Technical Work Group Meetings 2009

Home Browse Search

Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Page 5 DRAFT Minutes of July 16 -17, 2008, Meeting Norm asked what happens to the carryover funds for the Experimental Flow Fund. Dennis explained that there are two sets of carryover. The AMWG sets aside $500K which stays in the basin fund and is carried ' on Reclamation's portion of the budget. GCMRC notifies Reclamation what they intend to carry over and they discuss what to do with it. ' Reclamation will look into the status of carryover funds on known year -to -year projects. GCMRC FY09 Budget Emphasis. John Hamill gave a PPT presentation, (Attachment 6c). He mentioned several items that had changes. He brought copies of the AMWG motions relative to the budget. Two items ' were discussed and the only other issue was the tribal liaison position. He said the Deputy Secretary sent out a response to that and said DOI will be handling this issue. The other issue was a discussion on the near shore ecology and fall steady flows. He distributed copies of a letter he sent to the AMWG dated April 17, 2008 (Attachment 6c). They received only three responses on their budget comment form (Attachment 6e). GCMRC prepared responses to those comments and will share those with the group. He said it really helps to have the format so they are prepared for the budget discussion. Norm asked about the $1 million GCMRC receives from USGS for use by the AMP. John told him the amount is included and will be changed in the budget before the next iteration. He explained that DOI customers get a "corporate" rate but the money is not shown as a final line item. Mary said she wants to see the whole burden rate with the $1 million subtracted. She said she has requested this information every year for the past three years and won't approve this year's budget without seeing it. John said he didn't see the value in providing that information as there are different burden rates applied to different projects. : Dennis will send out a form for the AMP stakeholders to provide information on their ' ancillary projects within the GCDAMP. Kurt asked Norm if he wants to go through each project that has a conservation measure within each component. Norm said he wants to see the total scope of the BCOM. Glen suggested Norm bring those to ' the table. Dennis asked if the group would agree in FY09 on the ancillary projects and determine if they're part of the program. The group continued to review the nine issues. He said the lengthy discussion on the 2000 LSSF made him feel good about what GCRMC is doing and asked the TWG if that issue was resolved. Mary said she wasn't sure they had enough money to do the work. Kurt asked if other people felt the same way. John Hamill ' reminded them that if they take money from one project, they have to put it in another. Mary said that Glenn and Ted had mentioned what can be done with the money for LiDAR so she was wondering what can be done "with more than less." Glenn said it would be more because plant and species responses can be delineated but cautioned there is a limit. He is to trying to find out the costs and said a big part of the overflight costs are in the overprocessing. 1