Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"would not substantially impair or conflict with the comprehensive plan." Wi h <br /> <br />respect to federal projects, a reservation in the Congressional consent legisla ion <br /> <br />provides that "whenever a comprehensive plan, or any part or revision thereo , has <br /> <br />been adopted with the concurrence of the member appointed by the president, the <br /> <br />exercise of any powers conferred by law on any officer, agency, or instrument lity of <br /> <br />the United States with regard to water and related land resources in the Dela are <br /> <br />River Basin shall not substantially conflict with any such portion of such <br /> <br />comprehensive plan." Because the content of the comprehensive plan is deter <br /> <br /> <br />by majority vote of the DRBC, on which the federal government has a single v te <br /> <br /> <br />with each of the states, the consent legislation provides that the federal gover ment <br /> <br />need not shape its projects to a plan with which it is not in agreement and aut orizes <br /> <br /> <br />the president to "suspend, modify or delete" any provision of the comprehensiv plan <br /> <br />affecting federal interests when the president "shall find. . . that the national' <br /> <br />. " <br />so reqUIres. <br /> <br />Perhaps the most unique feature of the compact is the DRBC's power to <br /> <br />allocate the waters of the basin among the signatory states in accordance with ,he <br /> <br /> <br />Supreme Court's doctrine of equitable apportionment, discussed below, a provision <br /> <br /> <br />designed as an alternative to (1) what was considered to be the relatively inflex'ble <br /> <br />apportionments made by traditional water allocation compacts and (2) litigatio in <br /> <br />the Supreme Court. However, this allocation power, which permits essential ad ptive <br /> <br />13 <br />