WSP06085 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0402 . . project and the taxpaying public." Martin noted that full repayment under the terms of the contract would require the Bureau to charge "at a minimum, twice as much as the Service [BuRec] has ever charged for M&I water in its history" (emphasis in original). In February 1981, shortly after he assumed office, Interior Secretary James Watt was given a briefing on the unresolved audits. On March 9, 1981 BuRec Commissioner Designate Robert Broadbent and Assistant Commissioner Cliff Barrett met with representatives of the Inspector General's office to discuss the same subject. A March 26, 1981 memorandum from Supervisory Auditor Catherine Burke to the Files documents this meeting. In regard to the CRSP audit, the only subject mentioned in the memorandum was the Bonneville Unit repayment contract. BuRec had reported, "A request for Secretarial approval of criteria and procedures for negotiation of the contract is being prepared." By mid-June, 1981, BuRec Commissioner Broadbent was quoted in the Utah press as saying that spending on M&I portions of the Bonneville Unit had exceeded CUWCD's repayment obligation. Acting Assistant Commissioner William Klostermeyer was also quoted alluding to an OMB order that no further construction contracts for M&I features be signed until a supplemental repayment contract is signed. By August, however, the Bureau and the district had come up with a different approach. In July, the BuRec regional office formulated some options for dealing with the problem which avoided the need fpr a new contract and the concurrent requirement for a new local election for the voters to confirm the repayment commitment. In an August 5, 1981 faxogram to BuRec Regional Director Nelson Plummer (Salt Lake City, UT), Acting Assistant BuRec Commissioner J. Orren Church announced that, "In discussing your proposals to allow continued construction of M&I facilities on the Bonneville Unit, it was decided our optimal course of action was to employ the provisions of the Water Supply Act of 1958." Church directed Plummer to contact CUWCD and request approval of a resolution specifying "(1) a recognition that use of the Water Supply Act will decrease the amount of water available to the district until a supplemental or amendatory contract is executed for the future-use supply and associated deferred costs; and (2) the district's intent to contract for the future-use supply and repay associated costs." On August 13, 1981 CUWCD's Board of Directors approved such a resolution, which reduced CUWCD's entitlement of water from 99,000 to 39,000 acre-feet and increased its obligation to repay the ~ederal government by $10 million. 87