Letter on S. 1658 "To Authorize, Construct, Operate, and Maintain the Central Arizona Project, Arizona-New Mexico, and for Other Purposes"

Letter: From Donald F. Hornig, to Assistant Director for Legislative Reference, March 26, 196

Letter on S. 1658 "To Authorize, Construct, Operate, and Maintain the Central Arizona Project, Arizona-New Mexico, and for Other Purposes"

Letter: From Donald F. Hornig, to Assistant Director for Legislative Reference, March 26, 1964, page 3contribution to the plan has been made by other agencies of Federal or State Government, and the potentials of their programs have not been included in determining alternatives. ". . . Any comprehensive analysis of water resources potential and development should consider possible contributions from modifications in forest land management, yet these elements have apparently not been considered. . . ". . . In view of the magnitude and scope of the plan, a comprehensive study encompassing the coordinated participation of all Federal and non-Federal interests as provided for in Senate Document 97 would be most desirable . . . " Department of Health, Education, and Welfare --". . . The proposed plan, however, does not give adequate consideration to the necessity of reuse of water as a means of meeting the future growth requirements. Reuse is directly dependent on quality, a situation already of problem proportion in the area. ". . . We believe that one of the most pressing needs is for a detailed investigation of the long-range municipal, industrial, and agricultural waste disposal requirements in the Southwest. Such an investigation is now underway in a part of the area -- the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Colorado River Basin Project . . . " Cost and Economics It is noted that the total construction cost for the Initial Plan is estimated as $3, 126, 000, 000. Of this amount,$2, 969, 000, 000 would be fully reimbursable and would be repaid within 50 years . . . Costs allocated to power and municipal and industrial water service will be repaid in total at 3 percent interest by the water and power users. Irrigation costs will be returned without interest by the irrigators within their ability to repay with the balance being returned from revenues in the Development Fund. The remaining costs allocated to flood control, fish and wildlife, outdoor recreation, and area redevelopment are considered nonreimbursable. The degree of subsidy to irrigation is illustrated by the following proposed charges taken from the report. "Charges for irrigation water provided by the Central Arizona Project were based on a rate of $10 per acre-foot". "Dixie Project repayment is based on a rate of about$7 per acre-foot". -3-Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,395,175 byte

Letter on S. 1658 "To Authorize, Construct, Operate, and Maintain the Central Arizona Project, Arizona-New Mexico, and for Other Purposes"

Letter: From Donald F. Hornig, to Assistant Director for Legislative Reference, March 26, 1964, page 5(3) The Pacific Southwest Water Plan mentions, but fails to evaluate, the total opportunities for increasing water supplies by conservation methods. It is understood that present losses in the region are in the order of 4. 1 million acre feet in contrast to the 1. 2 million acre feet which would be newly available to Central Arizona under the plan. Canal lining alone will save 1. 7 million acre feet, it is estimated. It is suggested that the locations and amounts of water which could be recovered, and the costs involved be analyzed and incorporated into the Plan prior to authorization. The combined effects of the additional water available to Central Arizona through Colorado River diversion plus that which could be available through conservation will more than overcome the present overdraft on ground-water resources. There are certain other problems on which I have no recommendation, but which must be faced. Some of them are: 1. Is it sound policy to use northern California water for irrigation in Southern California when its value may be much greater for other uses, up to 20 or 30 times in some cases? 2. What are the long-range implications of a guarantee by the U. S. Government of future water priority and prices in the watersheds of origin in northern California? 3. Recognizing the economic value of the power generated at Marble Canyon, Bridge Canyon, and other proposed sites, has the effect of evaporation losses from the new reservoirs been considered adequately with respect to the total water supply, the increased salinity, and downstream power losses? -5-Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,412,355 byte

Letter on S. 1658 "To Authorize, Construct, Operate, and Maintain the Central Arizona Project, Arizona-New Mexico, and for Other Purposes"

Letter: From Donald F. Hornig, to Assistant Director for Legislative Reference, March 26, 1964, page 4"Irrigation water delivered to water users in California -- it was assumed that this rate would be about $2. 25 an acre-foot". "Municipal and Industrial revenues for the Central Arizona Project are based on a rate of$45 per acre-foot". (At canalside does not include treatment.) "As the staged constructed features of the California Import System are completed, water would become available for sale on an interim basis to meet the growing demands for municipal and industrial -- assumed this water would be sold -- at a rate of $75 per acre-foot . . . This rate is estimated to be the approximate cost of developing and delivering the water to southern California. " Specific OST Comments We believe that the Department of Interior's Plan represents a giant step forward in its concept of a regional water plan. The long-standing rivalries between the States appear to have been largely overcome through proposed developments which will be mutually beneficial. Our review of the Plan has resulted in the following comments and questions which we believe require serious consideration. (1) Although the Department of the Interior should logically be assigned the leadership role, important elements of a sound and truly comprehensive plan can only be provided by other agencies; so approval of the Plan should be contingent on a coordination of the roles of all other interested Federal agencies. (2) It is universally agreed that further development of reservoir storage and enlarged irrigation will increase the already high salt content of the lower Colorado. Concurrently, pollution loads from domestic and industrial use of water have increased to problem proportions. The report recognizes that water quality will be a problem, but its extent is not evaluated. Before proceeding with implementation of the Pacific Southwest Water Plan, comprehensive water quality analyses are required. These should be the foundation of a plan of water quality management which will assure that useable water quality will be maintained in the lower Colorado. Attention also should be given to the quality of water delivered to Mexico so there will be reasonable assurance that its quality will be within limits considered acceptable within the United States. -4-Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,445,373 byte

Memorandum for President Johnson: Visit of Deputy Prime Minister of Romania Alexandru Birladeanu

Memo attached to accompanying New York Times article about the success of the Birladeanu visit

Ranger VII: Briefing for Johnson Brings Out High Level Chit Chat on Various Aspects of Space

Last week, following NASA's brilliant success in photographing the moon with Ranger VII, several space agency officials visited the White House to brief President Johnson. Speaking to the President were Homer E. Newell, associate administrator of NASA for space sciences and applications; William H. Pickering, director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which directs the Ranger project; and Donald F. Hornig, the President's science adviser. The following excerpts are from an official transcription of the briefing distributed by NASA