CLICK here for
the Alliance comment letter.
Background
White House CEQ
last December released a proposal that would
significantly change the principles and
guidelines that govern America's water
resource planning. The proposal would
require that such projects help to improve
the economic well-being of the nation for
present and future generations, better
protect communities from the effects of
floods and storms, help communities and
individuals make better choices about where
to build based on an understanding of the
risk, and protect and restore the
environment.
The first set of
"Principles and Standards" (P&S) was issued
in September 1973 to guide the preparation
of river basin plans and to evaluate federal
water projects. Following a few attempts to
revise those initial standards, the current
principles and guidelines (P&G) went into
effect in March 1983. In the Water
Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2007,
Congress instructed the Secretary of the
Army to develop a new P&G for the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (section 2031). In an
effort to "modernize" the approach to water
resources development, the Obama
Administration is expanding the scope of the
P&G to cover all federal agencies that
undertake water resource projects.
General Reaction to the Actual Draft
Legislation
The proposed P&S will form a
central component of water resources public
policy in the U.S. and will directly
influence the type, nature and specific
features of federal water resources projects
agencies recommend for Congressional
authorization. They are critical to
determining what federal investments are
made in water resources and how they are
made. Congress recognized this, too, when it
passed WRDA in 2007.
"It was our
understanding that the intent of 2007 WRDA
was to provide a more balanced approach to
water resources management decision making,"
said Alliance President Patrick O'Toole.
"Unfortunately, the draft document clearly
elevates the non-structural and
environmental elements over economic and
human benefits and safety."
This apparent bias is viewed with great
concern by Alliance members, who run
irrigations systems and flood control works
throughout the Western United States.
Without more emphasis on the economic
impacts, human benefits and safety issues,
jobs will continue to be lost and
communities will become increasingly
threatened by natural disasters that can be
planned and mitigated for.
Key Concerns
"The increased control exerted by federal
agencies through a variety of means has
increasingly led to gridlock in the
management of water supplies in the West,"
said Alliance Executive Director Dan Keppen.
"We fear that the draft P&S, if implemented,
will lead to more of the same."
Key current
concerns outlined in the Alliance comment
letter include:
- The Water
and Related Resources Implementation Study
standards must respect and reflect existing
contracts and comply with Reclamation law;
- It is
unclear how the P&S apply to non-federal
entities involved with federal partners;
- In several
parts of the proposed principles and
standards, vague terminology must be
re-defined with clarity;
- The addition
of difficult-to-decipher terminology and
uncertain scope and study processes for new
projects may increase the potential for
litigation and delay;
- The proposal
promotes redundant and questionable
processes;
- No standards
are provided for quantification of benefits
and costs;
- The draft
proposal establishes a predetermined set of
priorities and biased watershed, ecosystem
and non-structural assessment approach;
- Peer review
standards that are consistent with the
Information Quality Act and Endangered
Species Act should be promoted;
- This is not
the proper forum to address national water
policy implications.
"This proposal
as currently drafted could bring water
project development to a halt," said Keppen.
"The process it creates is daunting and
uncertain, and the costs and delays it would
impose could preclude many planning and
development efforts."
Western water
users do not want to see a program that
becomes mired in a process that ultimately
delays implementation of critical projects.
Those projects - especially those that
enhance water supplies - already are very
time-intensive and any additional delay for
planning and studies will only add to the
time frame for providing relief.
Next Steps
The interagency work will focus on the
development of the "Procedures" which lay
out the detailed methodology for conducting
implementation studies under the new P&G.
The interagency process to develop those
procedures will begin almost immediately and
will likely take more than a year to
complete. Each agency will develop its own
"Implementation Guidance" to outline how the
new P&G apply to their agency-specific
missions completed in late 2010. The
Administration has sent the new draft P&S
the NAS for its review.
The Alliance
will continue to monitor this process and
engage as necessary on behalf of its
West-wide membership.
