EXPERIMENTAL WATER TREATMENT FACILITY

Mr. HARRIS. During hearings before this subcommittee in the summer of 1976 every witness who was asked endorsed the experimental pilot estuary treatment plant as having the potential as a savior for the Washington metropolitan area. In the relatively brief period since then, much new data have emerged concerning standards for safe drinking water. Does the corps remain confident that this project will successfully generate water that will meet EPA standards? General JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. HARRIS. Do you feel that the scientific community supports this position? I hate to speak of "community" among scientists, but as a general

General JOHNSON. Well, again, I'd like to defer to the professional in the area of specific water supply in potable water, but this is the practice that is presently used along the Ohio River, for example. It is not unique. It is in practice in some places in the country today.

Colonel WITHERS. I would say, sir, that our belief is that there is no question that we can meet current standards. The controversy within the scientific community is what those current standards might be changed to.

Mr. HARRIS. At any rate, do you feel that the project should be pushed ahead and that it has good chances of demonstrating out an important water supply for the area?

Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir.

REGIONAL WATER INTERCONNECTIONS

Mr. HARRIS. What kinds of water shortages are likely to occur in the Washington area in the near future? Are they likely to involve more than restrictions on outside used of water for more than a few days or do you believe that Fairfax County Water Authority can adequately service its customers by making fuller and earlier use of the existing interconnection with Falls Church?

Colonel WITHERS. I think the answer, sir, would be yes, definitely, and as General Johnson testified earlier, we are studying the subject of interconnections. We're studying both raw water interconnections and finished water connections. The latter, of course, would have been most helpful during the problem experienced by Fairfax County last summer.

Mr. HARRIS. Let me propound again to you all, which I alluded to before. We had a period where a water system, and this is for all of Alexandria, most all of Fairfax, and a good part of Prince William County, 600,000 people-their average daily water requirements were about 55 million gallons a day. All those people were put under water restrictions, and it's your testimony that your capacity at that time. at the day of highest usage exceeded the use there by 115 million gallons of treated water; is that correct?

General JOHNSON. That is correct.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Fauntroy, do you have any questions?

LOW FLOW ALLOCATIONS AGREEMENT

Mr. FAUNTROY. Yes, I have a number of questions, some general, and some more specific. My first question, General, has to do with a general consideration. You mentioned that in the course of future studies you expect to assess the socioeconomic effects of the agreement and the additional growth that may result. I wondered on what basis, or for what purposes did the corps conclude that the water would be, or should be, available to Fairfax County? For example, is this water for growth in the county, and does the environmental impact statement speak to the impact of added growth on the region? I indicated in my opening remarks that a great deal of growth has taken place in the Fairfax County area, some 60 percent of that in the metropolitan region, and one of the things that we are concerned about is balanced growth. Did your impact go to those socioeconomic factors?

General JOHNSON. Yes, sir, it did.

Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir, it went into some discussion, sir, on development, growth in the area, discussed this in terms of water supply and the mutual effects of one on the other. It also goes into considerable detail on the water quality concern with regard to the Potomac River in general.

Mr. FAUNTROY. Is the water intended to relieve the county of its obligations to provide adequate water from all other alternative sources; that is, did you discuss such alternatives as increasing the height of the Occoquan Dam, or moving water from other Virginia sources? I noted in the Governor of Virginia's inaugural speech a reference to the prospective falling through on the Shenandoah development, which, as a contributory apparently to the Potomac River, would mean two removals from the estuary, or the water supply. Did you look at those alternatives and conclude that they were not adequate?

SHENANDOAH PUMPOVER

Colonel WITHERS. Sir, the alternative which you mentioned, which is also called the Shenandoah pumpover, is discussed in the environmental impact statement, and we included a discussion of what we considered to be all other conceivable alternatives; yes, sir.

Mr. FAUNTROY. What is your assessment of the advisability of moving ahead with the Shenandoah project, given the low flow agreement that now allows water to be drawn lower in the Potomac?

Colonel WITHERS. Sir, we haven't made a judgment on that. The Commonwealth of Virginia is, I understand, presently in the midst of a study which began about a year ago, and we have asked the Commonwealth to provide us comments on what projects they will support for water supply of the metropolitan area, including northern Virginia.

EMERGENCY PUMPING STATION

Mr. FAUNTROY. General, you stated in your testimony that water from the emergency pumping station will be used only if it meets all standards for drinking water as promulgated by the EPA. The low flow allocation agreement, recently signed, states that the water from the emergency pumping station shall not be considered as water available to the District for purposes of computing the allocation of Potomac water, except for the water that is actually used.

Now, who will make the final decision as to whether Washington's residents are distributed such water, the Corps of Engineers, or the District Government?

Colonel WITHERS. Sir, the decision on whether or not to use the upper estuary water, which would be pumped through the emergency pumping station now being constructed, would be made only after consultation with the appropriate District officials and health officials, and a judgment that that water fully meets the drinking water standards.

Mr. FAUNTROY. Did your assessment of the environmental impact take into account communities south of Washington on the Potomac? How far did you assess the impact of the intake here?

Colonel WITHERS. It included the impact on communities farther to the south, inasmuch as it discussed to a great extent the overall issue of quality of water in the Potomac River.

IMPACT OF LOW FLOW AND POLLUTION

Mr. FAUNTROY. I have in mind a number of environmental questions that concern some of the areas where Washington area residents want to vacation. For example, would the effect of lower flow in the Potomac by virtue of the intakes and the use of the water, cause the salt water to back up further? I understand it backs up as far as Occoquan.

Colonel WITHERS. I can't give you the exact place in the vicinity levels, but, yes, sir, that is a concern. Another concern or use, of course, with the free-flowing Potomac River is, frankly, dilution of the pollution which exists, and reductions of flow in the Potomac River are of concern from that point of view, as well as from the point of view of where the salt water is, and its effect on fisheries and spawning.

Mr. FAUNTROY. Did you treat the subject, though?

Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir, that subject is treated in the environmental impact statement.

Mr. FAUNTROY. Do you recall what the impact might be?

Colonel WITHERS. The impacts on the water quality were related to the permit applications, sir, in general ways. There were no yes/no answers, or limits established. Unfortunately we don't have the scientific basis at this point to say that a certain amount or limit of flow is going to be deleterious to the environment. We know the general answer, sir, but not the specific answer.

Mr. FAUNTROY. I see. I have no further questions at this time, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HARRIS. Thank you, Mr. Fauntroy. Does the minority have questions?

FAIRFAX COUNTY

Mr. SINGLETON Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Minority has a couple of questions, one for General Johnson. In view of your statement on page 13, I believe it was, that the Dalecarlia pumping facilities could be readily expanded, do you think that this would be a viable and perhaps preferable alternative to solving Fairfax County's problem and their plan to tap into the Potomac?

General JOHNSON. Well, the potential is there.

Mr. SINGLETON. Is it viable? Is it feasible economically?

General JOHNSON. It is dependent upon what the economic evaluations would be. It could certainly be a viable, desirable solution.

Mr. SINGLETON. If this expansion were to take place, would we need, then, the tap in the Potomac?

General JOHNSON. In the near-term, my answer to that would be no. In the long-term, dependent upon what the Washington metropolitan area long-range study proves out as far as demand is concerned, it could be.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

Mr. SINGLETON Thank you, General. I have a couple of questions relative to the environmental impact statement. Perhaps you or Colonel Withers could respond.

The first is very simply, do you foresee any impediments to the final adoption of the environmental impact statement?

Colonel WITHERS. I would say, sir, that that question cannot be answered until we receive the comments of all those who intend to comment upon it. For example, we have not yet received comments on the draft environmental impact statement from the interested Federal agencies.

Mr. SINGLETON. The second question that I have relative to this was, have you received any comments from the general public-any public comments thus far?

Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir. We received a considerable number of comments 2 days ago at the public hearing.

Mr. SINGLETON. From these comments, can you project for us a trend or a generalization about the nature of the comments received? Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir. The comments which were received 2 days ago from citizens of the area indicated concerns with regard to water quality and the effects of water quality on projected growth in the region.

Mr. FAUNTROY. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SINGLETON. Certainly.

LOW FLOW ALLOCATION AGREEMENT

Mr. FAUNTROY. You raised a question which has been of concern to me, because many of my constituents have not felt that they have been adequately involved in either the process for arriving at the low flow agreement or in having opportunity to comment on the study or the agreement and proposal as it has been made available. Did we have a hearing in the District of Columbia at any time about the agreement?

Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir, we did. The hearing of Monday evening was in the District of Columbia. Last September there were three public meetings on the subject of the low flow allocation agreement. One of these was held in the District of Columbia, and the other two were held in Virginia and Maryland.

Mr. FAUNTROY. What representations were made at the hearing last week from residents of the District?

Colonel WITHERS. Sir, there were several residents of the District, and as I recall the testimony, they raised concerns with regard to a growth and its effect on environmental quality.

Mr. FAUNTROY. And that's all?

Mr. HARRIS. If I may, the hearings that I believe are being referred to are the hearings that occurred the night before last; is that correct? Colonel WITHERS. Yes, sir.

Mr. FAUNTROY. That's right.

Mr. HARRIS. I'm sure that the Colonel and the staff have not had a chance to analyze all the statements. How many witnesses did you have, Colonel, about 30, as I recall?

Colonel WITHERS. Sir, 23 persons spoke.

Mr. HARRIS. So, it may be that some of these answers he may want to supplement with you, Mr. Fauntroy, because I doubt if he's had a chance to analyze all the statements at this point.

Mr. FAUNTROY. The point is that I have had questions raised to me regarding the extent of both the District government's participation when it came aboard on the question of being a signatory and how much involvement it had in the actual formulation of the proposal, and second, from citizens who felt that they just hadn't had an opportunity to have a good look at the agreement to assess what would be their response. Thank you.

Mr. SINGLETON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Counsel has no further questions.

Mr. HARRIS. Thank you. I'd like to recognize Mr. Whalen of the minority, a distinguished colleague fresh from the United Nations. We appreciate his attendance here at this little U.N.

I'd also like to recognize my distinguished colleague from Connecticut, Mr. McKinney.

Mr. MCKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I have no questions. I would just apologize to you and the committee, and to the gentlemen who testified as I will certainly read their testimony. I had to testify before Senator Proxmire on the Consumer's Co-op Bank today in the Senate to try and change his mind to the right thinking.

USE OF VIRGINIA WATER

Mr. HARRIS. Thank you, Mr. McKinney. I just have one other question if I may ask. If an interconnection between Falls Church and/or Arlington and the Fairfax County Water Authority were expanded so that the Occoquan water could be supplied to these areas during extremely low flows of the Potomac River-in other words, I'm not talking about the flow the other way. I'm talking about the flow back when the Potomac is very low. Would this be a benefit to the District of Columbia and the Federal installations? Anyone who would like, might try to answer that.

General JOHNSON. Well, my general approach would be, yes, sir, but now I'd like Mr. Ways to respond.

Mr. WAYS. Yes, Mr. Chairman, it would certainly make more water available if we were relieved of the burden of Arlington County and Falls Church. That additional water could be made available to the District of Columbia and the Federal Government during the shortage periods.

POTOMAC RIVER FLOW AND USE

Mr. HARRIS. Harry, you and I have gone over these flow charts together and have some understanding, I think, of what we're talking about. Could you tell me what level you think the Potomac is flowing at right now?