Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />I <br /> <br />the Federal Government; adherence. to sound principles of financing and <br />sharing costs; improved Federal organization for more logical division <br />of responsibilities with greatest efficiency and least duplication; and <br />comprehensive basin planning with cooperation of State and local <br />interests. Only a few pending bills appear to fit this program. Signifi- <br />cant i!l the Miller Bill, H. R. 5301, which would make it possible for <br />local districts to plan and program their own development and, with <br />approval of plans by the Interior Department, borrow money from the <br />Government under authorization of Congress, to. finance construction. <br />Another is for extension of the watershed program. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />JOHN BLISS: Some bills before Congress would carry out rec.ommenda- <br />tions of the National Reclamation Association for greater localpartici- <br />pation:in development of water resources. These are in line with ow: <br />objectives, and should be supported. <br /> <br />A. M, ,sMITH: In August tlte new Secretary of Interiorout1ined the power <br />policy.of the Department. He said the policy is based upon acts and <br />statements of Congress and statements by the administration, and super- <br />sedes all statements of power policy heretofore issued by the Department. <br />Several loose expressions give cause for c.oncern. FOr example; . <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />"The Department---will---plan and recommend construction of <br />generating facUities in hydro projects under its jurisdiction <br />when such facilities are economically justified and feasible. <br />-.- -will particularly emphasize those multi-pw:pose projects <br />with hydro-electric developments which, because ofsh.e or <br />complexity, are beyond the mean.s of local public or private <br />enterprise. " <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />Who shall make tlte decision as to whether a project should be built and <br />as to who should build it? The document does not specify whether i.t <br />shall be. made by States, local interests, or the Department. The state- <br />ment says of the Department that: <br /> <br />"m general it will not oppose the construction of facilities <br />which local interests---are willing and able to provide--- <br />and which are consonant with the best development of the <br />natural resources of tlte area." <br /> <br />Who should decide whether the project is "consonant with the best devel- <br />opment of the natural re.sources"? The phrase "in general" is loose, <br />and the sentence might provide a loophole for gradual return to the <br />dictatorial attitude of the previous administraticm that the Federal <br />Government has sole responsibility for development of hydro-electric <br />power. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Th.e statement says the Department will give preference to public <br />.bQdies .and cQ-operatives in disposing of electric energy from Federal <br />plants, and power remaining after provision for existing preference <br />customers will be sold to private utilities. Should not existing private <br />utilities be given more equal break in acquisition and distribution of . <br />public power? The Department says rates will be such as to provide <br />for costs of producing and transmitting energy and to return capital <br />investment in power facilities, with interest, in not mOre than 50 years. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />-21- <br />