WSP03445 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" . Mr. David L. Wegner October 10, 1988 Page 3 consultant and other consultants. His relationship to the Executive Review Committee should be defined. Articulating the relationships more closely would also allow affected interests better opportunity to participate effectively in the process. Seventh, we are concerned about the missions and composition of the three teams. We believe that the economic study should start from the data base that has been developed by the Western Area Power Administration. You acknowledged at the meeting that the paragraph at the bottom of page 2 of the draft about development of the economic plan had been improperly written. You also acknowledged your intent to bring constituent groups into the process of planning the economic study at the beginning of that process. We are ready and willing to assist at any time we are invited. The "detailed economic analysis of operational options" called for by the Assistant Secretaries' letter of 3une 16, 1988, should include consideration of higher capacity releases using the full potential of the Glen Canyon rewinds, as well as the use of a re- regulating reservoir downstream of the dam. These options are clearly within the scope of reasonable alternative options. Concerning the environmental study plan, we do not see the justification for development of that/p1an totally by agency people when constituent groups are contemplated to have a role in developing the economic plan. We have the resources to assist you in this effort as well as in the economic effort and would be happy to make them available. This offer holds true for the integration team as well. However, we are concerned about the new language provided in this most recent draft to describe the mission of the integration team." If this is truly a technical group, it probably should have its mission confined to integrating proposals from the two study' teams until the Executive Review Committee, including the states and constituent groups, have an opportunity to review and approve the integrated plan. We do not believe that the integration team should determine the future activities of bureaus and agencies responsible for resources of the Colorado River. That is hardly a mission to be delegated to a group technically integrating study proposals and results. To summarize our views concerning the development of these studies and plans, I think it is fair to say that we feel the need to be included in the process early and to be part of the process throughout. We find it difficult, even imp~ssible, to separate policy issues from study directives or policy decisions from data analyses.