experienced numerous early delays in instituting its 
strategic water resource planning function. Charged 
by the 1965 Act with responsibility for establishing, 
with the approval of the President, principles and 
standards for the formulation and evaluation of 
Federal water resource projects, the Council was un- 
able to carry out this responsibility until 1973. In 
finally publishing its principles and standards, how- 
ever, the Council, by imposing a substantially higher 
discount rate for evaluating water projects than the 
one used by the Corps of Engineers (and other water 
resource agencies), found itself in the midst of the 
discount rate controversy. While the prevailing rate 
established under the former procedure was 5¥% 
percent, the Council established a new rate of 6% 
percent, which seriously jeopardized many water 
projects that could not meet the more stringent eco- 
nomic criteria. 
As a result of the Council action, immediate pres- 
sures were brought to bear in support of Congres- 
sional relief. Within 5 months the Congress enacted 
the Water Resources Development Act of 1974, 
which set the discount rate at about its former level. 
Following this action, the Council acceded to the 
Congressional mandate and set its discount rate at 
the level established by the Congress. 
Although the immediate conflict regarding the dis- 
count rate was resolved by the Water Resources De- 
velopment Act of 1974, the underlying controversy 
remains. The 1974 Act, in Section 80, called upon 
the President to undertake a thorough study of U.S. 
water resource projects, including an assessment of 
the discount rate issue. Although completed, the 
study has not been released, and the traditional pro- 
cedure for evaluating projects has continued to be 
used in the absence of new criteria. 
As a major factor influencing the selection of 
water development projects to be supported by the 
Federal Government, the discount rate issue is likely 
to continue to be a major point of debate in future 
considerations regarding all aspects of water resource 
development. In turn, the water navigation programs 
administered by the Corps of Engineers, including 
the port and harbor development program, will be 
significantly influenced by the resolution of thi is)? 
ue in years to come. 
afin second major Federal agency influencing U.S. 
ort development is the Maritime Administration 
(MarAd), which is generally responsible for the 
promotion of the U.S. merchant marine and related 
ents of me US water _ transportation” system. 
Through its Office of Port and Intermodal Develop- 
ment, MarAd carries out a variety of advisory_and 
promotional functions relating to U.S. port develop- 
ment. In general, these activities are intended to im- 
prove the efficiency and minimize the cost of the 
U.S._transportation system through improved ports 
and port facilities The basic statutory authority for 
rE EI aL eID MR le 
these activities is contained in Section-8-of-the-Mer- 
chant Marine Act of 1920 which provides that: — 
. it shall be the duty of the board [now 
the Maritime Administration], in coopera- 
tion with the Secretary of War, [now the 
Secretary of Defense], with the object of 
promoting, encouraging, and developing 
ports and transportation facilities in con- 
nection with water commerce over which 
it has jurisdiction, to investigate territorial 
regions and zones tributary to such ports, 
taking into consideration the economies of 
transportation by rail, water, and highway 
and the natural direction of the flow of 
commerce; to investigate the causes of the 
congestion of commerce at ports and the 
remedies applicable thereto; to investigate 
the subject of water terminals, including 
the necessary docks, warehouses, appara- 
tus, equipment, and appliances in connec- 
tion therewith, with a view to devising and 
suggesting the types most appropriate for 
different locations and for the most expedi- 
tious and economical transfer or inter- 
change of passengers or property between 
carriers by water and carriers by rail; to 
advise with communities regarding the ap- 
propriate location and plan of construction 
of wharves, piers, and water terminals; to 
investigate the practicability and advan- 
tages of harbor, river, and port improve- 
ments in connection with foreign and 
coastwise trade; and to investigate any 
other matter that may tend to promote 
and encourage the use by vessels of ports 
adequate to care for the freight which 
would naturally pass through such 
ports...” 
Essentially, the MarAd program is oriented to- 
ward pr r g echnical 
assistance and information in pursuing its eee, 
mandate in support of i ved U.S. port effici 
Consequently, the size of the staff and other suis 
devoted to this activity is relatively small. In total, 
only about 35 positions in both the headquarters and 
field offices are assigned to this program. 
In support of the MarAd port program, the Office 
of Port and Intermodal Development helps the port 
industry assess port requirements and plan the de- 
velopment of ports and port facilities. This is accom- 
plished through cooperative studies of port develop- 
ment in a number of States and on a national_basis. 
This effort is also carried out through port develop- 
ment and shipper conferences. By 1980, the Office 
of Port and Intermodal Development expects to have 
identified the future port requirements of 33 of the 
V-7 
