My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06630
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06630
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:23:39 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:46:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8443.400
Description
Narrows Unit - Reports
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
2/1/1978
Author
US DoI BoR
Title
Supporting Data for Special Report Investigation of Review Issues Narrows Unit Colorado part 1 of 3
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />.1-':. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />". <br /> <br />'. <br /> <br />.~ <br /> <br />, .' <br /> <br />I' <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />-" <br /> <br />, . <br /> <br />. , <br /> <br />;.' <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />.. -~-_._---- . --- .. <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />o <br />~~~RGOED Fon USE AFTER BRIEFING <br /> <br />APRIL 10, 1977 <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />, ,.... 1 <br />, _',;,1'.' _ <br />. \).i#'--.. <br />: .... <br /> <br />. .' THE imrTE HOUSE <br /> <br />Office of the ~~ite Hou~c Pre~s Sccrecary <br /> <br />-------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> <br />, ; . <br />" . <br /> ./ <br /> <br />STATEHENT ON HA'!T.R PROJECTS <br /> <br />~ J <br />1 <br /> <br />Tod~y I ~m announcing my decisions on federal water resource <br />programs: <br /> <br />,~ .~ <br /> <br />--I am reco~ending the deletion of funds for lE projcc~s, <br />at a total savings of over $2.5 billion. <br /> <br />": <br />,.' <br /> <br />--1 am %eco~mending modifications of 5 projects, ae a total <br />savings of almost $1.5 billion. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />o' <br /> <br />..' . <br /> <br />--:1 am recor...'1lendirlg the c.:..ntinuation of 9 project.s withcut:. <br />modification. <br /> <br />--1 am reco~~nding.the d~velopment of major policy refc~s <br />,in the following areas, <br /> <br />1. mere realistic project evaluation criteria; <br />2. dam safety; . <br />3. . cost. sharing for fede'ral proj ec~s; <br />4. water conserva~ion~ and <br />5. redirected public w~~ks programs. <br /> <br />In balancing the bucget, cutting back on inflaticn a~d ~a~i~g <br />the federal C;overn:nent more r(!sponsive to t~e needs of tr.e ?EC?.ie, <br />difficult choices have to be rlade. Activities "'lhich are wastefL:.l, <br />unsafe or economically O~ env~~o~entally unsound sir..ply ca~~~~ <br />be pursued. Water resource aevelo?ment ?rogr~.s of thp. CC=~S ~- <br />Engineers, the Bureau of Recl~ation <:l.:'ld the Ten::1.e.ssee Valley <br />Authority are a case in point. <br /> <br />In my budget reco~encations to the Congress last Febr~a~y <br />I initiated a ~ajor'review of ongoing water resour=e p~oje~~~. <br />The review is now cocplete and I have s~eci=ic reco~~e~dat~c~s <br />for the Congress on t.~e 32 projects .....~ic:h were subject to ?;,j.:::lic <br />hearings. They are based 0.:'1.' revie.....s b~' the Interior Dc?ar-::'::1.e~t., <br />the Corps of Engi~eers anc t~~ Tennessee Valley Authority, ~i:h <br />assistance fror.\ the Office of l-tanagement and Budget. and tl::e Cqu:-.ci 1 <br />en Environmental Quality. . <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />My decision on individual projects. was a difficult o~e. I <br />have tried to be fair a~d to give the bcne~it of the cc~bt O~ <br />some projects \{hich would certainly not b2 justified if they ~,'e!:e <br />proposed ~oday. However, I have not ~esitated to recc~~=nd te=- <br />mination or modification o~ projects \Jhich appeared justiiied y;h':n <br />they were crigin~lly autho~ized~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In consultation with the Congress, state and local gover~~ent! <br />and the public, I inter.d to develop detailed policy reco,,~~nda~io~~ <br />to insu~e that our water-related needs are met in the best m~~~~=, <br />and to use realistic criteria for water project evalu~tion~ T~e <br />review process I started during the first days of ~y ^a~inis~~~:ior <br />is not goinq to stop here; further work needs to be done and. fu~du' <br />mental improve~ents needs to be made~in ou= water policies und <br />'prO<Jrams. <br /> <br />,\ <br />, <br />, <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />-~ <br /> <br />-. .........: <br /> <br />The drough~ in the West and recent severe flooding in the <br />East ho'lve shown us that despite the massive numbers of fcd~=.:lll:l- <br />funded water projects in existence, we are still ~~ suscc~~i~lc <br />as ev~r to the ravages of the w~athcr~ Instead of p=occcdin~ <br />down the s.:tI:1e road of more and bigger s..tructural proj~c::5, ~..o::: <br />need to rethink our policies. <br /> <br />- <br />-' <br /> <br />(rnorel <br /> <br />'. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.