Laserfiche WebLink
monthly basis. It was also suggested and agreed upon that the discussions <br />should be open and that there could be no commitment of entities in the <br />meetings. <br />Concern was expressed that there needed to be avenues to make public the <br />discussions and actions of the group. It was suggested that public meetings by <br />the various entities and forum meetings be used to publicize the activities of the <br />study group. <br />It was suggested that a mailing list be set up to distribute information about the <br />progress of the study and any significant reports. The RIP mailing list will be <br />examined as a basis for a mailing list. Each individual was encouraged to think <br />of other entities that should be on the mailing list and send names and <br />addresses to Malcolm Wilson who will take responsibility for the list. <br />The publication of a newsletter was also discussed. It was felt, however, that <br />existing newsletters, such as the Recovery Program newsletter, could be used <br />as a vehicle for disseminating information to the broader group of entities <br />interested in the RIPRAP. George Smith and John Hamill agreed to take <br />responsibility for producing articles for the Recovery program newsletter. <br />V. Review and Clarify Goals and Objectives of Study <br />Goals and objectives were discussed earlier during the meeting. <br />George Smith passed out the new proposed target flows for the 15 Mile Reach <br />for review. The proposed target flows had not yet been reviewed by the CWCB. <br />Eric Kuhn noted that essentially there are two types of reservoirs in the basin, <br />single purpose storage reservoirs and dual purpose power generation and <br />storage reservoirs. It was noted that the most likely source of any reoperation is <br />in the potential for rescheduling of discretionary power releases. <br />A draft outline of tasks was distributed but was not discussed in detail due to <br />time constraints. <br />The draft schedule attached to the MOU was pointed out and it was explained <br />that it was based on the draft outline of tasks and attempting to fit them to the <br />time schedule in the RIP. Individuals were encouraged to review the outline of <br />tasks and schedule and suggest modifications. <br />Rev: April 5, 1995 5 CR003105.MIN <br />