WSP06362 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'l ". '1 Qu,:.\! J The departments and agencies listed participated directly in the regional studies and in this report, except as noted, by assigning representatives to the various work groups. The Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment became active in the work of CPS the final 2 years. The Department of Labor and the Department of Transportation did not formally participate, bUt provided data as requested. In actual numbers the Federal agencies had many more participants in the planning process than the seven States and one interstate commission which were also involved. Although many Federal agencies are knowledgeable about and may reflect the program viewpoints of thei,r counterpart State agencies. the framework planning - in scope, in geographic pattern, and in time frames - is different from State water development plans per se. Framework plans illustrate ways to meet the coming needs and the kinds of problems that are involved. Developments of specific projects under this or other comprehensive plans would require more detailed studies. The plans do not necessarily reflect the programs or viewpoints of any particular agency or State. Several States are currently in various stages of preparation of State water plans. The completed State water plans undoubtedly could reflect signifi- cant differences from framework plans due to dif- ferences in projections and their translation into the needs for water and related land resources. Introduction CRITERIA The criteria for this report and th.e regional studies were established by Federal and State law, by the Water Resources Council in its Guidelines for Frame- work Studies, Terms of Reference for the Pacific Southwest and other directives, and by the CPS through its Compendium of Framework Planning Policies. Broad Federal directives range from Senate Document No. 97 (1963) to the National Environ- mental Policy Act of 1969 (p.L. 91-190). One important criterion is Section 3( d) of the Water Resources Planning Act (p.L. 89-80) which prohibits study of transfer of water between areas under the jurisdiction of more than one river basin commission or interagency committee. Projections of regional growth and development identified as the "OBERS" level of economic activity, in accordance with the national projections developed by the Departments of Commerce (Office of Business Economics) and Agriculture (Economic Research Service), were provided to the field study groups by the Water Resources Council. However, three of the four regional groups developed modificalions of the OBERS projections for their base plans. The fourth, Great Basin, started 2 years later than the others and did not develop modifications because of lime con- straints. The regional groups were also free to develop independent alternative projections. Framework studies and assessments do not include benefits and cost determination, allocations of cost, and cost-sharing or repayment analysis. 5