257 



5.3.6 FORUM 6: Decisionmaking by one Federal operating agency (e.g. Corps or 

 Reclamation) + a complete public involvement program. 



This option woiild have the advantage of consolidating decisionmaking, and it would 

 not require creation of a nev^ bureaucracy. It might also reduce total costs. However, it 

 would require Congressional authorization. There is little reason to believe it would 

 materially affect credibility (tnist, equitable treatn-ent, legal/political challenges). 



5.3.7 FORUM 7: Decisionmaking by another Federal agency (e.g. NMFS) + a complete 

 public involvement program. 



The analysis for this option is similar to that for FORUM 5. Since the other Federal 

 agency to which decisionmaking would be transferred would, presumably, be an 

 agency which a major mandate for fish and wildlife, groups concerned about fish and 

 wildlife nught view this option as more credible that FORUM 5. However, groups with 

 a traditional relationship to the existing operating agencies might view this option as 

 having considerably less credibility. There might be somewhat greater costs in 

 transferring decisionmaking to an agency other than one of the existing operating 

 agencies. 



5.4 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE 



The three SOR agencies (BPA, Bureau, Corps) have not selected a preferred alternative. 

 The agencies have concluded that decisions regarding annual operating plans or 

 making future changes to the system operating strategy (SOS) do require a clearly 

 defined decisionmaking process that provides opportimities for regional participation 



Final Draft - September 15, 1993 88 



