|
<br />( 10 r
<br />
<br />manner in .....dch they would be made now. Section !'-"f H.R. 1246
<br />specifically preserves all necessary legal authority for both agen-
<br />cies, and generall1. protects the existence and operation of the
<br />"Law of the River. ' .
<br />The reason for the unanimous support for H.R. 1246 by State
<br />water resources management officials in the Colorado River Basin
<br />is fairly clear. It is in the interest of each of the Colorado River
<br />Basin States to protect existing water conservation storage for mul-
<br />tiple use on behalf of millions of their citizens rather than reserv-
<br />ing large additional amounts of empty space in reservoirs.
<br />\~ ~ It is alSo in the interest of the federal government and federal
<br />).b~ ~~ taxpayers to protect existing conservation storage. This is the most
<br />'\,f\ economic use of an existing resource, as was pointed out previously.
<br />,,;~ In addition, the protection of existing conservation storage will
<br />:\;~ ~ avoid unnecessary new water project construction in a growing
<br />'I' area of the country. Maintenance of a Floodway will materially de-
<br />crease the likelihood of increased future flood damages. Finally,
<br />floodway maintenance will likely allow the enhancement of down-
<br />stream fish and wildlife riparian habitat through the occurrence of
<br />periodic river flows, somewhat more akin to a natural flow regime.
<br />The approach taken by the Committee has the additional benefit
<br />that it requires virtually nO federal expenditures. If the benefits de-
<br />scribed' above are realized, the federal government should save tens
<br />of millions of dollars over the next several decades.
<br />
<br />SECTlON-By-SECTlON ANALYSIS
<br />
<br />Section 1. The Short Title.
<br />Section 2. Congressional Findings and Purposes. Congress finds
<br />that maintenance of the Colorado River Floodway is essential to ac-
<br />complish the multiple purposes of the dams and other control
<br />structures on the Colorado River. Congress finds that certain feder-
<br />al programs which subsidize or permit development within the
<br />Floodway threaten human life, health, property, and natural re-
<br />sources. Congress finds further that coordinated Federal, State and
<br />local action is necessary to limit floodway development.
<br />The purposes of the Act are to: "establish the Colorado River
<br />Floodway . . . to provide benefits to river users . . ." and to "es-
<br />tablish a Task Force to advise the Secretary of the Interior and the
<br />Congress on establishment of the Floodway and on managing exist-
<br />ing and future development within the Floodway . . ."
<br />"'" Section 3. Definitions. The definition of the term "fmancial as-
<br />C>':l sistance" is virtually identical to the defmition contained in the
<br />M Coastal Barrier Resources Act, P.L. 97-348.
<br />, ~ Section 4. Colorado River Floodway Task Force. This section es-
<br />o tablishes a Colorado River Floodway Task Force and specifies its
<br />o membership and functions. T Task F' .
<br />r ~ r endations to t and to the
<br />)' 'f" ess concernIll the means to re and main III t e Flo -
<br />I ~,U wa '" inc u in any necessa a Ion elation' de i
<br />1 1:~\"\CrI rIa or t e crea IOn 0 e 00 . 'th
<br />;>' It' ',~ w m roc ures' and the ssibili , of
<br />IOIc't "com nsation " in s ecl raor ma ar '~'P {e-
<br />b f~: l suiting rom impacts of the 1983 flood on prope v Outsl e fie
<br />
<br />io\l~ 1\<1'
<br />,,~l .:~
<br />
<br />-"
<br />
<br />11
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Floodway which: could not reasonablv Il!\XUE~!:!Lfor.eseen." The
<br />Task, ~'orce membership will contain representatives of a wide vari.
<br />ety oflocal, State and Federal interests. The Committee anticipates
<br />that federal agencies will actively participate in Task Force activi-
<br />ties, so that local and State'views will receive a full hearing.
<br />,Section 5!, Colorado River Floodway. This section reQuires the
<br />Se . ':the I terior in' consultation with pI> ~pypn ('.olo..rado
<br />iver Basin Stab'-'l, an 0 er mteres parties, to
<br />" '. (1) c?mple~ a study of the tributary floodflows downstream
<br />,0f.DaVIS Dam, and
<br />(2) define the specficboundaries of the Colorado River Flood-
<br />way so' that, the Floodway can accommodate either a one-in-one
<br />I . ..hundred, year river flow consisting of ,controlled releases and
<br />tributary inflow;, or. a. flow of forty thousand cubic feet per
<br />second -(cfs), whichever is greater, from below Davis Dam to the
<br />Southerly International Boundary between the United States
<br />. of America and the Republic of Mexico.
<br />The standard level of protection that has been adopted in the ad-
<br />ministration, of the National Flood Insurance Act is the one-in-one
<br />hundred year frequency flood. The Corps of Engineers has deter-
<br />mined that 40,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) is the maximum re-
<br />lease rate that historically would have inflicted a minimum level of
<br />downstream damages and has incorporated this flow level 'in its
<br />Hoover Dam flood control regulations continually since 1935, Con-
<br />sequently, the .boundaries of the Colorado River Floodway should
<br />be Capable of accommodating a one-in-one hundred year rIver flow
<br />ora 40,000 cfs flow, whichever is greater, from Davis Dam to the
<br />Southerly International Boundary between the United States and
<br />Mexico. ,
<br />. It is the Committee's judgment that the Secretary's analysis of
<br />the one-in-one hundred-year river flow should represent a realistic
<br />one-in-one hundred-year probability of such flow occurring in any I'-'
<br />reach of the river at a given time, and should not arbitrarily D
<br />assume that flood inflows from all tributaries occur simultaneous-
<br />ly. It is the nature of weather events along the Lower Colorado
<br />River, a desert region, that most rain storms are intense, localized
<br />thunder showers that would produce floods from only a few tribu-
<br />taries at a time, and the Secretary's study should reflect this. The
<br />Committee altered the definition of floodway boundaries in H.R.
<br />1246 as introduced for the specific purpose of ensuring that this
<br />technical matter was made clear,
<br />Section 6. Limitations on Federal Expenditures Affectinq the
<br />Floodway. This section states that, exceft as provided in SectIOn 7,
<br />no new expenditures or new financia assistance may be made
<br />ayailable under authority of any Federal law for any purpose
<br />within the Floodway.
<br />Section 7. Exceptions. There are several functions and uses of the
<br />floodway that serve the public interest. and are generally compati-
<br />ble with floodway operation. This section recognizes those functions
<br />and uses by providing limited exceptions, generally subject to Sec-
<br />retarial discretion, to the prohibition on federal expenditures.
<br />These exceptions are enumerated as river control structures and
<br />related works, public roads, military activities, fish and wildlife en-
<br />hancement projects, navigation aids, emergency action assistance,
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />,'"
<br />
|