PUB00121 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . Two or three of the projects likely to be presented to the Board this time may raise questions as to the economic justification for the project and the need for complete environmental assessments (federal environmental imoact statements may even be required in two cases). If the benefit:cost ratio for a project is below unity, how does the Board wish to proceed? What kinds of environmental assessments does the Board want? What other criteria should be employed in evaluating the merits of proposed projects? 3. Timing of Board Recommendations As noted above, federal EISs may be required for some proposed projects. Also, a license will be required from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in the case of one proposed project. Does the Board want to recommend projects for authorization to the General Assembly before all information which is presumably relevant to determining the merits of a project is in hand? If not, should the Board make more funds available to complete the study and permitting process? If so, on what basis (100 percent of cost, 50 percent, etc.)? Alternatively, should projects be recommended for authorization contingent upon the completion and review of such other information as may be required? 4. Financing Issues It is probable that two or three of the proposed projects will either be unable to put to immediat.e, 'use the yield of new reservoirs and/or unable to generate enough revenue to return the Board's investment. How should the Board handle these situations (recommend grants, take title to a 9Ortion of a project's yield in hopes of selling the water in the future and recovering the revenues, reduce the scope of the project, not participate, etc.)? JWM/gI Enclosures: as stated MEMORANDUM -3- 9/30/82