293 



place the following spring. But my understanding is there are some 

 other issues about 



General Harrell. Yes, sir, and that is sort of a disagreement be- 

 tween us as the engineering agency and the Council. We £ire work- 

 ing, coordinating, communicating to try for us to lay all the issues 

 on the table for them to look at, and hopefully we can come to- 

 gether with a full understanding of what is engineeringly possible 

 and what the time frame of that is. 



Mr. DeFazio. Okay. Again, I want to get back to the sense of ur- 

 gency. 



General Harrell. Yes, sir. 



Mr. DeFazio. You know, I am not a scientist and we will have 

 others who wiill address the drawdown. In fact, we will have some 

 testimony from some who say increased flows are harmful, which 

 will be of interest, I am sure, to many people. 



General Harrell. Yes, sir. 



Mr. DeFazio. But, you know, I think we are going to reach a con- 

 clusion that we shoiild drawdown John Day, as the largest, slowest 

 impediment to the migration, and I would just think it would be 

 a pretty good bet and not too risky for the Corps to do all necessary 

 contemporaneous preliminary preparation while fulfilling the full 

 requirements of the law under the EIS, with the assumption that 

 the EIS is going to find that out, you know, that it would be desir- 

 able, and I do not think it would be too expensive to do the ancil- 

 lary work. 



General Harrell. Sir, I agree, and we have that and I will com- 

 mit to you and others that we will move at full speed on this, I 

 would also like to provide further information on our John Day ac- 

 tivities for the Record. 



[The information foUows:] 



The John Day Drawdown study is an element of the Corps System Configuration 

 Study (SCS), the scope of which includes alternatives for providing fish recovery and 

 survival benefits. Phase I (reconnaissance level) of the SCS is scheduled to be com- 

 plete in the spring of 1994. 



The Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 1993 included two mil- 

 Uon dollars for Advanced Planning and Design (AP&D) of modifications to public 

 and private facilities that may be affected by a sustained operation of John Day at 

 minimum operating pool. At this time, our Portland District office is developing a 

 detailed scope of work and schedule for the AP&D activities. The general philosophy 

 is to evaluate John Day drawdown on its own merits and complete necessary studies 

 and designs as quickly as possible so that a decision whether to implement the 

 drawdown can be made earlier than for other SCS elements. 



It is anticipated at this time that 3 years will be required to complete the nec- 

 essary design activities for John Day modifications. Should it be determined that 

 the drawdown is beneficial, it is anticipated that modifications to affected facilities 

 could be completed such that a drawdown to the minimum operating pool could be 

 undertaken in 1999. 



Mr. DeFazio. And I would be interested, as soon as you have the 

 legal opinion finished, if you would submit it to this task force. I 

 would appreciate that because I would be interested in some of the 

 findings. 



General Harrell. Yes, sir. Counsel is currently reviewing this 

 question and I will provide that analysis as soon as possible. 



Mr. DeFazio. One other question. General, the Systems Oper- 

 ation Review, I guess, includes not all of the Bureau of Reclama- 

 tion dams, only those which are hydropower capable. And I am cu- 



