Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Bureau of Reclamation Response <br /> <br />The May 23, 1994, response from the Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation <br />(Appendix 3), indicated general concurrence with all three recommendations and <br />identified the actions the Bureau plans to take to address and implement the <br />recommendations, The Bureau also included additional comments on the draft audit <br />report, which we have considered and incorporated into the report as appropriate, <br /> <br /><i <br />'! <br />, <br />,. <br />~ <br />.~1 <br />',j <br /> <br />," <br /> <br />Recommendation I. The Bureau concurred with the portion of the <br />recommendation pertaining to indirect irrigation benefits, The Bureau stated that <br />indirect irrigation benefits were used in the cost allocation presented in the April <br />19TI Definite Plan Report but that the cost allocation in the 1988 Supplement report <br />was changed and that costs were allocated to irrigation based on use of facilities <br />rather than on benefits. According to the Bureau, the final cost allocation for the <br />Dolores Project, to be completed by October 31, 1996, would reflect the revision <br />cited in the 1988 Supplement. The Bureau also stated that it would request an <br />opinion from the Regional Solicitor's office by June 1, 1994, as to whether existing <br />Reclamation law provided the authority for the recovery of capitalized operation and <br />maintenance costs other than through capital repayment. The Bureau stated that it <br />would address the issue of cost recovery after it received the Solicitor's opinion. <br />According to the Bureau, the Projects Manager, Durango Projects Office, is <br />responsible for these actions, <br /> <br />.. <br />" <br />, <br />;:j <br /> <br />Recommendation 2. The Bureau concurred with this recommendation, stating <br />that it is currently updating the entire economic analysis for the Animas-La Plata <br />Project, including a review of the irrigation payment capacity, benefits, and the <br />Project cost allocation. The Bureau further stated that the updated cost allocation <br />would not include indirect irrigation benefits and that the estimated payment <br />capacities would reflect expected operation and maintenance costs and farm income <br />without agricultural subsidies, According to the response, the Projects Manager, <br />Durango Projects Office, is responsible for implementation, and the updated <br />economic and financial analysis is scheduled to be completed by September 30, 1994. <br /> <br />Recommendation 3. The Bureau concurred with the recommendation, stating <br />that it would WTite the appropriate Congressional committees and offices regarding <br />the results of the economic and financial analysis. According to the response, the <br />Regional Director, Upper Colorado Region, is responsible for implementation, and <br />the Congress is to be informed by October 31, 1994, <br /> <br />16 <br />