FLIP CHART 1

Principle 6: clarify “dam operations” to “operational flexibility” - discuss at glossary (Bill D)

Capacity - s/b “generating capacity?” Or change glossary.

MO 2.7 - Add “removal of jeopardy” to qualitative target?

Goal 8 - are terraces above maximum BHBF level? (“at some place”)

FLIP CHART 2

Add “community” to OHWZ & sand beach to element?

Comment 25: “PVA” but elasticity analysis (Norm H)

Comment 18: haven’t seen adverse impact on natives on Lees Ferry reach - where is burden of proof? 

Exceedence of 100,000 - impact hasn’t been analyzed. Caution on the side of natives. (Bill P)

FLIP CHART 3

Comment 18, continued

Eradicate trout if lower target? 

 - Probably - but would influence other actions taken

 - high levels of RBT and as a result of high water - low water –> fewer RBT

Make trout abundance target an Information Need

Operational flexibility definition - Bill D. to propose a new definition

Q - Planning to use spillways for high flows not a safe option.

FLIP CHART 4

A - Cannot artificially raise reservoir levels - legal restrictions

- confident that spillways can be used safely for purposeful release

= (back to page 24-page document)

MO2.1 ++ - May be more than 8 aggregations - small group recommend 

 –> “mainstem aggregation”
Concern about 1.4 - only one #? 

 –> PEP will address - get comments to Barry

FLIP CHART 5

Sampling backwaters - remanded to PEP

TWG Meeting - January 10, 2001

Vision Narrative

FLIP CHART 1

too long - 2 pages maximum 

 - Ahhhhhh

- Do need it - 2 pp too short

- Need this - for what purpose?

 - complex system - hart to convey in a short document

 - if to guide us

 - for outreach - may be shorter

FLIP CHART 2

- We’ve talked about need for years - shared vision

- Narrative is helpful - should be 5-6 pp - helps focus on what we’re trying to do 

 - pleased that states’ concerns are included: dam, COTR

- We’ve plowed this ground before - we haven’t resolved some big issues - can’t stop work on MOs

while we work on narrative

FLIP CHART 3

- “If you close your eyes, what do you see” - currently is 

 - admin. Processes, poetry 

- should be simplified, pick a style

- Is it just what we see, or do we include legal sideboards/caveats?

- Admin processes /caveats in a paragraph - included

- Detailed outline too long
- Make sure you can see the resource

FLIP CHART 4

- don’t be too technical or creative 

- dam language should be neutral, not negative

- lacks recognition of unique relationship between tribes & Grand Canyon

Process for Approval

- TWG product cannot go directly to AMWG

- If it’s a part of the SP package, AMWG has delegated to AHC on SP - should go there for

integration

- TWG AHC –> TWG –> AMWG AHC –> AMWG

FLIP CHART 5

- Let TWG finish –> AMWG –> AMWG AHC to include in SP

- Purpose of Narrative: resolve conflicts on big issues. Get AMWG’s comments on our cut - have

AMWG AHC to resolve any issues -

- TWG AHC –> AMWG –> AMWG AHC to resolve issues

- TWG AHC –> TWG –> AMW –> ask AMWG to change AMWG AHC to finalize with TWG

AHC

- Need AMWG input to move forward

FLIP CHART 6

- Don’t make it overly bureaucratic 

- Feb TWG mtg - discuss narrative with MOs

- Final document to AMWG ikn April with Mos

- Volunteers to help draft paragraphs 

- sign up sheets to go around, return to Barry Gold

- someone other than Barry Gold should be coordinator

- Gary Burton -

FLIP CHART 7

F.1 and all of E - Randy Peterson
Comments on Detailed Outline

- not strong need for background # 2 and #3

- can simply put in those documents already written as is - or as attachments

- include p3 only - all else is attachments

- roles and responsibilities has not yet been written

FLIP CHART 8

- # 6 on p 3 - Action Plan may be integrated with the section above

- Between 2G2 and 2G3 - a section on tribal consultation and coordination

- Change 2G2 to “How compliance (NHPA, ESA) is integrated with GCMRC’s resources programs”

- Management Plan / work plan should be separate

FLIP CHART 9

F - Institutional scope - add new IV:

- IV Operation of CRSP electrical systems

2B - Philosophy - How AM works within the AMP -

- “AM philosophy underpinning the AMP”

History of AM in general under #2B

Concern about our view of AM vs general understanding of AM

- both should be included

FLIP CHART 10

- The PA should be under E.VIII

- FWS should be under E.VIII

- NPS should be under E.VIII

- Roles and responsibilities came from EIS and GCMRC Strategic Plan - NRS should be under IRP

- Change 2.F. to compliance activities

FLIP CHART 11
- guidance to GCMRC

- outreach document

-SP should/should not include background documents

- Don’t rehash documents that are already written

- SP can resolve conflicts between documents