153 



3 



Historically, spill at dams has been a sword of Damocles and is a world wide 

 problem. NMien the Columbia River dams were first constructed, heaw involuntary spill 

 was unavoidable. For example. Bonne\-ille Dam became operational in 1938, but it's first 

 powerhouse could only pass 85 kefs — a small fraction of tlie remaining flows and 

 floods — hence the rivei- was mostly spilled and supersaturated. By tlie eaih' 1940's, 

 biologists associated high flows witli excessive mortalit)-, but didn't know why it 

 happened. After about 20 years of investigations, it was proven by Dr. Ebel that spill 

 supersaturated tlie water and tliia killed the salmon. By 1968 excessive supersaturation 

 killed ca. 20,000 adult salmon at John Dav Dam and this shocked tiie Region, NMFS 

 soon announced that gas supersaturation was endangering the salmon runs. E\entually a 

 gas standard of 1 10 °/o was adopted and spill was gi'eatly restricted or nonexistent, The 

 region relied upon previously tested smolt collection and transportation via barges. With 

 the passage of the Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act in 1980, tiic 

 Northwest Power Planning Council created a water budget for augmenting spring flows. 

 If any was to be spilled, we assumed that llie enviromnental and fishery agencies would 

 hold gas levels to safe limits, i.e. close to 1 10 % of barometric pressure. This as.sumption 

 proved incorrect and supersaturation in the range of 120-130 % quietly returned to the 

 Snake and Columbia Rivers. By 1992. hydro operators were faced with a dilemma: spill 

 as requested and possibly kill endangered salmon, or don't spill and have their operahon 

 i-uled to be jeopaadizing endangered salmon. Fishery agencies requested suspension of the 

 gas supersaturation standard, and this forced public hearings. Therefore tiie gas 

 supersaturation problem has become deja vu all o\er again. 



2. What independent scientific research Is being conducted to monitor the 

 effects of spill and its alternative In the Columbia River system? Please comment 

 on the results of relevant studies. 



Ver\' little independent research is being conducted on any aspect of spill or 

 Columbia Ri\'er salmon. This is because thoro is little opportunity for independent 

 researchers to tap the S400 million dollars' year tliat are being spent on salmon by the 

 Corps, BP.A, NMFS, and NBS. Federal planning processes and difficult procurement 

 regulations effectively preclude open, competiti\'e procurement of most fisher>' projects. 

 Contracting between fishery agencies (via interagency transfers and memos of aVjeement) 

 is typical and far easier than contracting outside tlie govw'mment. Thus, fishery agencies 

 have an enormous ad\antage o\er the private sector in si.curing funds because the> 

 idenrifv- regional fishery research priorities, they can claim any project as their business, 

 and tliey lia\e the resources of the tax payers. The result i^ essentially a closed shop tiiat 

 greatly minimizes participation by uni\ersilies and pri\ate enterprise. 



If the Senate wishes to expand the role of indeptndent research (private or 

 university') in tlie Columbia and Snake Rivers, adjustment^ will be necessary in the 

 Federal .Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and tlie Bonneville Power Administration 

 Procurement histructions (BPPI). Additionally, inceiirives are needed to encourage the 

 cooperation and collaboration of fishery agencies with independent investigators. 



