7913

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7913
• Author: Freshwater Society.
• Title: Water Management in Transition, 1985.
• USFW Year: 1985.
• USFW - Doc Type: Navarre, MN.
• Copyright Material: YES

The federal objective of
water resources planning is
to contribute to national
economic development,
consistent with laws and
executive orders
concerning the protection
of the nation's environment.

One of the major criticisms
of current federal water
development is the
inordinate time period
between the beginning of
planning and the
completion of construction
of a project.

Because public officials must demonstrate to their constituents that studies
generate results consistent with needs and expenditure, Corps planners must
quickly provide a limited range of acceptable alternatives so that potential
sponsors along with the financing community can evaluate possible financing
alternatives. During the reconnaissance and feasibility phases of planning it is
important to document the interjurisdictional effects of projects having
widespread benefits as these will likely require the development of new
institutional mechanisms.

During reconnaissance planning, the states and the Corps will be called upon
for data and advice on how multiple local interests can equitably share the costs
of feasibility planning, This step is critical in assuring that affected interests pay
fair costs and receive appropriate consideration in planning decisions. Therefore,
even though the reconnaissance planning phase is done at federal expense, a
close working relationship demands the seeking out of potential sponsors to
cost-share the subsequent feasibility study.

During the feasibility phase, interjurisdictional considerations are equally
important, as sponsors will be sought to share construction costs. This will
require a detailed accounting of the benefit and cost distribution across
geographic areas and over time. Although detailed accounting of benefit and
cost incidence is difficult, it is important that this task begin early, as it is key
to successful negotiation of joint planning and construction endeavors.

Addressing Non-Federal Concerns

To fully address non-federal concerns without inappropriate deviation from the
federal water development objective, we need to take full advantage of the
flexibility which is provided in the federal guidelines for water project planning
- Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related
Land Resources Implementation Studies, March 10, 1983. These are commonly
referred to as the Principles and Guidelines or simply the P&G.

The federal objective of water resources planning is to contribute to national
economic development, consistent with laws and executive orders concerning
the protection of the nation's environment. The P&G require each water resource
development agency to develop a National Economic Development (NED)
plan-that plan which maximizes national economic development benefits. A
major concern of local sponsors is the ability to levy taxes or assess fees to project
beneficiaries in order to obtain revenues to finance projects.

Planning studies typically address complex problem sets; they involve multiple
needs, opportunities, project purposes and jurisdictions. Frequently the
comprehensive plans formulated in this environment result in projects which
are beyond the capability of local sponsors to finance - because of jurisdictional
limitations, scale of projects or vendibility of outputs, Additionally, there may
be real disagreements over the value of certain elements of "federal" plans-
for instance, those that provide mitigation for valuable or scarce national
resources which may be locally abundant.

The solution to this dilemma lies in the flexibility of the P&G - which state
that each plan, including the NED plan, be formulated "in consideration of' four
criteria: completeness, effectiveness, efficiency and acceptability, The
acceptability criterion includes acceptance of a plan by state and local interests.
An acceptable project may involve considering a smaller scale, shorter design
life, staged development of separable increments, enhanced use of mixed-
strategy plans incorporating nonstructural and demand management measures,
reduced environmental mitigation, increased emphasis on outputs creating
regional or local employment of tax gains and the substitution of recurrent costs
for capital costs. Acceptability considerations may also raise the issue of lowering
costs by modification of engineering and environmental procedures without
significantly increasing risk where legally possible.

25