My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP09929
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
9001-10000
>
WSP09929
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:56:34 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:01:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Colorado River Basin - General Publications
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
5/4/1979
Author
Comptroller General
Title
Colorado River Basin Water Problems - How to Reduce Their Impact - Report to the Congress of the United States
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
150
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />00078!" <br /> <br />organizational and decisionmaking entity <br />needed to achieve basinwide planning and <br />management of the water resources. <br /> <br />However, the Environmental Protection <br />Agency and the States disagree. The <br />Agency prefers strengthening existing <br />organizations, and the States believe <br />existing management is adequate. <br /> <br />GAO continues to believe that a basinwide <br />entity with authority is needed to plan <br />and manage the basin's water resources. <br />~his is because severe and complex issues <br />are facing the basin and because existing <br />entities have tended to focus on individual <br />issues, rather than dealing with supply, <br />quality, water rights, etc., on a compre- <br />hensive basis. (See pp. 54 and 55.) <br /> <br />Most of the agencies commenting on the <br />report did not believe funding should <br />be deferred for the desalination plant, <br />primarily because of the potential loss <br />of water in a water-short area and the <br />need to meet a national obligation for <br />improving the quality of water to Mexico. <br />However, in light of the increased cost <br />of the plant, GAG believes that other, <br />less costly alternatives may exist and <br />should be evaluated before proceeding <br />with construction. (See pp. 44 and 45.) <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />lV <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.