Laserfiche WebLink
<br />) <br /> <br />Environmental Study Team <br /> <br />The Envi ronm.nt.! Study Team meeting was held <br />February 16, 1989, in Phoenix, Arizona. The <br />objective of the m..ting was to r.vl.~ the draft <br />GCES 'l'echnical Study Plan and dis~uu the <br />initiation ot monitor-lng efForts and technical <br />study development during FY89. <br />GCES staff began the meeting with a discussion <br />of the direc,tion q!ven by the Executive Review <br />Committ.e.. That direction was to develop the <br />technical studies necessary to address the <br />Assistant Secretaries' recommendations and to <br />provide results that will result in a "75t level <br />of confidence." The tiain9 and extent of the <br />studies .hould use the confidence level criterion <br />as the study boundary quid.line. Additional <br />discussion centereet on the need, intent and <br />selection of the Senior scientist. <br />The Team spent the remainder of the meetinq <br />reviewing and discuss1nq the technical work items <br />proposed in the Dratt Technical Study Plan. The <br />draft study plan is separated into 2 periods, <br />FY89 and the out years. Ouring FY89, the effort <br />will center on the reinitiation of monitoring <br />programs, development of the integrated resource <br />plan, and the development of specific technical <br />study plans. The work for FY90 and the remainder <br />of the out years, was purposely not outlined <br />because it was felt that the Senior Scientist <br />should b. part of that decision process. Each of <br />the 17 defined FY89 work items were reviewed and <br />discusged by the study team. <br /> <br />Ec:ooomc Study ore. <br /> <br />The Econo.ic Study Tea. .et February 17, 1989, <br />in Phoenix, Arisona, to discuss the eeonomic <br />studies and to outline the process for <br />completion of the prot~type efforts. The meeting <br />began with a discussion of the environmental team <br />meeting and a definition of the direetion <br />provided by the Executive Review Committee. The <br />intent and selection of the Senior Scientist was <br />diseussed. <br />The technical portion of the meeting centered <br />on a review of the three methodologies proposed <br />tor the prototype economic analysis. Spreck <br />Rosekrans, Environ.ental Petens. Fund, outlined <br />the SLFIN methodology, costs, and proeess for <br />running the prototype analysis. Michael Roluti, <br />Recla..tion, followed with the EGEAS methodology, <br />and the costs associated with running the <br />prototype. A brief discussion was held on the <br />Western approaeh, but no costs estimates were <br />provided. Following that, the team discussed the <br />need for sensitivity analysis and the importance <br />ot the hydrology input data base. <br />Four seenarios will be analyzed in the <br />prototype analysis; a low, medium, and large load <br />growth area, eaeh with different levels of CRSP <br />penetration, and a "trout scenario" based on <br />hourly and monthly operation of Glen canyon Dam. <br />In addition, one scenario will be tested against <br />a low and a high hydrology base case. Each <br />scenario will be cOMpared to the base case. The <br />Economic Study Team telt that this approach will <br />provide the basis by which II thorough review ot <br />the methodologies can be made. The meeting ended <br />with a discussion of the integration of the <br />economic and envi ronmental study resul ts. <br /> <br />" <br />I <br /> <br />Complete not.s of both m.etin911 are availabla <br />from the GCES office. <br /> <br />Executive Review CaImi ttec <br /> <br />Th. GCES Executive Review COllUllittee (ERe) met <br />on February 21, 1989, 1n Phoenix, Arisona. The <br />meeting marked a significant milestone in the <br />~RC, as Dick Harks bid adieu to the group and <br />handed ov.r his responsibilities to the new <br />Superintendent at Grand Canyon National Park, <br />Jack Davis. <br />The ERC foeused their efforts on a review of <br />the GCES Draft Technical Study Plan and the <br />Senior Scientist position. Dave Wegner <br />outlined the loqic in the development of the <br />draft study plan and the comments received in <br />the envi ronmental IInd economic study tealll. <br />meetings. The ERe made several recommendations <br />regarding the ordering of the FY89 work and <br />requested clarification on several others. <br />Wayne Marchant led the discussion on the <br />selection of a Senior Seientist, and requested a <br />recommendation from the ERC. As a result, <br />initiation of IPA discussions with the Senior <br />Scientist eandidate has begun. <br />Th. eompletion of the GeES Phase II and III <br />!'rogram tor I.plementation document was <br />reviewed. Dave wegner went over the types of <br />comments received, how they are being dealt <br />with, and requested direction on several issues. <br />Sam Spiller, TWS, discussed the need for Fish <br />I< Wildlife Service Coordination Act reporting, <br />and identified several alternat.e ways t.hat. it. <br />could be handled in the Gcts program. No action <br />was taken on this issue. <br />The ERe will consider II recommendation for a <br />joint meet.ing with the technic~l study teams. <br /> <br />UPCOMING MEETINGS <br /> <br />Environmental Study Team - March 20, 1989 - Las <br />Vegas, Nevada <br />Economic study Tea. March 21, 1989 La. <br />Vegas, Nevada <br />Executive Review committee - no meeting set <br /> <br />GCES UPDATE <br /> <br />s~udy Manager: Oav1d-wegner <br />Editor: Barbara Taylor <br />Editorial Assistance: Public Affairs/GCES Staff <br />Typesetting: Linda ~tzold <br />Graphics: Ginger Reeve <br />Photography: Mike Phillips <br />