Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~GJu1~ <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />used the words Comprehensive Regional Water Resource Management Plans. Dean <br /> <br />Johanson said that he believed the council considers Phase I and Phase II as <br /> <br />a resource management program, and felt that WRC was not at a stage of looking <br /> <br />at planning, but instead wants to look at a means of developing a plan. Barry <br /> <br />then stated that in checking the letter on that, WRC uses both terms. It was <br /> <br />decided that Dean Johanson should check to see what term to use so that the <br /> <br />letter would be consistent. Mr. Sanchez then stated that if there were no <br /> <br />other changes that the draft letter would be finalized and sent. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Frank Dunn, Department of the Army, San Francisco, California, questioned whether <br /> <br />or not WRC had revised their ideas with respect to what they would approve under <br /> <br />this program and wanted to know if anyone had discussed the letter with the <br /> <br />Council. Dean Johanson said it appeared that WRC was tying their Level B studies <br />to the development of regional plans and if PSIAC rejected the Council's Phase I <br />program they in effect rejected the Level B program as well. Mr. Dunn felt that <br />there seemed to be a softening and that it appeared that WRC was willing to <br /> <br />encourage any high quality studies as long as they seemed to be developing some <br /> <br />kind of information leading towards a regional plan some time in the future. He <br /> <br />wanted to know if there was an opening in the door to carry out studies without <br /> <br />commitment to management planning as long as the information was good. Mr. Sanchez <br /> <br /> <br />said he felt that the next part implied that it had to lead to water resource <br /> <br /> <br />management planning in order to be funded. Eugene Neblett stated that WRC was <br /> <br /> <br />encouraging PSIAC to do something that would satisfy Phase I and that if PSIAC <br /> <br /> <br />didn't propose to do that, there was not much more the committee could get from <br /> <br /> <br />WRC. Mr. Dunn remarked that he was reading into the letter a possibility of a <br /> <br />change in attitude. Mr. Saunders stated that he couldn't help thinking that if <br /> <br />PSIAC had a river basin study or a special study that they really wanted to get <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />B-5 <br /> <br />l <br />