WSP07112

• File Number: 8410.350
• Description: Basin Multistate Organizations - Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee
• State: CO
• Basin: Statewide
• Date: 1/1/1968
• Author: MBIAC
• Title: MBIAC Annual Progress Report - Fiscal Year 1968
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

0[)23"':

Mr. Edwards said that the Department of Interior does not and
has never insisted that the exact language suggested be used, and
he cited recent language approved in the standards for the State of
Missouri which made clear that the Department has no desire to dic-
tate concerning the gr01,th of economic development within any of
the States affected.

By way of sun1ffiary, Assistant Secretary Edwards emphasized that
the Scntes and the Federal Government are working toward the same
purpose and with the same dedication to move toward clean water in
accordance with che will of the public and the mandace of the
Congress as expressed in legislation.

National Outlook on Water and Related Land Resources Planning

Mr. Henry Caulfield, Executive Director of the Water Resources
Council, told the Committee that the Water Resources Planning Act is,
in a SGnse, an effort to provide the means for creating a partnership
among the Federal agencies in Washington through the Water Resources
Council, and in the field by means of sllch organizations as the
Missouri Basin Inter-Agency Committee and the Title II river basin
commi.ssions.

Title lIT. of the Water Resources Planning Act represents the
desire of the Congress and the President to have increased competence
at the State level in water resources planning and implenlentation.

ML. Caulfield indicated that he considered the HBIAC extremely
fortunate in having the talent available to organize and implement
a Type I study in the manner in which it has been implemcnted in
this Basin. This important circumstance has provided the Inter-
Agency Committee with many of the advantages that are inherent in
the river basin commission approach.

FlCame\;ork planning, Hr. Caulfield said, fills a real need in
exposing alternatives that thc public must discuss and decide upon
so that professional planners can pLoceed along the route the public
dictates. In this connection he cautioned against the citing of
alternatives ..hich did not represent real basic courses of action.

He then discussed current studies on the discount rate used
for projec t planning and the flood protec tion cos t sharing ques tion.
In the face of tight budget necessities, Mr. Caulfield urged water
resources planners to find nel..,1 "'lays to finance certain types of
development in the water field that could be made self supporting
and he pledged his very best efforts in attempting to find methods
of cost sharing and practical methods of financing tha.t would work

20

it

.-:~...~:..::~_...:'.~'-.
W~-~~~~:-::~
F.~?~;><:':
~i~;~;:;:
'.'" "I
}~~~~~~
~:);}i-W
I

.'",-,.j

~'i<"'1

......'.',.1

~..".;.;;'l'
?A~~,
~-f'"''
~f:.1;:;.~;'<

a

o

~

...<,.-'..... '.

[;~i~'{?~: I

'-'''-''-'

.

..

~:;.:..~~::.>::.. I

. ~ '

....1
~~~~. ::. '.

. ~.. .~ ~ ."-

,.' I

:".""