This contribution to the long-term public interest y.'ill surely be equal tO,or greater than, most of the specific project planning being carried out at this time. . . :Havingsaid this,.I do not want to leave the impression that I have any 'quarrel with our on-going actiort programs or the planning to bring others .into being. We can't be like the guy who said, 'stop the world, I want to ,get off. I We have to keep going on with the action programs as we under- stand them today. But, the thrust of what I am trying to say is that while these action. programs are going forward, for Heaven's sake, we need men like you to develop long-range plans for the future and establish .some of these priorities that I have been talking about and answer some of the questions related. to the one that I posed to you. I do feel, however, ,that at this particular point in history when we have large unfunded back- logs of authorized work that we would be well advised to spend more effort in a generalized taking of inventory than in continuing to stockpile detailed plans that cannot, for one reason or another, be. funded for construction. It was just last week in hearings before the Interior Committee when I 'queried a witness as to what the backlog now in the Bureau of Reclamation was fo.r unfunded projects; that were authorized but unfunded. It was five billion dollars. What was the backlog on Corps of Engineers!, As I recall, 'the statistics of the Bureau of Reclamation showed a backlog of $5 billion and the Corps of Engineers a backlog of $10 billion. So, I make the gen- eral suggestion that, ,with this kind of backlog on the books, that it might be well now to do a little more planning overall than working for more and ,more backlog. Now, please notice my reference to "careful evaluation." This is one way of getting my remarks back to the subject of your conference. As I men- tioned previously, I am most gratified with the progress that is be.ing .demonstrated relative to updating our analytical procedures. While I am development-oriented and realize fully that the recently promulgated dis- count rate criterion is adverse to a showing of justification, or reclamation is adverse to a showing of feasibility, I cannot in good conscience oppose the new criterion. By the same token, I am proud to be enumerated among those who believe that we have been far off in recognizing and tabulating the affirmative economic and social gains that accrue from properly conceived feasible projects. I shall continue to encourage your efforts to correct this deficiency. II '."t.:;: {:_::~'<>:~-'::?:1 ';::~;'(';:(~:~:;:5;; l~-:::~::.~. ".-.; -~'-:" : '.",;--;,- .'. ~;- .-"