Abstract
AbstractA common hypothesis is that federal water agencies pursue continued appropriations with little consideration of national economic efficiency. In the mid‐1980s, faced with a vote on a supplemental municipal and industrial water repayment contract on the Bonneville Unit of the Central Utah Project, the Bureau of Reclamation confirmed this hypothesis. Through modifications in cost allocation procedures, the bureau shifted costs from municipal and industrial water to hydropower and irrigation. The result of this action was retention of the irrigation purpose in the Bonneville Unit, which would have been unjustified under previous cost allocation procedures.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
