Technical Work Group Meetings 2009

Home Browse Search

1 n Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group Page 8 Minutes of July 16 -17, 2008, Meeting Since this line item has budget implications, the group will need to bring a recommendation back to the TWG for consideration before making a recommendation to the AMWG. Review of Issues presented at yesterday's meeting. Kurt reviewed the following: Sediment • Important for GCMRC to meet with TWG reps regarding questions asked of the sediment models. Action: The Center has dealt with DASA • Look at running HECRAZ model against archaeologist site locations. Action: Glenn Bennett is willing to look at that against the archaeological models. He will make some runs on that. Mary B said she'd like to go to 100,000. Glenn said he could do that. No budget impact to FY09 Near Shore Ecology Pilot Project — TWG review part of AMP? Action: John Hamill said GCMRC would share the scope of work on that project with the TWG. Matthew said he got the SAs review back and will respond to those and then distribute to the TWG. John said they also need to talk with the NPS for permitting on the pilot study. Mary said if there is going to be a problem, the TWG needs to be informed. BOR Budget • Tribal Monitoring Funding — What happens to non - expended funds? Action: Mike Berry is heading up the effort between Reclamation and tribes and whether those funds can be redistributed to the tribes and if there is something leftover, determine how those fund can be distributed. Mike will report back to the TWG at a later date. • Tribal AMP Participation Funding expended listed by individual tribes. Action: The Tribes will respond to Mike Berry and information will be presented to the TWG. The four tribes attending today's meeting concurred (Southern Paiute, Hopi, Hualapai, Zuni) with this action. GCMRC Budget • HFE Research Projects that continue into 09 are not shown in the budget. Action: John Hamill will create an addendum on ongoing projects with the HFE for the TWG's information. John said he would include a summary spreadsheet in FY09 and is out of the Experimental Flow Fund and can also include some language about linkages to other projects. Dennis said he couldn't find the tie with the original AMWG assignment and that this project is intended ' to fulfill that directive but is losing its identity. • Show full overhead for each project (how USGS contribution is expended). There was a very ' lengthy discussion with Mary Barger requesting that each GCMRC project show the actual cost including burden and then having GCMRC subtract the $1 million they receive at the bottom of the spreadsheet. She has asked for this for the past several years and it never gets ' done. John said he didn't see the utility in doing two different spreadsheets and asked the TWG to weigh in on what they feel should be done and then proposing that to the AMWG for a decision. Mary said she provided comments on a spreadsheet and didn't know if the group would have time to discuss. There isn't a lot of detail in the projects. Her reason for bringing up the issue again is that she is a very detail oriented person and feels it would better inform the TWG in their budget deliberations.