Water Resources kxi 

The Nation’s Water Supply 

MD-7999 

lllll~~llllllllllilllllll

LM109088 

issues And Concerns 

As our Nation approaches the 21st century its population growth and industrial development as well as changing water use priorities are placing new demands on our water 

resources and are leading to increasing water shortages and competition for the limited 

supply * 

How bad a water picture do we face?No one knows for sure. Fortunately, there is 

now a growing awareness that water resources arelimitedland seriously polluted and that 

ways must be found to augment the water supply and achieve the greatest use from existing 

resources. 

This study examines existing and emerging water resources issues and concerns and 

represents the perspective GAO is using to organize its audit efforts. 

Study By The Staff 

Of The United S@tes 

General Accounting Off ice APRIL 13,1979 
FOREWORD 

While the United States as a whole has an abundant water 

supply, the geographical distribution and availability of its 

water resources often does not match needs and demands. This 

condition, magnified by the Nation's continuing population 

growth and industrial development, has led to water shortages 

and increased competition for the limited supply. Also, new 

national priorities have emerged. Satisfaction of energy and 

food and fiber needs; changing land use policies; and preservation and enhancement of environmental, aesthetic, and recreational values place new demands on our Nation's water 

resources. 

The Water Resources Council's Second National Water 

Assessment shows that the increase in annual freshwater consumptive requirements by the year 2000 will further compound 

water supply problems. These include shortages resulting 

from poor distribution of supplies, instream-offstream conflicts, competition among offstream users, ground water 

overdrafts, quality degradation of both surface and ground 

water supplies, and institutional conflicts that inhibit a 

unified water management. 

Fortunately, however, there is now an emerging awareness 

that water resources are limited and can be polluted to the 

point where they are not only useless but hazardous to life. 

It is becoming increasingly clear that our Nation must 

augment its water supply to avert critical water shortages 

and must try to achieve the greatest use from existing 

supplies. Better management and technology is necessary to 

achieve more efficient use of water from conservation, 

improved surface and ground water management, weather modification, desalination, and water reuse. 

The resolution of existing and projected future problems emphasizes the need for comprehensive, coordinated 

water resources management. Water resources management-- 

including unified efforts in planning, development, and project operations by all concerned agencies and guided by 

Federal water policy-- is the key to solutions to the water 

resources problems. The challenge is to reshape our water 

policies and programs to best satisfy our Nation's social, 

economic, and environmental goals. 

In this study we sought to identify existing a.nd._UZe-m-e..rg.- 

ing water resources problems.and,_Assues, and we hope the study 

will contribute to a betterunderstanding of the key water 

_----. ..-__.__-_ 

i 
problems facing our country. The study was prepared by the 

CFnifym anarniic Development.v,js~o~ as part of GAO's 

con lnulng reassessment of national concerns and represents 

the perspective GAO is using to organize and direct audit 

efforts. 

To obtain copies of GAO staff studies and reports, see 

the instructions on the inside of the back cover. Questions 

concerning this study should be directed to Mr. Harold 

Pichney, Water Programs Coordinator. He is located in 

Room 6812, GAO Building, and can be reached at (202)275-6076. 

Community and Economic 

Development Division 

ii 
Contents 

Page 

CHAPTER 

1 WATER RESOURCES PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, 

AND DEVELOPMENT 

Scope and concerns of this study 

Related issues 

The Federal role 

Water supply and use trends 1975-2000 

Water supply problems-7 today and in 

the future .3t1g ~+%a~!:,.~ .&f&~., .,k,++.: 

President's watgr policy actions 8('s 3 

2 WATER RESOURCES ISSUES AND CONCERNS 

3 MAJOR WATER RESOURCES ISSUES AND CONCERNS 

Are existing plans, policies, and 

programs effectively addressing the 

water resources problems facing the 

Nation, regions, and States? 

Do water agencies and industry have 

effective water management and 

conservation programs which make 

efficient use of water supplies? 

Will Federal and non-Federal efforts 

ensure an adequate water supply for 

municipal and industrial purposes? 

Are financing, cost sharing, and 

repayment policies for Federal or 

federally assisted water resources 

projects and programs effectively 

meeting today's needs? 

What are the problems impacting on the 

timely, efficient, and economical 

construction and maintenance of water 

resources projects? 

Ground water supply management and 

conservation-- what are the problems 

and how can they be resolved? 

1 

1 

1 

3 

9 

15 

1% 

21 

22 

22 

30 

36 

43 

49 

55 
CHAPTER 

Page 

4 OTHER WATER RESOURCES ISSUES AND CONCERNS 61 

How can water quality and water supply 

programs be effectively integrated? 61 

Do Federal agencies adequately consider 

environmental effects in water resources 

management and project formulation? 62 

Are water information collection and 

evaluation efforts promoting optimal 

water resources programs? 62 
CHAPTER 1 

WATER RESOURCES PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, AND DEVELOPMENT 

SCOPE AND CONCERNS OF THIS STUDY 

The focus-6fvrzis study is on those programs and --. activities concerning water resources pl &c -?Zi-,XZagement, 

.~. -.-- and development designed to provide adequate water supplies 

to meet present and future demand> Also, we are concerned 

with another water resource problem, flooding, because loss 

of life and property from floodwaters continue to be 

significant and affects all parts of-the United States. 

Water resources planning encompasses the assessment of -. .- the quantity-and quality of available water supplies, forecasting future water demands, analysis of existing and 

potential water supply problems, and preparing proposals for 

resolving such problems. 

Management of water resources covers such things as 

._ _ allocating water among competing uses to optimize project 

benefits, developing technology to augment or make more 

efficient use of water supplies, and carrying out 

activities to reduce the demand for and to conserve water 

supplies. 

The development of water resources primarily concerns 

matters relating to project formulation, justification, and 

construction. Water resources developments may be singlepurpose flood control or navigation projects or multiplepurpose dam and reservoir projects which may provide for 

hydroelectric power generation, flood control, recreational 

activities, and water supplies for irrigated agriculture as 

well as for domestic and industrial uses. 

RELATED ISSUES 

Federal programs on the development and management of 

water resources are not so clearcut to deal exclusively with 

water supply but may concern, to a significant extent, land 

use, environmental protection, and transportation policy 

matters. Also, Federal policies and programs on nonwater 

areas such as energy development and food production can 

impose significant demands for water supplies and, therefore, 

impact on the development and management of water supplies. 

Examples of the more important interrelationships follow. 

1 
Land is a major element in developing facilities for 

the storage and conveyance of water. Lands required for 

such purposes usually have economic and environmental values 

in alternatives uses. Intensive land use for urban and 

industrial development often creates water supply problems. 

By the same token, the development of water resources to 

provide irrigation water can transform unproductive land to 

land more productive for food and fiber products. Also, 

concern for preserving and protecting outdoor recreation, 

fish and wildlife habitat, as well as other environmental 

values has precluded or materially altered the development 

of water resources. Land use planning, management, and 

control issues are the subject of another GAO staff study. 

Environmental issues affect the management and development of water supply, particularly those matters relating to 

water quality. For example, water pollution resulting from 

irrigation and municipal and industrial wastes significantly 

impacts on the availability and use of our water resources. 

Also, the development of water resources projects affects 

environmental conditions such as fish and wildlife habitat, 

recreation and esthetic values. While we are concerned with 

water supply quality problems in this study, water quality 

matters, especially pollution abatement efforts, are primarily examined in a separate GAO study on environmental 

protection issues. 

Energy and food issues also impact upon water supply 

matters. Water is essential to almost every energy process 

and is required in tremendous quantities to produce food and 

fiber products. Federal policies and programs to develop 

new energy sources, such as synthetic fuels, to help solve 

the energy crisis as well as those to enhance food production 

for domestic and foreign markets will result in severe competition among water uses in the Western States where supplies 

are not adequate to meet demands. 

Also, adequate water flows are necessary to maintain 

our navigable waterways which are a significant part of the 

Nation's overall commerical transportation network. While 

some aspects of the navigation purposes of multipurpose 

water resources projects are covered under this study, the 

construction of new locks and dams for transportation purposes 

and other primarily transportation-related Federal programs 

to maintain and foster waterborne commerce, such as constructing and improving channels, canals, and harbors, are 

covered under a separate GAO staff study on transportation 

issues. 
Problems and issues resulting from too much water 

(flooding) are covered under this study as well as by staff 

studies on domestic housing and community development issues 

and land use planning, management, and control issues. Under 

this study, for example, we are concerned with both structural and nonstructural alternatives for controlling floods. 

Under the other studies, our concerns cover such related 

matters as flood plain zoning, flood insurance programs, and 

flood disaster relief programs. 

Other GAO Staff Studies Related 

to Water Resources Issues 

Title 

Land Use Issues 

Transportation Issues 

Domestic Housing and Community 

Development Issues 

Food, Agriculture, and Nutrition 

Issues for Planning 

Environmental Protection Issues 

Facing the Nation 

Report No. 

and Date 

CED-79-15 

11/16/78 

CED-78-159 

10/10/78 

CED-79-44 

2/5/79 

CED-79-36 

l/29/79 

CED-79-63 

3/15/79 

THE FEDERAL ROLE 

Management of the Nation's available water resources is, 

to a considerable extent, a State responsibility. State and 

local governments have an immediate and utilitarian interest 

in water resources management because their well-being, as 

that of the Nation as a whole, depends upon the availability 

of water resources of adequate quality and quantity. 

declared 

arY responsibilities of the States and local interests in developing water supplies for domestic and industrial purposes and 

that the Federal Government should participate and cooperate 

with State and local interests in developing water supplies 

in connection with the construction of Federal water resources 

projects. It is interesting to note that Federal projects for 

the development and use of water resources are seldom initiated without strong State support and generally not undertaken 

in opposition to State desires. 

3 
The Federal concerns with our natural resources, 

environment, and the economic and social well-being 

of our people have led to many acts of Congress which 

clearly indicate that the Federal Government may participate 

to some degree in all aspects of water resources planning, 

management, and development. In response to such Federal 

concerns, the developing body of law has established 

varying degrees of Federal interest in such areas as hydroelectric power, irrigation, water supply, flood control, 

navigation, outdoor recreation, and fish and wildlife preservation and enhancement. The degree of Federal participation 

is generally limited to that required to achieve national 

objectives in an optimal manner and varies from a maximum 

participation in planning activities to minimum participation 

in operation and maintenance activities. 

The Federal role in water resources planning basically 

stems from the Water Resources Plannina Act of 1965 (Public 

Law 89-80). A The act was deslgned to encourage conservation, 

development, and use of the Nation's water and related land 

resources on a comprehensive and coordinated basis by 

Federal, State, and local governments and private enterprise. Also, the act established the Water Resources Council, provided for establishment of river basin commissions, 

and authorized financial assistance to States for comprehensive water and related land resources planning. The 

river basin commissions were designed to be planningcoordinating entities where representatives of States and 

Federal agencies could coordinate activities and jointly 

develop river basin or regional plans for water and related 

land resources. 

With respect to the management and use of the Nation's 

water resources, the Federal Government, by ownership of 

much of the land in the West, by its responsibilities over 

Indian lands, by constructing and operating water resources 

projects, by its various loan, grant, and technical 

assistance programs to municipalities, rural communities, 

and farmers, has both a direct and indirect role in such 

matters as the allocation of water among competing uses, 

water laws and rights, conservation and efficient use of 

water supplies, water quality, as well as water research 

and technology to increase the useable water supply. 

The President's Water Policy initiatives call for 

enhanced Federal-State cooperation and propose grant 

programs to help States plan for their water needs and 

a task force with State, local, and Federal officials to 
examine water-related problems and to deepen the FederalState partnership in water resources policy and planning. 

Also, the Policy initiatives emphasizes nonstructural 

measures to reduce flood damages, raises the issue of 

Federal assistance for the deteriorating water systems in 

the East, and calls for the participation of States in the 

financing of Federal water projects. The Water Policy 

initiatives, as well as the increasing concerns over the 

adequacy of the Nation's water supply to meet future 

denands, may lead to legislative and administrative policy 

changes which could materially affect the respective roles 

of Federal, State, and local governments in water resources 

planning, management, and development. 

Federal water-related programs are spread through 26 

agencies within 8 departments and 10 independent agencies 

and commissions. The agencies have different missions, 

clientele, as well as a variety of ways for financing their 

programs. 

Federal water and water-related programs are funded by 

many different appropriation accounts. For example, the 

public works appropriations for fiscal year 1978 provided 

about $3.4 billion to the Corps of Engineers (Civil 

Functions) and the Bureau of Reclamation for construction, 

rehabilitation, and operation and maintenance of water 

resources projects. Agricultural appropriations for fiscal 

year 1978 included, for example, $229 million for conservation operations, $250 million for rural water and waste 

disposal grants as well as $750 million for water and 

sewer facility loans. 

The principal agencies involved in water resources 

planning, management, and development are discussed below. 

A&x. cJoc52s 

The Water Resources Council was established to carry 

out the policy of the Government as set forth in the 1965 

Water Resources Planning Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-80)--to 

encourage conservation, development, and utilization of 

water and related land resources on a comprehensive and 

coordinated basis. 

Its principal functions include: 

--To maintain a continuing study and prepare periodically an assessment of the adequacy of supplies of 

water necessary to meet the water requirements in 

each water resources reqion in the United States 

and of the national interests therein. 

5 
--To appraise the adequacy of administrative and 

statutory means for coordination and implementation 

of the water and related land resources policies 

and programs of the several Federal agencies and to 

make recommendations to the President with respect 

to Federal policies and programs. 

--To establish, after consultation with appropriate 

interested Federal and non-Federal entities and 

with the approval of the President, principles, 

standards, and procedures for Federal participation 

in the preparation of comprehensive regional or 

river basin plans and for the formulation and 

evaluation of Federal water and related land resources projects. 

--To assist the States financially in developing 

and participating in the development of comprehensive water and related land resources plans. 

/--9~.c besoYa 

The Department of Agriculture is involved in the 

management of national forests for their multiple uses, 

products, and services; watershed treatment and management; 

small watershed and flood prevention projects for flood 

prevention, water supply, irrigation, drainage, recreation, 

fish and wildlife, and water quality management; economic 

analyses and projections of rural activities; credit, cost 

sharing, and technical assistance to farmers for installation of soil and water conservation practices and to rural 

bodies for water supply and sewage facilities; and supporting research. The Farmers Home Administration, which administers rural development , provides financial and management 

assistance in carrying out soil and water conservation, 

watershed protection and flood prevention, and community 

water and sewer system loan programs. 

.- 

The Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, 

develops plans for beach protection, flood control, 

navigation, and multiple-purpose projects. It constructs, 

operates, and maintains project facilities. It regulates 

the use of navigable waters of the United States with respect 

to dredging and obstructions to navigation. Also, it provides State and local interests with flood plain information 

and carries out an Urban Studies Program to help metropolitan 

areas solve water and related land resources problems. 

6 
The Department of the Interior has responsibilities 

in water resources research: data collection such as monitoring the quantity and quality of ground water supplies; 

desalination; conservation and development on public 

lands; studies of outdoor recreation; administration 

of certain wild and scenic rivers; sports, fisheries 

and wildlife; hydroelectric power marketing; weather 

modification; and development and operation of irrigation 

and multipurpose water resources projects. 

4%~ 8c96-7 zq 

The Department of Transportation is involved with 

the navigation, marine safety, vessel pollution, and 

highway and bridge aspects of water resources development. 

/Q&-c L9rP9k2. 

The Department of Energy makes studies of the power 

phases of river basin development and licenses and 

regulates non-Federal hydroelectric power plants and in 

cooperation with the Council, assesses the impacts and 

requirements of water for energy resources development. 

s&&C! b@O 3 y 

The Department of Commerce conducts hydrometeorological studies; provides river and flood forecast and 

warning services; performs business and industrial water 

requirement analyses; makes projections of economic 

activity; takes census of a broad range of water uses; and 

conducts supporting research. 

~&eooQ~3 

The Department of Housing and Urban Development is concerned primarily with the municipal and urban aspects of 

water and related land resources, including flood insurance 

and urban hydrology. It makes financial grants to States 

and to metropolitan and urban communities for comprehensive 

planning and community development which may include support 

for water and sewer facilities, open spaces, recreational 

areas, and historic and aesthetic preservation. 

b8$%%2 @OP2d/ - 

The Environmental Protection Agency is concerned with 

the abatement of water pollution and enhancement of the 

water quality of rivers-and bodies of water, in cooperation 

with State and local governments and industry. It makes 

financial grants and provides technical assistance to State 

and local governments. It establishes standards for effluents from sources of discharge, for use of receiving water, 

and for drinking water and enforces its regulations for 

carrying out these standards. 

River Basin Organizations 

The United States has established several types of 

organizations for planning and managing river basins: 

7 
River Basin Commissions --To meet the need for broad 

participation in planning, the Water Resources Planning 

Act provides for the establishment of Federal-State river 

basin commissions on request of the States and recommendation of the Water Resources Council. Commissions have 

been established for the Pacific Northwest, the Great Lakes, 

the Ohio River, the Missouri River, the Upper Mississippi 

River, and the New England River Basins. Commission 

functions include: 

--To serve as the principal coordinating agency for 

plans for water and related land development. 

--To prepare and keep up-to-date a comprehensive 

coordinated joint Federal-State plan for water and 

related land resources development within the basin. 

Interstate Compacts-- Interstate compacts are entered 

into because of mutual recognition of the interests of 

several States in shared interstate waters. One of the 

principal purposes of many of these compacts is to allocate 

the use of the waters of an interstate river between or 

among the participating States to help secure property 

rights in water in the States concerned. Others have 

attempted quality management standards. About 35 interstate compacts relating to water resources have been 

approved by the Congress. 

Federal-Interstate Compact Commissions--The FederalInterstate Compact Commission for the Delaware River 

Basin was established by the legislatures of four States 

and the Congress in 1961. The Delaware River Basin 

Commission, created by the compact, is composed of representatives of the four basin States and the Federal 

Government. It is vested with broad powers to manage and 

control the water and related land resources of the entire 

Delaware Basin. A similar Federal-interstate compact has 

been established for the Susquehanna River Basin. 

Tennessee Valley Authority--An independent Federal 

corporation was established by Congress in 1933 for water 

management activities in the Tennessee River Basin. It has 

constructed and operates an extensive system of dams, powerplants, and electric transmission systems, and other 

structures. The TVA continues to plan and develop the water 

and land resources of the basin. 

8 
Federal-State Interagency Committees-- Federal-State 

Interagency Committees have been chartered by the Water 

Resources Council in the Pacific Southwest, Arkansas-WhiteRed, and the Southeast river basins. These bodies, composed 

of representatives of Federal and State agencies, coordinate 

planning activities and operational policies of the 

participants. 

International Implications 

The development and management of water resources 

has international implications. The International Boundary 

and Water Commission, United States and Mexico; and the 

International Joint Commission, United States and Canada, 

administer treaties between the respective nations 

that establish rights and responsibilities to waters 

flowing in streams across the international boundaries. 

WATER SUPPLY AND USE TRENDS 1975-2000 

Water is used for many purposes--domestic, livestock, 

manufacturing, mining, steam-electric generation, irrigation, 

navigation, recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, and 

waste disposal. Water used for these purposes may be 

withdrawn from its native course or may be used instream-- 

free flowing, regulated, or ponded. It may be supplied by 

public or publicly regulated distributors or it may be 

self-supplied; its source may be from surface water, 

ground water, seawater, or waste water; and its quality 

may range from clear mountain streams to highly polluted 

waste waters. 

To assess the adequacy of the Nation's water resources, 

reliable information must be available on the amount, 

availability, and quality of our water resources and on 

current usage and future requirements. 

From a national perspective, there are abundant fresh 

water resources. Average annual precipitation is 30 inches 

for the conterminous United States, and average natural 

runoff is about 1,400 billion gallons per day (bgd). Large 

reserves of ground water also exist. However, with existing 

surface storage and the effects of extremes of annual precipitation that cause floods and drought, only about 680 bgd 

of the average streamflow is considered available. The 

difficulty is that the geographical and temporal distribution of water are highly variable. Precipitation varies 

widely from region to region, from season to season, and 

from year to year. Similar variation occurs in runoff and 

streamflow. 
Regions exhibiting high levels of consumptive use 

through irrigated agriculture, such as the Southwest 

and West Central States, have the most varied annual 

runoff. Some regions of the country have chronic deficiencies, others have floods and periodic droughts. Most 

parts of the Nation are not satisfied with their water 

resources, and poor water quality is a problem in every 

region. Florida has a serious emerging water-shortage problem because of large increases in population and economic 

activities; California's water supply problem is one of 

improper distribution rather than a lack of overall supply; 

and the Southwest States and most of those in the semiarid 

regions west of the Mississippi have the Nation's most 

severe existing and emerging water-short problems. 

Even in areas of high average annual precipitation and 

runoff, a series of dry years sometimes occur, resulting 

in serious droughts such as occurred in the Northeast during 

1961 and 1966, and in the West and other parts of the United 

States during the period 1976 to 1978. Adverse effects of 

droughts are particularly serious in areas which use a high 

proportion of the available average annual runoff or where 

storage and distribution facilities are inadequate to provide sufficient carryover during prolonged periods of low 

streamflow. Streamflow in the humid East tends to vary less 

from year to year and month to month than that of the 

other regions. 

About 30 percent of the Nation's streamflow in an 

average year is supplied by ground water that emerges as 

natural springs and other seepage outlets. In turn, 

seepage from streams, rivers, canals, and reservoirs is a 

principal source of ground water recharge. During years 

with subnormal precipitation, most of the flow in many 

smaller streams in low flow months comes from ground water. 

Ground water is thus important to the continuity of 

streamflow. 

From a hydrologic perspective, there must be adequate 

recharge capability and adequate water available for 

percolation at least equal to the withdrawals, otherwise 

there will be ground water mining (withdrawal in excess 

of natural recharge). 

In some areas of the Nation, ground water mining is 

substantial. For example, it is over 14 million acre-feet 

annually in the High Plains area (mostly parts of Nebraska, 

Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas), an amount about equal to the 

natural flow of the Colorado River. 

10 
In summary, two-thirds of the combined total fresh 

(335 bgd) and saline (57 bgd) water withdrawals in the 

conterminous United States come from streamflow and surface 

storage sources, and an additional 15 percent (61 bgd) 

comes from ground water sources that are highly interactive with streamflows. Thus, a total of 80 percent of 

the Nation's water presently being withdrawn comes from 

fresh surface and ground water sources. Remaining 

sources of water are saline (15 percent) and ground water 

mining (5 percent). 

A Nation's economy--the population; its productivity, 

income, geographic distribution, trade and travel activities, lifestyles, and even its sense of values--affect 

the requirements for water and are significant considerations in water and related land resources management. 

During the 25-year period from 1975 to 2000, the 

national population is expected to increase by 52 million, 

or 24 percent, to about 268 million; gross national product 

is projected to increase at an annual rate of 3.86 percent 

from $1,516 billion in 1975 to about $3,134 billion by the 

year 2000; and personal income is estimated to increase 

at an annual rate of about 3.7 percent from $1,341 billion 

in 1975 to about $3,345 billion by 2000. 

The greatest percentage growth in population and 

income is expected in the "Sunbelt" States. If the 

present trend continues, these States will have about 

45 percent of the Nation's population by the year 2000. 

This growth is expected to occur primarily in existing 

metropolitan areas, intensifying the pressures on their 

water and land resources. The rapid growth rate of 

western cities, many of which are located in arid regions, 

forebodes increasing problems of competition for water in 

those areas. 

Water use involves two variable components: (1) 

withdrawal from a surface or ground water source, and 

(2) consumption of all or some portion of the amount 

withdrawn. (Withdrawal of water is that amount taken 

from a surface or ground water source. Consumption refers 

to that portion of withdrawn water not returned to the 

source.) 

Total freshwater withdrawals for all offstream uses-- 

irrigation, domestic household, manufacturing, mining, and 

stream-electric generation-- for an average year condition 

were 338.5 bgd in 1975. By the year 2000, freshwater 

withdrawals are projected to decrease to about 307.0 bgd, 

90 percent of the 1975 value. This expected decline 

11 
recognizes certain assumptions about water use efficiencies 

and recycling resulting from available technology and 

conservation efforts. The most significant contribution 

to these reductions in offstream uses will be made in the 

manufacturing sector. Although smaller reductions in 

withdrawals will be made in other sectors, the portions 

of total withdrawals represented by irrigation and steampowered generation of electricity will remain essentially 

unchanged. All other offstream uses will increase. 

Consumptive uses of water are generally more critical 

than withdrawals because this water is not available 

for other downstream uses. Offstream consumptive uses 

for the United States averaged 106.6 bgd in 1975 and are 

projected to increase by 26 percent to 135.0 bgd by 2000. 

12 
FUNCTIONAL USE WITHDUWALS AND CONSUMPTION, 1955-2000 

an. 0 

297.8 

866.8 

Freshwater Withdrawals, 1955-2000 

100 

w 

W 

to 

W 

W 

us. P 

131.9 

113.6 

103.1 

Freshwater Consumption, 1955-2000 

*Other: Includes commercial water use. 

iource: Water Resources Council Second 

National Water Assessment 

13 
ANNUAL WATER 

REQUIREMENTS FOR 

OFFSTREM USES - 

AVERAGE YEAR 

(!flLum~m~) 

FRESHWATER 

WImRAwAL AND 

CONSlJXTION BY 

REGIONS - 

1975, 1985, 2000 

(mm ottgs Pzl UT) 

Doatic cd r.rdal 

Cmcral Obieipal) 21,:s) 23*%3 27,916 4,976 5.665 6,630 

-tml(aswal) 2,092 2,321 2,401 1,294 l&J9 1,439 

-w s.530 6,016 6,732 1,109 1,216 ls369 

lbmrwtErill~ 51,zl0 23,664 19,661 6,049 6,693 14.6% 

Api-lIrrigUiS U6,7b3 166.232 U3.846 66,391 92,820 92.506 

ururoJ 1,9l2 2.233 2JSl 1.9P 2.233 2,SSl 

stu noctric m- 94,ISS 80,05i 1,118 4.062 loO.fU 

ni8erda 7,055 8,832 11,328 2.1% 2.777 3,609 

RIblie Iada md ochmt+ 1.84~ 2.123 2.42s 1.216 1.449 1.712 

Totcl, hmskmtar 331.45s 330.3u 3Q6.91b 106.SCl 120.524 l3s.054 Total. sdaa 59.747 91.239 118,815 

IvrAL 398.202 421.s52 625,729 

' rial htcborioc cod d~cdlamemu -es. 

lzkriw 

Withdravals I COWDBpCiOO 

1975 1 1985 I 2000 I 1975 I. 1985 I 1000 

NW h&and 

md-Adantic 

south Atlutic~f 

Crur bku 

Ohio 

Tuau800 

uppar muiuippi 

Lomr lffmissippi 

SotIris-Rd-i&4y 

muouri 

kkurrU4tlitrEOd 

faam-au 

Xl0 Granda 

Uppa b&or&o 

uwa Colorado 

Crut Buin 

Puific Nortkwut 

UlifO& 

AlAOh 

Cuibbem 

Torrl, Ragiou 1-18 

rooul. llegiou l-21 

5,094 

18,297 

2b.5U 

62.909 

36,927 

7,6l2 

12,397 

lb.562 

337 

38,016 

l2.867 

16,925 

6,318 

6,868 

8.9lS 

7,969 

37,493 

39,635 

29s 

1,879 

908 

333.373 

338,455 

3*93s 

l5,854 

25,453 

32,660 

27,835 

7.K9 

10,377 

17,u3 

327 

48,030 

13,797 

l5.930 

6,199 

7,841 

a.527 

7,3l2 

38.100 

10,5~2 

030 

1.619 

963 

327,301 

330.313 

3.231 

U.869 

28,338 

25,6U 

16,923 

6,Ol2 

7,908 

26,839 

517 

L11,35h 

l3.333 

U,538 

5.630 

7,519 

7,858 

7,258 

35.843 

41,299 

756 

l&l50 

888 

080 

1.839 

0,667 6,777 

2393 3.298 

1.798 2.f25 

310 6U 

1.161 1.600 

6,025 4,5s3 

u.E 

202 

19,203 

8,062 8.766 

U.262 10,225 

4*240 b.320 

2.b41 3,017 

6,597 i,tss 

3.778 3,763 

ll.905 14,6U 

26,637 27,929 

58 206 

603 637 

-376 363 

303.920 105.s57 ll9.307 

306,914 106.561 UO,526 

1,059 

3,5&Z 

lO.054 

6.692 

4.331 

1,103 

2.687 

5,SlO 

06 

19,910 

8,886 

lO,S30 

0,017 

3,232 

4,706 

4,034 

ls.193 

29,699 

457 

665 

299 

133,633 

us,o5* 

Source: Water Resources Council Second 

National Water Assessment 

14 
WATER SUPPLY PROBLEMS - TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE -- 

The Second National Water Assessment's comparison of 

water supply and demand data shows that there are major 

water problems in most of the 21 water resource regions 

and serious local problems in most of the 106 subregions. 

For example, almost every region west of the Mississippi 

River has indicated an inadequate supply of surface water 

for food and fiber production at present output efficiencies and quantities. Dramatic instances of ground water 

depletion are found in the High Plains areas extending 

from Texas to Nebraska, and Central Arizona and parts of 

California are heavily dependent on ground water. 

The increasing demands for surface water is leading 

to severe competition for offstream uses of water for 

energy, food and fiber, and municipal and industrial needs. 

These demands coupled with associated environmental and 

instream flow requirements will result in more severe 

basinwide and local problems in many parts of the United 

States. Excessive ground water withdrawals is increasingly 

causing diminishing water pressure, declining spring and 

streamflow, land subsidence, and saltwater intrusion 

problems. The interrelationship of surface and ground 

water supplies as well as droughts further complicate the 

water supply and quality problems. 

While droughts are normal climatological phenomena, 

there is no capacity yet to forecast their occurrence 

with certainty nor how long they will last. It is clear 

that no part of the Nation is immune to the possibility 

of drought. The Northeast drought of 1962-66 presented 

serious water supply problems. In 1976-77 the Nation 

was again hit by drought, which centered in the West, 

Northwest, and upper Midwest, with locally dry areas 

in the humid East as well. In some areas, precipitation 

levels were well below the lowest of record. 

One potential man-induced way to augment existing water 

supplies is weather modification. While some progress has ~ 

been made in weather modification research by Federal and 

State agencies, such as our understanding of the weather 

and our ability to effect changes, the overall research 

goal of developing a technology which can reliably and 

predictably produce cloud and weather changes in various 

climatic regions has not been achieved. In addition, 

increased weather modification activities raise legal 

and institutional issues which are being considered 

by the States. 

15 
Our current work indicates that a lack of a Federal 

weather modification policy and problems in managing and 

coordinating the Federal research efforts have hindered 

the effectiveness of the Federal programs. Until improvements are made, the basic question of whether weather modification (precipitation augmentation) is a potentially major 

source of water supplies cannot be positively answered. A 

recent report (July 1978) by the Weather Modification 

Advisory Board, an independent group established pursuant 

to law to study weather modification programs and issues, 

concluded also that Federal policy and management improvements were needed and made such recommendations. 

Demand for municipal and rural domestic water will 

be an increasingly serious problem, a situation related 

to population distribution. Some communities are now 

restricting water connections, zoning land use, and defeating bond issues for water supply projects. 

With increasing concern for national energy independence, major new developments for oil, coal mining, 

including coal slurry pipelines, can be expected. Where 

water supply is already limited, a transfer of water from 

an existing use or through importation will be required. 

In the West, this transfer will almost inevitably be from 

irrigated agriculture. Retirement of irrigated farmlands, 

however, will result in a loss of agricultural production, 

a decline in rural lifestyle, and increased population 

concentrations in urban centers. On the other hand, limiting energy development and industrial growth because of 

inadequate water supplies could result in higher unemployment, and economic hardship for some regions and the 

Nation. A conservation program which would increase the 

efficient use of irrigation water could provide water for 

alternative uses such as energy production. However, some 

conservation actions, such as sprinkler systems, will 

require additional electric energy. 

The interaction between water quantity and water 

quality is clear. With increased consumptive use, 

streamflows will continue to be reduced. In some places 

this may mean that return flows and sewage effluents will 

constitute an increasing portion of stream volumes. In 

many rivers of the East today water quality problems are 

evident as a result of reduced flows. With increasing 

off-stream uses and urban concentrations, this problem will 

intensify. Conflicts between flow regulation and downstream water uses could have major interstate and 

international implications. 

16 
Also, the interrelationship of water and land resources 

presents problems which stem largely from a collection of 

socio-economic changes resulting from the choices and 

decisions of individuals, firms, and governments. Urbanization and intensive industrial development often lead 

to serious pollution problems and water short conditions 

where water supplies are not sufficient to meet such rapid 

development. Conversion of agricultural lands to urbanrelated uses and wetlands to urban and agricultural 

uses are other major concerns. However, development of 

water resources can transform unproductive land to high 

yield farmland or promote economic growth on undeveloped 

areas. In brief, competition for use of the Nation's 

water-related land resources is continuing to increase, 

especially in and adjacent to urban growth centers. 

Throughout the Nation plans are being made for increased water use and, when those expectations are 

summed up, it becomes evident that in many areas, if 

the present use patterns continue, there will be water 

shortages and severe conflicts. Unfortunately, no simple 

solutions are available. 

Another continuing water resources problem is 

flooding which affects all parts of the United States, 

arid as well as the humid areas. In 1975 flood damages 

were estimated at $3.4 billion on a flood plain of 140 to 

180 million acres, and 113 persons were killed by flood 

waters. Historically, cities and industries have 

been located on flood plains, and larger channels, 

levees, and dams have been constructed to provide 

flood protection. 

In urban areas, property damage is accompanied by 

unemployment and dislocation of people. Almost half of 

all flood damages are suffered by agriculture as existing 

crops and livestock are destroyed and productive land is 

covered or washed away. The impact of flooding on wildlife, fish, and ecosystems is mixed. Wildlife food and 

habitat are often removed or covered by floodwaters, resulting in severe damage to natural systems. 

Since 1965, increasing attention has been given to 

nonstructural alternatives in the control and alleviation 

of flood damages. But, information on flood hazards, 

environmental effects, flood damage reduction approaches, 

and institutional arrangements through which unified 

flood plain management might be achieved is generally 

lacking. The Unified National Program for Floodplain 

17 
Management recently adopted by the Water Resources Council 

recognizes these deficiencies and indicates progress in 

overcoming them. 

By the year 2000, flood damages are expected to 

increase to $4.3 billion even with moderate application of 

flood plain management regulations. However, to reduce 

flood damage, better management of the flood plain is 

required, which includes a combination of traditional 

structural measures such as dams and levees, and nonstructural measures such as relocation of high risk 

properties out of the flood plain. The participation of 

local, State, and Federal governments is required for 

successful flood plain management. 

How bad a water picture do we face? This question is 

difficult to answer; probably, we can only guess. Some 

believe our Nation will not take effective action to solve 

our water resources problems until we are faced with severe 

crises similar to those when other natural resources became 

short or endangered. Others are more optimistic but show 

an anxiety that present water management policies, institutional arrangements, and strategies leave us in a poor 

position to cope with the foreseeable shortage of water 

supplies. 

Basic questions that must be addressed include how can 

water resources be managed optimally to meet national, 

regional, and local needs and can changes in the present 

patterns of water allocation and use be made in the face 

of political and institutional opposition by numerous 

and well-organized constituencies. 

Federal, State, and local governments as well as the 

private sector must share the responsibilities for solving 

our water problems. With the sharing of responsibilities; 

integrated and comprehensive water resources planning and 

management, including intensive, coordinated water research 

programs; and compromises between competing uses and 

interests; our Nation can find the ways to more efficiently 

and effectively manage its water resources to best satisfy 

our future economic, environmental, and social goals. 

PRESIDENT'S WATER POLICY ACTIONS 

Recognizing our Nation's water resources problems, 

the President's Environmental Message of May 23, 1977, 

directed the Office of Management and Budget, the Council 

on Environmental Quality, and the Water Resources Council, 

18 
under the chairmanship of Secretary of the Interior, 

Cecil Andrus, II* * * to conduct in consultation with the 

Congress and the public, a review of the present Federal 

water policy." He further stated that '* * * we need 

comprehensive reform of water resources policy, with 

water conservation as its cornerstone." 

Water Resource Policy task forces were established to 

study the following matters 

--revision of water resources planning and evaluation 

criteria and procedures, 

--cost sharing, 

--policy considerations and alternatives relative to 

institution and institutional arrangements, 

--water conservation, 

--water quality, 

--research, and 

--reserved water rights. 

In July and August 1977, hearings were held in major 

metropolitan areas. Considerable adverse reaction was 

voiced, especially from water interests in the Western 

States. Consequently, the Senate passed a resolution, 

S. Res. 284 (October 19771, expressing its concern about 

possible interference with the traditional State role 

in water allocation actions and the need for consultation 

with the Congress. 

On June 6, 1978, the President announced his water 

policy message and sent to the Congress water policy 

initiatives designed to: 

--Improve planning and efficient management of Federal 

water resource programs to prevent waste and to 

permit necessary water projects which are cost 

effective, safe and environmentally sound to 

move forward expeditiously. 

--Provide a new, national emphasis on water 

conservation. 

19 
--Enhance Federal-State cooperation and improved 

State water resources planning 

--Increase attention to environmental quality 

The President concluded his water policy message by 

saying, 

"These initiatives establish the goals and the 

framework for water policy reform. They do so 

without impinging on the rights of States and by 

calling for a closer partnership among the Federal, State, county, city, and other local levels 

of government. I want to work with the Congress, 

State, and local governments and the public to 

implement this policy. Together we can protect 

and manage our Nation's water resources, putting 

water to use for society's benefit, preserving 

our rivers and streams for future generations of 

Americans, and averting critical water shortages 

in the future through adequate supply, 

conservation and wise planning." 

The reaction to the President's water policy message 

varied; some were disappointed and considered it "watered 

down," others gave it cautious approval because of the 

policy's "mild tone." In general, the policy drew, 

initially, limited praise from environmentalists, who had 

hoped for more changes, and from those interests who prefer 

"business-as-usual." 

On July 12, 1978, the President issued directives for 

all agencies to take certain actions to implement his policy 

initiatives. In response to a request from the Senate 

Budget Committee, GAO reported on the water policy 

initiatives. _1/ 

l/"Review of the President's June 6, 1978, Water Policy 

Message" (CED-79-2, 11/6/78). 

20 
CHAPTER 2 

WATER RESOURCES ISSUES AND CONCERNS 

The following are important water resources issues and 

concerns facing the Nation. 

*1. 

*2. 

*3. 

*4. 

*5. 

*6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

Are existing plans, policies, and programs effectively 

addressing the water resources problems facing the 

Nation, regions, and States? 

Do water agencies and industry have effective water 

management and conservation programs which make 

efficient use of water supplies? 

Will Federal and non-Federal efforts ensure an adequate 

water supply for municipal and industrial purposes? 

Are financing, cost sharing, and repayment policies for 

Federal or federally assisted water resources projects 

and programs effectively meeting today's needs? 

What are the problems impacting on the timely, efficient, and economical construction and maintenance 

of water resources projects? 

Ground water supply management and conservation--what 

are the problems and how can they be resolved? 

How can water quality and water supply programs be 

effectively integrated? 

Do Federal agencies adequately consider environmental 

effects in water resources management and project 

formulation? 

Are water information collection and evaluation efforts 

adequate to promote optimal water resources programs? 

*Deserving priority attention. 

21 
CHAPTER 3 

MAJOR WATER RESOURCES ISSUES AND CONCERNS 

ARE EXISTING PLANS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS 

EFFECTIVELY ADDRESSING THE WATER RESOURCES 

PROBLEMS FACING THE NATION, REGIONS, AND 

STATES? 

Adequate planning is an essential ingredient in 

developing and administering an effective, efficient water 

resources program. Such plans include the establishment of 

policies and programs for water research and technology 

efforts. Defects in water planning can have major impacts, 

both short and long range, on the Nation's multi-billion 

dollar water resources activities. In view of the 

shortages and emerging water problems facing our Nation, 

such planning should provide a sound basis for rational, 

well-considered decisions among alternatives or competing 

uses of our water resources to meet the needs and desires 

of the people. 

THE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 

Water resources planning encompasses analyzing existing 

and potential water problems and preparing solutions to such 

problems. Planning procedures and policies differ from 

region to region and among agencies. Each region has 

different problems to address while each agency has a 

different mission. 

Efforts to coordinate or combine water resources planning, such as the Water Resources Planning Act of 1965, have 

produced few positive results. However, the President's 

Water Policy Statement called for improved planning, enhanced 

Federal-State cooperation in water policy and planning, and 

increased attention to environmental quality. The President 

issued specific initiatives for improving the planning and 

evaluation of Federal water resources programs and projects, 

as well as for strengthening Federal-State water resources 

planning and policymaking. 

Usually, several alternatives are available to solve 

a water-related problem. It is during the planning stage 

that these alternatives must be evaluated and the best 

solution chosen. Some of the factors that must be 

considered in evaluating the alternatives are: 

--whether there is a need for development of 

alternative supply sources; 

22 
--what is the most cost effective method of getting 

additional water; 

--whether structural (project construction) or nonstructural solutions are appropriate; 

--how water should be allocated to users; 

--how to minimize the harmful environmental impacts 

of water development; and 

--how to coordinate the Federal, State, and regional 

-water, land, transportation, and environmental 

policies most effectively. 

Efforts to plan and implement water resources programs 

are concerned with and are affected by several factors. Some 

of these factors follow: 

--Federal, State, and local planning roles. 

--Regional and basin water resources planning. 

--National water policy. 

--Institutional arrangements. 

--Federal planning grant programs. 

--Methods to increase water supplies. 

Federal, State, and Local Planning Roles 

Prior to the last decade, the primary Federal role in 

water resources planning related to public works activities, 

such as flood control, navigation, irrigation, and watershed 

activities. Federal involvement generally arose in response 

to interstate needs; in cases when the financial commitments 

were beyond State or local capability, and to foster national 

objectives, such as western land settlement or soil and 

watershed conservation. Federal agencies, created to 

execute the programs, generally operated independently of 

the States and were responsible for program and project 

implementation decisions. State and local involvement in 

the decisions varied, depending upon the nature and purposes 

of the programs and projects, the relationship between 

State, local and Federal officials, and the non-Federal 

financial repayment requirements. 

States had defined their own policies relative to water 

quantity and quality management and had developed laws and 

practices for the allocation and use of water. States were 

also engaged in water resources planning and development. 

Local governments generally had primary responsibility for 

23 
local water supply and wastewater treatment and disposal. 

Planning efforts were generally of a localized nature and 

were usually directed at a specific problem. 

In more recent times, a number of new Federal water 

related programs have emerged. For example, the Water 

Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, the Coastal 

Zone Management Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Water 

Resources Planning Act, and flood plain management legislation indicate where the Federal interests and activities 

have been expanded over its traditional role in relation to 

other levels of government. 

Regional and Basin Water Resources Planning 

Some river basins have no overall basinwide planning 

authority, others have established river basin commissions, 

and some have interstate compacts. 

River basin and interstate compact commissions develop 

basinwide water resources plans. Also, States have planning 

systems to address their water problems. Assessments of all 

types of basinwide planning systems and a cross section of 

State planning systems are needed before judgments can be 

made on the best planning mechanism and techniques for seeking resolution of national and regional water problems. 

National Water Policy 

One of the President's water policy task forces 

addressed planning and evaluation criteria and procedures 

for Federal water resources development. One of the major 

issues raised in the task force study concerns the objectives 

which should govern the formulation and evaluation of water 

resources plans, for example, consideration of water 

conservation and nonstructural solutions. 

Selection and definition of national objectives 

establish the basic character and direction of Federal 

water resources planning. The "national economic development" and "environmental quality" objectives have governed 

water resource planning undertaken directly by a Federal 

agency as well as interagency basin planning. The Congress, 

in passing the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1970, stated 

"It is the intent of Congress that the objectives 

of enhancing regional economic development, the 

quality of the total regional economic development, 

the quality of the total environment, including its 

protection and improvement, the well-being of the 

people of the United States, and the national 

24 
economic development are the objectives to be 

included in federally financed water resource 

projects * * *.rl 

These additional factors have not yet been fully included 

in the Principles and Standards which govern Federal water 

resources planning and project formulation, or implemented 

by the Federal agencies. 

In addition to concerns over the expanding national 

objectives, there are many uncertainties at the State and 

local level over interpretation of environmental laws and 

regulations, future needs for energy development, relationship of water resources development and land use controls, 

and the future Federal commitment to water resources 

development. A definitive national policy that clears up 

these and other uncertainties is needed to ensure effective, 

coordinated water resources planning between the Federal, 

State, and local governments. 

Institutional Arrangements 

The President's water policy task force said that 

practically every problem which can be identified in the 

water resource area, except physical availability, can be 

defined as an institutional problem. The President and 

others have said that the water resources agencies may 

need to be reorganized to effectively integrate their 

diverse but related objectives. Agencies charged with 

protecting the environment or fish and wildlife conservation 

often disagree with those responsible for water resources 

development. In other cases, the objectives of those 

primarily responsible or concerned for a project purpose 

such as flood control, conflict with the objectives of 

those concerned with hydropower electric generation from 

the same project. These disagreements sometimes result 

in project delays, higher costs, and decreased benefits. 

The President, working with Governors, has created 

a task force of Federal, State, and local officals to act 

as a continuing guide for implementing water policy reforms 

and to ensure that the State and local role in the Nation's 

water policy is constant and meaningful. This task force 

should provide ideas for resolving some of the institutional 

problems. 

Federal Planning Grant Programs 

The President's Water Policy Statement proposed an 

increase in the funding of State water planning under the 

1965 Water Resources Planning Act. He recommended 

25 
increasing the program from $3 million to $25 million 

annually to assist Governors in developinq a total water 

management capability. This program, a 50/50 costs 

sharing program is to be available to all States so they 

can address their priority concerns. 

Some Colorado River Rasin States said that Federal 

planning grants were an important part of their piarlniny 

efforts. Many State plans are being prepared with 

different levels of implementation. A concern often heard 

is that Federal funds are used to develop plans that are 

put on the shelf and never used. It would seem desirable 

to examine the grant proqram so that any necessary improvements can be made before increased funding takes place. 

Methods to Increase Water Supplies 

One of the long-term solutions to predicted water 

shortages is to increase the available usable water supply. 

Such efforts have generally received a low priority. If 

development is to continue and shortages avoided in some 

areas, the usable supplies will have to be increased. 

Most of the methods of increasing water supplies will 

concern research and development activities. Such methods 

include (1) weather modification through cloud seeding to 

increase rainfall or snowpack, (2) desalination of sea, 

brackish, and used water, and (3) salvaging water by 

channelinq streams and controlling stream-side plant life 

and vegetation which consume water, and (4) reuse of 

waste water. These methods of auqmentation are in 

various stages of development or implementation. Further 

development and use of these methods generally involves 

overcoming technical, economic, social, or political 

constraints. 

In addition, there is some water imported from 

other basins to augment supplies in some areas. However, 

legislation prohibits study of interbasin transfers as 

a source of supply for the Colorado River Basin. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION 

Some of the more important matters which should be 

considered when addressing, planninq, and programminq 

issues and concerns include: 

1. How well do Federal, State, and regional aqencies 

choose between alternative projects or purposes 

when planninq for the development of an area's 

water resources, includinq the coordination of 

26 
2. 

water resources plans with environmental, land 

use, and transportation plans and policies. Also, 

are the impacts and value of proposed individual 

projects adequately considered, on a basin-wide 

basis, during the planning phases? 

How effective is the Federal organization structure 

for addressing water resources issues? What should 

the Federal role be in water resources planning? 

Is there effective integration and coordination of 

planning efforts between Federal, regional, and 

State agencies? What are the organizational impediments and institutional constraints to effective 

planning and what actions are necessary to resolve 

such problems? 

3. Are the river basin commissions adequately meeting 

their objectives? Do regional water development and 

State plans comprehensively address their water 

problems? Are regions and States looking far enough 

into the future to recognize emerging water problems 

and plan for solutions? Are incentives needed for 

better regional planning? 

4. What are the benefits and disadvantages of the 

alternative plans and programs for increasing water 

supply in water short areas? Can demands be controlled or decreased as an alternative to increasing 

supplies? How can problems related to water 

shortages be effectively solved? 

5. How effective are WRC's monitoring procedures for 

Federal planning grants and is the grant program 

meeting its objectives? How are the State plans used 

by the States, regional authorities, and Federal 

Government? 

PAST AND CURRENT GAO EMPHASIS 

Recent GAO work has concentrated on reviews of water 

resources planning and programming and related Federal 

efforts and programs. We are reviewing the plans and programs to solve the water resources problems in the Colorado 

River Basin. Also, we are reviewing plans and programs to 

meet water needs for energy development, irrigated agriculture, metropolitan areas; and the Nation's desalination and 

weather modification efforts. We have also responded to 

congressional requests by reviewing such matters as: the 

California drought of 1976-77, and drought relief programs, 

snowpack measurement and data collection to forecast water 

supply, alternative ways for authorizing water projects, 

and the President's water policy. 

27 
GAO Reports Report No. and Date 

Problems Affecting Usefulness of the 

National Water Assessment 

California Drought of 1976 and 1977-- 

Extent, Damage, and Governmental 

Response 

Water Resources Planning, Management, 

and Development: What are the Nation's 

Water Supply Problems and Issues? 

Improvements Needed by the Water Resources 

Council and River Basin Commission to 

Achieve the Objectives of the Water 

Resources Act of 1965 

Review of Federal Efforts to Forecast 

Snow Depth and Run-off Information 

Analysis of the Process of Authorizing 

Water Resources Projects 

Reserved Water Rights for Federal and 

Indian Reservations: A Growing 

Controversy in Need of Resolution 

Federal Response to the 1976-77 Drought: 

What Should Be Done Next? 

GAO Studies in Process 

Review of Plans and Programs to Meet 

Competing Water Needs in the Colorado 

River Basins 

Survey of Nonstructural Alternatives for 

Solving Water Resources Problems 

Review of the Nation's Saline Water 

Conversion Needs 

Survey of Energy and Mineral Development 

Needs and Other Alternative Uses of 

Water to Fulfill Changing Priorities 

CED-77-50 

3/23/77 

CED-77-137 

10/19/77 

CED-77-100 

7/28,'77 

CED-78-1 

10/31/77 

CED-78-43 

l/27/78 

CED-78-41 

l/30/78 

CED-78-176 

11/16/78 

CED-79-26 

l/31/79 

28 
Survey of Coal Slurry Pipelines and 

Their Effect on Water Supplies 

Review of Weather Modification Efforts 

(Rainfall Augmentation) 

Survey of Effectiveness of River Basin 

Commissions 

1 ,“i‘ 

.._ ,,1 

x .: 

: ” L 

29 
DO WATER AGENCIES AND INDUSTRY 

HAVE EFFECTIVE WATER MANAGEMENT 

AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMS WHICH 

MAKE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER SUPPLIES? 

The President, on June 6, 1978, announced his "Water 

Policy" which, among other things, is designed to "Provide 

a new, national emphasis on water conservation." He said 

that this new policy resulted from a comprehensive review 

of Federal water policy which showed that water conservation 

had not been addressed at a national level even though we 

have pressing water supply problems. The review showed that 

--21 of the 106 total watershed subregions in the 

country already had severe water shortages and by 

the year 2000 this number could increase to 39 

subregions, 

--the Nation's cities are beginning to experience 

water shortage problems which can only be solved 

at a very high cost, 

--in some areas, precious ground water supplies are 

being depleted at a faster rate than they are 

replenished, and 

--in many cases, an effective water conservation program could play a key role in alleviating these 

problems. 

The President detailed 12 specific initiatives for 

increasing the emphasis on conservation in Federal water 

resources programs including: requiring the consideration 

of water conservation in the principles and standards 

for planning water and related land resources developments; 

making appropriate community water conservation measures a 

condition of Federal water supply, wastewater treatment, and 

housing grant and loan programs; providing assistance to 

farmers and urban dwellers on how to conserve water; 

establishing water conservation goals and standards in 

Federal buildings and facilities; examining Federal programs 

and policies so that more water conservation and reuse 

measures can be implemented; and implementing certain 

irrigation repayment and water service contract procedures. 

The President also said that none of the initiatives would 

impose any new Federal regulatory programs for water 

management. 

30 
THE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 

The problems and issues concerning effective water 

management and conservation programs primarily involve 

three basic areas: agricultural use, municipal and 

industrial use, and ground water management. The first two 

areas are discussed below. Ground water problems and issues 

are fully covered on page 55. 

Agricultural use 

The greatest potential, as well as the greatest need, 

for better water management and conservation is in the 

irrigated areas of the West. Irrigation of crops accounts 

for over 80 percent of consumptive uses of water, most of 

which occurs in the arid and semiarid West. 

Irrigation is a relatively inefficient water use, 

since under present practices less than half of the water 

delivered for irrigation is actually consumed by the crops. 

The remainder, which is excess to crops needs, may be absorbed by weeds; oversaturate the lands causing drainage 

problems; or return to the supply system for further uses 

at a downstream location, degraded in quality by minerals, 

fertilizers, sediment, and pesticides. These return flows 

may be used downstream for additional irrigation purposes. 

In some cases, however, the excess water may bypass downstream potential users and be lost or become ground water 

and require substantial energy to pump the water back to 

the surface. 

Some techniques which could lead to "productivity 

increases," that is, maximizing agricultural output per 

unit of water, are the lining of water conveyance and 

distribution systems, more exact timing of water deliveries by computer techniques, avoiding overdeliveries, 

and use of water savings methods, such as drip and 

sprinkler irrigation systems. Other measures include 

suppressing reservoir evaporation, controlling unwanted 

vegetation which consumes considerable water, and 

increasing yields without additional water through 

better crop varieties, fertilizers, and management. 

Additional water conservation techniques which could be 

effective, but are sensitive issues, are water-pricing policies which encourage conservation such as (1) charging progressively higher rates as greater quantities of water are 

used and (2) eliminating or reducing Federal subsidies to 

recipients of Federal irrigation water. 

31 
Municipal and industrial use 

An adequate supply of water is essential to the Nation's 

citizens and industries. If the demand continues to increase, 

the Nation will have to develop new supplies or use existing 

supplies more efficiently. If neither of these steps is 

taken, emergency restrictions on water use will have to be 

imposed if and when shortages occur, and communities will 

have to make hard decisions on future growth and development. 

The Congress has consistently held that supply and 

water use regulations are the responsibility of State and 

local governments. However, various Federal programs offer 

numerous opportunities for encouraging and implementing 

water conservation programs. For example, Federal agencies 

(1) provide funds for water resources planning, (2) construct dams and reservoirs to increase the water supply, 

(3) construct and operate public buildings and military 

and civilian housing and finance housing programs where 

water conservation programs could be undertaken, and (4) 

provide grants to local entities for constructing wastewater treatment facilities, the size and costs of which 

could be reduced if conservation were practiced. 

Several techniques which can help make more efficient 

use of municipal and industrial water supplies are watersaving devices, metering, pricing, leakage control, water 

pressure control, educational campaigns, and industrial 

conservation such as reuse and recycling. Each of these 

techniques must be considered on a case-by-case basis. 

Although these techniques generally are believed to save 

water, many have either not been thoroughly studied or 

had their cost effectiveness evaluated. No centralized 

data bank or clearinghouse on water conservation measures 

and techniques exists. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION 

The more important matters which should be considered 

in addressing water management and conservation issues and 

concerns include: 

1. Have the Federal agencies developed adequate data 

to determine what role they should take in promoting agricultural efficiencies? Have they related 

their roles and efforts to the basic causes of 

agricultural inefficiencies? 

32 
2. Do Federal, State, and private enterprise effectively coordinate their efforts to promote better 

water management and conservation? What are the 

constraints to effective coordination and are they 

adequately recognized and dealt with? 

3. What efforts have been made to meet the needs for 

a clearinghouse on municipal and industrial water 

conservation practices? Are the efforts and 

Federal activities effective in ascertaining the 

current technology, additional research needed, 

Federal incentives needed, priorities, and 

legislative authority needed for implementing 

effective water management and conservation 

practices? 

4. How effective are Federal housing programs in 

promoting better municipal and industrial water 

management and conservation? Have federally 

controlled building and facilities led the 

way? 

5. Are water agencies using pricing systems and 

user charges as a means for reducing water demand 

and promoting more efficient use? 

6. Are there new technologies for promoting better 

water management and conservation, and which offer 

the most potential? How effective is the Federal 

effort to develop new technologies and are Federal 

agencies effectively implementing such technologies? 

What are the constraints to their implementation 

and are efforts made to overcome them? Are any 

changes in the Federal role necessary? 

PAST AND CURRENT GAO EMPHASIS 

GAO has issued four reports recently dealing with 

water conservation programs in the agricultural, and 

municipal and industrial sectors. Currently, our 

efforts are centered on the impact on water supplies of 

industrial water reuse and recycling and the Department 

of Agriculture's efforts to promote better water 

management and conservation. 

33 
In two reports I/ issued in June 1976 and September 

1977 we identified many problems concerning the implementation of improved agricultural water management 

and conservation practices and we made applicable 

recommendations to the Secretaries of the Interior and 

Agriculture and the Administrator of the Environmental 

Protection Agency. These agencies have established a 

task force to deai with these matters. 

In a report 2/ issued in April 1978, we recommended 

that the Chairman-of the Water Resources Council establish 

an interagency task force to jointly develop Federal 

objectives, policies, and action plans for a clearinghouse for water conservation practices involving municipal 

and industrial water supplies. In addition, the task force 

would ascertain the current technology, additional research 

needed, Federal incentives needed, priorities, and additional legislative authority needed for implementing effective water conservation practices. We also made recommendations to individual Federal agencies, most of which 

were included in the specific initiatives announced by 

the President in his "Water Policy." 

GAO Reports Report No. and Date 

Municipal and Industrial Water 

Conservation--The Federal 

Government Could Do More 

CED-78-66 

4/3/78 

More and Better Uses Could Be 

Made of Billions of Gallons of 

Water by Improving Irrigation 

Delivery Systems 

CED-77-117 

g/2/77 

Better Federal Coordination 

Needed to Promote More Efficient 

Farm Irrigation 

RED-76-116 

6/22/76 

A/"Better Federal Coordination Needed to Promote More Efficient Farm Irrigation" (RED-76-116, June 22, 1976) and 

"More and Better Uses Could Be Made of Billions of Gallons 

of Water by Improving Irrigation Delivery Systems" 

(CED-77-117, Sept. 2, 1977). 

z/"Municipal and Industrial Water Conservation--The Federal 

Government Could Do More" (CED-78-66, Apr. 3, 1978). 

34 
GAO Reports 

Better Water Management and 

Conservation Possible--But 

Constraints Need to be Overcome 

Review of the President's June 6, 

1978 Water roiicy Message 

Report No. and Date 

CED-79-1 

10/31/78 

GAO Studies in Process 

Review of U.S. Department of Agriculture's 

Efforts to Promote Better Water Management 

and Conservation 

CED-79-2 

llj6j78 

Survey of Impact on Water Supplies of 

Industrial Reuse and Recycling 

35 
WILL FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL EFFORTS 

ENSURE AN ADEQUATE WATER SUPPLY FOR 

MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL PURPOSES? 

Municipal and industrial (M&I) water supplies are 

becoming more critical each year. An increasing number of 

the Nation's urban areas periodically suffer from water 

short periods, requiring conservation programs. Most of 

our urban areas estimate M&I water shortages by the year 

2000. By that time, demographers expect that 90 percent 

(about 242 million) of the population will be served by 

central systems. Yet, water resources available to meet 

the corresponding growth in municipal and industrial water 

needs are limited. Increasingly, metropolitan areas are 

going outside their immediate sources of supply or are using 

local water supplies faster than they can be replenished. 

Such sources of supply will not be available indefinitely, 

and a lack of an adequate future water supply can have 

significant local, regional, and national implications. 

In the past year much public attention has focused on 

municipal and industrial water supply and, increasingly, as 

shown in the President's water policy statement, it is 

becoming a national concern. Within the last two years 

a Congressional lobby has been advocating that the Federal 

Government establish programs to aid urban M&I water systems. 

As a result, the Congress has become more interested in such 

programs. 

PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 

Problems and issues which revolve around M&I water 

supply vary considerably from city to city and region to 

region. Issues include water quality, quantity, distribution systems, and management of the systems. All major 

M&I problems may not have been identified because data on 

individual cities' problems have not been compiled. 

Urban areas are now becoming more aware of their problems because of difficulties in meeting water quality standards, the increased publicity on water conservation, the 

increased costs of meeting demands, difficulties in obtaining water rights, and the continued environmental conflicts 

with water resources development. However, in the past, 

metropolitan population and industrial growth have occurred 

without adequately considering the problems, such as 

environmental and social impacts and increasing costs of 

providing water supplies to meet demands. The attitude of 

planners has been that water can be obtained in unlimited 

36 
quantities to meet any demands which arise from economic 

growth. As a result, demands for municipal and industrial 

water supplies continued to rise in all areas of the 

country, including the water-short areas. 

In the drought of the early 1960's more than 14 million 

of the 50 million persons living in the Northeast were 

forced to restrict their water use to conserve the dwindling 

suPPlY* In the 1976-77 drought, communities in certain 

parts of the United States were faced with water shortages, 

empty or near empty reservoirs, and water rationing. 

Solutions to M&I water shortages are not simple. 

Short-term solutions may include instituting conservation 

measures, raising reservoir levels, increasing intake 

from existing resources, purchasing supplemental supplies, 

reusing waste water, or a combination of these and other 

solutions. Long-term solutions would include those above 

and others, such as building reservoirs, increasing research efforts in weather modification and desalinization, 

and controlling growth in water-short areas. Often, it is 

not feasible for cities to implement many of the short-term 

solutions, and they sometimes lack the will or financial 

resources to undertake the long-term solutions early enough 

to avert a future water supply crisis. 

Many metropolitan areas and municipalities depend on 

local funding resources to solve water supply problems 

while others depend largely on state or federal aid. States 

vary in the amount and type of aid which they provide for 

water supply. 

In view of the increasing efforts to establish Federal 

financial assistance programs for urban water systems and 

the potential for the Congress to enact such legislation in 

the near future, it becomes desirable to study the pricing 

systems for M&I water supplies. Costs of municipal water 

supplies are increasing as cities must rehabilitate old 

deteriorating water systems, go farther for new water 

sources, and as low-density suburban areas are brought into 

the supply systems. An important issue, therefore, is 

whether water utilities are financially self-supporting, 

through appropriate pricing policies and systems, so that 

they can rehabilitate their water systems and meet future 

demands. 

Systems of pricing and user charges are employed for a 

number of purposes, including the provision of revenues to 

recover costs, allocation of financial burdens to direct 

37 
beneficiaries, as well as to provide general revenues. 

Often, pricing policies may be established on the basis 

of political as well as financial considerations, and 

general revenue funds are used to compensate for deficits in water system revenues. Also, water pricing 

systems may be an important factor which directly or 

indirectly impacts on the allocation of water supplies 

as well as on land use and an area's growth and 

development. Another factor which may significantly 

affect water prices are the costs of implementing the 

requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act. 

Water for Small Communities and Rural America 

While central water supply systems provide safe, 

potable drinking water to most of our Nation's population, 

a large segment is not so well protected. In all parts of 

our Nation, in varying degrees, about 33 million Americans 

reside outside the service areas of central systems and 

have their own domestic water supplies, usually obtained 

from deep wells. About 4 million persons have no piped 

water supply. Also, many rural communities are reporting 

that their water supplies do not meet the Safe Drinking 

Water Act standards, and they are faced with potential 

high costs of additional treatment or new supply sources. 

The Farmers Home Administration has identified over 

24,000 rural communities with a need for a central water 

system or an improved one. 

While the national policy enunciated in the Rural 

Development Act states adequate water supplies should be 

provided for economically distressed communities to help 

provide efficient and orderly growth and development, many 

small communities are faced with an insufficient quality 

and/or quantity water supply to maintain or improve their 

viability. At least one-quarter of the 6,500 nonmetropolitan communities in the 11 Western States have water in short 

Sw?PlY I water of poor quality, inadeguate storage and treatment facilities, and deteriorating distribution systems. 

The types of problems and potential solutions often 

extend far beyond a single community's boundary. For 

example, up-stream waste discharges create water quality 

problems for downstream communities, and lowered ground 

water levels from deep-well pumping have caused problems 

for communities with neighboring shallow wells. 

38 
M&I water distribution systems 

In the East and in small, old western towns there is 

a special concern about deteriorating water distribution 

systems. It is not unusual for a city's central distribution 

system to be over 100 years old. These systems, ravaged by 

rust, nearby construction, and water pressures much greater 

than anticipated when designed, are beginning to show signs 

of complete collapse. 

As the water systems age, they begin to leak. A lot 

of municipal and industrial water is lost while it is being 

conveyed to the users. For example, Boston cannot account 

for 50 percent of its water supply due to either leakage 

or its metering system. Leakage can lead to low water 

pressure, high costs, and infiltration of foreign substances 

causing low water quality. These problems can be reduced 

by locating and eliminating leaks, and replacing or relining 

pipes. However, this can be extremely expensive and, for 

the most part, is funded locally. Federal funding for 

municipal and industrial water distribution has been 

minimal. 

Another concern about distribution systems is the 

inadequacy of some present systems to handle increasing 

populations. Many systems are operating at or about full 

capacity. As a result, future development centers will 

need entirely new systems instead of tapping into existing 

systems. 

The constraints to solving M&I problems --- 

Because M&I water problems and solutions have not been 

completely identified, it is difficult to identify the constraints to solving the problems; however, there are examples which indicate the nature of such difficulties. 

Many municipalities are experiencing difficulties 

in solving their problems because of institutional, financial and other constraints which limit their capabilities 

or willingness to address the problems. In some instances, 

communities have experienced water shortages while adjacent 

or nearby communities have water to spare. Institutional 

agreements between communities could solve or reduce many 

of these problems. In other situations, municipalities 

complain that funds are not available for water projects 

while, at the same time, charge low water rates or use 

M&I water revenues for other purposes. 

39 
The availability of water is another possible constraint to solving M&I problems. More than half of the 

Nation's urban areas are projecting water shortages, under 

normal rainfall conditions, by the year 2000. With the 

trend of increasing population movements to cities, particularly in the water-short Southwest, and increased 

per capita consumption of water, there is the question 

whether there is sufficient water available to adequately 

satisfy future M&I demands. 

While the capital requirements for M&I water systems 

are high, the cost of water until fairly recently has generally been low. However, the heavy dependence on water 

for energy development and production could drive up the 

cost. The energy and minerals industries have the financial resources to successfully compete for the available 

water supplies if the water is allocated on the basis of 

who can pay the most. This could seriously impact on 

meeting M&I needs unless government establishes priorities and allocates water on a basis other than economic 

factors in the market place. 

Other issues 

To have sound, comprehensive M&I water resources 

planning and development, there must be integrated 

management of water supply and quality, wastewater 

collection and disposal, and storm water management. 

Although improvements are being made in water supplyquality planning, different Federal, State, and local 

agencies continue to carry out their individual programs without the integrated comprehensive water planning 

and management necessary to most efficiently and effectively 

meet future water demands. 

Many municipal and industrial areas have continued to 

grow in arid regions of the country despite the concerns 

for depleting the regions' water supply. In some areas, 

such as Phoenix, there is a growing reliance on the 

Federal Government to provide future water supplies to 

meet increased demands of a growing population. At this 

point, we can only guess at the future implications that 

depleting regional water supplies and diverting other 

water sources will have on meeting water needs in such 

regions. This matter raises the question whether the 

Federal Government should provide assistance for 

development of water resources which might unwisely 

encourage growth in water-short areas. 

40 
Another matter of interest is how industries, who 

are not recipients of water from public water systems, 

obtain their water supply, the extent to which their 

water withdrawals and uses are subject to regulation, 

and how metropolitan areas anticipate and make provision 

for future industrial needs. Much of the water used by 

industry does not pass through a public water system but 

is withdrawn from and returned to the streams by the 

individual industries whose needs often represent a large 

portion of water demand in metropolitan areas. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION 

In addressing the issues and concerns for M&I water 

supply, important questions which should be considered 

include: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

What are the M&I water supply problems and potential 

solutions in small communities and rural areas; 

what are the institutional, financial, or other 

constraints to solving these problems; and what is 

the Federal role and should it be modified to best 

help communities meet their water needs? 

What is the extent of the deterioration of distribution systems in cities, towns, and rural areas; 

what are the constraints to solving the deterioration problems; and what should be the Federal 

role in solving the problems? 

What are the causes of the constraints to solving 

water problems and what can be done to reduce 

or eliminate them? Are there viable alternatives 

to the traditional solutions for solving the water 

supply problems? 

Are there municipalities that do not have sufficient 

water sources for meeting demands? If such shortages 

exist, what alternatives are available and should 

there be a Federal role to help meet this problem? 

What are the water pricing policies and systems of 

M&I water suppliers? Are such water suppliers 

financially self-supporting and provide the revenues 

to rehabilitate antiquated water systems and to meet 

future water demands? 

What is the extent of, and how can improvements be 

made, in integrated management of water supply, 

water quality, wastewater use, and storm water 

runoff? 

41 
PAST AND CURRENT GAO EMPHASIS 

GAO's past audit work in M&I water supply is mostly 

related to water conservation in metropolitan areas. Our 

current work includes a review of actions by metropolitan 

areas to meet water resources needs, survey of M&I water 

distribution systems problems in large cities, and study 

of M&I water supply problems for small communities and rural 

America. 

GAO Reports 

Municipal and Industrial Water 

Conservation--The Federal 

Government Could Do More 

Report No. and Date 

CED-78-66 

4/3/78 

GAO Studies in Process 

Review of Actions by Metropolitan 

Areas in Meeting Water Resources 

Needs 

Survey of Municipal and Industrial 

Water Distribution System Problems 

in Large Cities 

Survey of Municipal and Industrial 

Water Supply Problems in Small 

Communities and Rural America 

42 
ARE FINANCING, COST SHARING, AND REPAYMENT 

POLICIES FOR FEDERAL OR FEDERALLY ASSISTED 

WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS 

EFFECTIVELY MEETING TODAY'S NEEDS? 

Financing, cost sharing, and repayment requirements for 

Federal and federally assisted water resources projects and 

programs have evolved over the years as new agencies, programs, and project purposes have been authorized to meet 

needs. As a result, there are many variations in these 

requirements among agencies as well as among programs with 

similar purposes and objectives. This situation leads 

to widespread confusion, encourages local interests to 

"shop around" among agencies to get the most favorable 

arrangement, and results in inequitable treatment of 

project beneficiaries. 

When Federal water resource developments were first 

authorized, the thrust of the programs was to provide for 

transportation and the settlement and economic development 

of the West. The conditions in the Nation were vastly 

different from those of the highly developed and affluent 

country we live in today. As a result of these programs, 

the general taxpayinq public who may not directly receive 

any of the benefits often pays all or most of the costs of 

federally subsidized water resources developments. Most 

past decisions on financing, cost sharing, and repayment 

policies were made given the circumstances of the 

time. However, circumstances and priorities have changed. 

New national concerns have surfaced, such as environmental protection and water conservation. Furthermore, 

there is increasing competition for the Nation's resources, the demands on them have become much greater, 

and the value placed on water resources has increased 

significantly. New policies may be needed to encourage 

better water resources management and provide a more 

equitable distribution of financial burdens. Increasing 

water shortages will create an insistent demand that the 

users of water and water-related services more fully 

pay for the benefits they receive. 

PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 

Policies for financing, cost sharing, and repayment 

are separate from, although closely related to, policies 

of economic evaluation (benefit/cost analysis). The 

question of whether a project is economically justified 

43 
and, therefore, should be developed is a separate issue 

from that of who should pay for the costs associated with 

project planning, construction, and operation and 

maintenance. However, the question of who pays for a 

project often determines the enthusiasm with which 

the project is supported and the prospects for its 

authorization. Many believe that the best test of the 

need for a project is the willingness of the direct 

beneficiaries to pay for it. 

The need for water policy reform has long been recognized, but numerous attempts by various groups, until 

recently, have met with little success. The National 

Water Commission in its June 3, 1973, report to the 

President and the Congress, was very concerned with cost 

sharing and financing of Federal water resource projects. 

The Commission made a number of recommendations calling 

for more State and local participation in project 

financing and recommended that identifiable beneficiaries 

pay more of the costs. In November 1975, the U.S. 

Water Resources Council studied this issue (as directed 

by section 80~ of the Water Resources Development Act 

of 1974) and reported its findings to the President. 

However, little action has been taken on the findings, 

conclusions, or recommendations contained in those 

reports. 

The President's recent water policy initiatives 

proposes legislative changes to improve financing and 

cost sharing for water projects. The proposals are designed 

to encourage more local initial commitment in financing 

water resource projects. In addition, the President 

proposed revising the methods for determining the repayment requirements from irrigation beneficiaries. 

Some observers believe that there is now an increasing 

recognition and willingness to place more emphasis on State 

and local sharing of initial project costs and on project 

beneficiaries to repay more costs of federally financed 

water resources projects. 

Federal financing, cost sharing, and repayment policies 

affect the "construction" agencies--Corps of Engineers, 

Bureau of Reclamation, Soil Conservation Service, and the 

Tennessee Valley Authosity--as well as the "grant" agencies-- 

such as HUD and EPA--which also help finance water projects. 

Altogether, there are about 25 Federal agencies which 

participate in project financing with about 185 different 

legal sources of authority governing the financing, cost 

sharing, and repayment arrangements. Following is a 

discussion of the problems and issues. 

44 
Should 

Among Federal Programs? 

A major issue deserving consideration is whether more 

consistent financing, cost sharing, and repayment requirements should be developed for agencies and programs which 

present alternative means for accomplishing similar purposes and objectives. The formulas and repayment terms 

presently used to determine the Federal/non-Federal 

participation differ among agencies and types of projects. 

Certain types of Federal programs are, therefore, 

more attractive than others to local interest groups. 

Cost sharing policies should provide incentives for 

Federal and non-Federal interests to negotiate projects that 

will be most desirable and cost effective from both the 

national and local viewpoints. This does not imply that 

there is a single method that will be suitable in all 

circumstances, but there seems to be a need to reform 

policies to provide such incentives. Present policies 

provide inconsistent incentives in several major respects, 

for example (1) alternative ways of achieving the same 

purpose, such as reservoirs, levees, or nonstructural 

measures for reducing flood damage, are often inconsistent 

in terms of financing and cost sharing procedures, (2) 

financing and cost sharing provisions differ among 

agencies, and (3) incentives are often inconsistent in 

terms of repayment provisions. 

Should Beneficiaries 

Pay More Project Costs? 

Another issue to be considered is whether identifiable 

beneficiaries should more fully pay for their share of the 

water resources programs from which they receive benefits. 

Repayment requirements for projects vary depending on 

(1) the allocation of construction costs to different 

purposes (for example, flood control, irrigation, and 

power) , (2) non-reimbursable features included in the project, and (3) repayment terms--interest rates, periods of 

repayment, and interest free years--which often vary among 

agencies and project purposes. 

Also, the Federal Government often subsidizes water 

resources projects in several different ways. Presently, 

it advances funds for the full cost of building a project 

and permits repayment of the reimbursable costs over a 

long period. In effect, these are loans to the non-Federal 

45 
entities and, depending upon the terms of repayment, provide 

various financial benefits to the project beneficiaries. 

Investments in water resources development projects usually 

are financed by U.S. Government borrowings. If reimbursement 

policy does not provide for repayment of the non-Federal 

cost share with interest comparable to the interest paid 

by the Federal Government on its borrowings, the interest 

foregone is an additional Federal subsidy. 

A very important issue is whether the conditions today 

justify the continuation of cost sharing policies which 

were established under very difficult conditions and for 

achieving certain national objectives. Those who support 

full repayment contend that private identifiable beneficiaries, as distinguished from the general public, should 

pay their full share of costs unless subsidies are 

justified to serve some compelling social, environmental, 

or national economic objectives. 

Would More Non-Federal Participation 

Eliminate Uneconomical or Potentially 

Harmful Projects? 

Another consideration is whether increased participation by non-Federal interests would help eliminate less costeffective projects which might not be supported if more 

non-Federal money were involved--thus relating support 

for a project to willingness to invest. It would be 

worthwhile to explore and identify ways that the Federal 

Government could encourage such investments and identify 

incentives which might be offered. 

Present policies can tempt potential water project 

beneficiaries to request projects that they would not be 

willing to finance if their own money were involved. Also, 

such policies often lead to types of developments; for 

example, flood control, drainage, and beach and shoreline 

protection projects which have encouraged more intensive 

development in the flood areas. Often, subsequent more 

intense floods or storms far exceed the projects' 

capability to protect life and property, and greater 

losses result from the development generated by the 

projects. Also, some projects provide windfall gains 

to a few beneficiaries as well as adversely impact on 

existing water and related land uses such as fish and 

wildlife habitat and recreation. 

Legislative and administrative constraints related 

to financing, cost sharing, and repayment provisions may 

discourage selection of the most economical or beneficial 

solution to water-related problems. Planning a Federal 

46 
or federally assisted water project, involving cost sharing 

sometimes leads to negotiations between the Federal and 

non-Federal interests over the kind of project and the mix 

of project services. A loss in net benefits may result if, 

because of cost sharing requirements, non-Federal interests 

negotiate for a project that does not provide optimum net 

benefits but one that is more desirable from the standpoint 

of required local cost sharing. 

Are Water Projects Being 

Effectively Managed? 

An important question is whether water resource 

projects are being managed in a way that will provide 

greater insurance of full repayment of reimbursable costs. 

Marketing practices at projects with vendible outputs 

as well as their day-to-day management should be examined 

to determine whether projects' operations help maintain 

the project beneficiaries capability to meet their 

financial obligations as well as provide sufficient 

funds to operate and maintain these projects and satisfy 

repayment obligations. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION 

The more important issues and concerns which should be 

addressed include: 

1. Should policies and requirements be changed so that 

they are more consistent among agencies and programs 

which present alternative means for accomplishing 

similar objectives and purposes? Should financing 

and cost sharing policies be designed to encourage 

the formulation of projects and programs which will 

provide optimum net benefits, considering national 

as well as local objectives and interests? 

2. Should identifiable beneficiaries be required to 

assume a larger share of the costs of the water 

provided by Federal water resources projects? 

Currently, the Nation's general taxpayers assume a 

large portion of the cost of such projects yet 

receive no direct benefits in return. On the other 

hand; flood control, irrigation, navigable waterway, 

and recreation users receive direct benefits from 

water resources development sometimes at no or 

little cost of providing the benefits. 

3. Would increased financial participation by nonFederal interests help eliminate less cost 

beneficial water resource projects? State and 

47 
4. 

5. 

6. 

local interests often provide little if any 

"front end" financing. 

Are the debt repayment provisions such as interest 

rates, and repayment schedules and procedures 

reasonable and consistent with legislative intent? 

In some cases, when debt repayment arrangements 

are made, specific repayment schedules of amounts 

and dates are not designated. In certain cases, 

there are long periods before any repayments are 

required even though the projects provide vendible 

products. 

Do Federal agencies manage and operate water 

resources projects to best ensure compliance with 

repayment requirements and in accordance with 

authorized purposes? If water resource projects 

are not managed efficiently and do not maximize the 

benefits (vendible projects) provided, the financial 

soundness of the projects may be adversely affected. 

Are alternative methods of establishing financing, 

cost sharing, and repayment requirements available, 

or should they be established, which could better 

promote water conservation and environmental 

protection? 

PAST AND CURRENT GAO EMPHASIS 

Over the past several years, GAO has not made reviews 

of the financing, cost sharing, and repayment policies 

for water resources programs and projects. Recently, GAO 

began an analysis of the issues involved if the water 

users who receive water from Federal irrigation projects 

were required to pay full costs. Also, GAO is reviewing, 

on a selected basis, the financing, cost sharing, and 

repayment policies and requirements for various Federal 

agencies, and programs for the primary purpose of 

identifying issues and problems for further GAO study. 

GAO Studies in Process 

Survey of the Development and Repayment 

of Municipal Water Supply and Recreation 

Agreements for Federal Water Resources 

Projects 

Analysis of Issues on Repayment of Full 

Costs of Federal Irrigation Water Supply 

48 
WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS IMPACTING ON THE TIMELY, 

EFFICIENT, AND ECONOMICAL CONSTRUCTION AND 

MAINTENANCE OF WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS? 

The fiscal year 1978 budget for construction and maintenance of Federal water resources projects totaled about 

$3.7 billion. These activities are primarily performed by 

the Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Soil 

Conservation Service, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. 

Rising construction costs, environmental concerns, lengthy 

construction periods, and the President's reevaluation of 

the desirability of constructing many water resources projects has focused increasing attention on project selection, 

authorization, and construction. 

There are about 1,900 Federal water projects in various 

stages of planning and construction, of which about 1,200 

projects are authorized for construction. Over 780 projects, 

at an estimated cost of about $20 billion, are under 

construction. In June 1978, President Carter asked the Congress to fund more than 3 dozen new projects which would cost 

the Federal Government $718 million to complete. This request was in addition to new project starts included in the 

Public Works Appropriation bill that would cost about 

$1.3 billion. 

The Federal Government has invested over $50 billion 

in water resources projects which includes the ownership 

of over 2,000 dams. In addition, it also regulates over 

1,600 non-Federal dams. The recent failures of the Bureau 

of Reclamation's Teton Dam in Idaho and non-Federal dams 

in Georgia and Pennsylvania have intensified interest in 

dam safety. 

THE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 

New Project Construction 

The programs of the Federal water construction agencies 

have been directed toward meeting the major water needs of 

the Nation. For example, the Bureau of Reclamation has been 

responsible for the reclamation of arid and semiarid lands 

in the 17 Western States. The Corps of Engineers, on the 

other hand, has provided flood control protection to communities and agriculture interests throughout the Nation for 

years by constructing dams, levees, and drainage projects. 

49 
In his "Water Policy Message" to the Congress, the 

President stated that the Policy is designed to 'I* * * permit 

necessary water projects which are cost effective, safe, and 

environmentally sound to move forward expeditiously." He 

concluded that "some water projects are unsafe or environmentally unwise and have caused losses of natural streams 

and rivers, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreational 

opportunities." The President recognized that nonstructural 

means and conservation practices by themselves will not 

meet the Nation's future water needs. Structural measures 

will be needed because: 

--The Western States will require increased water 

supplies for agricultural and municipal and industrial purposes. 

--The Eastern States are requesting Federal assistance 

to repair or replace their aging municipal water 

supply systems. 

--The energy crisis will focus increased attention on 

water needs for mineral extraction and production, 

coal slurry pipelines, and other energy development 

projects. 

--Hydropower can be increased by installing additional 

generating capabilities. 

--Flood damages can be reduced through the acquisition 

of flood-prone land and property. 

--The mitigation of fish and wildlife losses will 

require the construction of facilities and the 

acquisition of land. 

But, historically, it has taken a long time to construct water resources projects. For example, in many cases 

it takes about 15 to 26 years from project conception to the 

appropriation of construction funds. Actual construction, 

depending on the project type and size, often requires an 

additional 5 years beyond the 15 to 26-year period. 

Although construction does not take the major portion of the 

time, it represents the major portion of the cost in project 

development. Besides the design and construction of a project, the construction phase includes (1) site investigation 

work, (2) purchase of land, (3) relocation of housing, roads, 

and power transmission lines, (4) foundation preparation, 

and (5) purchase of equipment and supplies. 

50 
Project construction can be delayed for the obvious 

reasons beyond the agencies' control, such as bad weather 

and labor strikes. But some delays can be avoided or 

reduced with (1) better utilization of Government and 

contractor personnel, (2) improved inspection practices, 

(3) increased use of consultants during construction, and 

(4) improved practices for the purchase and design of 

equipment. In addition, some delays are caused by 

environmental and/or safety issues which are not known 

until construction is started or, in some cases, when 

the project is near completion. For example, project 

construction was stopped or delayed on the Tellico Dam 

in Tennessee, Blue Marsh Lake Dam in Pennsylvania, and 

the Auburn Dam in California because of consideration of 

an endangered species, historical preservation, and dam 

safety purposes, respectively. There are other dams in 

the same situation. 

In a report L/ issued in June 1977, GAO recommended 

that (1) the Bureau of Reclamation study some of its 

questionable dam design practices and (2) develop procedures 

to better ensure that design intent is achieved during 

construction. These recommendations were accepted by the 

Bureau and endorsed by an independent panel of dam experts 

as being applicable to all Federal agencies. The independent 

panel also recommended that the Federal agencies establish 

programs to better coordinate their use of the latest design 

techniques and construction practices. Also, a Federal 

interagency committee in November 1977 recommended that the 

Federal agencies improve their construction inspection and 

quality control procedures and practices. 

The purchase of land, rights-of-way, and the relocation 

of facilities involve considerable costs and is of great 

concern to the local citizenry. Also, as projects are modified or terminated, the Federal Government has found itself 

in a position of utilizing the land for purposes other than 

originally intended or disposing of it, such as that which 

occurred at the Garrison Diversion Unit and the Tacks Island 

Project. Therefore, the Federal agencies' policies, practices, and procedures for purchasing and disposing of land 

and rights-of-way, and relocating facilities is an important 

concern. 

i/"Actions Needed to Increase the Safety of Dams Built by 

the Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers" 

(CED-77-85, June 3, 1977). 

51 
Rehabilitation and Maintenance 

of Existing Projects 

Aging dams are becoming of increased concern which 

will intensify as the dams become older and need for the 

storage facilities increase. For example, about 12 percent 

or 250 Federal dams are more than 50 years old. It has 

been estimated that by the year 2000 over one-third of 

the dams then in existence will be at least 75 years old. 

The Corps and Bureau expect their operation and maintenance 

budget to increase over 300 percent in the next decade. 

The condition of older reservoir dams or other structures, such as navigation locks and dams, may require 

renovation or replacement of the facilities. Also, the 

potential exists for expanding or redirecting existing 

projects' benefits to meet new or changing water demands. 

In some cases, this will require the redesign and 

modification of projects. 

In order to implement an effective repair and 

rehabilitation program, the Federal agencies must 

establish a thorough inspection program. This inspection 

program should consider structural and material deterioration, impact of design problems, and other effects 

which can result from misuse, and poor operational practices 

and equipment. 

Federal Dam Safety Programs 

The dam failures of the past few years have brought 

dam safety issues to public attention. In June 1977, 

we issued two reports dealing with dam safety for both 

Federal and non-Federal dams, including emergency 

preparedness programs for Federal dams. In November 1977, 

the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering, 

and Technology issued proposed guidelines to improve 

Federal dam safety programs. An independent panel of nonGovernment experts is expected to issue a report on its 

review of these guidelines. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION 

Some of the more important matters related to construction and maintenance activities which should be addressed 

include: 

52 
Construction 

1. Do Federal real estate acquisition requirements 

(legal and administrative) hamper the timely, 

efficient, and economical construction of water 

resources projects? 

2. Is the construction process being efficiently 

managed and controlled? Does the Federal Government 

need to maintain better control over contractor work? 

How effective are the construction quality control 

programs of the contractor and the Federal agencies? 

3. Are construction practices appropriate? For example, 

are new and updated design techniques and practices 

being used? Do the Federal agencies coordinate and 

disseminate information about the most current 

construction practices? 

4. What are the pros and cons for having several 

Federal water construction agencies? Should their 

roles be better defined? 

Maintenance 

1. Are existing facilities being adequately inspected 

and maintained? Is there a Federal role for ensuring adequate inspection and maintenance programs for 

non-Federal water projects? 

2. What efforts are being made to rehabilitate existing 

facilities and equipment for (1) safety purposes 

and (2) the expansion and reallocation of project 

benefits? Is this work being performed to meet priority water needs, such as energy production and 

municipal and industrial water supply? 

3. How effective are Federal efforts in implementing a 

national dam safety program for both Federal and 

non-Federal dams? Have emergency preparedness plans 

been prepared for these dams? Does the Federal role 

in dam safety need to be better defined? 

PAST AND CURRENT GAO EMPHASIS 

GAO has not issued any reports, within the last 3 years, 

which specifically address construction and maintenance 

activities of the Federal water construction agencies. In 

the past few years, we have concentrated our efforts on dam 

safety. Also, at the request of a congressional committee 

53 
we have reviewed matters relating to congressional control 

over the development and funding of water resources projects, and the reasons for and potential solutions, for the 

long time frames for completing flood control projects. 

Currently, GAO is reviewing the Federal efforts to improve 

the safety of dams and beginning its analysis of construction and maintenance activities at Federal water resources 

projects. 

GAO Reports Report No. and Date 

Actions Needed to Increase the CED-77-85 

Safety of Dams Built by the 6/3/77 

Bureau of Reclamation and Corps 

of Engineers 

Slow Progress in Developing and 

Implementing a National Dam Safety 

Program 

CED-77-94 

6/29/77 

Improved Project Authorizations and 

Agency Practices Can Increase 

Congressional Control of Water 

Resources Projects 

CED-78-123 

7/H/78 

Corps of Engineers Flood Control 

Projects Could Be Completed Faster 

Through Legislative and Managerial 

Changes 

CED-78-179 

g/22/78 

GAO Studies in Process 

Review of Federal Efforts to 

Improve the Safety of Federal 

and Non-Federal Dams 

Survey of Maintenance Activities 

on Federal Water Resources Projects 

Survey of Construction Activities 

on Federal Water Resources Projects 

I 

54 
GROUND WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AND 

CONSERVATION--WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS 

AND HOW CAN THEY BE RESOLVED? 

In a GAO report entitled "Ground Water: An Overview" 

(CED-77-69, 6-21-77), we discuss the importance of ground 

water, identify problems in managing the resources, and pose 

a number of questions on its management, conservation, and 

use which warrant attention by the Congress and Federal and 

State agencies responsible for planning and administering 

water resources development. 

Since the GAO report was issued, many of the problems 

have become more serious because much greater reliance was 

placed on use of ground water supplies during the 1976-77 

drought in many parts of the country. Currently, imbalances in water supply and demand cover considerable portions of our Nation, and many of the areas are drawing on 

a diminishing ground water supply to meet water demands. 

The President's recent water policy message reemphasizes 

the concern that ground water supply problems are emerging 

as one of the major water resources issues facing our 

Nation. 

THE PROBLEMS AND ISSUES 

Presently, ground water supplies about 20 percent of 

all fresh water used in the United States. The estimated 

storage capacity of aquifers (underground reservoirs) is 

nearly 20 times the combined volume of all the Nation's 

rivers, ponds, and other surface waters. Although the 

ground water supply in the 48 contiguous States is plentiful, little more than one-quarter of it--equivalent to 

about 10 years annual precipitation--is available for use 

because it cannot be economically extracted using present 

techniques. 

The dependence on ground water varies from locality 

to locality. Only 2 percent of the water Montana uses comes 

from ground water, while 62 percent in Arizona comes from 

ground water. About 80 percent of municipal water systems 

are supplied by wells which serve about 30 percent of the 

Nation's population. Irrigation accounts for over half of 

ground water use. 

The Nation's ground water supply is suffering from 

serious problems. Many places across the Nation are withdrawing the ground water faster than the water in the 

aquifer is replenished. Diminishing artesian pressure, 

55 
declining spring and streamflow, land subsidence, and saltwater intrusion problems are strong evidence of excessive 

use of ground water. The use of ground water at rates 

exceeding natural recharge defers the inevitable day when 

(1) alternative sources must be found or (2) serious 

decisions must be made concerning the continued existence 

of water dependent industries, irrigation developments, and 

proposed community expansions. In some areas, declining 

water tables will cause abandonment of activities before 

the water is totally consumed because of the increasing 

energy cost to bring it to the surface. Also, overpumping 

of ground water has environmental consequences. Base flows 

in streams are reduced or eliminated, resulting in increased 

harm during critical low-flow periods to aquatic and wildlife habitats in streams, wetlands, coastal marshes, and 

estuaries. 

In the High Plains region of western Texas-eastern 

New Mexico, the ground water problem is particularly acute. 

The fast-dwindling and increasingly expensive supply of 

ground water, with no other water sources identified, may 

soon lead to serious economic and social consequences. 

Similar problems are developing in the ground water aquifer 

which extends from Texas to as far north as the Platte 

River in Nebraska. 

Less dramatic, but prevalent throughout the Nation, are 

problems facing municipalities that draw water from aquifers. 

Because ground waters have traditionally been assumed to be 

relatively inexpensive sources of unpolluted water of generally uniform temperature, cities, given an option, have 

chosen those waters rather than surface supplies. As the 

population has increased so has the amount of pumping and 

and the number of wells. Some cites have found themselves 

forced to go deeper in aquifers of diminishing volume. As 

a consequence, forecasts indicate that many areas will face 

serious water supply problems by the turn of the century. 

If present use patterns continue, alternative water supplies 

will be required, probably at a much higher cost. 

Although ground water depletion may have divergent 

causes and have a variety of adverse effects, the demand for 

ground water and the diminishing supply seem certain to continue under current projections. While ground water may, in 

many areas, continue to meet much of the increasing need in 

the short term, State governments, perhaps with the assistance of the Federal Government, will inevitably be forced to 

bring rates of withdrawal into balance with rates of recharge 

to ensure the availability and fullest use of fresh ground 

water supplies. 

56 
Ground water contamination is recognized increasingly 

as a serious problem. Ground water recovery from contamination and pollution is typically slow. Thus, ground water 

degradation may be considered a semipermanent condition 

once it has occurred. Waste from animal feedlots, community landfills, toxic and hazardous materials, septic 

tanks and cesspools, and municipal and industrial discharges 

are proving to be major sources of contaminants of ground 

water in many locations across the country. Because a considerable percentage of the population derives drinking 

water from ground water sources, contamination, whether 

real or potential, poses a health threat. 

In areas dependent upon ground water for municipal, 

industrial or agricultural uses, continued degradation of 

ground water guality will have significant implications in 

the economies of the affected communities. One effect will 

be to raise the cost of treating water to achieve a suitable 

quality. 

Surface and ground water are often interrelated, and 

actions on one can affect the other. For example, the 

excessive use of ground water in one area may result in 

surface water depletions in another; the benefit ‘in&one 

area may be a cost to another. 

As with surface water systems, ground water aquifers 

are no respecters of political boundaries. Although water 

rights legislation in most areas covers ground water, the 

same institutional problems of managing surface waters that 

cross State boundaries exist for ground water management. 

Another serious problem of ground water management is 

lack of information regarding the extent, volume, recharge 

rate, and effect of pumping. Too often wells are dug, pumping begun, and problems of ground water depletion realized 

only when ground water levels begin to fall. Without better 

capability to predict the consequences of ground water pumping programs, the beneficial value of the conjunctive use 

of surface and ground waters cannot be planned effectively. 

Management of ground water resources has been primarily 

a local and State responsibility with assistance from the 

Federal Government. Major Federal ground water activities 

have been data gathering, research, technical assistance, 

and water resources development. The problems associated 

with managing aguifers, where the Federal Government is the 

owner or trustee for a portion of the overlying land, gives 

the Federal agencies a direct interest in ground water 

57 
management. Considering the extensive Federal landholdings, 

especially in the water-short Western States, the interest 

is very substantial. 

Ground water management in the Western States has 

basically involved a degree of regulation of ground water 

withdrawals and use under the State water rights systems. 

More intensive regulation has taken place in some areas 

of severe ground water problems. However, substantial 

damage had already occurred in some of these areas and 

other problem areas have not received needed attention. 

Federal and State agencies recognize the need for 

improved ground water management, and point out that ground 

water management must improve to provide orderly development, proper use, and conservation of the resource. Also, 

effective planning and management of ground water supplies 

should include research programs for developing better 

techniques for (1) obtaining geological and hydrological 

data, including pollution sources, (2) monitoring ground 

water supply and quality, (3) protecting and conserving the 

resource, (4) recharging aquifers to compensate for excessive use, and (5) utilizing underground aquifers as 

storage reservoirs. 

In our June 1977 report, we raised the following questions about ground water management, conservation, and use: 

--Should the Government take a more active role in 

ground water management? If so, what should its 

role be and what agency or agencies should be 

responsible? 

--Should future construction of Federal water resource 

projects depend on whether the States show that their 

laws provide for integrating surface and ground water 

rights? 

--How crucial is an inventory of water rights to proper 

management of ground water? Should the Government be 

responsible for inventorying these rights? 

--Should the Government systematically identify areas 

with ground water problems to assign priorities for 

Federal assistance in obtaining ground water data? 

--Should there be a national water policy requiring all 

Federal agencies involved in water planning or 

construction activities to require use and management 

58 
of surface and ground waters as a unit? If so, how 

should such a policy be implemented? 

--Should water be transferred from one river basin to 

another to reduce ground water pumping or to recharge 

aquifers? 

--Is enough being done to identify and prevent the 

intrusion of saltwater into ground water? 

--Should Federal programs be devised which provide 

incentives to decrease dependency on ground water 

for irrigation in water-short areas? Is it feasible 

to compensate for decreased farm production in such 

areas by increased farm production in areas not 

requiring irrigation? 

These questions, involving basic policy, warrant consideration by the Congress. Some should be studied by the Federal 

and State agencies responsible for the planning and administration of water programs; others may be more suitable for 

private research associations or academic institutions. 

ISSUES AND CONCERNS FOR CONSIDERATION 

The more important ground water issues and concerns 

which should be addressed include: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Is the informational base on the quantity and 

characteristics of ground water aquifers adequate 

to provide for effective planning and management 

of ground water resources? 

What efforts are being made, or what are the constraints, to controlling excessive depletion of 

ground water supplies and establishing programs 

for recharging the aquifers? 

Do administering organizations' laws, regulations, 

and policies adequately recognize the interrelationship of surface and ground water and require 

and promote their conjunctive management and use? 

Are there effective mechanisms and implementing 

efforts to protect ground water resources from 

pollution? 

What is the nature and extent of research and 

development efforts to find better ways to protect, 

recharge, and manage ground water resources? 

59 
6. In planning for and managing of Federal water 

resources projects and programs, do Federal 

agencies consider ground water problems and 

seek to provide for effective conjunctive use 

of ground and surface waters? 

PAST AND CURRENT EMPHASIS 

Until recently, GAO had not made reviews of ground 

water resources because Federal programs and projects 

essentially covered surface waters and ground water 

problems were not considered significant issues. 

Currently, we are reviewing the Federal efforts to promote 

more effective ground water management and conjunctive use 

of surface and ground water as well as efforts to control 

depletion and contamination of ground water. 

GAO Reports Report No. and Date 

Ground Water: An Overview CED-77-69 

6/21,'77 

Waste Disposal Practices - 

A Threat to Health and the 

Nation's Water Supply 

CED-78-120 

6/16/78 

GAO Studies in Process 

Survey of Federal Efforts to 

Promote More Effective Ground 

Water Management and Conjunctive 

Use of Surface and Ground Water 

Survey of Efforts to Control 

Depletion and Contamination of 

Ground Water 

60 
CHAPTER 4 

OTHER WATER RESOURCES ISSUES AND CONCERNS 

HOW CAN WATER QUALITY AND WATER SUPPLY 

PROGRAMS BE EFFECTIVELY INTEGRATED? 

From early times, our country encouraged urban, 

economic, and industrial growth through unlimited use 

of our water resources. As time progressed, rapid 

growth occurred and along with it came water supply and 

quality problems and changing priorities. While 

cumulative water use patterns grew, other matters, such 

as health and environmental factors, became prominent: 

subsequently, our Nation's water resources planning and 

management broadened into two distinct categories: 

water supply and water quality. 

Although the Congress enacted major water supply 

and quality legislation, it did not formally link either 

the areas themselves or the respective legislative acts. 

Since its inception in 1965, the Water Resources Council 

has given little attention to water quality planning and 

management. It was not until 1977 that the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) was made a full statutory member of 

the Council. EPA, conversely, had conducted water quality 

planning outside the Council's programs for comprehensive 

water resources planning. Consequently, the water supply 

and quality areas have not been effectively merged. 

The matters for concern include Federal agencies' 

policies, procedures, and practices for determining 

whether environmental matters are adequately considered 

during water project and program planning and development 

and whether projects and programs comply with requirements. 

Also, what are the problems and constraints to effective 

implementation of the requirements from both a programmatic 

and legislative standpoint? Another important area warranting attention is whether Federal agencies are conducting 

research into the environmental impacts so as to improve 

the prediction of ecological effects and to develop alternatives or modifications as well as ways to mitigate the 

expected environmental damage. 

Issues which should be explored under this topic include 

(1) assessing the respective roles of Federal water pollution 

control and water supply planning and development agencies, 

particularly as they comprise interrelated elements of a comprehensive, total water management scheme, (2) exploring 

Federal assistance and/or incentive programs for promoting 

integrated water quality and quantity programs at the State 

61 
and local level, and (3) analyzing legal, technical, monetary, 

and/or other constraints or obstacles impeding or adversely 

affecting water quantity and quality management integration 

at the Federal, State, and local levels. 

DO FEDERAL AGENCIES ADEQUATELY CONSIDER 

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS IN WATER RESOURCES 

MANAGEMENT AND PROJECT FORMULATION? 

In the past, water resources projects were constructed 

and water-related activities were undertaken with little 

regard for adverse environmental effects. As a result, 

our natural environment has suffered substantial damage. 

Natural stream channels have been altered or reloca$ed; 

feeding and spawning areas and estuary habitats have been 

severely damaged; and wetlands and grasslands have been 

destroyed. Rivers, streams, lakes, and oceans have been 

heavily damaged by uncontrolled waste discharges. 

To protect the environment and to ensure that 

environmental values are carefully considered along with 

other project purposes, the Congress enacted, for example, 

the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 and the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Other legislation, as well as the principles and standards for planning 

and formulating water and related land resources developments, require consideration of environmental and social 

values. 

Although water projects may provide economic and 

social benefits, the public interest may best be served 

when the environmental costs of development are kept 

within acceptable limits and a balance is struck between 

environmental and developmental values. The challenge 

is to foresee the environmental and social consequences 

of proposed water uses and projects: to evaluate alternative ways to accomplish the project purposes, considering 

the economic benefits and costs as well as the environmental effects; and develop projects which provide net 

optimum benefits, including the recognition that some 

environmental change is inevitable. 

ARE WATER INFORMATION COLLECTION 

AND EVALUATION EFFORTS PROMOTING 

OPTIMAL WATER RESOURCES PROGRAMS? 

To effectively plan, manage, and develop water 

resources, managers must have complete and reliable information on such matters as the weather, water supply, and 

demand. Data collection and evaluation is vital for 

planning and assessing alternative actions and making 

62 
decisions: a deficient information inflow can adversely 

affect decisionmaking and, hence, ultimate program 

results. 

Also, environmental and socio-economic data was not 

extensively developed in the pre-1970 years; with 

the advent of the National Environmental Policy Act, 

however, the need for such data increased tremendously. 

While progress has been made, gaps in existing data 

and probable future needs still chronically plague 

water resource planners. For example , ground water 

is an important, emerging water resource concern. 

Relatively little is known about the extent and quality 

of ground water resources, the movement of underground 

aquifers, aquifer boundaries, and ground water and 

surface water interrelationships. 

As the water resources decisionmaking framework 

changes, basic data requirements also change: the problem 

is ensuring that the right kind of data will be available 

when needed, and that potential users know that it exists 

and have access to it. Therefore, there must be adequate 

research efforts to develop techniques and data collection 

systems. Without a complete information base, water 

resource planners and managers are seriously hampered in 

seeking to optimize the use of our Nation's water resources. 

Issues and concerns which should be examined in this 

area include (1) assessing the adequacy of existing data 

collection and use, (2) determining whether standards or 

procedures exist, need to be or can be developed, for consistently obtaining and analyzing data, and (3) analyzing 

the Federal Government's role in hydrologic data collection 

and evaluation. 

995025 . 63 
Single copies of GAO reports are available 

free of charge. Requests (except by Members 

of Congress) for additional quantities should 

be accompanied by payment of $1.00 per 

copy. 

Requests for single copies (without charge) 

should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

Distribution Section, Room 1518 

441 G Street, NW. 

Washington, DC 20548 

Requests for multiple copies should be sent 

with checks or money orders to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

Distribution Section 

P.O. Box 1020 

Washington, DC 20013 

Checks or money orders should be made 

payable to the U.S. General Accounting Office. NOTE: Stamps or Superintendent of 

Documents coupons will not be accepted. 

PLEASE DO NOT SEND CASH 

To expedite filling your order, use the report number and date in the lower right 

corner of the front cover. 

GAO reports are now available on microfiche. If such copies will meet your needs, 

be sure to specify that you want microfiche 

copies. 
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER 

UNITEDSTATES 

GENERALACCOUNTINGOFFICE 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20548 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE US&S300 

POSTAGE AND PEES PAlD I*\ 

U. S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OPFKE - 

US MAIL 

I 

THIRD CLASS