DRAFT
Minutes
of the
105th
Quarterly Meeting
of
the
The
meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by UMRBA Chair Mike Wells. The following were present:
|
Gary Clark |
|
|
Rick Mollahan |
|
|
Martin Konrad |
|
|
Laurie Martinson |
|
|
Rebecca Wooden |
|
|
Mike Wells |
|
|
Dru Buntin |
|
|
Gretchen Benjamin |
|
Federal Liaisons:
|
Terry Smith |
|
|
Bill Franz |
|
|
Linda Leake |
|
|
Rick Nelson |
|
|
Mike Sullivan |
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service |
Others in attendance:
|
Cathy Cutler |
|
|
Janet Sternburg |
|
|
Rich Worthington |
|
|
Chuck Spitzack |
|
|
Hank DeHaan |
|
|
Marvin Hubbell |
|
|
Brian Markert |
|
|
Brian Johnson |
|
|
Rebecca Soileau |
|
|
Don Powell |
|
|
Jeff DeZellar |
|
|
Don Hultman |
|
|
Jon Duyvejonck |
|
|
Scott Yess |
|
|
Barry Johnson |
|
|
Mike Slifer |
|
|
Bob Goodwin |
Maritime Administration |
|
Mark Carr |
|
|
Elisa Royce |
|
|
Dan McGuiness |
Audubon |
|
Gary Loss |
CDM |
|
Tim Feather |
CDM |
|
Mark Tompkins |
CH2M Hill |
|
Bently Green |
CH2M Hill |
|
Heather Schoonover |
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy |
|
Ron Kroese |
McKnight Foundation |
|
Kathleen Logan Smith |
|
|
Kim Knowles |
|
|
Brad Walker |
Prairie Rivers Network |
|
Christine Favilla |
Sierra Club |
|
Owen Dutt |
Shannon and Wilson |
|
Russell Schuab |
Shannon and Wilson |
|
Stephen Black |
|
|
Catherine McCalvin |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Todd Strole |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Paul Rohde |
Waterways Council, Inc. |
|
Holly Stoerker |
|
|
Dave Hokanson |
|
|
Barb Naramore |
|
Meeting Minutes
Gretchen
Benjamin moved and Gary Clark seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the November 13,
2007 meeting as drafted. The motion was
approved unanimously.
Executive Director’s
Report
Holly
Stoerker noted that all UMRBA Board members, alternates, and staff must sign
conflict of interest disclosure statements.
She urged those Board members present to complete the forms and turn
them in at the end of the meting. Forms
will also be sent to those not present at the meeting.
Stoerker
highlighted the following items from her written report included in the agenda
packet.
§
Strategic
planning for the EMP Long Term Resource Monitoring Program is nearing its
conclusion and a draft plan should be available for review in May.
§
The
Explanatory Statement accompanying the FY 08 appropriations act included
Congressional language limiting EMP funding to projects already underway. Stoerker thanked Corps staff for their
efforts to secure a favorable interpretation of this language. She also commented that it will be important
to resist having such language included in the FY 09 appropriations committee
report. Marvin Hubbell commented that
the Corps has been able to work with the restriction this year, but it will be
problematic in the future. The greatest
impact has been felt by the St. Louis District, followed by the
§
The
UMR Spills Coordination Group is planning a responder training session in May and
notification drill to exercise the UMR Spill Response Plan in March.
§
In
December, UMRBA submitted comments on the National Research Council Report on
the
§
In
January, UMRBA transmitted comments on the draft Hypoxia Action Plan.
§
Plans
are underway for two workshops focusing on the connections between the Clean
Water Act and ecosystem restoration on the
§
The
Corps has finalized its UMR Comprehensive Plan report. While the conclusion still remains that none
of the alternatives have a positive benefit-cost ratio, the number and scope of
the recommendations have increased.
§
The
USGS Cooperators’ Roundtable, which UMRBA co-hosted last November with ICWP,
was very successful. Copies of the
presentations and a summary of the recommendations are posted on both the ICWP
and UMRBA websites.
§
ICWP
is hoping to sponsor another series of regional workshops focusing on state
water planning. Stoerker urged UMRBA to
consider co-hosting one of these meetings in this region.
§
The
UMRBA Board and Water Quality Executive Committee will be making visits in
Chairman’s Report
Mike
Wells announced that Holly Stoerker will be retiring as UMRBA Executive Director,
effective June 30, 2008. Barb Naramore
has been selected to fill the position following Stoerker’s departure. In early March, Naramore will begin serving
fulltime in her current position, to facilitate the transition.
Wells
also announced that, in March, UMRBA will begin the process of seeking to fill
the Ecosystem & Navigation Program Director position, which Naramore
currently occupies. He said the hope is
to have new staff on board by early June.
Wells
announced that Stoerker’s retirement party is to be held in conjunction with
the August 2008 quarterly meeting, rather than the May 2008 meeting, as
previously indicated.
Dan McGuiness
Recognition
Holly
Stoerker presented Dan McGuiness with a UMRBA Certificate of Appreciation in
recognition of his many contributions and years of service to the people and
places of the
Interbasin Diversions
The
Interbasin Diversion Charter, signed by the Governors in 1989, requires that,
at UMRBA Annual Meetings, each State report on out-of-basin diversion requests
made during the previous year that exceeded an average of 5 million gallons per
day during any 30 day period. The following reports were offered in
accordance with the Charter:
Navigation and Ecosystem
Sustainability Program (NESP)
Economic Reevaluation — Chuck Spitzack
described the results of the Economic Reevaluation requested by the Assistant
Secretary of the Army (CW). The
reevaluation showed that the risks of not implementing the navigation
improvements originally recommended following the Navigation Study is greater
than the risk of implementing them.
Therefore, the Interim Report recommends proceeding with the first
increment plan and also developing new multimodal tools. Spitzack also summarized the views of the
External Peer Review (EPR) panel, which concluded that the Reevaluation is
incomplete because it lacks a multimodal basis, among other things. Spitzack said the Corps agrees with the EPR
panel’s recommendations concerning the need for improved models and sensitivity
analysis, but does not believe it is appropriate to delay the first increment
plan. Spitzack indicated that the public
review period ends soon and the report is expected to be finalized by March 31,
2008.
FY 08 and FY 09 Work Plans — Spitzack distributed
copies of the FY 08 NESP work plan, detailing how $8.856 million in funding was
distributed among project activities. He
also presented the “most efficient” work plan for FY 09. That plan is based on $50 million in funding,
split equally between navigation and ecosystem work activities. Spitzack explained that a 2-3 year ramp-up
will be required, moving from $50 million in FY09 to $200 million by FY
11. After that time, a steady level of
funding at approximately $265 million/year will be required. Spitzack emphasized the need for construction
contracts that allow and reward contractor driven innovation and efficiencies.
Implementation Guidance — Rich Worthington said
that there have been a number of meetings with ASA (CW) staff regarding the WRDA
implementation guidance for NESP, but he does not yet have a draft to share
with partners for review. However, he
summarized the major provisions in the draft guidance and said they parallel
the authorization closely. In
particular,
Martin
Konrad asked about the requirement for External Peer Review.
Rick
Nelson asked why fish passage and dam point control projects need approval at
the Chief of Engineer’s level.
Implementation Report to
Congress —
Spitzack explained that NESP implementation reports to Congress are required
every 4 years. The first report is due
in June 2009. Spitzack said these
reports offer an opportunity to develop state-of-the-art reports on adaptive
management, which would go beyond what is required in the authorization. He reviewed the Statement of Work for the
Report to Congress included in the UMRBA meeting packet.
Gretchen
Benjamin questioned the need for two reports in 2009 — a Report to Congress in
June and then an “enhanced” report in December.
Spitzack explained that the Congressionally-set June deadline may not
allow sufficient time to develop the adaptive management baseline for the
future. Holly Stoerker commented that
the adaptive planning reports should be decoupled from the required Reports to
Congress. She suggested that the Reports
to Congress focus on accomplishments and future plans under NESP, rather than
on state-of-the-art adaptive management.
UMRBA Vision for
Integrating NESP and EMP — Holly Stoerker reported that UMRBA had recently received
letters from Deputy Director of Civil Works Steve Stockton and Assistant
Secretary of the Army John Paul Woodley, in response to the vision statement
UMRBA transmitted to them regarding EMP-NESP integration. Stoerker characterized the letters as
cordial, but noncommittal. The
Administration is not in a position to commit to a transition from EMP to NESP,
because it would involve a commitment to budget for NESP, a commitment the
Administration has not made.
Chuck
Spitzack said he felt UMRBA’s vision statement was very helpful because it laid
out a transition strategy for ecosystem restoration projects. However, he questioned the implications for
LTRMP, noting that it is not clear if the NESP authorizing language would allow
LTRMP to be funded in part under NESP, if it was not fully funded under
EMP.
Institutional
Arrangements
— Chuck Spitzack presented a variety of potential alternative configurations
for a River Council, which he described as reflecting feedback from MVD on the
2005 Operational Model and additional considerations related to the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and the WRDA-authorized NESP Advisory Panel.
Dru
Buntin noted that partners were previously told that the River Council would
meet the needs of the Advisory Panel. He
questioned why this judgment has changed and why the Corps is seeking to avoid
FACA. Spitzack explained that the
relationship between the Advisory Panel and River Council is complicated by
FACA, which is administratively burdensome.
Buntin commented that the applicability of FACA may be appropriate given
the large amount of funding involved in NESP.
Spitzack
explained that the draft concept paper he distributed last week has since been
modified to reflect a FACA-exempt River Advisory Panel (RAP) to consult and
guide the program and a FACA-compliant River Council (RC) to collaborate, coordinate,
and integrate with other programs. The
RAP members may be a subset of the RC.
Rebecca
Wooden said that the questions and concerns regarding institutional arrangement
that UMRBA raised in its January 2006 letter of comment had not yet been
addressed. She emphasized that the
States still have serious concerns about the River Council concept.
Spitzack
outlined a schedule for further consideration and development of the
institutional arrangements concepts, including further discussion at the upcoming
NECC-ECC meeting, with a proposal to the District Commanders by May or June,
and the first meeting of these new groups in November 2008.
Gretchen
Benjamin commented that the institutional arrangements process is
bewildering. The concepts seem to change
continually, and there is a lack of communication. Yet she said she believes there is urgency to
getting organizational changes made.
Rebecca
Wooden said that NECC-ECC is not the appropriate forum to seek policy-level
input on institutional arrangements.
Laurie Martinson stressed the importance of giving the UMRBA Board an
opportunity to more fully discuss and provide input. All Board members agreed. Buntin expressed frustration that the
material provided in advance of the meeting reflected substantial changes from
where the institutional arrangement concepts had previously been left and then
Spitzack presented yet another alternative today.
Spitzack
indicated he would develop a timeline for review and input and provide it to
UMRBA staff following the meeting.
Water Quality Update
Designated Uses Project — Dave Hokanson
described the work of the UMRBA Water Quality Task Force related to designated
uses on the river. Currently the Task
Force is focusing on aquatic life use and the potential value of establishing
subcategories. Challenges include
answering questions such as:
§
What
is the right “conceptual framework” or “grid” to apply in more habitat-informed
implementation of the Clean Water Act?
§
What
are the important, map-able, measurable distinctions?
§
How
can information and approaches from other river programs like LTRMP and EMAP be
integrated?
§
What
is the relationship between data and decisions?
§
Can
main channel criteria protect uses in other areas?
Hokanson stressed that there is a lot of work
ahead on this project. Some of the
immediate next steps and opportunities include meetings of the UMRCC-Water
Quality Tech Section (March 18), Water Quality Task Force and Executive
Committee (June 10-11), and the Clean Water Act-Ecosystem Restoration Workshops
(April 16-17 and June 11-12).
Outreach
to EPA—
Hokanson reported that he and the Water Quality Task Force Chair Jim Baumann
met with EPA Region 5 staff in November.
Similarly, Water Quality Executive Committee (WQEC) Chair Chuck Corell
and Hokanson met with the EPA Region 7 Administrator in January. In March, members of UMRBA staff and WQEC
will meet with Water Office Directors at EPA headquarters. The purpose of these visits is to generate
increased support for UMRBA’s interstate coordination efforts. One possibility is an Interagency Personnel
Agreement between EPA and UMRBA.
Kim Knowles and Kathleen Logan Smith of the
Missouri Coalition for the Environment described the Mississippi River Water
Quality Collaborative, which is composed of 13 state-based groups from 9 of the
10 river states, as well as regional and national groups. It includes biologists, environmental
engineers, attorneys, and activists.
There are five work groups, each focusing on a different water quality
issue: water quality standards, farm policy, 402 discharge permits, 404 wetland
permits, anti-degradation, and nutrients.
For each issue area Knowles and Logan-Smith
described the Collaborative’s goals and actions. The Collaborative participates in rule
development, comments on permits and permit appeals, presents legal challenges,
conducts citizen outreach, and hosts in-the-field workshops.
Logan Smith thanked UMRBA for the opportunity to
start building a working relationship with regard to water quality issues in
the basin.
NESP-Related
Collaboration
Holly Stoerker said that UMRBA is enhancing its
collaborative efforts on NESP-related issues, as well as water quality
issues. In particular, an ad-hoc group
including UMRBA, Waterways Council Inc., the River Resource Alliance, The
Nature Conservancy, and Audubon, have been working together on a regular basis
to promote funding for NESP in FY 09.
She expressed appreciation to these partners for their hard work and
willingness to work together.
Paul Rohde emphasized that it will be very
difficult to secure funding this year.
Catherine McCalvin reported that TNC Board members made Congressional
visits last week in support of NESP.
Although there are many members who support NESP, the feedback the TNC
received was disappointing. In
particular, there will likely be a Continuing Resolution until a new
Administration is in office.
FY 2009 Federal Budget
Corps of Engineers — Terry Smith reported
that the FY 09 proposed budget for the Corps is $4.741 billion, down from
FY 08 by $130 million. The budget emphasizes the Corps’ 3 main
mission areas (i.e., navigation, flood damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem
restoration), projects with high return on investment, a user fee for inland
waterway barges, and “actions for change.”
Smith
outlined both the total Corps and MVD budgets with respect to General
Investigations (GI), Construction General (CG), and Operation and Maintenance
(O&M). He noted that the EMP is one
of six national priority construction projects. He also explained that
the O&M budget is being presented according to 54 USGS subwatershed
units.
Barb
Naramore asked if the new inland waterway user fee proposal would disadvantage
certain regions because it is based on lockages and not all waterway segments have
locks. Paul Rohde commented that the
proposal is not being well-received by the industry, in part because it is
viewed as inequitable. He said that
waterway users are eager to see the details of the proposal, which has not yet
been released.
Environmental Protection
Agency —
Bill Franz reported that activities associated with EPA’s “Clean and Safe
Water” goal will comprise approximately 36 percent of EPA’s FY 09 proposed
budget. Funding for Section 106 is
proposed to increase by $3 million, Section 319 funding is slated to decrease
by $16 million, and the Targeted Watershed Program is zeroed out. Franz commented that Congress typically
reinstates the watershed funding. Cuts
are also proposed in FY 09 for the Clean Water and Safe Drinking Water state
revolving funds.
Franz
said four specific regional programs are funded under the “Geographic Programs”
account. In addition, the “other”
category includes funds for additional regional programs including Puget Sound
and
In
response to a question about Section 104 funding, Franz explained that,
although it has been zeroed out in the FY 09 budget, the authority still
exists.
Fish and Wildlife
Service
— Rick Nelson said that the overall Fish and Wildlife Service budget increased
by 6 percent in FY 08, but is proposed to decrease by 2 percent in FY 09. The Ecological Services budget is slated for
an $8 million cut.
With
regard to specific work on the UMR, Nelson said the Ecological Services program
is estimated at about $715,000 in FY 08.
This includes funding from the Department of the Interior budget, as
well as funding transfers from other agencies.
Don
Hultman said the budget for Refuges is up $39 million nationally in FY 08. There are eleven refuges on or near the
Hultman
described the Fisheries program as having relatively stable funding. In
total, the 3 UMR fisheries resource offices are funded at about $1.3 million in
FY 08. Hultman also noted that the FWS grant programs to UMR states have
been increasing about 1-3 percent per year.
However, the FY 08 totals have not yet been updated.
U.S. Geological Survey — Linda Leake presented
an overview comparison of the FY 08 and FY 09 budgets for USGS, noting that the
$968 million proposal for FY 09 is a decrease of $38 million from FY 08. Some program accounts will be decreased, while
others increase. Functions related to
climate change will be streamlined by consolidating them under one budget line
item. Leake also noted that the budget
includes $8.2 million for a new “Water for
Leake
also briefly reviewed the activities underway in each of the five states’
Leake
concluded by explaining that USGS has just received approval for executive
realignment into regional offices that will integrate across USGS disciplines. UMR states will be assigned to one of 3 regions:
North Central, South Central, or
U.S. Department of
Agriculture
— Mike Sullivan explained that the trend in the USDA budget is to put less
emphasis on discretionary programs and more on mandatory programs. Discretionary spending is down $135 million,
with funding being redirected from RC&D,
Mandatory
program funding, including what the Administration believes will be needed for
new Farm Bill programs, totals $2.6 billion.
The Administration’s budget includes $1.05 billion for EQIP, $360 million
for the Conservation Security Program, $181 million for WRP, and $84 for CRP
technical assistance.
Sullivan
also presented a graph illustrating the NRCS staffing trend over the past 10
years, showing that Farm Bill programs are taking increasing time and displacing
the effort previously devoted to conservation operations and other
discretionary programs.
Middle
Steve
Black of the Southwestern Illinois RC&D gave a presentation describing the
Middle Mississippi River Partnership (MMRP).
He explained that the Middle Mississippi is the 200 miles of river
between the confluence with the Missouri River and the confluence with the
The
MMRP emphasizes coordination of projects on the ground. Black gave the example of
MMRP
will be receiving collaborative planning funds from the Corps of Engineers to
move its work forward by doing a study.
The focus of the study, which is one of only five such studies in the
country, is 1) setting regional goals, objectives, and strategies, 2)
developing a hydro geomorphic model, and 3) conducting assessments of five
river reaches.
Administrative Issues
Personnel Manual — Martin Konrad
explained that there are two amendments to the UMRBA Personnel Manual that the
Board discussed yesterday. The first
involves changes to the way in which paid leave is awarded to project
employees. The second would adjust the
salary ranges for the Executive Director and Program Director positions. Konrad moved to amend the UMRBA Manual of
Personnel Practices as follows:
§
In
Chapter V, Part A, Section 1, delete existing language and insert the
following:
§
In
Chapter II, Part A, increase the bottom and top figure of the salary ranges for
the Executive Director, Water Quality Program Director, and Ecosystem & Navigation
Program Director by 8 percent.
Gretchen
Benjamin seconded the motion, which was then passed unanimously.
Naramore Employment
Status —
Martin Konrad moved and Gary Clark seconded a motion to change Barb Naramore’s
employment status from part-time to full-time, effective March 3, 2008 or as
soon thereafter as possible. The motion
passed unanimously.
Stoerker Annual Leave — Mike Wells explained
that when a UMRBA employee leaves, the payment in cash for earned but unused
annual leave is limited by the UMRBA Personnel Manual to pay for 30 days
(240 hours). Wells said the Board would
like to make an exception to that policy for Holly Stoerker. Gretchen Benjamin moved and Rebecca Wooden
seconded a motion authorizing payment to Holly Stoerker for all her earned but
unused annual leave, upon her retirement.
The motion passed unanimously.
FY 2008 Budget Revisions
— Mike
Wells noted that a number of the actions that the Board just took have budget
implications, particularly for payroll-related expenses. He explained that yesterday the Board
discussed a variety of amendments to the FY 2008 UMRBA budget, which total an
increase of $36,530, including the following: