Minutes of the
106th Quarterly Meeting
of the
May 20, 2008
The meeting was called to
order at 9:35 a.m. by UMRBA Chair Martin Konrad. The following were present:
UMRBA Representatives and
Alternates:
|
Gary Clark |
|
|
Rick Mollahan |
|
|
Martin Konrad |
|
|
Neil Volmer |
Iowa (DOT) |
|
Laurie Martinson |
Minnesota (DNR) |
|
Rebecca Wooden |
|
|
Dick Lambert |
|
|
Mike Wells |
|
|
Dru Buntin |
|
|
Todd Ambs |
|
|
Gretchen Benjamin |
|
Federal Liaisons:
|
Bill Franz |
|
|
Mike Jawson |
|
|
Charles Wooley |
|
|
Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh |
|
|
Terry Smith |
|
Others in attendance:
|
Tim Schlagenhaft |
|
|
Steve Lee |
|
|
Jonathan Peterson |
|
|
Kevin Bluhm |
|
|
Jon Christenson |
|
|
Adam Rasmussen |
|
|
Don Powell |
|
|
Jeff DeZellar |
|
|
Chuck Spitzack |
|
|
Michael Tarpey |
|
|
Marv Hubbell |
|
|
Gary R. Clark |
|
|
Colonel Robert Sinkler |
|
|
Karen Hagerty |
|
|
Rich Astrack |
|
|
Linda Leake |
|
|
Rick Frietsche |
|
|
Gary Wege |
|
|
Scott Yess |
|
|
Paul Rohde |
Waterways Council, Inc. |
|
Heather Schoonover |
Institute for Agriculture
and Trade Policy |
|
Dan McGuiness |
Audubon |
|
Gary Loss |
CDM |
|
Vince Shay |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Doug Blodgett |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Gabrielle Horner |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Dan Larson |
River Resource |
|
Holly Stoerker |
|
|
Barb Naramore |
|
|
Dave Hokanson |
|
|
Kirsten Mickelsen |
|
Meeting Minutes
Laurie Martinson moved and
Todd Ambs seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the February 20, 2008
meeting as drafted. The motion was approved
unanimously.
Executive Director’s Report
Holly Stoerker highlighted
the following items from her written report included in the agenda packet:
§
On March 5-6,
UMRBA staff, Board members, and Water Quality Executive Committee members
talked with members of Congress and the Administration about funding and
program development of EMP and NESP, including the relationship between the two
programs. They also promoted funding for
UMRBA’s interstate water quality activities.
UMRBA staff submitted earmark request forms to 11 Congressional members
for UMRBA water quality funding.
§
On April 16-17,
UMRBA held the first of two “Ecosystem Restoration and the Clean Water Act”
workshops. Participants identified
potential ways to connect ecosystem restoration and water quality protection
efforts; a summary of those ideas was distributed. The second workshop will be on June 11-12 in
§
The U.S. EPA has
posted an opening for a 2-year Environmental Protection Specialist position
with the UMRBA under an Intergovernmental Personnel Agreement (IPA). The posting will close on May 23. The UMRBA will review the candidate list and
participate in the interviewing process.
The position will primarily work on the UMR Designated Uses Project and
will also generally support the work of the UMRBA Water Quality Task Force.
§
The LTRMP
Strategic Planning Team has released a draft plan for FY 10-14 and requests
comments be submitted to the appropriate point of contact by June 16, 2008. The
team hopes to have a final draft to present at the EMP-CC’s August 2008 meeting
for endorsement. An operational plan
will be created after the strategic plan is finalized, serving to link the
strategic plan’s outcomes and outputs to the LTRMP annual work plans.
§
The Interstate
Council on Water Policy is working with the Corps on a proposal to conduct a
national assessment of states’ water planning processes. Regional meetings are proposed for states to
share their planning needs. UMR will
likely be included in the Northeast region meeting in June 2009.
Holly Stoerker announced that
this is her 106th and last UMRBA quarterly meeting. She expressed her appreciation for those she
has worked with over the years and the progress that has been made on the
river, as well as her hopes that people will continue to work in a respectful,
collaborative way. Martin Konrad
announced Stoerker’s retirement party will be held in
Remarks from Brigadier General Walsh
Brigadier General Michael
Walsh described his vision for the
General Walsh and Colonel
Robert Sinkler presented an award to Dan McGuiness for forty years of service
as a conservationist on the
Inland Waterway User Fees
Paul Rohde of the Waterways
Council reported on the history and current status of the Inland Waterways
Trust Fund (IWTF) and the Administration’s proposal to shift from a gas tax to
a lock-use fee. The trust fund was
enacted in 1977 and established a $0.10 per gallon fuel tax, which is now $0.20
per gallon. The tax costs each vessel
approximately $8,000-16,000 per fill up.
The IWTF pays for 50 percent of the total costs for new construction and
major rehabilitation on the inland navigation system. The Administration is proposing the lockage
fees in reaction to the decreasing trust fund balance, which is currently at
$139 million. Rhode commented that
spending the trust fund money is preferable to accumulating a large fund
balance while leaving navigation needs unmet.
Administration’s proposal — The Administration announced on April 4 that it is
proposing to transition from the fuel tax to a user fee. The fee would be imposed starting on October
1, 2008 at $50 per barge, per lockage, at the larger locks (i.e., 600 feet in
length and above). It would increase by
$10 each year until it reaches $80 in 2012.
At the same time, the fuel tax will be reduced to $0.10 per gallon in
October 2008, to $0.05 in October 2009, and would end in October 2010. Forty segments would be added to the existing
27 taxed segments. This expansion would
include the Black and
Waterways Council’s perspective – The Administration’s proposal has several
fundamental problems, according to Rhode:
According to Rhode, the
Corps’ project delivery system is ineffective and needs to be addressed (e.g.,
the Olmstead project took 25 years to complete). Delays in project construction have led to
substantial lost benefits, and the current timetable from initiation of
construction to completion is 18-25 years.
This compares with four to eight years following WRDA 86. Existing systems should be improved, rather
than creating a new model. Rhode called
for predictable, consistent, and adequate funding; increased commitment to
operation and maintenance and system reliability; and a reduction in the
non-federal cost share on navigation projects from 50 to 25 percent.
Todd Ambs asked what the
likelihood is of the lockage fee proposal moving forward and getting
Congressional approval. Rohde responded
that the proposal came quickly and has Congressional opposition, but said the
discussion will continue. Dru Buntin
asked about Congressional reaction to industry’s proposal to reduce the
non-federal cost share on inland navigation projects from 50 to 25
percent. Rohde said that the
Congressional response to this idea is still to be determined.
Navigation and Ecosystem Sustainability Program (NESP)
Program Update
— Chuck Spitzack reported that the Reevaluation Report was submitted to Corps
headquarters in March and was approved to go to the Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Civil Works (ASA CW) in April.
The District Commanders and their senior staff were briefed in April and
a meeting is planned with MVD staff.
Spitzack thanked the UMRBA, EMP-CC and NECC/ ECC for re-energizing the
Institutional Arrangements process. The
Corps launched a UMRS Communication Team in April, and more information will be
presented at the August meeting. The
team plans on coordinating with partner agencies and lower river
districts. Holly Stoerker asked when the
Corps will hear back from the ASA on the reevaluation report, and Terry Smith
said he did not know because there has been no feedback yet.
Ongoing
and future activities include:
§
First Increment
Plan and FY 09 plan scenarios (out for comment soon)
§
Communication
plan (July)
§
Proposal for the
River Advisory Panel (out for comment in July/August)
§
Revised Program
Management Plan (August)
§
System-wide goals
for ecosystem, human use, and navigation
§
Learning and
communication principles
§
Reach planning —
a pilot ecosystem objectives workshop will be held next week
§
First
Implementation Report (Program Management Plan and report outline to discuss in
August; report due June 09)
Martin Konrad asked if there
is a schedule for reach planning efforts.
Spitzack replied that there is not, but Corps staff will work on
developing one. Spitzack noted that NESP
funding constraints limit the amount of reach planning that can be accomplished
in FY 08. Gretchen Benjamin asked how
the communication plan is going to work.
Spitzack said that the Communication Team will be working on
inter-district and inter-program communication and that a draft plan will
hopefully be done in July. Benjamin said
it is good to have internal communication and coordination and acknowledged
that funding constraints are tough. But
she urged that more money be invested for public outreach, especially at this
early stage of the program. Spitzack
agreed that it is important, and that the budget is lean. He stressed that the Corps must balance
public outreach with other things that need to be done, but said funding for
public outreach has been kept relatively high, in comparison to other program
components. Benjamin expressed interest
in working with Corps on public outreach.
Colonel Sinkler said he appreciates this offer.
WRDA Implementation Guidance — Terry Smith said that implementation guidance is
needed for NESP because the WRDA authorization is ambiguous on some points,
leaving issues to be addressed by the Corps as the implementing agency. He explained that the guidance is an internal
directive to Corps staff, and is not written for a broad general audience. Smith reported that the guidance has been
approved in Corps headquarters and will hopefully be finalized and sent to the
ASA in a month. Once finalized, the
guidance can be modified over time as needed.
Smith explained that the
partners’ comments on the draft guidance related primarily to five main issues:
1) various limitations on delegated authorities, 2) adaptive management, 3)
Project Implementation Reports, 4) comparable progress, and 5)
condemnation.
Smith reviewed the Corps’ response
to UMRBA comments in particular:
§
Language
concerning dam point control was clarified.
As suggested in the UMRBA’s comments, dam point will augment, rather
than supplant, hinge point control for purposes of enhanced water level
management.
§
Delegation of
authority for various report and plan approvals will be evaluated later as
experience from implementation is gained.
§
The intent of the
language in regards to condemnation is to work with a willing seller at fair
market value. Condemnation will not be used under the NESP restoration program
to take title or real estate interests from unwilling sellers. Instead, it will be a carefully limited tool
employed only to address certain title and valuation issues, with the
landowner’s consent.
§
The Corps agrees
that collaboration on project priorities should occur.
§
Cost sharing for
the feasibility phase of restoration projects is the Corps standard; EMP was
under an older approach. This will be worked on and addressed as we go forward
§
Monitoring and
adaptive management will be exempted from the one and three percent caps,
respectively, relative to total costs for CAP projects. The guidance has been revised in accordance
with the comments.
§
Consultation and
funding agreements with the Department of the Interior and states are not
limited to $100,000. But agreements
above this amount must be approved by the Division, rather than District,
Engineer. An effort will be made to
change the cap on District-level approval to $200,000.
§
The Corps concurs
with UMRBA’s observations that the WRDA-mandated Advisory Panel need not be
limited to the narrow functions specified in the legislation and may included
individuals who are involved in NESP implementation activities. ASA Woodley is retaining the position of the
Advisory Panel Chair at this time.
§
The definition of
comparable progress is still unclear and will be developed in collaboration
with partners.
Comments from other partners
will be discussed at the NECC-ECC meeting.
Martin Konrad expressed appreciation
to the Corps for its response to UMRBA’s comments, but asked if there would be
an opportunity to work together on some of the remaining issues. Smith said the guidance needs to be finalized
in order to have it in place should NESP receive an FY 09 appropriation. However, he said the remaining issues can be
addressed as the Corps and its partners gain implementation experience with
NESP. Holly Stoerker asked Smith to thank
Rich Worthington for his work on the implementation guidance and presence at
UMRBA meetings.
Institutional Arrangements — Barb Naramore outlined the development of the
Institutional Arrangements (IA) focus group, which was created in response to
concerns expressed by the UMRBA Board and state EMP-CC members at the February
quarterly meetings. These state concerns
included lack of a consensus problem statement among the partnership and the
evolving number of IA proposals. Members
of the IA Focus Group include four Corps staff and one representative each from
the FWS, USGS, EPA, Waterways Council, TNC, Wisconsin DNR, Missouri DOC, and
UMRBA.
After meeting in person and
via conference call, the IA Focus Group developed a written report dated May
12, 2008. According to Naramore, the
group’s fundamental conclusions outlined in that report include:
1.
Much of our
existing institutional arrangements structure functions well.
2.
We will need a
new structure to meet NESP’s legislative and practical requirements.
3.
It is important
to have NGOs engaged.
4.
It is preferable
for the NESP IA structure to be exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Major
recommendations contained in the report include:
1.
Form a
2.
The RAP should
meet the requirements of WRDA 07.
3.
The RAP’s
membership should follow the WRDA 07 provisions.
4.
The RAP’s scope
should be limited — i.e., don’t pursue a River Council at this time, but be
open to evolution as needs and circumstances change.
5.
No changes to the
EMP-CC are recommended now.
The Focus Group’s proposed
purpose statement for RAP is “to provide the partnership consultation and
guidance necessary to successfully implement the ecosystem restoration
component of NESP.” Naramore described
the RAP’s scope of activities as including:
The
proposed timeline for RAP development includes the following:
Rebecca Wooden asked whether
ASA Woodley will appoint the RAP members, and if it will be done by name or
position. She noted that such
appointment processes can be lengthy.
Naramore said that, while the focus group recognizes this challenge, ASA
Woodley has indicated he will retain the appointment authority. Spitzack agreed that there needs to be more
thought given to this issue.
Rich Astrack presented the
results of the Final Report and Recommendations for the Upper Mississippi River
Comprehensive Plan that was authorized in WRDA 1999, in the interest of
systemic flood damage reduction. The
plan covers three UMR reaches and one
Astrack outlined six major conclusions
drawn from the study as follows (conclusions two, three, and four were carried
forward from the previous version of the report):
i.
cost-shared
feasibility phase reconstruction analysis on individual flood risk management
systems,
ii.
systemic analysis
of critical transportation infrastructure,
iii.
UMRS hydrologic
modeling should be maintained and updated,
iv.
develop a
methodology to clearly convey flood risk on the UMRS,
v.
close data gaps
in a number of areas, and
vi.
perform watershed
analysis on individual tributaries as interest and funding permit.
On behalf of the Corps team
involved in the Comprehensive Plan, Astrack thanked Holly Stoerker for her
great contributions to the planning effort.
EMP and NESP: Congressional Outlook on Funding
Gabe Horner from The Nature
Conservancy thanked Holly Stoerker for bringing several parties together to
advocate for NESP funding. Horner
described The Nature Conservancy’s (TNC’s) support for EMP and NESP funding,
and TNC’s message that “now is the time for
Horner
also noted that TNC has hired a lobbyist to work on
Paul Rhode described
Waterways Council, Inc. (WCI) initiatives in
Dan McGuiness from Audubon
distributed a handout describing Audubon’s 2008 Federal Legislative Priorities
for Mississippi River Restoration.
Audubon is interested in successful NESP and EMP implementation because
the
Dan Larson described the
River Resource Alliance’s efforts to build grassroots support to improve the
decaying infrastructure on the
Holly Stoerker commented on
the UMRBA’s recent Congressional visits.
Although there will likely be a Continuing Resolution to provide FY 09
funding, it is important to continue advocating so a strong foundation for the
future is established. Earmarks are an
issue for all Corps projects, not just NESP; and it will be particularly hard
to get individual members to formally submit requests for earmarks. The Appropriations subcommittee staff was
clearly concerned about including NESP as a “new start” without a phase out
plan for EMP. Stoerker acknowledged that
the Corps should not and cannot have a “plan” that commits the agency to a
transition from EMP to NESP at this time, but said information from Corps staff
was very helpful in articulating one possible approach to phasing out the EMP
over the next three to four years. The
UMRBA and its NGO partners were then able to share this option with
appropriations subcommittee staff, in response to their questions about the
transition from EMP to NESP.
Gary Wege asked how we should
spend the small amount of NESP funding we do have in the interim and whether it
is the appropriate time to do more outreach for the program by developing a
symbol or trademark. Stoerker pointed
out that we should be careful when doing outreach because there is a limit to
how much and what kind of public outreach can be done under NESP. She pointed out that NGOs are better
positioned to do outreach than state or federal agencies. Wege said that we could learn from the
Vince Shay of TNC announced
that Catherine McCalvin has left TNC’s
Rohde presented a plaque to
Dan McGuiness in recognition of his collaborative efforts.
UMR Spill Response Update
Steve Lee, Emergency Response
Team Manager with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), presented a
summary of recent Mississippi River-related responses in
§
I35-W Bridge Collapse — The I-35W bridge over the Mississippi River north
of downtown
The
appearance of surface oil sheens downstream from the collapse site raised
concerns that a fuel tanker truck may have been on the bridge, and a Wakota
CAER response equipment cache was moved into position. However, it was ultimately determined that
there had not been a tanker involved and there was no large scale fuel
release The bridge did collapse on a
rail car adjacent to the river, but this did not result in a spill or other
significant release. Air monitoring was
established to detect any possible airborne environmental or health
hazards. U.S. EPA, in partnership with
the MPCA and the Minnesota Department of Health, set up neighborhood monitoring
air stations due to concerns about asbestos, lead, heavy metals and plastics. Water sampling was also conducted to assess
impacts to the river. However, no significant problems were found via air or
water monitoring.
§
Rail Car Release of Ethylene Glycol — In February 2008, on a rail bridge over the
Mississippi River between
§
Gasoline Tanker Spill — In January 2008, a gasoline tanker rollover
occurred on the Interstate 94/394 interchange in downtown
Spill Notification Drill and Spill Response Training — Dave
Hokanson of the UMRBA described the scenarios, participants, objectives and
outcomes/observations from a March 2008 UMR Spill Plan notification drill. This drill incorporated a scenario involving
a spill near
Administrative Issues
Holly Stoerker discussed the
proposed FY 09 budget for UMRBA, which reflects a deficit of $18,000.
The following dates and
locations were identified for future meetings:
|
August
5-7, 2008 |
|
|
November
18-20, 2008 |
|
|
February
17-19, 2009 |
|
The meeting was adjourned at
3:15 p.m.