Authority for Interagency Coordination
*Many federal agencies have responsibilities coneited with,
orbearing upon river-basin development.". And we have ob-
served the growing acceptance of the need for comprehensive
These agencies include:
DEiPATMENT f0 AGiCULtTULE
Agricultural Research Adminis-
Bureau of Agricultural Economics
Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils,
and Agricultural Engineering
Farm Credit Administration
Farmers Home Administration
Production and Marketing Admin-
Rural Electrification Administra-
Soil Conservation Service
DEPARTMENT OF THE ABMY
Corps of Engineers
DEPAarMEr o0r COMMERCE
Bureau of the Census
Bureau of Foreign and Domestic
Bureau of Public Roads
Civil Aeronautics -Administration
Coast and Geodetic Survey
Inland Waterways Corpokation
DEPAwBTMrA or THE INTERIOR
Bonneville Power Administration"
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Bureau of Land Management
Bureau of Mines
Bureau of Reclamation
Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Southeastern Power Administra-
Southwestern Power Administra-
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
DErATaxaNT or TWa TBAiAsur
AToxMo Esso~ CoxmmssIox
ConuoaO or EcoNOMCo ADVrExs
F~DRALX Pownu COMMISSION
FDEB.wA SECTrmuT AGENCT
Public Health Service
HoUING AND HOME FINANqc AGNaNO
Community Facilities Service
INT4sNATIONAL BOUNDArY AND
WATER CkOMISSION, UNrfnED
STATES AND MEXICO
INTWATIONAL, JOINT CoxIMIUSIo
INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION
NATIONAL FomST RBESEvATIxo Cox-
:NATIONAL. SECOBTrr RESOURCES
REOONSTRUOTtO FINANCE COwOBA-
SEounsTB s AND ExCHANGE CoxMsa-
TENNESSEE VALLEY AuTTHOIrT
planning and development to obtain optimum beneficial uses
of river systems and their watersheds. But there has yet
evolved no all-pervading statutory mandate assuring the
requisite coordination of the many federal activities concerned.
Nevertheless, many steps in this direction have been taken.
For example, some of the more recent enactments require coor-
dinating ;action. among agencies for specific purposes." In
addition to certain statutory requirements, however, a number
of administrative steps have been taken to facilitate coordina-
tion among and within agencies, as we shall now see.
FEDERAL INTER-AGENdY Rtv BASIN COMMITTEE.-TO pro-
vide for consultation in the preparation of river-basin surveys,
an interagency agreement was concluded in 1939 by the De-
partments of Agriculture, the Army, and the Interior, and
concurred in by the National Resources Planning Board."1
Upon the Board's dissolution in 1943, these Departments to-
gether with the Federal Power Commission entered into a
similar agreement establishing the Federal Inter-Agency River
lSee, for example.
Act of August 20, 1937, 2, 50 Stat. 731, 732, as amended, 16 U. S. C. 882a,
requiring the Bonneville Power Administrator to act in consultation with an
advisory board composed of representatives of the Secretaries of Agricul-
ture, the Army, the Interior, and of the Federal Power, Commission.
Act of March 29, 1944, 4, 58 Stat. 132, 188, 16 U. S. C. 583c, authorizing
agreements between the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior relating
to sustained-yield forest management.
Act of December 22, 1944, 1 1, 58 Stat. 887, in specified circumstances,
requiring cooperative action by the Secretaries of the Army and the Interior
with affected states and with each other in connection with contemplated,
navigation, flood-control, and: irrigation improvements. i
Act of August 14, 1946, 2, 60 Stat. 1080, 16 U. 8. C. 662, in specified cir-
cumstances, requiring consultation by federal and nonfederal agencies with
the Fish and Wildlife Service and state agencies concerned, for the purpose
of preventing loss of and damage to wildlife resources.
Act of June 30, 1948, 2 (a),62 Stat. 1155, 33 U. S. C. 466a (a) (Supp. III),
directing the Surgeon General to prepare pollution-control programs in
cooperation with other agencies.
Act of May 17, 1950, S 205, 64 Stat. 163, -, directing the Army Engineers
to coordinate survey of Arkansas-White and Red River Basins with certain
SSIumxAnY BaroarB oN FsoaA. INTEa-AGLNCY RIVEB BASIN COMM'ITEE
AND ITS SUBCOxMMrITF E, p.1 (December 81, 1949 Revision).
Basin Committee (FIARBC).19 The Department of Com-
merce became a party to the agreement in 1946, and the Fed-
eral Security Agency in 1950.1" The purpose of this agreement
was to permit these agencies "to cooperate more completely in
the preparation of reports on multiple-purpose projects and to
correlate the results to the greatest practicable extent." 0
A large share of the work of FIARBC is discharged through
subcommittees and regional committees.21
Although FIARBC has provided an opportunity for inter-
agency discussions, its ability to achieve coordination between
agency programs is limited in several ways. The Committee
is without statutory standing and has no budget."02 The au-
thority, powers, and financial discretion of the constituent agen-
cies remain with these agencies to be exercised individually by
them.203 As a result, FIARBC's decisions are advisory only
and their implementation depends entirely upon the voluntary
cooperation and individual consent of its member agencies.
Furthermore, an agency's ability to cooperate in effectuating a
Committee decision with which it agrees may be limited by
the statutory provisions relating to that agency's power and
SId. pp. 28-24. For dissolution of the NRPB, see Act of June 26, 1948,
101, 57 Stat. 19, 170.
"'Id. p. 25 (Commerce); Minutes, FIARBC, July 27, 1950, p. 5 and Ex-
hibits A, B, and C (PSA).
Id. p. 23.
m Id. pp. 4, 5. Four major technical subcommittees are now active: Bene-
fits and Costs, Hydrology, Sedimentation, and Energy-Conservation Proce-
dures. Regional committees have been established for the Missouri Basin,
Columbia Basin, Pacific Southwest, and Southwest. Ibid. and Minutes,
FIARBC, June 12, 1950, Exhibit A.
"Id. p. 2.
Id. pp. 2-3. These limiting factors undoubtedly are reflected in
FIARBC's unsuccessful efforts to reconcile the California Central Valley
reports of the Army Engineers and of the Bureau of Reclamation. A sub-
committee appointed to deal with the problem made a point-by-point analy-
sis of the major differences, but did not resolve them. Id. pp. 19-20. In
analyzing its own accomplishments, FIARBO said merely that "the report
of this subcommittee has been extensively used by the two agencies pri-
marily concerned, both in resolving their differences as set forth in the re-
port, and in preparing their final reports." I4. p. 20. For one evaluation
of FIARBC and its effectiveness, see BREonr OF THE COMMISSION ON OBRANI-
Despite these limitations, FIARBC has achieved some posi-
tive results, such as the work of its technical subcommittees.0
REORGANIZATION AcT.-Not to be overlooked are the broad
possibilities of coordination for comprehensive development
afforded by the Reorganization Act of 1949.20" It provides
means by which agencies and functions may be consolidated
"according to major purposes." 207 The Act also permits the
transfer or other disposition of the records, property, personnel,
and unexpended funds affected by any reorganization. 8 But
such funds may be used only for the purpose for which they
were originally made available.20'
There is some question, however, as to the extent to which
the administrative provisions relating to a particular function
would be affected by a reorganization plan consolidating in
any single agency the exercise of similar functions previously
exercised by more than one agency. For the Act declares that
"any statute enacted in respect of or by any
agency affected by a reorganization *
NATION OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT, App. L, pp. 25-26
(January 1949). See also infra, pp. 456-460.
"See, e. g., the studies, reports, and conferences sponsored by the sub--
Committees on Hydrology and Sedimentation, and another subcommittee's
1949 revision of the Federal Power Commission's GrLssARY OF IMPORTANT
POWEB AND RATE TERMS ABBREVIATIONS, AND UNrTS OF MEASUREMENT. See
SUMu=AB RaBror, pp. 8-14, 17-18.
Act of June 20, 1949, 63 Stat. 203, 5 U. S. C. 133z et seq. (Supp. III).
"2(a)(4), 63 Stat. 203, 5 U. S. C. 133z(a)(4) (Supp. III). With
specified qualifications, the Act enables accomplishment of: "(1) the trans-
fer of the whole or any part of any agency, or of the whole or any part of
the functions thereof, to the jurisdiction and control of any other agency;
or (2) the abolition of all or any part of the functions of any agency; or
(3) the consolidation or coordination of the whole or any part of any
agency, or of the whole or any part of the functions thereof, with
the whole or any part of any other agency or the functions thereof; or
(4) the consolidation or coordination of any part of any agency or the
functions thereof with any other part of the same agency or the functions
thereof; or (5) the authorization of any officer to delegate any of his func-
tions; or (6) the abolition of the whole or any part of any agency which
agency or part does not have, or upon the taking effect of the reorganization
plan will not have any functions." 3, 63 Stat. 203, 5 U. S. C. 133z-1 (Supp.
4,63 Stat. 204,5 U. S. C. 133z-2 (Supp. III).
shall, except to the extent rescinded, modified, superseded, or
made inapplicable by or under authority of law *
have the same effect as if such reorganization had not been
FISCAL COORDINATION.-In connection with the foregoing
reorganization possibilities, the Budgeting and Accounting
Procedures Act of 1950 provides added authority for certain
transfers of appropriations, whenever under authority of law
a function of an agency is transferred or assigned from one
agency to another.2. Use of the funds is limited, however,
to the purpose for which they were originally available."
The 1932 Economy Act also permits certain transfers of
funds between federal agencies as payment for work done or
materials furnished by one agency for another.'
Also, by the Budgeting and Accounting Procedures Act of
1950, Congress sanctioned the use of a performance budget.21
Such a budget should facilitate coordination among agencies
in carrying out the separate parts of an integrated program.
DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION OF ACTION OF SUBORDINATE
AGENCIES.-As we have noted, many executive departments
'and agencies are participating in river-basin development.
Some of these departments have more than one subordinate
operating agency involved in such development. Conse-
quently, each of such departments has a special responsibility
. for coordination.
There are certain limits upon the authority of department
heads to transfer responsibilities or enforce coordination among
subordinate agencies,. The basic authority under which they
may delegate or reassign responsibilities reads: 2
9(a) (1), 63 Stat. 206, 5 U. S. C. 13-7T(a) (1) (Supp. III).
m Act of September 12, 1950, 202, 64 Stat. 882, -.
m" 202(b), 64 Stat. -.
"Act of June 80, 1982, 601,47 Stat. 382, 417, as amended, see 31 U. S. C.
Act of September 12,1950, 102(a), 64 Stat. 832,-.
For a further discussion of this question, see REPORT OF THE COMMISSION
oN OBaANIZATIO OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT, App. B,
p. 27 (January 1949).
."R. S. 161, from Act of July 27, 1789, 1 Stat. 28, as amended, 5
U. S. 0. 22.
The head of each department is authorized to prescribe
regulations, not.inconsistent with: law, for the gov-
ernment of his Department, the conduct of its officers
and clerks, for distribution and performance of its busi-
ness, and the custody, use,: and preservation of the rec-
ords, papers and property appertaining to it.
The key words are "not inconsistent with law." Opiniis of
the Attorney General indicate that, where a statute relating
to: the powers of an; agency within an executive department
grants authority directly to such agency, any order transfer-
ring such authority would be "inconsistent with law."" Until
recently, authority was frequently conferred directly upon sub-
ordinate agencies or bureaus.n8 In such cases, the authority of
the department head was usually "supervisory" in character.,
The tendency in recent legislation and reorganization plans,
however, is to transfer functions and authority from the sub-
ordinate agencies and officials to the department head and to
lermit reassignment within his department.2' Such plans
1 27 OPa. ATr'Y Go 542; 29 Ore. ATr'Y Ga. 247; 30 OPs. ATrTY GN. 119;
36 Ors. Atr'Y GEN. 75; 37 Ors. ATT'Y GBN. 864.
"See, e. g.: Bureau of indian Afairs (k S. 43, from Act of July 9,
m*B 51, 4 4fiat 64,; as amended, 25 U. 0. 2; and Act of August S, 1946,
60 Stat. 19, 25 U. S. C. la) ; Bureau of Land Management (1946 Reorganiza-
tIon Plan t. 3,f 408(a), 60 Stat. 1097, 1100,43 U. S. 1 note following);
Bureau of Mines (Act bO May 16, 1910, 5 2, 36 Stat. 869, 370, as amended,
80 U. S. C. 8); Bureau of Reclamation (Act of May 26, 1928, 44 Stat. 651,
see 4U S C. 873a); Coast and Geodetic Survey (Act of AuguSt 1947,
f 1, 61 Stat 787, 33 U. 883a (Supp. III)); Geological Survey (Act
of March 3,1879, S 1,20 Stat. 377, 394, 4 U. C. 31) ; National Park Service
(Act of August 25, 1916, 1, 39 Stat. 538, as amended, 16 U. S. C. 1);
Rural Electrifcation Administration (Act of May 20, 1986, $ 1, 49 Stat.
1863, as amended, 7 U. S. C. 901); Soil Conservation Service (Act of April
27, 195, 5 5, 49 Stat 163, 164, 16 U. S. 0. 590e); Weather Bureau (Act of
October 1, 1890, S 3, 26 Stat. 658, as amended, 15 U. S. 0. 818).
SSee, e. g., R.. S. 441, from Act of March 3, 1849, 9 Stat. 395, as
amended. See 5 U. S. C. 485 (Interior); Act of February 14, 1908. $ 8,10,
32 Stat. 825, 82, 829, 5 U.. 596, 599 (Commerce).
See, e. g., these Reorganization Plans set out following 5 U. .. 1. 83-15
(Supp. III): No. 2, 1949, i) 1, 2, 14 F. R. 5225, 63 Stat. 1065; No. 3, 1949,
S 1, 14 F. R. 5225, 68 Stat. 1066; No. 5, 1949, 1 2, 14 F. B. 5227, 3 Stat.
1067; No. 6, 1949, 1 2, 14 F. R. 5228, 63 Stat. 1069; No. 7, 1949, 2, 14 F. R.
5228, 63 Stat. 1070; No. 3, 1950, if 1, 2, 15 F. R. 3174, 64 Stat. -. But
see 5 1 of Reorganization Plan No. 7, 1949, supra. See also Act of August
10,1949, 1 5,68 Stat. 578,-.
were effectuated in 1950 for the Departments of Commerce
and the Interior, among others, but not for the Department
of Agriculture.' Apart from the mere fact of transfer of the
functions, these plans leave unaffected the statutory provisions
governing the manner in which the functions must be admin-
istered.22 To that extent, therefore, administrative coordina-
tion of developmental operations is unaided by the reorganiza-
Some administrative coordination of river-basin activities
has nevertheless been achieved within these limitations. We
shall confine our discussion here to the Departments of Agri-
culture and the Interigr since each is responsible for a variety
of river-basin operations performed by separate subordinate
Department of Agriculture.-Responsibility for the coor-
dination and supervision of the Department's activities "relat-
ing to land and water resources" rest$ with the Assistant Sec-
retary.22 In addition, Departmental Field Representatives
m Interior, see Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1950,. 1, 2, 15 F. ,. 3174,
64 Stat. -; Commerce, Inland Waterways Corporation.excepted, see Be-
organization Plan No. 5 of 1950, 1, 2, 15 FX. 3174, 64 Stat. Foe
defeat of the plan for the Department of Agriculture, Reorganization Plan
No. 4 of 1950, see 96 CoNG. REO. 7319-7327, unbound ed., May 18, 1950.
See supra, pp. 433-44. For discussion of conflicts in such statutes, see
infra, chapter 10, pp. 493-643.
S"Coordination among .separate part, of a program for a particular
basin is not to be confused with the separate problem of adoption of uniform
standards for projects. For example?, this latter problem is one dealt with
by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors. See supra, pp. 99-100.
Moreover, it should be noted that the Department of the Army is largely
free from the problem of intradepartmental coordination so far as water-
resource functions are concerned. For among its subordinate agencies, the
Corps of Engineers alone has relevant duties.
The Department of Commerce has several bureaus concerned with basin
development. However, their activities primarily concern data collection
and analysis. Thus, the problem of coordination is not acute and con-
sists principally of assignment of jurisdiction rather than continuous co-
ordination of operations. Nevertheless, it has created an intradepartmental
Field Committee for the Arkansas-White and Red River Basins. Unpub-
lished letter from Secretary of Commerce to Gustav E. Larson designating
Iim Chairman, June 30, 1950. The Department also has in the Office of
Ihe Secretary a program group on area development.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS, 1 A. B. 19.
have been appointed for the Pacific Northwest, Missouri River
Bani: Pacific Southwest, and Arkansas-White and Red River
Basins.I5 Integrated agricultural plans are being prepared for
the Pacific Northwest and the Arkansas-White-Red Regions,
and such a plan has already been completed for the Missouri
The scope and objectives of these regional programs are
illustrated by the following excerpt from the departmental
directive under which the Missouri Basin plan was prepared: 22
This program will be designed to: Conserve and im-
prove the lands of the Basin; build up and protect the
forest resource; protect, enhance and develop the water
resource; enlarge and improve the farm plant by irri-
gation and drainage; reduce flood and sediment dam-
Sages; enhance recreation and wildlife; and otherwise
support, complement and balance the programs of other
agencies-particularly the engineering activities being
carried out under the "Pick-Sloan" plan.
Field Committees are established in regions in which the
Department undertakes ite preparation and installation of an
integrated agricultural program. The agencies of the Depart-
ment previously listed are represented on these committees.m
The Scretary's fieldrrepresentative functions As chairman.
These committees are devices for coordination of the planning
and execution of the regional programs by joint preparation of
Secretary of Agriculture Memorandum No. 1170, August 1, 1946; Secre-
tary of Agriculture Memorandum No. 1176, October 17, 1946; Secretary of
Agriculture Memorandum No. 1250, February 3, 1950; Secretary of Agricul-
ture Memorandum No. 121, July 17, 1950. Each serves on the Basin Inter-
agency Committee, and also serves in the field as liaison and coordinatiig
officer for the Department, with its own agencies in the region, with state
and 6loal'public agencies, and with other organizations and groups inter-
ested in resources development. The agencies of the Department are asked
to extend to them "full cooperation and assistance." Id.
'Secretary of Agriculture Memorandum No. 1220, July 9, 1948, and H.
Doc. No. 373, 81st Coni, 1st ses., 1949 (Misiour) ; Sectetary of Agricul-
ture Memorandum No. 1256, May 9, 1950 (Columbia); Secretary of Agricul-
ture Memorandum No. 1261, July 17, 1950 (Arkansas-White-Red).
2 Secretary of Agriculture Memorandum No. 1220, July 9, 1948.
See supra, n. 195, p. 430.
the plan and by joint consideration of annual programs and
budgets., The Secretary's field representatives and the agebry
representatives on the Field Committee do not, however, act
in an administrative capacity.
The Land and' Water Resources Staff in the Office of the
Secretary aids the Assistant Secretary in coordinating the De-
partment's land and water programss'
SDepartment df the Interior.-i- he Department bf the In-
terior has taken similar steps to facilitate interbureau program
coordination. Several Field Committes have been.established
to formulate integrated departmental programs for their re-
DEPARTMir Mr W A1B Ct Lrum ADMINISTRATIVE REoULATIONs, 1 A. R. 25.
"Department of the interior Order No. 2485, Augst 25, 19M. Field
Committees werp establiUsed for Alaqka, Pag cl Northwest, Pacific Central,
Colorado River-6reat Basin, Missouri River Basin, Southwest, and Eastern
Regions. While not all of them have yet been organized, some have been
funetioning for several years. Four of them have formulated comprehensive
six-year, advance programs for their resective basins. MI.Issoo r RvBa
BASIN PROJECT, PB0~iAM OF THU DEPABTMENTt or THE INTE'BIO (February
1949); IPcarrO No awear NIEans, RouCqEs AIM I)PVEXWMEr T 19490-1955
(June 1949 Revision).; PoOPOSAL or AN TE iiATo POGAM FOn THE DEPAT-
itnt'or a ImNTou ivn THmu SourTEWST REGIOKN, 1950-1956 (Prelminary
Draft, March 1950); S=x-YuEa IN TranAr PBoBnaM Fon TEm DEABRTWYT Oer
THE laipwi AIA"KA, 1951-196 8(1950). /I 1
An indication of the scope of activity covered can be gained from the Mis-
souri Basin rep~or~'tabie of contents. The chapters deal with: Irrigaion
Development; Power iDeveopment; :Munktpal, Industrial, and Domestic
Water Supply; BaticDIata; The Indian in the Missouri Basing Mnerl Re-
sources in the Missouri Basin; Fish and Wildlife; Recreation; ~ eR n-
ing Public Domain i the Missouri Basin; Problems; The Machinery of Co-
ordination; and Six-Year Program for Missouri River Basin.
The Pacific 1 orthwest report discusqes changes in authorization and
aii portion provisions, departmental-procedures, and organizational ma-
chlnery, which it sayp are needed. If comprehensive development is to be
Each of these Field Committees is directed to (a) Formulate its collective
concept of a Department-wide, long-range program adequate to.,meet the
requirements of the region; (b) Advise and assist in the preparation of
annual appropriation estimates and annu al locations of funds l. order to
achieve a balanced program for the Department as a whole in the region; (c)
Explore the extent of, and recommend steps to remedy overlaps, duplication
and gaps in current departmental programs and obstacles to their effectua-
tion; (d) Serve as a focal point for the Department in dealing with other
agencies, groups and persons both public and private; (e) Facilitate Intra-
The order establishing these committees states, however, that
none of its provisions shall:
S be construed to authorize a committee chairman, a com-
mittee, or its staff to execute, administer or otherwise
direct any bureau activity within a region.
As a further means of facilitating coordination of the activ-
ities of its subordinate agencies, the Department of the Interior
hMas rJi d that ey specify in their budget estimates the
extent to which their requests for funds will or will not enable
them to carry out their advance programs.m
THl iiELTIVE SPHERES OF FEDERAL AND NONFEDEBAL D-
ViLOPMENT.-The trend toward comprehensive development
is complicated, as we have seen, by the distribution of federal
functions among many agencies operating under a variety of
largely uncoordinated statutes. Other complications arise in
the event of contest between a proposal for nonfederal devel-
opment and onefor federal development in the same area.
deparfaental coordination and review of reports at the regional level; (f)
Recetve anl interchange information pertinent to the maintenance of a pro-
grnu for the area; (g) Submit recommendations for effecting improvements
and economies In administration; (h) Promote the settlement of differences
which 'may occur between bureaus; and (1) Prepare aniual and special re-
Sas r required Order No. 2465, pp. 2-.
S Pipgram Staff in the Secretary's Office examines all policies and pro-
grams of the Department with the objective of ascertaining that "(a) they
are integrated and internally consistent; (b) they constitute a full utilia-
tion of the Department'spowers for carrying out the responsibilities of the
Department; (c) they are appropriately related to the programs and policies
of other agencies of government; and (4) they are in proper context with the
current and prospective needs of the national economy." Department of the
Interior Order No. 2894 December 16, 1947. A Program Committee consist-
ing of representatives of each agency advises the Program Staff. Depart-
ment of the Interior Order No. 2421, April 14,1948.
mDeprtment of the Interior Budget and Finance Letter No. 5, March
21, 1950. The request for preliminary estimates for 1952 provided that,
"Within limitations of the over-all budget policy, the bureaus and offices
will be expected to take into account the program recommendations of
the Field Committee in the preparation of their preliminary estimates not
only with respect to their own needs but also with respect to the relation
of their activities to the programs of other agencies in these areas. Each
bureau and office should advise the Division of Budget and Finance of any
material deviations in their estimates from the 1952 amounts of the six-year
programs developed by tie Field Committees and the reasons therefore "
A case now before the Federal Power Commission is illus-
trative.22 In 1944, Congress "approved" a, general plan of
development embracing eleven prjgp~s for the Roanoke River
Basin for flood control and other purposes, as recommended
by the Chief of Engineers in House Document No. 650, 78th
Congress, 2d session.2 The same provision "authorized" con-
struction of two of the eleven projects.2' In 1948, a private
company applied for a Federal Power Commission license to
develop Roanoke Rapids, one of the remaining nine projects,
and that with the highest benefit-cost ratio.2
The Secretary of the Interior, designated by statute as the
marketing agent for surplus power from reservoir projects under
Army control, is opposing the granting of a license.23 Amoiig
other things, he contends that, in approving the eleven-project
plan for the basin, Congress reserved this site for federal devel-
opment. Furthermore, he maintains that the applicant's plan
is not "best adapted to a comprehensive plan" fbr improing
or developing the waterway for the benefit of commerce, "for
the improvement and utilization of water-power development,
and for other beneficial uses, including recreational purposes,"
all as required by Section 10(a) of the Federal Power Act."'
He further argues that the benefits to, the public would be less
under the applicant's plan than under federal development in
accordance with House Document No. 650. Anid he asserts
that unified operation of all eleven dams and an integrated
transmission system is necessary to attain maximum power
On the other haid, the applicant contends that "approval"
of the general plan did not constitute a reservation of the site
"Re Virginia Electrio and Power olomnpay, Project No. 2009, Fderal
SAct of December 22, 1944, 10, 58 Stat. 887, 891.
'Re Virginia Electric and Power Company, Project No. 2009; and H. Doc.
No, 650, 78th Cong., 2d sess., pp. 7-8 (1944).
"Act of December 22, 1944, 5, 58 Stat. 887, 890. See brieti of the SeCre-
tary of the Interior filed in Re Virginia Electric and Power Company, Project
No. 2009, Federal Power Commission.
OAct of June 10, 1920, 80(a), 41 St., 108, 1068, ,amended, 1~
U. S. 0. 808(a). See also spra, p. 275.
for federal development; that Roanoke Rapids Dam has not
been satthorized; and, that there is no assurance it will be
authorwied in the nea, future. Moreover, maintaining that
its proposed development is in substantial accord with that
recommended for the site by the Army Engineers, the appli-
cant argues that its prompt development of the site and of
the power benefits under a license containing the safeguards
authorized by Congress would be in the public interest and
would meet the requirements of the Federal Power Act. The
position of the Commission's Staff is much the same as that
of the applicant as regards compatibility of the applicant's
project with the general plan of development approved by
Another point of dispute relates to the necessity for, and
availability of, steam support to assure maximum utilization
of the hydroelectric potential.
In this case, the Commission had by letter expressed approval
of the Army Engineer plan, later printed in House Document
No. 650.i Thereafter, Congress "approved" that plan.2" The
summation of the questions thus raised is whether the Com-
mission may subsequently authorize nonfederal development
of one of the projects comprehended by that plan.
The decision of the Presiding Examiner, which is subject to
review by the Commission, ordered that a license be issued.2
A somewhat similar question has arisen in connection with
the King's River Project in California where an irrigation dis-
trict and a private company have applied for Federal Power
Commission licenses, to develop three of the projects compre-
hended by the Bureau of Reclamation's general plan for de-
See briefs of Virginia Electric and Power Company, and of the Staff
of the Federal Power Commission, filed in Re Virgiia Electric and Power
Co., Project No. 2009, Federal Power Commission.
"H, Doe. No. 650,78th Cong., 2d sess., p. 2 (1944),
Act of December 22, 1944, 10, 58 Stat. 887, 891,
m Examiner's decision of March 17,1950. After a rehearing, the Examiner
concluded on November 16,1950 that the order "needs no modification." On
November 22, 1950, the Secretary of the Interior filed a motion "for suspen-
sion of the 20-day rule for the filing of exceptions, for abbreviation of the
record, and for.fxing the date for filing exceptions,"
velopment of the: Central Valley, which has been transmitted
to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior, with the approval
of the President under Reclamation Law."2 The Commission
authorized the issuance of licenses, but a rehearing has been
ordered and the cases are still pending.
FEDERAL-STATE COORDINATION.-Any program for compre-
hensive development of our water and land resources requires
coordination of state and federal interests and responsibilities.
Each government has responsibilities in this field and each is
engaged in a number of facets of basin development. We shall
set forth here some of the more significant provisions of federal
law relating to federal-state coordination.
These include provisions for state participation in federal
development, provisions for federal-state cooperative agree-
ments for resource management or development, and provisions
for federal aid to state development. In addition, other pro-
visions expressly recognize the interests of the states, or reserve
specified aspects of basin development to state jurisdiction.
State participation in federal development is provided for
in a number of ways. One method is to require that federal
plans and reports be submitted to the states for their com-
ments.2 Another method is to provide for state participation
a Re Presno Irrigation District, Project No. 1925 and Re Pacific Gas and
.Ni fr- Oompany, Project Nos. 175 and 1988, Federal Power Commission.
California Debris Commission may consult with commission of state
engineers. Act of March 1, 1893, 24, 27 Stat. 507, 511, 88 U. S. 684.
Consultation with state fish and wildlife agencies required of any federal
agency impounding, diverting, or otherwise controlling water, or of any
public or private agency acting under federal permit. Act of August 14,
1946, 1 2, 60 Stat. 1080,16 U. S. C. 062.
Reports for navigation, flood control, or irrigation works must be sub-
mitted to affected states for their comments; comments must be included
with report; if a state objects, then irrigation project not deemed authorized
except by Act of Congress. Act of December 22, 1944, 1, 58 Stat. 887. For
administrative requirements for cooperation antedating this statute, see
pars. 503 (b), 504, Oiders and Regulations of the Chief of- Engineers, dated
April 0S, 1933.
Of. Notice of any application for a Federal Power Commission license
must be given by the FPO to any interested state or municipality. Act of
inwe 10, 1920, 4, 41 Stat. 108, 1065, as amended, 16 U.. S. C. 97.
7~ 13 :C .1
in investigation and planning of basin-development programs. "
Still another is to condition the federal development upon state
approval or to require certain state action before the federal
development may preeedo". Pr-ovision has often been made
for the creation of advisory boards representing state or local
In preparing or adopting "comprehensive programs" for eliminating -or
reducing pollution, the Surgeon General is to act in cooperation with "State
water pollUtio4 agencies and.interstate agencies, and with ansitepalties
and industries involved." Act of June 80, 1948, 1 2(a), 02 Statl. 11M.583
U. 8 ,. 460a (Supp iL).
Surrwy of ArkansasW1hite and. Bd Basins to be coordinated with ,ie
states. Act of May 17, 1950, 205,64 Stat 16, -.
SUrvey of New England-lNew York Area to be coordinated with the states.
See President's letters of October 9, 150, to the Secretary of the Army and
others setting up a New York-New England Survey Commisslon, and Act of
May 17190, 205,64 Stt. 168,-
State legislatures must consent to acquisition of further land by the ne -
States for national forest purposes. Act of March 1, 1911, J 7,86 Statt 981,
962,asuamenP ed,18 U. S C.. ..516.
State W.Isltare aust consemt to act authorizing herald t states
for eeoatefation f timal post roads. Act of July 11,196 ,11, 9 Stat L 5.
FPederamp eadalttres for certain parpodea under Clarke-McNary Act may
not exceed the amount expended by the states. Act of June 7, I5K, H2, 4, 51
48 Stat. 6s5,654, as amended, 10 S. O. a 51W5,' B68 (Supp. 1m).
State legislature must consent to establishment of fish and game sanctu-
ateine:atlo il forests. Act of March 10, 193 4, 48 Stat. 40,' 1O I SC.
State ust consent before any Rural Electrifiation Administration loan
can be made to construct, operate, or enlarge any generating plant. Act of
May S, 1986, 5 4, 49 Stat 138,1865, as amended, 7 U. C. 904 (Supp. III).
In certain circumstances, state must provide tinds, easements, aWd rights-
4-w for federal Sdood-otr projects, And must agree to maintain and
operate projects after eolWpleton. See-awg r, pp. 144-1468 .
No Irrigation water may be delivered within Columbia Basta Project unta
state comens to aertal rowihilona ot federal act. Act of March 31, 1038,
S7, Sat..14, 20,16 U.. C.8'5c-S
State where pollution orfiates must consent before Judical action can
be Initiated under thel tatute to abate it. Act of June 80, 1948, 2(d) (4),
62 Stat. 1155, 115, 833 U. S. 406a(d) (4) (Supp.I Y.
State legislature must consent to provisions of actrelating to fish restora-
tion and management projects, and must pass certain laws before program
can be elective ittthate. Act of August 9, 1950, 1 1, 64 Stat. 480.
interests.2 Or the statute may authorize programs to be car-
ried out through state agencies."
Provision has often been made for carrying out conserva-
tion and development of resources through cooperative federal
and state action. This is especially true in the case of forest,
fish and wildlife, and land-utilization programs."
m For example:
Beach Erosion Board to consist of seven members, three of them selected
from among cooperating state agencies. Act o July 1980, 2, 4 Stat. 918,
945, 33 U. S. 426.
Water Pollution Control Advisory Board to include a representative of
state government. Act of June 30, 1948i; 6(b), 62 Stat. 1155, 1158, as
amended, 33 U. S. C. 466e(b) (Supp. III).
The Federal Inter-Agency River Basin Committee's Subcommittees for the
Columbia and the Mis~aurt Basins include representatives of the states
involved. See SUMMArBY REPoaT ON FmREBA. INTEB-AGENCY RIVEB BASIN
COMMITTEE AND ITs SUBCoMfMITTEES, pp. 81-35.(1949). The Subcommittee for
the Arkansas-White and Red Basins is to invite the State Governors to
participate in its meetings. See Minutes, FIARBC, June 12, 1950, Exhibit
A, p. 2.
Federal-aid highway construction to be carried out through state agencies.
Act Of November 9,1921, 12 42 Stat. 212,215, as amended, 28' U. S .18.
Secretaries of Agrictilture and the Army iay utilize the services of federal,
state, and other public agencies for carrying out the parposes'of the 1986
Flood Control.Act as amended and supplemented. Act of June 28,1938, 5,
52 Stat. 1215,:1223, as amended, 33 U. S. 0. 701b-2.
Secretary of Agriculture to cooperate with any state, or group of states,
when requested to do so, in protection against fire in forested watersheds
of navigable streams. Act of March 1, 1911, 2, 36 Stat. 961,.16 U. C. 563.
Secretary of Agriculture may secure the cooperation of state authorities
in the construction and maintenance of national-forest roads as parts of state
highway systems. Act of March 4, 1913, 37 Stat. 828, 843, as'amended, 18
U. S. C. 501.
Secretary of Agriculture to cooperate'with states in the construction of
rural post roads; state must consent to provisions of the federal act. Act
of July 11,1916, 1, 39 Stat. 355, as amended.'
Federal cooperation with states for forest fire suppression, for production
and distribution of forest tree seeds alid plants, and for assisting farm
owners in establishing and improving "wood lots, shelter belts, windbreaks
and other valuable forest;growth." Act of June 7,1924, 1,4,5,43 Stat. 658,
654, as amended, 16 U. S. 0C 564, et seq. (Supp. III).
Federal cooperation with individuals and public and private agencies in
investigations and experiments for reforestation, fire protection, disease
control, and utilization of forest products. Act of May 22, 1928, 5$ 1, 9, 45
Stat. 699, 70% as amended, :16 S. C. 581, Slh (Supp. III); see also Act of
April 26,1940, 54 Stat. 168, 16 U. S. C. 594a.
Beach erosion investigations and studies to be made in cooperation with
appropriate agencies of various states. Aet of July 8, W190, 2, 46 Stat. 918,
945, 38 U. S. C. 423 See also Act ft July 81, 1945, 2,95 Stat. 508, 3 U-, S. O.
426b; Act of August 13, 1946, 60 Stat. 1056, 3 U. S. C. 426e-426h.
STennessee Valley Authority may cooperate with states concerning fertili-
zer, power, and basin planning. Act of May 18, 1933, 5(c), 10, 22,48 Stat.
58,61,64, 69, as amended, 16 U. S. C. 831d(c), 8311, 831u.
Secretary of the Interior may cooperate with states in a program of wild-
life conservation and rehabilitation. Act of March 10, 1934, 1, 48 Stat.
401, as amended, 16 U. S. C. 661.
Secretary of Agriculture may cooperate with any person, or governmental
or other agency in soil-conservation program. Act of April 27, 1935, S 1, 49
Stat. 163,16 U. C. 590a. See 1supra n. 99, p. 368.
Cooperative agreements with states in acquisition, development, and
management of state forests, and coordination of federal and state forest-
management activities. Act of August 29, 1935, 49 Stat. 963, 16 U. S. C.
567a et seq.
Sense of Congress to undertake flood-control activity in cooperation with
states, their political subdivisions, and localities thereof. Act of June 22,
1986, 1, 49 Stat. 1570,33 U. S. C. 701a.
A "comprehensive study" of federal and state public park, parkway, and
recreational-area programs to be undertaken in cooperation with and with
the consent of state officials having jurisdiction over areas involved; coop-
eration with states authorized for the purpose of developing "coordinated and
adequate public park, parkway, and, recreational-area facilities." Act of
June 23, 1983, S1,49 Stat. 1894, 16 U. S. C, 17k.
Secretary ot Agriculturemay cooperate with any person, or governmental
or other agency, for development of water storage and utilization facilities
and may require enactment of certain state laws as a condition to,extending
benefits under federal act. Act of August 28, 1987, i 2, 4, 6, 50 Stat. 869,
870, 16 U. S. C. 590s, 590u, 590w,
Cooperation with State of Oregon for coordinated administration for
sustained-yield of "0 and C lands" and adjacent lands. Act of August 28,
1937, 50 Stat. 874.
Federal cooperation with states in wildlife restoration projects. Act of
September 2,1937,50 Stat. 917, as amended, 16 U. S. C. 669 et seq.
President authorized to reserve certain national forest lands from entry
upon request of municipality which obtains its water supply therefrom;
municipality to reimburse United States for resulting loss of revenues.
Act of May 28, 1940, $S 1, 8, 54 Stat. 224, 225, 16 U. S. C. 550a, 552c.
Cooperative sustained-yield forest management agreements with states
and private land owners. Act of March 29,1944, 58 Stat. 132, 16 U. S. 0. 583
Federal policy "to assist in the construction, but not the maintenance, of
works for the improvement and protection against erosion by waves and
currents" of shores owned by states, municipalities, and other political sub-
divisions. Act of August 18, 1946, 1, 60 Stat. 1056, 3 U. S. C. 426e.
Federal aid to state programs has been rendered in a variety
of ways. Thus, grants-in-aid or loans are used to help states
carry out development; programs.'" Bonds of states and local
public agencies are exempted from federal income taxation."
Public land and rights-of-way have frequently been granted to
states and local agencies..1 Moreover, state and local public
Cooperation with states in forest pest control; Secretary of Agriculture
may require state contributions. Act of June 25, 1947, 61 Stat. 177, 16
U. S. C. 594-1 et seq. (Supp. III).
Federal cooperation with states in fish restoration projects. Act of
August 9,1950,64 Stat. 480.
Cooperation with states in services to private forests. Act of August 25,
1950, 64 Stat. 473, repealing Act of May 18, 197, 50 Stat. 188, 16 U. S. C.
Federal aid to highways, Act of November 9,1921,42 Stat. 212, as amended,
23 U. S. C. 1 et seq. (Supp. III).
TAennessee Valley Authority may extend credit to states and municipalities
to assist in operation of power facilities. Act of August 31, 1935, 7, 49
Stat. O75, 1076,16 U. S. 831k-1.
Federal aid to state wildlife and fish restoration programs. Act of Sep-
tember 2, 1987, 50 Stat. 917, as amended, 18 U. S. C. 669 et seq., Act of
August 9, 1950,64 Stat. 430.
Federal aid to protection of state or municipally owned shores from
erosion limited to one-third of the cost; if states or municipalities do the
construction, they may be reimbursed byr Federal Government. Act of
Augst 13, 1946, 8S 1,2, 60 Stat. 1056, 33 U. S. C 426e, 426f.
Reconstruction Finance Corporation loans to states, municipalities and
public agencies. Act of June 30, 1947, S 4(a) (3), 61 Stat. 202, 203, as
amended, see 15 U. S. C. 604(a) (3) (Supp. III).
Loans and grants to any state, municipality, or interstate agency for con-
struction of sewage-treatment works, and allotments 'to states and inter-
state agencies for investigations, research, surveys, and studies related to
prevention and control of pollution. Act of June 30, 1948, if 5, 8(a), 8(c),
62 Stat. 1155, 1158, 1159, as amended, 33 U. S. C. 466d, 466g(a), 466g(c)
Federal loans or advances to states, their agencies, and political sub-
divisions for financing the cost of advance planning and preparation of
public works. Act of October 13, 1949, 63 Stait. 841, 40 C. 451-458
"*Act of February 10, 1939, 1808(a), 53 Stat. 199, as amended, 26
U. S. C. 1808(a).
m For example:.
Swamp and overflow lands granted to certain states. Act of March 2,
1849,9 Stat 352; Act of September 28,1850, 9 Stat. 519.
bodies are often given preference in obtaining power, power
jprvileges, water, or recreation sites at federal projects.2 Fed-
eral property and services have frequently been made available
to state or local agencies on favorable terms or. upon mere re-
quest.m Variousprovisions have been made for federal pay-
ments to states or local bodies, including payments in lieu of
taxes and contribution of proceeds from federally administered
See generally, 43 U. S. C, csh 14,20, 23.
Desert lands granted 'to certain states for reclamation purposes: Act of
August 18, 1894, 4,28 Stat. 372, 422, as amended, 43 U. S 0.41.
. Rights-of-way for highways. B. S. 5 2477, from Act of July 26, 1866K, 8,
14 Stat. 251, 258,43 U. S. a 982; Act of November 9,1921, 1 17, 42 Stat 212,
21, ~ s amended, see 28 Ui S. 018.
Rights-of-way for various purposes. Act of February 15,1901, 31 Stat. 790,
as amended, 43 U.. S. C. 95; Act of March 4, 1911, 36 Stat 1235, .1258, 43
U. S0. 961. See also general 43 U. S. C, ch. 22.
Secretary of the Army authorized to grant easements for certain rights-
of-way over certain lands under his jurisdiction. Act of July 24, 1946,
1 7, 60 Stat. 641, 643,43 U S. S 981b.
See supr, n. 236, p. 299.
Surplus Army road-construction material transferred to states. Act of
vember9, 921, i 42 Stat. 212,213,23 U. S. C. 5.
:2 SurgeoiQ general may, upon request of any state water-poltluon agency
or interstate agency, conduct investigations and research and make astr eWs
concerning any spedrcic problem of water pollution., Act of June 30, 1948,
S3, 62 Stat 1155,1157, 33 U.S... 44016 (Supp III).
States and local agencies given favorable terms in disposal! of surplus
federal property. Act of October 8,1944, 13, 58 Stat. 76, ,70, as amended,
50 U. 5.0. App. 1622; repealed by Act of June 0 1949, 68 Stat. 399.
Federal assistance to state and local governments in major disasters.
Act of September 30, 1950,64 Stat 1109.
Twenty-five percent of all moneys received from national forests paid to
states for benefit of public schools and roads. Act of May 28, 1908, 35
Stat 21, 20, 16 U. S. 500; Act of March 1, 1911, 18, 36 Stat 961, 968
as amended, 16 U. S. 0. 500.
Payments to states from Boulder Canyon Project revenues. Act of
December 21, 1928, 14(b), 45 Stat. 1057, 1059, 43 U. S. O. 617c(b) ; Act of
July 19, 1940, i 2,8, 54 Stat 774, 77, 43 U. S. 618a, 618b.
Tennessee Valley Authority payments to states. Act of May 18,1988, 18,
48 Stat. 58,66,16 U. S. 0. 881.
Fifty percent of "Oregon and California land-grant fund" paid to coun-
ties. Act of August 28,1937, Title 11, 50 Stat 874, 875.
State control over certain aspects of basin development has
often been recognized or enabled. This is done through stat-
utes declaring particular waters to be nolnnavigable; statutes
relating to interstate compacts; statutes concerning water
rights under state law; and statutes providing for application
of state fish and game regulations."P Also, applicants for li-
Seventy-five percent of all moneys received from lease of lands acquired
by the United States for flood-control purposes, paid to states for benefit
of public schools and roads. Act of August 18, 1941, 7, 55 Stat. 638, 650,
as amended by Act of July 24, 1946, 5, 60 Stat. 641, 642, 33 U. S. C. 701c-.
See also Act of June 28, 1938, 4, 52 Stat. 1215; 1222.
One percent of the purchase price or of the value at time of acquisition
of lands acquired by Department of Agriculture under 1944 Flood Control
Act, to be paid annually to the county in which land is located. Act of
December 22, 1944, 13, 58 Stat. 887, 905.
Financial assistance to states for school purposes in areas affected by
federal activities. Act of September 23, 1950, 64 Stat. 967; Act of September
30,1950, 64 Stat. 1100.
Waters declared nonnavigable. See 83 U. S. C. 21-55.
For interstate compacts approved, see supra, notes 287-292, pp. 65-66.
For a discussion of Acts of 1866, 1870 and 1877 in relation to water rights,
see aspra, pp. 35-42, 178-179.
Proceeedings for condemnation of property for river and harbor liA-
provements to be in accordance with state law. Act of April 24, 1888, 25
Stat. 94, 38 U. S. C. 591.
SCharges for Water from reservoir sites reserved on public lands subject to
state control and regulation. Act of February 26, 1897, 29 Stat. 599, 48
U. S. 664.
Waters within national forests may be used for certain purposes under
state law or under federal law and regulations. Act of June 4, 1897, 5 1,
30 Stat. 11, 36,16 U. S. C. 481.
State civil and criminal jurisdiction over persons upon national forest
lands unaffected. Act of June 4, 1897, 1, 30 Stat. 11, 386, 16 U. S. C. 480;
Act of March 1, 1911, 12, 36 Stat. 961, 963, 16 U. S. C. 480.
:Subject to approval of location and plans by the Secretary of the Army
and the Chief of Engineers, the state legislature may authorize bridges over
waterways, the navigable portions of which lie wholly within that state.
Act of March 3, 1899, 8 9,30 Stat. 1121, 1151,8 3 U. S. C. 401.
State laws relating to control and use of water unaffected by federal
Reclamation Act; Secretary of the Interior to proceed in conformity with
such laws. Act of June 17, 1902, 8, 32 Stat. 388, 890,43 U. S. C. 383.
Forest Service officials to assist in enforcement of state laws in regard to
stock, forest fires, and fish and game. Act of May 23, 1908, 35 Stat. 251,
259,16 U. S. C. 553.
senses under Federal Power Act must submit evidence of com-
pliance with certain state laws, and public-service licensees are
Blanket consent to interstate compacts for the purpose of "conserving the
forests and the water supply;" no further congressional action required.
Act of March 1,1911, 1 1,36 Stat. 961,16 U. S. C. 552.
Federal condemnation of land in aid of state or state agency, in connec-
tion with federal navigation and flood-control improvements. Act of Au-
gust 8, 1917, 9, 40 Stat. 250, 267, 33 U. S. C. 593; Act of August 18, 1941,
S6, 55 Stat. 638,850,338 U. S. C. 701-2.
Federal Power Act not to affect or interfere with state laws relating to
control and use of water. Act of June 10, 1920, 27, 41 Stat. 1063, 1077,
i6 S. s. .821.
C Consent of Congress to six midwestern states to negotiate agreement re-
lating to jurisdiction over boundary waters. Act of March 4, 1921, 41 Stat.
1447, 33U. S. C. 11.
Colorado River Compact approved and operation of Boulder Canyon
Project and use of water made subject thereto. Act of December 21, 1928,
8, 18, 45 Stat. 1057, 1062,1064, 43 U. S. C. 617g, 617.
Consent to compacts between states relating to certain flood-control
works; approval by Congress required. Act of June 22, 1936, 4 49 Stat.
1570, 1571, 33 U. S. C. 701d.
Consent to interstate compacts for developing any park, parkway, or
recreational area; approval by Congress required. Act of June 23, 1986,
3, 49 Stat. 1894, 1895,16 U. S. C. 17m.
'Certain tate jurisdiction over tributaries of Red River specifically recog-
nited. Act of June 28,1988, 4,52 Stat. 1215, 1219.
Consent to interstate compacts for regulation of certain fishing in inland
waters. Act of June 8, 1940,54 Stat. 261, 16 U. S. 0. 667a.
Boulder Canyon Project Adjustment Act not to Interfere with "such
rights as the States now have" to waters and their control. Act of July
19,1940, 14,54 Stat. 774, 779,43 U. S. C. 618m.
Recreational use of Army reservoir areas subject to state laws for the
protection of fish and game. Act of December 22, 1944, 4, 58 Stat. 887,
889, as amended, 16 U. S.. 460d.
Certain employees of Bonneville Power Administration may be covered
by state unemployment' compensation law. Act of October 23, 1945, 7,
59 Stat. 54, 548, 26U. S. 0.1606.
State highway department must approve location and plans of privately
owned highway toll bridges authorized by General Bridge Act of 1946.
Act of August 2, 1946, 502(c), 60 Stat. 812, 847, 33 U. S. C. 525.
Consent to interstate compacts for prevention and abatement of water
pollution; congressional approval required. Act of June 30, 1948, 2(c),
62 Stat. 1155, 1156, as amended, 33 U. S. C. 466a(c) (Supp. III).
Secretary of the Interior shall make recommendations for use of water
of Central Valley project "in accord with State water laws." Act of Oc-
tober 14, 1949, 2, 63 Stat. 852, -.
subject to certain state regulation.,2 State law governs the
formation and incorporation of the water-users' organizations
which distribute water under the Reclamation Law, and of
public bodies and cooperatives eligible for Rural Electrifica-
tion Administration loans.0" In addition, almost all federal
power is distributed by entities organized and largely regulated
under state law.
Progress in Coordination Within Particular Regions
At the outset, we said that there is no single, uniform federal
policy governing comprehensive development of water and land
resources. We also pointed out, however, that some statutes
separately deal with individual projects, specific areas, and
single river basins. Under a combination of these latter laws
and other legislation of general application, development with-
in different basins has approached varying degrees of compre-
Most of these laws are concerned principally or exclusively
with the physical aspects of integration, Efforts to provide
for coordination have been concerned primarily with integrat-
ing groups of engineering projects without a parallel regard
for harmonizing the economic and social objectives of such
projects. This aspect has been noted by the, Hoover Com-
mission and by its Task Force on Natural Resources: "
Applicant for Federal Power Commission liense must comply with state
laws relating to bed and banks, to use of water, and right to engage in
business. Act of June 10, 1920,1 9, 41 Stat. 1 6 108,,16 U.,. C. 802.
Public-service licensees under Federal Power Act must abide by certain
state regulation of services and charges. Act of June 10, 1920, S 19, 41
Stat 1063, 1073,16 U. S. C. 812.
SAct of August 4, 1939, 2(g), 53 Stat. 1187, 1188, 48 U. S. C. 485a(g) ;
Act of May 20, 1986, 5 4, 49 Stat 1868, 1865, as amended, 7 U. S. 0. 904
"DEPARTMENT OF THE INTmBIOR, REPORT OF THE COMMISSION ON OGANIZA-
TION OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT, p. 26 (March 1949);
REPoaT OF THE COMMISSION ON ORGANIZATION OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF
THI GWovEaMWNT, App. L, p. 31 (January 1949).