4th Draft AMPSP Page 1 of 59

1 Adaptive Management Program Strategic Plan

2

3

4 This strategic plan guides the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP) 

5 through a series of goals and management objectives. Accomplished together, they meet 

6 the intent of the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992 (GCPA) and the Record of 

7 Decision on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement 

8 (ROD).

9

10 The plan is grounded in statute and uses the concept of adaptive management to meet its 

11 purpose, to evaluate the effectiveness of actions taken to protect downstream resources. 

12 The nature of the AMP is to monitor the effects of the ROD and experiment to verify that 

13 these changes are indeed producing the expected benefits and are meeting the intent of 

14 the GCPA, and to advise the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) of the findings. This 

15 plan describes the history of the program, the use of adaptive management in this context, 

16 the statutory framework, and specific objectives and actions to meet our goals.

17

18

19 BACKGROUND

20

21 Where the Institutional Authority Derives

22

23 The genesis of the AMP comes from Section 1804(c) of the GCPA, which requires the 

24 Secretary to complete a final Glen Canyon Dam Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

25 in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. The final 

26 EIS was published in March of 1995 and finalized by a ROD that was signed on October 

27 9, 1996.

28

29 Sections 1804 and 1805 of the GCPA require the Secretary to:

30

31 (1) Adopt criteria and operating plans separate from and in addition to 

32 those specified in section 602(b) of the Colorado River Basin Act of 1968 and 

33 exercise other authorities under existing laws, so as to ensure that Glen Canyon 

34 Dam is operated in a manner consistent with section 1802 and to fulfill 

35 consultation requirements of section 1804(c) of the GCPA.

36

37 (2) Establish and implement long-term monitoring and research programs 

38 and activities that will ensure that Glen Canyon Dam is operated in a manner 

39 consistent with that of section 1802 and the consultation requirements of section 

40 1805(c).

41

42 When the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) began the task of developing an EIS on 

43 the operations of Glen Canyon Dam, research on the effects of dam operations had 

44 already been underway for nearly a decade under the auspices of the Glen Canyon 

45 Environmental Studies (GCES). GCES Phase I had come to the conclusion that dam 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 2 of 59

1 operations did indeed affect the resources of the Grand Canyon, but in answering the 

2 fundamental question had managed to raise a myriad of new questions regarding these 

3 impacts. GCES Phase II was in the process of trying to answer that new set of questions 

4 when the EIS process began.

5

6 Because of the significant level of uncertainty surrounding the resources of the Grand 

7 Canyon and the effect of dam operations on those resources, the EIS included as an 

8 element common to all alternatives an adaptive management approach. This approach 

9 would allow for scientific experimentation that would add to the knowledge base of the 

10 effects of the operation of Glen Canyon Dam, and which could result in the development 

11 of recommendations to the Secretary regarding additional operational changes. 

12

13 The AMP is not intended to satisfy all of the mandates in the GCPA. Likewise, the 

14 program is not intended to derogate any agency’s statutory responsibilities for managing 

15 certain resources. The AMP was developed and designed to provide an organization and 

16 process for cooperative integration of dam operations, resource protection and 

17 management, and monitoring and research information. The program would meet the 

18 purpose and strengthen the intent for which this EIS was prepared and ensure that the 

19 mandates of the GCPA of 1992 are met through future advances in information and 

20 resource management.

21

22 History of Compliance With Federal Laws

23

24 Numerous statutes and compacts govern the operation of the Colorado River and thus, 

25 affect the AMP. These are summarized in the Background section of the Guidance 

26 Document (see Appendix XX) furnished to the Adaptive Management Work Group 

27 (AMWG) by its chairman on January 19, 2000. The Colorado River Compact of 1922, 

28 the 1944 Treaty with Mexico, the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948, the 

29 Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) Act of 1956, the Colorado River Basin Project 

30 Act of 1968, along with various other compacts, court decrees, and other documents are 

31 commonly and collectively known as the “Law of the River.” These are all controlling to 

32 the AMP. Additional laws that control the AMP include the legislation authorizing 

33 Grand Canyon National Park and the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, and the 

34 GCPA of 1992.

35

36 The Guidance Document also refers to the Secretary’s role as trustee for Native 

37 American trust resources, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), NEPA, and the 

38 Endangered Species Act (ESA) as other laws and obligations which affect the AMP. In 

39 addition, Section 204 of Title II of P.L. 106-377 controls the level of funding of AMP 

40 activities from CRSP power revenues. Operation of the AMWG is controlled by the 

41 Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

42

43 One of the objectives of this strategic plan is to assure that all AMP activities are in 

44 compliance with the full body of law which affects this program. To help understand the 

45 history and background of the AMP, the following institutions and documents are 

46 described:
4th Draft AMPSP Page 3 of 59

1

2 Glen Canyon Environmental Studies

3

4 The GCES were initiated with a memorandum dated December 6, 1982, from 

5 Reclamation Commissioner Broadbent to the Regional Director of the Upper Colorado 

6 Region. The stated purpose was to “. . . see how the present flow patterns impact the 

7 total riverine environment in the Grand Canyon and how various low-flow periods affect 

8 rafting and the fishery resources in the river.” In addition, the memorandum calls for 

9 “[e]nvironmental studies of the effects of the present and historic operation of Glen 

10 Canyon Dam on the vegetation, wildlife, fishery, recreation, and other environmental 

11 resources of the Grand Canyon.” (Broadbent, 1982)

12

13 Glen Canyon National Recreation Area Proposed General Management Plan (GMP)

14

15 The purpose of the plan comes from the enabling legislation. The plan states that the 

16 Glen Canyon National Recreation Area is “ . . . to provide for public outdoor recreation 

17 use and enjoyment . . . and to preserve scenic, scientific, and historic features 

18 contributing to public enjoyment of the area.” (National Park Service, 1979)

19

20 Grand Canyon Protection Act

21

22 The GCPA was enacted on October 30, 1992. It states that “The Secretary shall operate 

23 Glen Canyon Dam in accordance with the additional criteria and operating plans 

24 specified in Section 1804 and exercise other authorities under existing law in such a 

25 manner as to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which 

26 Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were 

27 established, including, but not limited to natural and cultural resources and visitor use. 

28 The Secretary shall implement this section in a manner fully consistent with and subject 

29 to the Colorado River Compact, the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, the Water 

30 Treaty of 1944 with Mexico, the decree of the Supreme Court in Arizona vs. California, 

31 and the provisions of the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956 and the Colorado 

32 River Basin Project Act of 1968 that govern allocation, appropriation, development, and 

33 exportation of the waters of the Colorado River Basin.” (GCPA of 1992)

34

35 Biological Opinion (BO) on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam

36

37 The BO is dated December 21, 1994. It states that the “biological opinion is in response 

38 to . . . Reclamation’s . . . request . . . for formal Section 7 consultation, under the 

39 Endangered Species Act . . ., on the proposed action to operate Glen Canyon Dam 

40 according to operating and other criteria of the Modified Low Fluctuating Flow 

41 Alternative . . . modified by a memorandum dated June 17, 1994. . . . ” (United States 

42 Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), 1994)

43

44 Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement

45
4th Draft AMPSP Page 4 of 59

1 The Glen Canyon Dam Final EIS is dated March 1995. The purpose of the EIS was to 

2 “determine specific options that could be implemented to minimize—consistent with 

3 law—adverse impacts on the downstream environmental and cultural resources and 

4 Native American interests in Glen and Grand Canyons.” The ROD elaborated by stating 

5 that an “[A]nalysis of an array of reasonable alternatives was needed to allow the 

6 Secretary to balance competing interests and to meet statutory responsibilities for 

7 protecting downstream resources and producing hydropower, and to protect affected 

8 Native American interests.” (United States Department of the Interior, 1996)

9

10 Grand Canyon National Park General Management Plan

11

12 The GMP is dated August 1995. The primary purpose of the plan is to provide a 

13 foundation from which to protect park resources while providing for meaningful visitor 

14 experiences. The GMP identifies the “values for which Grand Canyon National Park was 

15 established.” The GMP was developed from several other park plans of relevance to the 

16 AMP including the 1988 Backcountry Management Plan, 1989 Colorado River 

17 Management Plan, and 1994 Resource Management Plan. Other plans subsequent to the 

18 GMP include the 1997 Resource Management Plan and the 1998 Draft Wilderness 

19 Management Plan.

20

21 Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC)

22

23 The purpose of the GCMRC is to fulfill the directive in the GCPA for the “establishment 

24 and implementation of a long-term monitoring and research program to ensure that Glen 

25 Canyon Dam is operated in a manner that protects the values for which the Grand 

26 Canyon National Park and the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were created.” 

27 (Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Power, 1995)

28

29 Record of Decision on the Operation of Glen Canyon Dam

30

31 The ROD acknowledged that the Secretary must operate Glen Canyon Dam in 

32 compliance with the GCPA. “This Record of Decision . . . documents the selection of 

33 operating criteria . . . as analyzed in the final Environmental Impact Statement.” 

34 “Analysis of an array of reasonable alternatives was needed to allow the Secretary to 

35 balance competing interests and to meet the statutory responsibilities for protecting 

36 downstream resources and producing hydropower, and to protect affected Native 

37 American interests.” “The goal of selecting a preferred alternative was not to maximize 

38 benefits for the most resources but rather to find an alternative dam operating plan that 

39 would permit recovery and long-term sustainability of downstream resources while 

40 limiting hydropower capability and flexibility only to the extent necessary to achieve 

41 recovery and long-term sustainability.” (United States Department of the Interior, 1996)

42

43 National Park Service (NPS) 2001 Management Policies

44

45 The 2001 Management Policies is the “basic Service-wide policy document of the 

46 National Park Service.” These policies define how “the National Park Service will meet 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 5 of 59

1 its park management responsibilities under the 1916 National Park Service Organic Act 

2 “to conserve the scenery and the natural and historic objects and the wildlife therein and 

3 to provide for the enjoyment of the same in such manner and by such means as will leave 

4 them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.” (NPS, 2001)

5

6

7 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY UNDERPINNING THE AMP

8

9 Introduction

10

11 Adaptive management is a collaborative, science-based approach to resource 

12 management. “Adaptive management applies the concept of experimentation to the 

13 design and implementation of natural-resource and environmental policies. An adaptive 

14 policy is one that is designed from the outset to test clearly formulated hypotheses about 

the behavior of an ecosystem being changed by human use.” 15 1 

16

17 Traditional adaptive management includes three basic characteristics:

18

19 “As a decision-making perspective, adaptive management is ecosystemic rather 

20 than jurisdictional. The adaptive approach crosses boundaries and links functions 

21 such as fisheries and land management. 

22

23 What is being managed is a population or ecosystem, not individual organisms or 

24 projects. Failures at the individual level need to be tolerated because risk-taking 

25 is needed if hypotheses are to be advanced and tested.

26

27 The time scale of adaptive management is the biological generation rather than 

the business cycle, the electoral term of office, or the budget process.” 28 2

29

30 It was felt that this approach would provide the flexibility that was needed to meet the 

31 intent of the GCPA in the face of the uncertainty that this complex system continued to 

32 pose. In developing management policies, questions would arise regarding the expected 

33 response of the Colorado River ecosystem to dam operations and other management 

34 actions. Those questions would be formulated as hypotheses that would be tested 

35 through experimentation. The information gained from those experiments would be 

36 incorporated into recommendations to the Secretary regarding future management of the 

37 dam and downstream resources. 

38

39 Although the Glen Canyon Dam AMP has some sideboards and limitations that separate 

40 it from a traditional adaptive management approach, the general principles still apply. 

41 The goal of this program is an ecosystem management approach, with attention paid to 

 

1 Kai N. Lee, Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment, 

Washington, DC: Island Press, 1993, p. 53.

2 Id., pp. 62-3.
4th Draft AMPSP Page 6 of 59

1 mandates to address sensitive resources. The keys to using this kind of an adaptive 

2 management philosophy as a base for a program like the Glen Canyon Dam AMP are to 

3 (1) develop a clear and robust program of experimentation designed to answer questions 

4 about ecosystem linkages and causal relationships between human actions and ecosystem 

5 responses, (2) establish an effective process for incorporating new knowledge and 

6 information produced by experimentation into management decisions, (3) keep resource 

7 analysis and decision making ultimately focused on the ecosystem level, and (4) maintain 

8 an open and flexible attitude toward defining the pathway to meeting the goals of the 

9 program, so that the program can remain truly “adaptive.”

10

11 Science in Adaptive Management

12

13 Scientific activities in the Grand Canyon actually started millennia ago as Native 

14 Americans lived in and migrated through this area of the North American continent. 

15 Through generations of experience, they utilized the natural resources of the canyon to 

16 sustain life, while maintaining profound respect for the canyon’s spiritual and cultural 

17 significance.

18

19 Early pioneers and explorers such as John Wesley Powell opened the canyon to modern 

20 scientific discovery, and expeditions of geologists, anthropologists, and artists fanned the 

flames of public interest. Through the 19th and 20th 21 centuries, significant scientific 

22 understanding was established.

23

24 An organized effort of scientific study in the Grand Canyon arose out of activities 

25 surrounding proposals to install additional generators on the bypass tubes, and to rewind 

26 and uprate the existing generators at Glen Canyon Dam, resulting in the establishment of 

27 the GCES in 1982. The intent of the studies was to determine the effects of dam 

28 operations on downstream resources. The studies were conducted by Reclamation and 

29 began the integrated monitoring of the Grand Canyon ecosystem. While the studies were 

30 limited by unanticipated events such as floods in 1983 through 1986, they did identify 

31 significant negative effects of dam operations on the downstream environment, which 

32 ultimately led to both the preparation of an EIS and the passage of the GCPA.

33

34 Issuance of the ROD in 1996 established the AMP and the GCMRC, insuring that 

35 scientific ecosystem inquiry would continue in compliance with the GCPA. Within this 

36 administrative framework, science plays a major role in adaptive management. It is the 

37 role of GCMRC to manage this scientific data collection. It serves as an independent 

38 science organization of the AMP under the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 

39 serving with the Technical Work Group (TWG) as an interface between the scientists and 

40 the AMWG.

41

42 The goal of this scientific inquiry is to discover facts about the ecosystem downstream of 

43 Glen Canyon Dam, using a rigorous monitoring and research program. While significant 

44 progress has been made in the past 20 years of intensive study, the ecosystem is 

45 extraordinarily complex, and much is still unknown. Hypotheses are framed from these 

46 unanswered questions.
4th Draft AMPSP Page 7 of 59

1

2 Long-term monitoring is critical to understanding the status and trends of important 

3 resources. A stable monitoring program allows repetitive measurements on a consistent

4 time scale, which allows short- and long-term comparison with previous measurements. 

5 Methods range from traditional sampling techniques to multispectral remote sensing, all 

6 in an effort to answer the basic questions, “are the resources being protected and 

7 preserved?” and “are conditions improving, stable, or degrading?”

8

9 In contrast, research activities are hypothesis driven. They attempt to enlarge 

10 understanding of critical ecosystem processes. They employ a fine focus on specific 

11 aspects of the ecosystem. Most often, they require experimental comparison of an 

12 alternative treatment against a control or baseline environment. However, because there 

13 are many other compounding factors beside dam operations, the experiments must 

14 attempt to segregate these effects through careful controls.

15

16 Understanding of ecological processes has changed substantially as the result of these 

17 monitoring and research activities. The resulting answers to questions and hypotheses 

18 thus add to the knowledge base available to the AMWG as they make recommendations 

19 to the Secretary.

20

21 Management within the Glen Canyon Dam AMP

22

23 Federal and state management agencies have delegated responsibilities for many of the 

24 resources downstream of Glen Canyon Dam. Authorities for these agencies are typically 

25 contained in statute, from which agencies develop policies. Government agencies rely on 

26 these statutes and policies as they make management decisions. As noted in the EIS, 

27 “...the AMP is not intended to derogate any agency’s statutory responsibilities for 

28 managing certain resources.”

29

30 In the Glen Canyon Dam AMP, formal recommendations are made from the AMWG to 

31 the Secretary regarding dam operations and other management actions needed to comply 

32 with the GCPA. The AMWG is composed of members familiar with policy and 

33 management decision making. The AMWG attempts to operate through consensus, but 

34 voting occurs on formal recommendations. These recommendations are transmitted to 

35 the Secretary through the Secretary’s designee.

36

37 The Secretary then responds to these recommendations as the final decision maker, either 

38 directly or through actions of the agencies under delegated authority. In the latter case, 

39 implementation of these recommendations by a federal agency often depends on internal 

40 discussions between the management agency and the Secretary. The Guidance 

41 Document contains additional thoughts on this interaction between management agencies 

42 and the AMP.

43

44 How Science and Management Are Integrated

45
4th Draft AMPSP Page 8 of 59

1 The entities primarily responsible for integration of science and management in the Glen 

2 Canyon Dam AMP are the GCMRC and the TWG. As identified in the final EIS, the 

3 GCMRC is responsible for developing the annual monitoring and research plan, 

4 managing and coordinating all monitoring and research programs, and managing all data 

5 collected as part of those programs. Thus, the GCMRC oversees contracts with 

6 scientists, who monitor the resources, and integrates the scientific information for 

7 communication to the TWG. To assure that its protocols are appropriate and sufficient 

8 for assessing status and trends, the GCMRC periodically convenes Protocol Evaluation 

9 Panels (PEP) comprised of external peer reviewers. Reports of PEP findings are 

10 provided to both the GCMRC and TWG for their evaluation. If the recommendations are 

11 agreed upon, changes in research and monitoring protocols are made. A Scientific 

12 Advisory Board, comprised of eminent scientists from outside the AMP, provides advice 

13 to all levels of the AMP and serves as an independent review body whose responsibility 

14 is to assess the quality of science and the integration of that science into management 

15 recommendations through the adaptive management process.

16

17 The TWG, which is comprised of technical representatives of all the entities comprising 

18 the AMP, communicates information from scientists and the GCMRC to members of the 

19 AMWG. It is their primary role to develop monitoring and research criteria and resource 

20 questions for investigation by GCMRC. They must understand the policy implications of 

21 advances in scientific understanding and the resource consequences of current and 

22 proposed decision making. The successful integration of science and management 

23 depends largely on this ability of scientists and decision makers to communicate 

24 effectively.

25

26 How Management of One Resource Affects Other Resources

27

28 The individual-resource management approach that is prevalent in resource management 

29 today cannot be applied to the Colorado River ecosystem in Grand Canyon. The complex 

30 interdependence of resources that together comprise the ecosystem becomes manifest 

31 when management of one resource (natural, cultural, recreational, economic) produces 

32 unexpected effects on another resource. Benefits and impacts to all resources must be 

33 considered and managed in order to produce a desirable and sustainable result. 

34

35 The Colorado River ecosystem is full of examples of resource interdependence. Perhaps 

36 the most illustrative example comes from the planning of the experimental 

37 Beach/Habitat-Building Flow in 1996. This experimental flow was designed to test the 

38 hypothesis that flows greater than powerplant capacity (which is approximately 31,000 

39 cubic feet per second [cfs]) would mobilize sediment stored in the river channel and 

40 deposit it on the river banks at a stage that would not be vulnerable to erosion by river 

41 flows at normal operating levels. However, in designing and scheduling the experimental 

42 flow, the effects of the higher flow on a whole suite of biological factors, from aquatic 

43 food base to endangered Kanab ambersnail to food source and nesting habitat for 

44 endangered Southwestern willow flycatcher to the timing of seed release and potential 

45 spread of the nonnative tamarisk trees had to be considered. Similarly, the effects of 

46 higher flows on the stability of cultural sites had to be assessed. Both recreational 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 9 of 59

1 boating and trout fishing in the 15 miles below Glen Canyon Dam would potentially be 

2 impacted, and the timing and the magnitude of the flows would influence the expected 

3 level of impact. There would also be significant impacts to power generation. Some of 

4 the effects of the experimental flow would be positive and some would be negative. The 

5 challenge to the resource managers and decision makers was to maximize the positive 

6 impacts while minimizing the negative ones.

7

8 Future management decisions must always understand the interdependence of resources, 

9 and seek to not only understand the potential effects on non-targeted resources when 

10 designing and implementing management actions on targeted resources, but also to 

11 approach management actions from an ecosystem perspective.

12

13

14 GEOGRAPHIC AND PROGRAMMATIC SCOPE

15

16 A discussion of scope of the AMP is set forth in a letter dated February 19, 2000, from 

17 Steve Magnussen wherein he cites a January 11, 2000, Guidance Document (Glen 

18 Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program AMWG FACA Committee Guidance) 

19 prepared by Interior Solicitor Scott Loveless. As stated in the Guidance Document, “The 

20 key to the scope of AMWG’s responsibilities is whether a specific desired resource effect 

21 downstream of the dam can be achieved through some manipulation of dam operations. 

22 Under the ROD, the upper limit of planned release level is 45,000 cfs. Long-term 

23 monitoring and research, including test flows within the current range of authorized 

24 operations, are intended to enable finer and finer tuning of operations over time, as 

25 additional knowledge and experience are gained, to better achieve the target mix of 

26 resource benefits, as outlined in the EIS, pages 54-65.” In addition, the GCPA also 

27 authorizes other management actions to accomplish its purposes. Examples of other 

28 actions include water temperature control, stabilization of cultural sites, non-native fish 

29 control, and removal of non-native vegetation.

30

31 The scope of the AMP is limited by the range of dam operations and other management 

32 actions available to achieve a specific desired resource effect downstream. This is 

33 complicated by the fact the dam and immediate downstream areas occur on the Colorado 

34 River at approximately the mid-point between the river’s origin in the Rocky Mountains 

35 and its terminus in the Gulf of California. Many activities, facilities and conditions on 

36 the river occur both upstream and downstream of the planning area that significantly 

37 influence attainment of AMP goals but over which the AMP has little or no control. 

38 Despite these limits, the AMP provides information necessary to determine efficacy of 

39 the ROD to meet its intended purpose under the GCPA, as well as recommendations on 

40 dam operations and other management actions to the Secretary.

41

42 In addition, the AMWG may coordinate with other organizations and programs and offer 

43 recommendations to the Secretary regarding actions that may be undertaken by other 

44 agencies. Activities outside the scope of the AMP “will be funded separately, and do not 

45 deter from the focus of the Act” (AMWG Charter). 

46
4th Draft AMPSP Page 10 of 59

1 The geographic scope of the AMP is defined in a longitudinal sense from the forebay of 

2 Glen Canyon Dam downstream to the western boundary of Grand Canyon National Park at 

3 Grand Wash Cliffs on Lake Mead.

4

5 The lateral scope is an issue of ongoing discussion involving the effects of dam

6 operations on the area of potential effects as it relates to compliance with Section 106 of 

7 the NHPA, the effect of tributaries on the mainstream Colorado River, and the potential 

8 effects of the operation of the powerplant, bypass tubes, and spillways of Glen Canyon 

9 Dam. It includes the downstream inundation level to which dam operations impact 

10 physical, biological, recreational, cultural, and other resources.

11

12 The AMP may do research outside the geographic scope defined above to obtain needed 

13 information. Such linkages with other areas “should be made on a case-by-case basis, 

14 considering ecosystem processes, management alternatives, funding sources, and 

15 stakeholder interests” (Downstream: Adaptive Management of Glen Canyon Dam and the 

16 Colorado River Ecosystem, National Research Council 1999). 

17

18

19 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

20

21 Organizational Components of the AMP

22 The Glen Canyon Dam Final EIS calls for the establishment of the AMP to assess 

23 the effects of the Secretary’s actions on downstream resources. The critical entities in the 

24 AMP include: the Secretary and his/her designee, AMWG, TWG, GCMRC, and 

25 Independent Review Panels. These are shown in Figure 1 from the Glen Canyon Dam 

26 Final EIS.

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

Technical

Work Group

(TWG)

 Grand Canyon 

Monitoring and

Research Center

(GCMRC)

Independent

Review Panel(s)

(IRPs)

SECRETARY OF

THE INTERIOR

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT

WORK GROUP

Secretary's Designee
4th Draft AMPSP Page 11 of 59

1

2 Figure 1. Organizational components of the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program.

3

4 The AMWG and TWG include representatives from federal and state resource 

5 management agencies, Native American tribes, and a diverse set of other private and 

6 public stakeholders. The Secretary under the FACA appoints AMWG members. The 

7 roles for the specified entities in the AMP were originally defined in the Glen Canyon 

8 Dam Final EIS (pages 34-38) and are currently as follows:

9

10 Secretary’s Designee

11

12 • Serves as the Secretary’s principal contact for the AMP and as the focal point for 

13 issues and decisions associated with the program.

14 • Chairs the AMWG.

15 • Responsibilities include ensuring that the Department of the Interior complies with its 

16 obligations under the GCPA and ROD for the Glen Canyon Dam EIS.

17 • The designee reviews, modifies, accepts or remands the recommendations from the 

18 AMWG in making decisions about any changes in dam operation and other 

19 management actions.

20

21 Adaptive Management Work Group 

22

23 • Provides the framework for AMP policy, goals, direction and priorities.

24 • Develops recommendations for modifying operating criteria and other resource 

25 management actions.

26 • Facilitates coordination and input from interested parties.

27 • Reviews and forwards the annual report to the Secretary and his/her designee on 

28 current and projected year operations. 

29 • Reviews and forwards annual budget proposals.

30 • Ensures coordination of operating criteria changes in the Annual Operating Plan 

31 (AOP) for Colorado River Reservoirs and other ongoing activities.

32

33 Technical Work Group

34

35 • Develops with GCMRC criteria and standards for monitoring and research programs 

36 and provides periodic reviews and updates of these.

37 • Develops resource management questions (i.e., information needs in response to the 

38 AMWG management objectives) for the design of monitoring and research programs 

39 by GCMRC.

40 • Provides information as necessary for preparing annual resource reports and other 

41 reports as required by the AMWG.

42 • Reviews strategic plans, annual work plans, long-term and annual budgets, and other 

43 assignments from the AMWG.

44

45 Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 12 of 59

1

2 • Responsible for developing and managing the annual monitoring and research 

3 programs, and managing all data contracted to be delivered to GCMRC as part of 

4 those programs.

5 • Ensures development of research research designs and proposals for implementing 

6 monitoring and research identified by the AMWG.

7 • Manages monitoring and research on resources affected by dam operations and other 

8 management actions.

9 • Administers research proposals through a competitive contract process, as 

10 appropriate.

11 • Coordinates, prepares, and distributes technical reports and documentation for review 

12 and as final produc ts.

13 • Facilitates interaction between scientists and TWG and AMWG.

14 • Coordinates review of the monitoring and research program with independent review 

15 panel(s).

16 • Prepares and forwards technical management recommendations and annual reports, as 

17 specified in section 1804 of the GCPA to the AMWG and the TWG.

18 • Coordinates research and monitoring activities with NPS and tribes.

19

20 Independent Review Panel(s) 

21

22 • Responsible for periodically reviewing resource specific monitoring and research 

23 programs and for making recommendations to the AMWG and GCMRC regarding 

24 monitoring, priorities, integration, and management.

25 • Provides reviews of the AMP monitoring and research programs, including the 

26 GCMRC and Programmatic Agreement (PA).

27 • Provides technical advice as requested by the GCMRC or AMWG.

28 • Provides science assessments of proposed research plans and programs, technical 

29 reports and publications and other program accomplishments, as requested.

30 • Conducts a five-year review of GCMRC monitoring and research protocols.

31

32

33 INSTITUTIONAL SCOPE 3⁄4 WHAT THE PROGRAM INFLUENCES OR IS 

34 INFLUENCED BY

35

36 Annual Operating Plan

37

38 The AOP process was designed by Reclamation to project future Colorado River system 

39 reservoirs contents and downstream releases for the upcoming water year to allow the 

40 Secretarial determination of Colorado River Basin water delivery obligations. This 

41 process is conducted with input from the Colorado River Management Work Group and 

42 other members of the public in accordance with the Criteria for Coordinated Long-Range 

43 Operation of Colorado River Reservoirs (Operating Criteria), and Sections 1802(b) and 

44 1804(c) of the GCPA of 1992 (P.L. 102-575).

45
4th Draft AMPSP Page 13 of 59

1 Individual reservoir operations in the Colorado River reservoir system are based on 

2 “appropriate consideration of uses of the reservoirs for all purposes,” as required by the 

3 Operating Criteria. Because hydrologic conditions will vary from any assumptions 

4 utilized in the AOP process, the AOP-projected reservoir operations and dam releases 

5 will be subject to monthly revision during the year to accommodate changing hydrologic 

6 conditions. However, releases must be governed in accordance with the “Law of the 

7 River.”

8

9 As a part of this AOP process, the decision on releases for the Lower Division states must 

10 be made in accordance with a “surplus,” “normal,” or “shortage” determination. 

11 Releases must also meet treaty delivery obligations to the Republic of Mexico.

12

13 The GCPA requires criteria, operating plans, and reports “separate from and in addition 

14 to” those mandated by the Operating Criteria, noting that the GCPA is implemented fully 

15 consistent with and subject to the water allocation and development provisions of 

16 previous compacts and statutes contained in the “Law of the River.” As noted in the 

17 GCPA report language, these criteria primarily affect the Glen Canyon Dam powerplant 

18 operations, and do not affect any delivery obligations to the Lower Basin or to Mexico.

19

20 Programmatic Agreement

21

22 The PA regarding the operation of Glen Canyon Dam is a legally binding document 

23 among the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Reclamation, Arizona State 

24 Historic Preservation Officer, NPS, Havasupai Tribe, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, Kaibab 

25 Paiute Tribe, Navajo Nation, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Paiute Indian Tribe of 

26 Utah, and Zuni Pueblo (see Appendix XX). The PA represents fulfillment by 

27 Reclamation and the NPS of their responsibilities under Section 106 of the NHPA. It is 

28 anticipated that the Western Area Power Administration (Western) and the GCMRC will 

29 be added as signatories in the near future.

30

31 The PA has stipulations which include: (1) identification and evaluation of all cultural 

32 resources within the area of potential effects; (2) development of a plan for monitoring 

33 the effects of Glen Canyon Dam operations on historic properties and for carrying out 

34 remedial actions to address the effects of ongoing damage to historic properties; and (3) 

35 preparation of an historic preservation plan. 

36

37 In the AMP, PA signatories and GCMRC science activities provide input to AMWG and 

38 TWG members on cultural resource issues. However, TWG and AMWG do not oversee 

39 PA activities but are considered as interested parties to decisions made by the PA 

40 signatories. Only through the budget process do TWG and AMWG have a direct effect 

41 on PA activities.

42

43 Some of the AMP processes or activities are used to help fulfill responsibilities under the 

44 PA. For example, cultural resource monitoring trips have been combined with other 

45 scientific trips to obtain expertise or save money. The GCMRC database will be used to 

46 maintain cultural resource information and the LIDAR maps will be used to map the area 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 14 of 59

1 of potential effect. The AMP activities are intertwined with PA responsibilities since 

2 many AMP activities can impact cultural resources. These include different flow and 

3 release regimes, recovery of species or habitat, recreational use, and scientific 

4 monitoring. 

5

6 Biological Opinion

7

8 Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA 1973, as amended, requires that any action a federal agency 

9 authorizes, funds, or carries out must not jeopardize the continued existence of any listed 

10 species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Regulations containing the 

11 procedures for implementing the ESA are found at 50 CFR Part 402 entitled Interagency 

12 Cooperation - Endangered Species Act of 1973, as Amended; Final Rule. In brief, to 

13 comply with the ESA, an evaluation of the affects of any discretionary federal action 

14 must be conducted by the action agency in conjunction with informal consultation with 

15 the FWS. For minor activities, this can be limited to verbal communication. For a larger 

16 or more complex action, or for any major construction activity as defined, the action 

17 agency is required to prepare a biological assessment (BA). The BA describes the action 

18 and evaluates the affect to each species that may be present in the action area by 

19 comparing the current condition of the population and habitat to what it is expected to 

20 occur during and following the action. A determination is limited to either “no affect,” 

21 which equates to no effect at all, positive, negative, or neutral, or to “may affect,” which 

22 equates to any effect, positive, negative, or neutral. “May affect” can be further qualified 

23 with a determination of ‘likely to adversely affect’ or ‘not likely to adversely affect.’ A 

24 “may affect and is likely to adversely affect” determination triggers formal consultation 

25 with the FWS. A determination of “may affect and not likely to adversely affect” can be 

26 addressed with informal consultation with the FWS. 

27

28 Any “may affect” determination triggers formal consultation which may result in either a 

29 “not likely to adversely affect” determination or in issuance of a BO. Once consultation is 

30 requested, the FWS has 90 days to render a BO and an additional 45 days to write the 

31 BO. The FWS usually prepares a draft BO. The period of time that the draft is under 

32 review does not count toward the 135 days. Consultation is between the action agency, 

33 an applicant if there is one, and the FWS. If there is an affect on tribal lands or waters, 

34 the tribes must be consulted. If the FWS determines that the proposed action will 

35 jeopardize the continued existence of the species by appreciably reducing the likelihood 

36 of both survival and recovery of the species in the wild by further reducing its number,

37 reproduction, or distribution (the jeopardy threshold), they prepare a BO which must 

38 contain a reasonable and prudent alternative (RPA). An RPA must be within the 

39 jurisdiction of the action agency, technologically and economically feasible, consistent 

40 with the original intended purpose of the project, and one which the FWS believes will 

41 remove jeopardy. The BO must also contain an “incidental take” statement if any take is 

42 expected to occur, reasonable and prudent measures, and terms and conditions designed 

43 to reduce take and address adverse modification of designated critical habitat. The BO 

44 can contain conservation measures, conservation recommendations, and other topics as 

45 well. Once the action agency receives the draft BO, they may choose to share the 

46 document with other stakeholders (see March 1988 Consultation Handbook, FWS).
4th Draft AMPSP Page 15 of 59

1

2 The BO is the FWS’s recommendation to the action agency. Consultation is concluded 

3 when the action agency responds to the FWS by accepting the BO as written, or 

4 describing if and how they will implement the BO. Once this commitment has been 

5 made, the action agency is responsible for implementing the agreed to RPA or to re6 consult with the FWS. Any commitments made by Reclamation would be of higher 

7 priority than discretionary actions. 

8

9 In short, the ESA affects the AMP through: (1) the requirement to consult with the FWS 

10 on any discretionary action which may affect listed species or adversely modify 

11 designated critical habitat prior to taking the action, and (2) through commitments an 

12 action agency makes to conserve species in response to RPAs in BOs. With respect to 

13 the AMP, several BOs contain RPAs with significant responsibilities for Reclamation. 

14 These include the requirements of:

15

16 • the development of an adaptive management program that will include 

17 implementation of studies required to determine impact of flows on listed and 

18 native fish,

19 • the implementation of a program of experimental flows to benefit the endangered 

20 and native fish,

21 • the feasibility evaluation of a temperature control device,

22 • determining responses of native fish to various temperature regimes and river 

23 flows,

24 • coordinating the preparation of a Little Colorado River management plan,

25 • the establishment of a second spawning aggregation of humpback chub in the 

26 mainstem or tributaries,

27 • conducting a Razorback sucker workshop, and

28 • the evaluation of the overwinter survival of young-of-year humpback chub

29 • the relocation and collection of approximately 75 percent of the Kanab ambersnail 

30 individuals from 50 percent of the habitat expected to be inundated by test flows

31

32 From this list, it is clear that ESA issues are a primary concern of the AMP.

33

34 National Park Service Activities

35

36 The activities of the AMP occur within the confines of two areas administered by the 

37 NPS: Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. 

38 Therefore, AMP activities will have an influence on the NPS resources, and the NPS 

39 activities will influence resources under the purview of the AMP. The management of 

40 the national park system and of NPS programs is guided by and consistent with public 

41 laws, treaties, proclamations, Executive Orders, regulations, and directives of the 

42 Secretary and the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.

43

44 Of great importance are the NPS Organic Act of 1916, the General Authorities Act of 

45 1970 and the 1978 amendments to this Act (the Redwoods Amendment). Although the 

46 Organic Act and the Redwoods Amendment use different language, they define a single 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 16 of 59

1 standard for the management of the nationa l park system. National Parks have two 

2 primary purposes; first, to conserve park resources and values, and second, to provide for 

3 the enjoyment of park resources and values by the people of the United States. By 

4 enjoyment, it is meant to encompass all the people of the United States not just those who 

5 visit parks. It also includes benefits such as scientific knowledge and inspiration as well 

6 as other forms of enjoyment.

7

8 The NPS has three levels of guidance documents: (1) Management Policies 2001, the 

9 basic policy document of the NPS, (2) interim updates or amendments accomplished 

10 through Director’s Orders, and (3) detailed and comprehensive handbooks or reference 

11 manuals issued by associate directors. These documents provide NPS field employees 

12 with sufficient guidance to carry out Management Policies and Director’s Orders.

13

14 The primary responsibility of NPS managers is to preserve park resources and values 

15 without impairment. The NPS cannot conduct or allow activities in parks that would 

16 impact park resources and values to a level that would constitute impairment, unless 

17 directly and specifically provided for by legislation or by the proclamation establishing 

18 the park. In cases of doubt as to the impact of activities on park resources, the NPS will 

19 decide in favor of protecting the resources.

20

21 Impairment is defined as impact that would harm the integrity of park resources or 

22 values. Whether an impact meets this definition depends on the specific resources or 

23 values affected; the severity, duration, and timing of the influence; the direct and indirect 

24 effects of the influence; and the values and purposes for which a particular park unit was 

25 established. However, the laws do give the NPS the management discretion to allow 

26 impacts to park resources and va lues when necessary and appropriate to fulfill the 

27 purposes of a park, so long as the impact does not constitute impairment.

28

29 The NPS has established a tiered process for planning and decision making. General 

30 management plans are the highest of these tiers. The GMP focuses on why the park was 

31 established, and what management should be achieved and maintained over time. Action 

32 plans for dealing with complex, technical, and sometimes controversial issues are a level 

33 of detail and analysis beyond that appropriate at the GMP or strategic plan level. 

34 Implementation planning provides this level of detail and analysis. Park resource 

35 management plans, river management plans, and wilderness management plans are 

36 examples of implementation plans.

37

38 Operation of the CRSP Power System

39

40 The Glen Canyon Dam powerplant is tied to a vast system of generators, transmission 

41 lines and delivery points in the western United States, Canada, and Mexico. It is legally 

42 obligated to provide electricity to wholesale electrical customers and others in the West. 

43 Reclamation operates Glen Canyon Dam in close coordination with Western. Western 

44 markets the electrical power produced and owns and operates the federal transmission 

45 system which delivers the electricity. 

46
4th Draft AMPSP Page 17 of 59

1 Long-Term Firm Electrical Power

2

3 Under the authorizing legislation for the CRSP, federal dam operators are required to 

4 produce “the greatest practicable” amount of long-term firm power at Glen Canyon Dam, 

5 integrating the operation of Glen Canyon Dam with the other CRSP powerplants and 

6 other federally-owned electrical powerplants. 

7

8 Western’s long-term contracts for electricity are with small municipalities, rural electrical 

9 cooperatives, federal defense facilities and other federal and state institutions, and Indian 

10 tribes. This power is sold strictly in the CRSP market area which includes Colorado, 

11 Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, and Nevada. Revenue from these sales is placed 

12 into the Basin Fund, a fund which repays to the U.S. Treasury the capital costs of the 

13 CRSP mainstem dams and the irrigation assistance portion of the Upper Basin 

14 participating projects.

15

16 Long-term firm electrical power has been marketed according to a marketing plan 

17 established by Western. The contracts for electricity made possible under this plan end in 

18 2024. Western is obliged to deliver electricity in the amounts specified in these contracts. 

19 This can be supplied by the CRSP generators or Western may purchase some of this 

20 power from other generators. The contract amount can be adjusted every five years to 

21 take into account changing circumstances or resources. 

22

23 Operation for a Federal Load Control Area

24

25 Western operates two load control areas that are electrically tied to Glen Canyon Dam. A 

26 load control area is a geographical area assigned to a controller to monitor electrical 

27 demand and generation and make sure that they “match” on a moment-by-moment basis. 

28 This is referred to as “regulating.” Currently, Glen Canyon Dam generation can change 

29 by up to 1,000 cfs to adjust to these “swings” in demand. The contribution by Glen 

30 Canyon Dam to these two load control areas is evenly divided. Western’s Operation 

31 Center in Phoenix, Arizona sends a “regulation” signal every few seconds directly to 

32 Glen Canyon Dam.

33

34 Reserve Sharing Groups

35

36 Reserves are required by electrical production and distribution companies to serve as a 

37 “back-up” in case of unforeseen electrical system problems. The existence of reserves 

38 minimizes the possibility of interruption of electrical service. Western has contractual 

39 agreements with two reserve sharing groups. Reserve sharing groups are formed to share 

40 the “damage” caused by generator and transmission outages, transmission overloads and 

41 other emergencies or unplanned events. 

42

43 For the two reserve sharing groups, Western is obligated to provide up to 70 Megawatts 

44 of power from one or more of the CRSP powerplants. Typically, Glen Canyon Dam has 

45 provided the bulk of this service.

46
4th Draft AMPSP Page 18 of 59

1 Emergency Service

2

3 Western calls upon Glen Canyon Dam and other CRSP dams to respond to a variety of 

4 electrical system emergencies. These emergencies and the response to them by Western 

5 and Reclamation are a requirement of all participating members of the Western Systems 

6 Coordinating Council. These are described in the EIS for the operation of Glen Canyon

7 Dam and are authorized in the ROD. Further details on the emergency exception criteria 

8 are contained in the Operating Agreement Associated with Glen Canyon Dam Operating 

9 Criteria between Reclamation and Western dated July 7, 1997. Generally, these 

10 emergencies are related to transmission line and generation outages. During these 

11 emergencies, the operating limitations on Glen Canyon Dam contained in the ROD may 

12 be exceeded.

13

14

15 PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES 3⁄4 HOW THE AMP WORKS

16

17 Charter

18

19 The current Charter of the AMP is attached as an appendix. This Charter was recently 

20 renewed as a formal FACA committee for an additional two years.

21

22 Operating Procedures of AMWG and TWG

23

24 Attached as appendices are the current operating procedures of the AMWG and the 

25 TWG. These have been formally recommended by these two groups, and are in harmony 

26 with the AMP Charter. They serve to give formal structure to AMP meetings.

27

28 Tribal Consultation and Coordination

29

30 Federally recognized Indian tribes are domestic dependent nations, and the legal 

31 relationship between the Federal Government and tribes is one as set forth in the 

32 Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, executive orders, and court decisions. 

33 Indian tribes have a guaranteed right to self-govern and to exercise inherent sovereign 

34 powers over their members and reservations. The United States government works with 

35 Indian tribes on a government-to-government basis to address issues concerning Indian 

36 tribal self-government, trust resources, and Indian tribal treaty and other rights. Tribal 

37 trust resources include land and natural resources either on or off Indian reservations and 

38 other assets, retained by, or reserved by or for Indian tribes held by the Federal 

39 Government in trust and are protected by a fiduciary obligation on the part of the United 

40 States.

41

42 In order to establish regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with Indian 

43 tribal governments various Executive Orders, Secretarial Orders and Memorandums have 

44 been issued over the last eight years. Some of these include Executive Order 13084 

45 Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments signed May 14, 1998, 

46 and reissued on November 6, 2000; Executive Order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites signed 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 19 of 59

1 May 24, 1996; Secretarial Order 3175 Department of the Interior Responsibilities for 

2 Indian Trust Resources signed November 8, 1993; (now Departmental Manual release 

3 303 DM 2); Secretarial Order 3206 American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 

4 Responsibilities, and the ESA signed June 5, 1997; Memorandum for the Heads of 

5 Executive Departments and Agencies - Government-to-Government Relations with 

6 Native American Tribal Governments signed April 29, 1994.

7

8 To ensure the fulfillment of the federal Indian trust responsibility, the Department of the 

9 Interior has established policies and procedures for government-to-government 

10 consultation with federally recognized Indian tribes and tribal members for the 

11 identification, conservation, and protection of American Indian trust resources, trust 

12 assets, or tribal health and safety. Indian trust assets are values derived from land 

13 resources including surface water and groundwater, natural vegetation and wildlife, and 

14 air quality. Any potential impacts from federal actions or activities to tribal trust assets 

15 must be properly addressed between the affected tribe and the appropriate federal agency 

16 prior to any disturbance to such resources. 

17

18 How Compliance is Integrated into the AMP

19

20 Every management action by the Glen Canyon Dam AMP is assessed for necessity of 

21 compliance with the ESA, NEPA, and the NHPA. Reclamation, as the agency taking the 

22 action to modify dam operations, is most often the lead federal agency on these actions.

23

24 In the case of ESA, the action agency follows the procedure as referenced in the 

25 Biological Opinion section above If the consultation results in a BO and the action 

26 agency accepts the BO, the resulting RPAs and terms and conditions are binding and 

27 control those activities of the AMP. Since the ESA has such a high priority among 

28 Federal laws, endangered species appropriately have a high priority among AMP 

29 resources.

30

31 In the case of NEPA, the ROD detailed specific changes in dam operations designed to 

32 benefit downstream resources. The nature of the AMP is to monitor the effects of the 

33 ROD and experiment to verify that these changes are indeed producing these expected 

34 benefits and are meeting the intent of GCPA. If changes to the Glen Canyon Dam 

35 operating criteria are recommended to the Secretary, additional NEPA compliance will be 

36 addressed to implement those changes.

37

38 In the case of NHPA, Reclamation’s compliance for dam operations follows the three 

39 stipulations of the PA, identification and evaluation of historic properties, monitoring to 

40 determine effect, and adoption of an historic preservation plan which will describe a 

41 process to resolve adverse effects of dam operations on historic properties. Decisions are 

42 made through consultation with all PA signatories with the TWG and AMWG acting as 

43 the public interested in historic preservation. 

44

45

46 CALENDAR
4th Draft AMPSP Page 20 of 59

1

2 Budget Development Process

3

4 (To be provided by Budget Ad Hoc Group by end of May 2001, including timeline for 

5 developing the AMP budgets.)

6

7 Annual Report to Congress

8

9 As authorized by the GCPA, each year the AMP prepares a report to be transmitted to 

10 Congress. The report includes actions taken to meet the mandates of the GCPA, dam 

11 operations, and other management actions.

12

13 The report also serves to provide an update on the status of the resources addressed by the 

14 GCPA. The annua l State of the Colorado River Ecosystem (SCORE) report prepared by 

15 the GCMRC provides valuable input to this report.

16

17 SCORE Report

18

19 Communication between scientists and managers is one of the most important 

20 components of the AMP. The SCORE report serves the critical purpose of reporting on 

21 the status of the ecosystem, including a comprehensive reporting of change and trends 

22 among all resources. Through the use of qualitative and quantitative targets, it also 

23 provides a mechanism for determining if the management objectives are being met.

24

25 Results of annual monitoring and research activities should be made available to the 

26 adaptive managers as soon as possible, but no later than six months after each sampling 

27 period. Copies of scientific documents are available at GCMRC, many of which are 

28 available via the Internet.

29

30 Annual Science Plan

31

32 Each year GCMRC prepares a detailed science plan describing the monitoring and 

33 research activities proposed for the upcoming year. The plan is discussed with the TWG 

34 and the TWG budget ad hoc group in an effort to identify both important monitoring and 

35 research questions and relative priorities among the scientific activities. Final 

36 recommendation to the Secretary rests with the AMWG.

37

38 The science plan is critical to the evaluation of the effectiveness of actions taken to 

39 protect downstream resources. The plan must have a stable long-term monitoring 

40 component to address long-term trends. It must have a research component to address 

41 new questions that arise through scientific investigations. Finally, it must have the 

42 statistical rigor required to substantiate its conclusions. The annual work plan will 

43 include a report on the prior year’s activities.

44

45 Request for Proposal Process

46
4th Draft AMPSP Page 21 of 59

1 As recommended by the National Research Council (1996), the GCMRC will utilize a 

2 competitive proposal solicitation process open to government employees, public-section 

3 contractors, and universities through an open Request for Proposals (RFPs). Monitoring 

4 and research projects will be selected on the basis of their support of scientific capability 

5 and merit, submission timeliness on previous work (as evaluated through an independent, 

6 objective and unbiased peer review process), management objectives and information 

7 needs, demonstrated capabilities of proposers, and cost effectiveness. Following the 

8 selection of proposals, appropriate procurement mechanisms (i.e., grants, contracts, 

9 cooperative agreements) will be utilized for supporting selected projects. Most cultural 

10 resources programs, falling under the Secretary’s trust responsibilities, will be subjected 

11 to the same review protocol with a decision point only under after required revision.

12

13 The GCMRC’s commitment to ensuring the high quality of the scientific information 

14 produced by its programs highlights the importance of peer review at all levels of 

15 GCMRC scientific activities. GCMRC is committed to the use of scientific peer review 

16 and is drafting a set of peer review guidelines to describe the level of review received by 

17 all GCMRC proposals, programs, publications, and other products; and clearly convey 

18 the unambiguous standard of scientific objectivity and credibility followed by GCMRC.

19

20 These guidelines for scientific peer review will ensure that GCMRC matches the level of 

21 peer review to the nature of the proposal, program, publication or other product being 

22 reviewed, and describe the selection of qualified scientific peers, independence of the 

23 review process, and the inclusion of external (i.e., outside GCMRC) reviewers in the 

24 scientific peer review process.

25

26 In general, following approval by the AMWG of the long-term monitoring and research 

27 strategic plan, an annual monitoring and research program will be completed and 

28 approved each year in April. After approval of the annual monitoring and research plan, 

29 RFPs will be issued. Proposals will be screened by the program managers for their 

30 responsiveness to the RFP and all qualified proposals will undergo an independent and 

31 objective scientific peer review. Awards will be made on the basis of the results of peer 

32 review, along with the program manager’s evaluation of project relevance, and technical 

33 contracting requirements.

34

35

36 ACTION PLAN 3⁄4 WHAT, WHO, WHEN, AND HOW

37

38 (The Action Plan will be developed after completion of the management objectives)

39

40 Plan for Periodic Review

41

42 The AMP Strategic Plan is a guidance document for the AMWG and the Secretary that, 

43 when all its elements have been met, achieves the intent of the GCPA.

44

45 It is recommended that the AMP Strategic Plan be reviewed at the beginning of every 

46 other fiscal year. As set forth in the AMWG Charter, the AMWG is charged with 
4th Draft AMPSP Page 22 of 59

1 reviewing “long-term monitoring data to determine the status of resources and whether 

2 the AMP Strategic Plan goals and objectives are being met. If necessary, [AMWG will] 

3 develop recommendations for modifying the Glen Canyon Dam ROD, associated 

4 operating criteria, and other resource management actions pursuant to the GCPA.” 

5

6 Ad Hoc groups may be established to assist the AMWG with such a review, or the 

7 AMWG could delegate the task to the TWG. If changes are needed to the strategic plan, 

8 including any of the goals, management objectives, or information needs, 

9 recommendations will be made to the AMWG for approval to proceed with such changes.

10

11 The review process should be completed within six months of the beginning of the fiscal 

12 year that the review takes place.

13

14

15 BIBLIOGRAPHY

16

17 Broadbent, R. 1982. Uprating and Studies of Operational Alternatives--Glen Canyon 

18 Powerplant--Colorado River Storage Project. Dated December 6, 1982. 

19

20 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Power. 1995. Establishment of the Grand 

21 Canyon Monitoring and Research Center. Page 2.

22

23 Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992. Public Law (P.L.) 102-575. 

24

25 National Park Service, 1979. Proposed General Management Plan. Glen Canyon National 

26 Recreation Area/Arizona---Utah. Dated July 1979 (Reprinted August 1991). 72 

27 Pages.

28

29 National Park Service, 1995. General Management Plan: Grand Canyon National Park, 

30 Arizona. National Park Service. Dated August 1995. 67 Pages.

31

32 National Park Service, 2001. 2001 Management Policies.

33

34 Bureau of Reclamation, 1995. Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental 

35 Impact Statement. 337 + attachments pages.

36

37 United States Department of the Interior, 1996. Record of Decision. Operation of Glen 

38 Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement. Dated October 8, 1996. 15 

39 Pages.

40

41 United States Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994. Final Biological Opinion. Operation of 

42 Glen Canyon Dam as the Modified Low Fluctuating Flow Alternative on the Final 

43 Environmental Impact Statement. Operation of Glen Canyon Dam. United States 

44 Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Arizona State Office. Report 

45 Prepared for Regional Director, Bureau of Reclamation, Salt Lake City. Report # 

46 2-21-93-F-167. Dated December 21, 1994. 56 Pages.
4th Draft AMPSP Page 23 of 59

1

2 “Law of the River” synopsis

3 NPS Organic Act, 1916

4 Colorado River Compact, November 24, 1922

5 Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, 1948

6 Colorado River Storage Project Act, April 11, 1956

7 Colorado River Basin Project Act, September 30, 1968

8 Long-Range Operating Criteria, 1970

9 Long-Range Operating Criteria, October 30, 1992

10 National Environmental Policy Act (Section 7 consultation)

11 Grand Canyon Protection Act, October 30, 1992, and Legislative History

12 National Historic Preservation Act (Sections 106 and 110)

13 Programmatic Agreement on Cultural Resources, August 30, 1994

14 Historic Preservation Plan

15 Endangered Species Act

16 36 CFR 2.5 (research and specimen collection in NPS areas)

17 Record of Decision, Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact 

18 Statement, October 25, 1996

19 Operating Agreement Associated with Glen Canyon Dam Operating Criteria, July 7, 

20 1997

21 Biological Opinions

22 Operation of Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact Statement , March 1995 

23 Operating Criteria for Glen Canyon Dam in Accordance with the GCPA, February 24, 

24 1997

25 Operating Guidelines Associated with Glen Canyon Dam Operating Criteria, July 7, 1997

26 Annual Operating Plans

27 Colorado River Interim Surplus Criteria Final Environmental Impact Statement, 

28 December 2000

29 Record of Decision – Colorado River Interim Surplus Guidelines, January 2001

30

31 Rebecca Tsosie article on trust responsibility

32 Operating Criteria and Other Operating Parameters (C. Palmer 7/97)

33 Guidance Document (Scott Loveless, January 11, 2000)

34

35 uc.usbr.gov/amp

36

37

38

39

40
4th Draft AMPSP Page 24 of 59

1 Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group

2 Federal Advisory Committee

3

4 CHARTER

5

6 Official Designation: Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group.

7

8 Scope and Objectives: The Committee will provide advice and recommendations to the 

9 Secretary of the Interior relative to the operation of Glen Canyon Dam in accordance with 

10 the additional criteria and operating plans specified in Section 1804 of the Act and to the 

11 exercise of authorities under existing laws in such a manner as to protect, mitigate 

12 adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and 

13 the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were established, including but not limited to 

14 the natural and cultural resources and visitor use.

15

16 The Secretary of the Interior is implementing the Grand Canyon Protection Act (Act) of 

17 October 30, 1992, embodied in Public Law 102-575. The Act calls for implementation of 

18 long-term monitoring, research, and experimental programs and activities. As part of 

19 long-term monitoring, the Secretary’s Record of Decision (ROD) mandated development 

20 of an Adaptive Management Program (AMP). The AMP provides for monitoring the 

21 results of the operating criteria and plans adopted by the Secretary and research and 

22 experimentation to suggest appropriate changes to those operating criteria and plans.

23

24 The AMP includes an Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG). The AMWG will 

25 facilitate the AMP, recommend suitable monitoring and research programs, and make 

26 recommendations to the Secretary as required to meet the requirements of the Act. The 

27 AMWG may recommend research and monitoring proposals outside the Act which 

28 complement the AMP process, but such proposals will be funded separately, and do not 

29 deter from the focus of the Act.

30

31 Duration: It is the intent that the AMWG shall continue indefinitely, unless otherwise 

32 terminated by the Secretary. 

33

34 Agency or Official to Whom the Committee Reports: The AMWG reports to the 

35 Secretary through the Secretary's designee who shall serve as the chairperson and 

36 Designated Federal Official of the AMWG. In the absence of the Chairperson, a senior 

37 level Interior representative will act as Chairperson for the AMWG.

38

39 The Secretary's designee shall be responsible for preparation of meeting agendas and 

40 scheduling meetings of the AMWG. The Secretary's designee shall attend and chair all 

41 meetings of the AMWG. The Secretary=s designee will also be responsible for sending a 

42 formal summary report after each Advisory Committee meeting directly to the Secretary 

43 of the Interior with copies of subject summary report to be provided to all AMWG 

44 members.

45
4th Draft AMPSP Page 25 of 59

1 Bureau Responsible for Providing Necessary Support: The logistical and support 

2 services for the meetings of the AMWG shall be provided by the Bureau of Reclamation 

3 (Reclamation).
26

1 Estimated Annual Operating Costs: The operating costs are estimated at $200,000 annually for 

2 the establishment and support of the AMWG. This includes costs for required staff support, 

3 Reclamation staff and AMWG members, and expenses incurred in the recording and 

4 reproduction of meeting minutes, reports, notices, etc. 

5

6 Description of Duties: The duties or roles and functions of the AMWG are in an advisory 

7 capacity only. They are to:

8

9 a. Establish AMWG operating procedures.

10

11 b. Advise the Secretary in meeting environmental and cultural commitments of the Record 

12 of Decision.

13

14 c. Recommend the framework for the AMP policy, goals, and direction. 

15

16 d. Define and recommend resource management objectives for development and 

17 implementation of a long-term monitoring plan, and any necessary research and studies 

18 required to determine the effect of the operation of Glen Canyon Dam on the values for 

19 which the Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were 

20 established, including but not limited to natural and cultural resources, and visitor use.

21

22 e. Review and provide input on the report required in Section 1804 (c)(2) of the Act to the 

23 Secretary, the Congress, and the Governors of the Colorado River Basin states. The report 

24 will include discussion of dam operations, the operation of the AMP, status of resources, 

25 and measures taken to protect, mitigate, and improve the resources defined in the Act.

26

27 f. Annually review long-term monitoring data to determine the status of resources and 

28 whether the AMP Strategic Plan goals and objectives are being met. If necessary, develop 

29 recommendations for modifying the GCDEIS ROD, associated operating criteria, and other 

30 resource management actions pursuant to the Grand Canyon Protection Act.

31

32 g. Facilitate input and coordination of information from stakeholders to the Secretary to 

33 assist in meeting consultation requirements under Sections 1804 (c)(3) and 1805 (c) of the 

34 Act.

35

36 h. Monitor and report on compliance of all program activities with applicable laws, 

37 permitting requirements, and the Act.

38

39 Allowances for Committee Members (compensation, travel, per diem, etc.) While engaged in 

40 the performance of official business at AMWG and AMWG sub-group meetings (regular, ad 

41 hoc, and Protocol Evaluation Panel meetings) away from home or their regular places of 

42 business, all AMWG members or AMWG sub-group members shall, upon request, be 

43 reimbursed for travel expenses in accordance with current Federal travel regulations.
27

1

2 Estimated Number and Frequency of Meetings: The AMWG is expected to meet biannually. 

3 The Secretary's designee, who will serve as the Designated Federal Official, may call additional 

4 meetings as deemed appropriate. Fifteen members must be present at any meeting of the 

5 AMWG to constitute a quorum.

6

7 In accordance with FACA, a notice of each meeting of the AMWG shall be published in the 

8 Federal Register at least 15 days prior to the meeting advising the date, time, place, and purpose 

9 of the meeting. If it becomes necessary to postpone or cancel an announced meeting, a 

10 subsequent notice shall be published in the Federal Register as early as possible and shall explain 

11 the reasons for the postponement or cancellation. A news release for each meeting, 

12 postponement, or cancellation shall also be provided to selected major newspapers in Arizona, 

13 California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Utah. News releases shall also be 

14 provided to agencies and organizations expressing interest in publishing meeting announcements 

15 in newsletters.

16

17 In accordance with FACA, all meetings of the AMWG shall be open to the general public. Any 

18 organization, association, or individual may file a written statement or, at the discretion of the 

19 AMWG, provide verbal input regarding topics on a meeting agenda in accordance with FACA.

20

21 Termination Date: It is the intent that the AMWG shall continue indefinitely, unless otherwise 

22 terminated by the Secretary. The committee is subject to the provisions of the Federal Advisory 

23 Committee Act (FACA), 5.U.S.C. Appendix 2, and will take no action unless the charter filing 

24 requirements of section 9 of FACA have been complied with. The Committee is subject to 

25 biennial review and will terminate 2 years from the date the charter is filed, unless, prior to that 

26 time, the charter is renewed in accordance with Section 14 of the FACA. 

27

28 Committee Membership: Members of the AMWG to be appointed by the Secretary shall be 

29 comprised of: 

30

31 a. Secretary's Designee, who shall serve as chairperson for the AMWG.

32

33 b. One representative each from the 12 cooperating agencies associated with the EIS:

34

35 (1) Bureau of Reclamation

36 (2) Bureau of Indian Affairs

37 (3) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

38 (4) National Park Service

39 (5) Western Area Power Administration

40 (6) Arizona Game and Fish Department

41 (7) Hopi Tribe

42 (8) Hualapai Tribe

43 (9) Navajo Nation
28

1 (10) San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

2 (11) Southern Paiute Consortium

3 (12) Pueblo of Zuni

4

5 c. One representative each from the seven Basin States:

6

7 (1) Arizona

8 (2) California

9 (3) Colorado 

10 (4) Nevada

11 (5) New Mexico

12 (6) Wyoming

13 (7) Utah

14

15 d. Two representatives each from:

16

17 (1) Environmental groups

18 (2) Recreation interests

19 (3) Contractors who purchase Federal power from Glen Canyon Powerplant

20

21 Members will be appointed to the AMWG by the Secretary, with input and recommendations 

22 from the cooperating agencies, states, tribes, contractors for Federal power from Glen Canyon 

23 Dam, environmental representatives, and other stakeholders. To be eligible for appointment to 

24 the AMWG, a person must (a) be qualified through education, knowledge, or experience to give 

25 informed advice on water supply, diversion and delivery facilities, and their operation and 

26 management, or the environmental aspects of such operation; and (b) have the capability to 

27 constructively work in a group setting toward a common objective of structuring a mechanism 

28 for program implementation.

29

30 Members of the AMWG will be appointed for a 4-year term. At the discretion of the Secretary, 

31 members may be reappointed to additional terms. Vacancies occurring by reason of resignation, 

32 death, or failure to regularly attend meetings will be filled by the Secretary for the balance of the 

33 vacating member's term using the same method by which the original appointment was made. 

34 The Secretary, may at his discretion, initiate a new term where the remaining term of the vacancy 

35 is less than 2 years. Failure of an organization to be represented at two consecutive meetings 

36 will substantiate grounds for dismissal. The Chairperson will make the final determination in 

37 dismissing a member. 

38

39 To avoid conflict of interest issues arising from entities, including Federal agencies, having 

40 representatives on the AMWG and also submitting responses to request for proposals to perform 

41 work, the Federal procurement process shall be strictly adhered to. While members of the 

42 AMWG may give advice to the Secretarial Designee, all decisions in the procurement process 

43 shall be made by Federal procurement officials free of influence from AMWG members.
29

1 Subgroups: The committee may establish such workgroups or subcommittees as it deems 

2 necessary for the purposes of compiling information, discussing issues, and reporting 

3 back to the AMWG. 

4

5 Authority: The Grand Canyon Protection Act (Act) of October 30, 1992, embodied in 

6 Public Law 102-575, directs the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), among others, to 

7 operate Glen Canyon Dam in accordance with the additional criteria and operating plans 

8 specified in section 1804 of the Act and to exercise other authorities under existing law in 

9 such a manner as to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for 

10 which Grand Canyon National Park and the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were 

11 established, including but not limited to the natural and cultural resources and visitor use. 

12 The Secretary shall implement this section in a manner fully consistent with and subject 

13 to Section 1802 of the Act. Section 1805 of the Act calls for implementation of long14 term monitoring programs and activities that will ensure that Glen Canyon Dam is 

15 operated in a manner consistent with that of Section 1802.

16

17

18

19

20

21 

22 Secretary of the Interior Date signed

23

24

25

26 

27 Date Filed

28
30

1 GLEN CANYON DAM

2 ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT WORK GROUP

3 OPERATING PROCEDURES

4

5 FOREWARD

6

7 The Grand Canyon Protection Act (Act) of October 30, 1992, (Public Law 102-575) 

8 directs the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to Aestablish and implement long-term 

9 monitoring programs and activities that will ensure that Glen Canyon Dam is operated in 

10 a manner consistent with that of section 1802" of the Act. AThe monitoring programs and 

11 activities shall be established and implemented in consultation with the Secretary of

12 Energy; the Governors of the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New

13 Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; Indian tribes; and the general public, including 

14 representatives of academic and scientific communities, environmental organizations, the 

15 recreation industry, and contractors for the purchase of Federal power produced at Glen 

16 Canyon Dam.@ In order to comply with the consultation requirement of the Act, the Glen 

17 Canyon Dam EIS recommended formation of a Federal Advisory Committee. To fulfill 

18 this requirement, the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG) 

19 was established. The AMWG Charter imposes the following criteria: (1) the AMWG 

20 shall operate under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463); (2) the 

21 Chairperson shall be designated by the Secretary; (3) the Secretary=s Designee, shall also 

22 serve as the Designated Federal Official under the Federal Advisory Committee Act; (4) 

23 the Bureau of Reclamation will provide the necessary support in taking accurate minutes 

24 of each meeting; and (5) the AMWG shall continue in operation until terminated or 

25 renewed by the Secretary of the Interior under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

26

27 OPERATION

28

29 1. Meetings. The AMWG is expected to meet semiannually. The Secretary=s Designee 

30 may call additional meetings as deemed appropriate. A minimum of one meeting will be 

31 held annually. All meetings shall be announced by notice in the Federal Register and by 

32 news release to local newspapers.

33

34 Fifteen members must be present at any meeting of the AMWG to constitute a quorum.

35

36 Robert=s Rules of Order will be generally followed, except that some flexibility will be 

37 allowed as needs dictate.

38

39 The Bureau of Reclamation is responsible for arranging meetings and for other duties 

40 associated with operation of the AMWG. They will arrange for meeting location, 

41 provide staff for the Designee, minutes, Federal Register Notices and other operational 

42 requirements of the AMWG.

43

44 Meetings of the AMWG will be held in Phoenix, Arizona, to allow for better travel 

45 accessibility for the members as well as provide greater opportunity for the public to 

46 attend.
31

1 2. Chairperson. The Chairperson will be the Secretary=s Designee, who will preside over the 

2 meetings of the AMWG. In the absence of the Chairperson, the Chairperson will appoint an 

3 alternate. The Chairperson will designate an alternate who is an employee of the Department of 

4 the Interior. The Chairperson or designated alternate must be present before a meeting of the 

5 AMWG may convene. The Chairperson or his alternate is authorized to adjourn an AMWG 

6 meeting at any time.

7

8 3. Members. Membership shall follow the guidelines in the AMWG Charter. Members of the 

9 AMWG will be designated by the Secretary of the Interior. They shall serve for a term of four 

10 years. Members may be re-designated to serve for more than one term.

11

12 4. Alternate Committee Members. Each AMWG member may designate an alternate to serve 

13 for the same term as the member. Alternates must be identified to the Chairperson in writing. If 

14 the alternate is to represent the member at any AMWG meeting, the member will so notify the 

15 chairperson 1.5 days prior to such meeting. Alternates must meet the same qualifications as the 

16 member. Alternates will have authority to participate in AMWG business, including quorum and 

17 voting privileges. Representation by an alternate does not satisfy the minimum personal

18 attendance requirement of the member as described in the Charter. A list of members and 

19 alternates shall be maintained and made available to AMWG members.

20

21 5. Agenda. At least 30 days prior to any meeting of the AMWG, a draft of the proposed agenda 

22 and related information will be sent to the group members. Members shall review the agenda 

23 and return comments and proposed agenda items to the Designee within two weeks of the agenda 

24 mailing date. The final agenda will be sent to the members 15 days prior to the meeting. The 

25 Secretary=s Designee shall approve the agendas.

26

27 6. Voting. The maker of a motion must clearly and concisely state and explain his or her 

28 motion. Motions may be made verbally or submitted in writing in advance of the meeting. 

29 Notice of motions to be made by any member of the AMWG should be announced in the Federal 

30 Register and presented on the agenda. Motions may be proposed by any member in meetings 

31 where they are related to an agenda topic. After a motion there should be presentations by staff 

32 followed by a discussion and a call for questions. The public will be given opportunity to 

33 comment during the question period as allowed by the Chairperson. Any member of the public 

34 asked to address the AMWG, shall have a minimum of two minutes to comment. The

35 Chairperson can limit the total time allowed to the public for comments. Comments shall 

36 address the motion and not be repetitive to presentations, group discussions or other comments 

37 previously presented. The motion must be fully documented for the minutes and restated clearly 

38 by the Chairperson before a vote is taken.

39

40 The group should attempt to seek consensus but, in the event that consensus is not possible, a 

41 vote should be taken. Voting shall be by verbal indication or by raised hand. Approval of a 

42 motion requires a two-thirds majority of members present and voting. The views of any

43 dissenting member or minority group shall be transmitted to the Secretary along with the 

44 majority recommendation. Voting shall occur only with the formal meetings of the group.
32

1 7. Minutes. Detailed minutes of each meeting will be kept. The minutes will contain a record of 

2 persons present and a description of pertinent matters discussed, conclusions reached, and 

3 actions taken on motions. Minutes shall be limited to approximately 5-15 pages. The

4 corrections and adoption of the minutes will be by vote of the AMWG at the next subsequent 

5 meeting. The Secretary=s Designee shall approve all minutes. The Bureau of Reclamation is 

6 responsible for recording and disseminating minutes to AMWG members within 60 days of the 

7 subject meeting.

8

9 9. Public Involvement. No later than 15 days prior to each meeting of the AMWG or any 

10 subcommittee thereof, a notice will be published in the Federal Register. Meetings will be open 

11 to the public and advertised in local newspapers. Interested persons may appear in person, or file 

12 written statements to the AMWG. Public comments can be on any issue related to operation of 

13 the Glen Canyon Dam. A specific time for public comment will be identified in the agenda. 

14 Advance approval for oral participation may be prescribed, and speaking time may be limited. 

15 Minutes of the AMWG meetings and copies of reports submitted to the AMWG will be

16 maintained for public review at the Bureau of Reclamation=s Upper Colorado Regional Office in 

17 Salt Lake City, Utah, and at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. They will also be 

18 posted to the Bureau of Reclamation web site (www.uc.usbr.gov/amp).

19

20 10. Payment of Travel. Members of the AMWG may receive compensation for travel expenses 

21 under current Federal regulations. Alternates representing the official committee member may 

22 also receive compensation for travel expenses.

23

24 11. Open/Closed Meetings. If any member proposes discussion of a sensitive issue felt to 

25 require a closed session, he or she should so state in a proposal submitted to AMWG members in 

26 sufficient time to include it in the agenda published in the Federal Register Notice announcing 

27 the next meeting. A closed executive session may be held during a regular meeting, but should 

28 be used rarely. Any sensitive cultural issues will require consultation with Native Americans 

29 prior to meeting.

30

31 Telephone conference meetings must have a notice in the Federal Register 15 days prior to the 

32 call. There must be adequate opportunity for the general public to listen to the conference call.

33

34 The AMWG may conduct business outside of formal meetings through telephone polls

35 conducted by the Chairperson or his/her designee. In emergency situations, telephone polls can 

36 be requested by the AMWG member to act on clearly defined written motions for AMWG 

37 approval. Following approval by the Chairperson, a telephone poll will be conducted within 

38 seven working days. During a telephone poll, all members will be contacted and requested to 

39 vote. Approval of a motion requires a two-thirds majority of all members voting. The 

40 Chairperson is responsible for documenting in writing how each member voted and distributing 

41 the record to all AMWG members.

42
33

1 12. Reports and Record Keeping. The Annual Report (AR) required by the Grand Canyon 

2 Protection Act shall be written by the AMWG. The State of the Natural and Cultural Resources 

3 in the Colorado River Ecosystem report developed by the Grand Canyon Monitoring and 

4 Research Center will be attached to the AR and shall contain information on the condition of the 

5 resources impacted by the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. The AR shall be concise, containing 

6 critical resource issues and recommendations to the Secretary on future dam operations.

7

8 AMWG staff will supply GSA the required information to complete the summary report for 

9 Federal Advisory Committees.

10

11 13. Committee Expenses and Cost Accounting. An accounting of the expenses for operation of 

12 the AMWG shall be maintained by Reclamation. Expenses and other information will be 

13 submitted to GSA as required by FACA. Committee expenses are limited to approximately 

14 $154,000 annually.

15

16 SUB-GROUPS

17

18 1. Formation. The AMWG may form sub-groups in order to facilitate the mission of the 

19 AMWG as identified in the Act and the AMWG Charter. Sub-groups will be formed for 

20 completion of specific tasks or for specified periods of time. Sub-group members will be named 

21 by the members of the AMWG. Upon formation of a sub-group, the Chairperson of the AMWG, 

22 with the advice of AMWG members, will approve nominated members to serve on the sub23 group. Effort shall be made to keep sub-groups small. Sub-groups will be formed or dissolved 

24 by a vote of the AMWG.

25

26 2. Requirements. Sub-groups may choose their chairperson from among the AMWG named 

27 sub-group members. The chairperson of any sub-group may convene group meetings at his or 

28 her discretion. Sub-groups may develop their own operating procedures. Sub-group meetings 

29 must follow requirements of FACA, except they need not be chartered and members need not be 

30 appointed by the Secretary. One standing sub-group or subcommittee of the AMWG will be the 

31 Glen Canyon Dam Technical Work Group (TWG). The TWG membership shall consist of one 

32 representative names from each organization represented in the AMWG, with the exception that 

33 two members from the National Park Service representing the Grand Canyon National Park and 

34 the Glen Canyon Recreational Area, and one representative from the US Geological Survey. All 

35 sub-groups will elect their own officers. Names of all sub-group members will be announced to 

36 the AMWG at regular meetings and will be attached to the minutes. Sub-group members may 

37 designate alternates subject to approval of the Designee and the AMWG.

38

39 3. Charge. Sub-groups will receive their charges from the AMWG. Sub-groups will work only 

40 on issues assigned them by the AMWG. They will not be empowered to follow other issues on 

41 their own. They are encouraged to submit issues to the AMWG they feel worthy of 

42 consideration and discussion, but the AMWG must approve work on all new issues. The 

43 AMWG may require the sub-groups to develop plans and direct them to come to a consensus or 

44 majority opinion at their discretion. Sub-groups shall determine their own operating procedures, 

45 which must be reduced to writing and included with the AMWG and sub-group records.
34

1 4. Reporting. Sub-groups will report at least annually to the AMWG at the request of the 

2 Chairperson. Sub-groups shall report only to the AMWG. They shall provide

3 information as necessary for preparing annual resource reports and other reports as 

4 required for the AMWG.

5

6 5. Ad Hoc Groups. Ad hoc groups shall consist of members of the sub-group only. 

7 These groups may meet to discuss assignments from the sub-group. Ad hoc meetings 

8 will not require Federal Register notices. Minutes are recommended but, not required. 

9 Ad hoc groups shall report only to the main body of the sub-group. On a case-by-case 

10 basis, the AMWG will provide direction to the subgroups on the flexibility they have in 

11 forming Ad hoc groups.

12

13 Adopted by vote of the TWG on In Phoenix, Arizona.

14

15 Approved: 

16 Chairperson

17 Date

18

19

20 rev. 00jul06 

21
35

1 GLEN CANYON DAM

2 TECHNICAL WORK GROUP

3 OPERATING PROCEDURES

4

5 FOREWORD

6

7 The Grand Canyon Protection Act (Act) of October 30, 1992, (Public Law 102-575) 

8 directs the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to Aestablish and implement long-term 

9 monitoring programs and activities that will ensure that Glen Canyon Dam is operated in 

10 a manner consistent with that of section 1802@ of the Act. AThe monitoring programs and 

11 activities shall be established and implemented in consultation with the Secretary of

12 Energy; the Governors of the States of Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New

13 Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; Indian tribes; and the general public, including

14 representatives of academic and scientific communities, environmental organizations, the 

15 recreation industry, and contractors for the purchase of Federal power produced at Glen 

16 Canyon Dam.@ In order to comply with the consultation requirement of the Act, the Glen 

17 Canyon Dam EIS recommended formation of a Federal Advisory Committee and a 

18 Technical Work Group. To fulfill this requirement the Glen Canyon Adaptive

19 Management Work Group (AMWG) was established. The AMWG held their first 

20 meeting on September 10-11, 1997 and officially formed the Glen Canyon Technical 

21 Work Group (TWG) as a subgroup. This group is comprised of technical representatives 

22 who represent the various stakeholders on the AMWG. The TWG shall perform those 

23 tasks charged to them by the AMWG. Additional responsibilities of the TWG are to 

24 develop criteria and standards for monitoring and research programs; provide periodic 

25 reviews and updates; develop resource management questions for the design of

26 monitoring and research by the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center; and 

27 provide information, as necessary, for preparing annual resource reports and other

28 reports, as required, for the AMWG. The TWG shall comply with all regulations of the 

29 Sunshine Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act pertaining to sub-committees. 

30 (See 41 CFR 101-6.10 Federal Advisory Committee Management). Staff resources for 

31 the TWG shall be provided by the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center and 

32 Reclamation.

33

34 OPERATION

35

36 1. Meetings. - TWG meetings will be held quarterly or more frequently as required. 

37 Where possible meetings will be scheduled 2-3 months in advance. Information will be 

38 provided to all interested parties. The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) will be 

39 responsible for submitting meeting notices to be published in the Federal Register 15 

40 days prior to meetings. Federal register notices may provide information on up to 3 

41 meetings at a time. The Chairperson will draft a reminder meeting notice to the TWG 

42 members and the staff will distribute it at least 10 days prior to the meeting. Meeting 

43 format will be in accordance with these Operating Procedures. Sixteen members must be 

44 present at any meeting of the AMWG TWG to constitute a quorum.

45
36

1 2. Officers. - The TWG will elect its own officers. The Chairperson will be elected for a 1-year 

2 term and selected by a vote of the TWG. The elected chairperson shall have the option of 

3 appointing an alternate member to represent the stakeholder for the term of the chairperson, 

4 however, the stakeholder shall have only one vote. With the recommendation of the TWG, 

5 compensation for the chairperson may be provided from Adaptive Management Program (AMP) 

6 funds. A Vice-chair will be selected to assist the Chairperson and will be an employee of 

7 Reclamation to ensure requirements of federal regulations are met and to provide assistance. 

8 Reclamation and GCMRC will provide staff and meeting resources. Reclamation shall be 

9 responsible for, and shall assure compliance with, the applicable federal regulations including 

10 those referenced above. The Chairperson shall be elected in the Decembersummer July meeting 

11 of the TWG or the first meeting prior to the first calendar start of the fiscal year meeting of the 

12 AMWG TWG. The new Chairperson will take office at the first meeting of the TWG following 

13 the first meeting of the AMWG of the year. The term of the TWG Chairperson will be October 1 

14 - Sept. 30. The current chairperson will serve until the new chairperson takes office.

15

16 Chair responsibilities:

17

18 Attend all TWG and AMWG meetings when possible.

19

20 Facilitate TWG meetings by leading discussions, arranging for an outside facilitator when 

21 required, and inviting input from TWG members, technical experts, and the public.

22

23 Organize or disband Ad Hoc task groups per TWG direction.

24

25 Ensure recognition of consensus or voting on decision items as appropriate, including 

26 development of minority opinion papers when consensus cannot be reached.

27

28 Present overview of TWG activities and recommendations at AMWG meetings.

29

30 Vice-Chair responsibilities include:

31

32 Attend all TWG and AMWG meetings when possible.

33

34 Assist the chairperson in facilitating the TWG meetings, ensuring that action items, 

35 responsible parties, and future agenda items are summarized and reviewed with the group 

36 by close of meeting.

37

38 Contact speakers, ad hoc committee chairpersons, and other contributors at least three 

39 weeks before the next TWG meeting to review assignments and determine how much 

40 time should be allotted for their presentations.

41
37

1 Prepare draft agenda for next meeting and provide review copies by E-mail to co2 chairperson, GCMRC program managers, and speakers about three weeks before the next 

3 meeting. Finalize agenda and send to co-chairperson two weeks before meeting.

4
38

1 Track and coordinate contributions of products for TWG/AMWG review with

2 stakeholders, GCMRC, ad hoc groups, and others.

3

4 Ensure complete meeting preparations (meeting room, motel, audio visual equipment, 

5 recording of minutes, etc.)

6

7 Review and distribute TWG products to AMWG.

8

9 3. Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC)

10

11 Develop GCMRC planning documents for TWG review.

12

13 Provide scientific opinions, documents, presentations, and reviews of TWG documents.

14

15 Develop research designs and proposals for implementing monitoring and research

16 identified by the AMWG, including draft budget estimates.

17

18 Provide scientific information and updates to the TWG for all resources of concern

19 identified in the EIS. Coordinate, prepare, and distribute technical reports and

20 documentation for review and as final products.

21

22 Prepare and forward technical management recommendations and annual reports as

23 specified in Section 1804 of the GCPA to the TWG.

24

25 4. Members. - The TWG membership shall consist of one representative named from each 

26 organization represented in the AMWG, with the exception of two members from the National 

27 Park Service representing the Grand Canyon National Park and the Glen Canyon Recreational 

28 Area, and one representative from the U.S. Geological Survey. The TWG organizational

29 membership was nominated by the AMWG, with the USGS representative having been

30 nominated by the Secretary=s Designee. Members were selected by the respective organization=s 

31 representatives. A list of TWG members will be distributed to the AMWG at regular meetings. 

32 TWG members may designate alternates. 

33

34 5. Alternate Committee Members. Alternates shall be designated by TWG members. 

35 Members can designate an alternate for any TWG or Ad Hoc group meeting they will be unable 

36 to attend, or for which the alternate is better prepared to represent the organization=s interests. 

37 Alternates shall sign-in on the attendance sheet noting that they are the alternate to the official 

38 member. The officially designated alternate, in the absence of the member, is allowed to fully 

39 participate and vote in TWG meetings without prior notification and be counted in the quorum.

40
39

1 6. Agenda. - Members, and others, requesting an item be added to the agenda should notify the 

2 Chairperson in writing (by mail, fax, or E-mail) at least 15 days prior to the meeting. The 

3 following information should be provided with each request: a discussion topic or title, the 

4 nature of the topic (i.e., sharing of information, discussion of an issue, or a proposed action), 

5 name(s) of the presenter(s), total amount of time required for presentation, and any other relevant 

6 points for meeting planning. The agenda will be finalized when the schedule is filled or when 

7 the pre-meeting briefing documents are distributed. Requests received after the agenda is 

8 finalized may be considered under new business (time permitting), or may have to be postponed 

9 until a future meeting. An agenda will be prepared and approved by the Chairperson and 

10 forwarded to the TWG meeting recorder. The meeting recorder will distribute the final agenda 

11 (by e-mail and/or by other means) to the TWG members and others on the distribution list. 

12 Reclamation is responsible for compliance with federal regulations. Reclamation will include in 

13 the Federal Register Notice: meeting dates, times, location, and a list of meeting agenda items.

14

15 7. Guidelines for Discussions. - The following ground rules will guide all discussions while 

16 the meeting is in session: Members will endeavor to arrive, return from breaks, and depart the 

17 meeting on schedule. Any person needing to continue private discussions after the meeting has 

18 been called to order will take their business outside the conference room. Members, alternates, 

19 and visitors wishing to address the TWG will wait to be recognized by the Chairperson or 

20 designated discussion leader before speaking. Speakers will make their points succinctly and 

21 yield the floor to the next speaker, waiting to again be recognized for rebuttals. Comments are to 

22 be applicable to the motion and not repetitive to presentations, group discussion or other 

23 comments previously presented. Discussions of new or unrelated business will be postponed 

24 until the appointed time on the agenda.

25

26 8. Voting. - The maker of a motion must clearly and concisely state and explain their motion. 

27 Motions may be made verbally or submitted in writing in advance of the meeting. Motions may 

28 be proposed by a member in meetings where they are related to an agenda topic. After a motion 

29 and a second to the motion there shall be presentations by staff, where they are necessary or 

30 desired. Presentations shall be followed by discussion and a call for questions. The public will 

31 be given opportunity to comment during the question period as provided for in these operating 

32 procedures. Any member of the public who has asked to address the TWG, shall be provided a 

33 reasonable time to comment. The Chairperson may limit the total time allowed to the public for 

34 comments. Comments shall be applicable to the motion and not be repetitive of prior

35 presentations, group discussions, or other comments. The motion shall be fully documented for 

36 the minutes and restated clearly by the Chairperson before seeking a determination of consensus 

37 or a vote is taken.

38 Consensus is the desired result. All reasonable efforts will be made to bring the group to a 

39 consensus decision or recommendation, including, for example, formation of ad hoc groups. If 

40 consensus cannot be achieved, a vote will be taken on motions and recommendations to be 

41 forwarded to the AMWG. Only members of the TWG or their alternate may vote. A majority 

42 recommendation will go forward along with a minority opinion report (containing the alternate 

43 recommendation and identification of who constitutes the minority). Ad hoc groups consisting 
40

1 of the dissenting members may be formed as needed to prepare minority opinions. Each

2 appointed TWG representative is expected to explain and/or clarify issues to their respective 

3 AMWG member. 

4
41

1 Recommendations to the TWG or AMWG will be summarized in report form, will contain 

2 relevant background material on the issues, and will include a brief summary of previous 

3 discussions related to the issue (i.e., ad hoc group or TWG discussions). Requests for actions 

4 associated with a briefing document will be posed as a specific written recommendation that can 

5 be approved as written, approved with modification, or not approved. Reports and

6 recommendations forwarded to the AMWG will be identified as having been approved through 

7 consensus of the entire TWG, except when a minority opinion is submitted to the Chairperson in 

8 writing prior to the agreed date for forwarding TWG recommendations to the AMWG (generally 

9 60 days before the next AMWG meeting). Members subscribing to the minority opinion will be 

10 listed in the minority report, which shall follow the same format outlined above for the consensus 

11 or majority report. The TWG Chairperson may invite a representative of the minority group to 

12 present the minority opinion to the AMWG.

13

14 9. Ad Hoc Groups and Meetings. - Ad hoc groups can be formed by the TWG as needed with 

15 membership consisting of TWG members and alternates only. Groups may invite technical 

16 advisors outside the TWG membership to assist on some issues. These groups may meet to 

17 discuss assignments from the TWG. Ad hoc meetings will not require federal register notices. 

18 Minutes are recommended, but not required. Ad hoc groups shall report of their deliberations 

19 and findings to the TWG. Presentations of findings from Ad Hoc groups may be given by 

20 individual members of the group. Ad hoc groups shall report only to the main body of the TWG. 

21 The AMWG may provide direction to the TWG on the flexibility they have in forming ad hoc 

22 groups. Ad hoc groups shall be formed by the consensus or vote of the TWG and shall terminate 

23 as soon as the assigned task is completed.

24

25 10. Minutes, Reports, and Record Keeping. - Minutes will be recorded by TWG staff support 

26 from Reclamation. Minutes will address the key topics of the TWG meetings including

27 proposals, motions, voting/approval of motions, majority/minority opinions, public comments, 

28 presentations, findings from ad hoc groups, and other pertinent information. Minutes will not be 

29 a complete transcript of the discussions. An audio tape recording of the meeting will be kept for 

30 each meeting. The corrections and adoption of the minutes will be reached by consensus of the 

31 TWG at the following meeting.

32

33 Minutes, attachments, agendas, and materials for upcoming TWG meetings will be distributed 

34 according to the schedule below:

35

36 A. Submittal of materials for upcoming TWG Meetings.

37

38 15 Business Days Prior to TWG Mtg: Responsible Person Submit To

39

40 _Agenda items Committee Members Chairman

41 _Materials for duplication & dist. Committee Members Staff

42
42

1 TWG members responsible for materials for an upcoming meeting shall forward them to the 

2 designated staff member in time to be included with the distribution which will occur 10 days 

3 prior to the meeting. Materials may be provided via e-mail or hard copy. Where copies of 

4 material are not provided to the designated staff member in time for normal distribution, the 

5 person or organization will be responsible for making their own copies and bringing them to the 

6 meeting. They may either: (1) e-mail, fax or other means; (2) duplicate prior to and distribute at 

7 the meeting. Staff, members, and public providing materials for distribution at the meeting 

8 should bring at least 40 copies. Meeting documents distributed at the meeting are to be provided 

9 first to the meeting recorder, TWG members, and the GCMRC Chief. Copies of all handouts 

10 will be placed in a designated location for official visitors and the public. If action is anticipated 

11 to be taken on or as a result of that material, all reasonable effort will be made to provide those 

12 materials to the members in advance of the meeting. In the event materials are not provided in 

13 advance of the meeting, action on this topic may be delayed at the Chairperson=s discretion. 

14 Individuals making presentations at TWG meetings shall notify TWG staff of any special audio 

15 visual equipment or supply needs at least two weeks before the meeting.

16

17 A mailing list containing members= mailing addresses, phone numbers, fax numbers, and E-mail 

18 addresses, as appropriate, will be maintained and distributed as needed. Updates will be 

19 prepared and the list re-distributed as appropriate. A copy of the roster of TWG members or 

20 alternates attending any meeting of the TWG shall be attached to the minutes, and shall include a 

21 list of all others in attendance.

22

23 B. Meeting material distribution to TWG members

24

25 10 Calendar Days Prior to TWG Meeting: Responsible:

26

27 _Minutes and attachments from the previous meeting Staff

28 _Agenda for the upcoming meeting Staff

29 _Materials needed for the upcoming meeting Staff

30

31 E-mail, regular mail, or other means shall be used for the distribution. 

32

33 Reclamation will be responsible for reports and distribution of materials to AMWG, and 

34 providing copies of information to the Library of Congress. The TWG shall assist 

35 GCMRC in preparation of the draft Annual Report to Congress pursuant to the Grand 

36 Canyon Protection Act.

37

38 Minutes, documentation from meetings, and reports shall be made available to the public 

39 at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. and the Upper Colorado Regional Office 

40 of the Bureau of Reclamation in Salt Lake City, Utah.

41
43

1 11. Arranging meetings and other duties associated with operation of the TWG. - Where 

2 possible, meetings will be scheduled 2-3 months in advance. All meetings shall also have 

3 a Federal Register Notice published 15 days or more in advance of any meeting. Meeting 

4 locations will be determined by the group in a preceding meeting. The staff will arrange 

5 meeting rooms and audio visual equipment, and block a number of hotel guest rooms. 

6 Meeting rooms will be arranged so that each of the 26 TWG members can be seated 

7 around the table. Alternates representing an absent TWG member should take their place 

8 at the table. Additional seating will be provided around the margin or rear of the room 

9 for alternates who are attending with the member, for official visitors and for the general 

10 public.

11

12 12. Public, Visitors, and Open and Closed Meetings. - All meetings are open to the 

13 public. It is not anticipated the group will require closed sessions unless a provision is 

14 made to do so. Only members of the TWG or their alternate may participate in

15 discussions of the group. Appropriate staff of Reclamation and the GCMRC shall 

16 provide pertinent information from their organization to respond to questions or make 

17 presentations when approved by the group. The public will be allowed to comment after 

18 discussion of each agenda item requiring a decision of that group and at the end of the 

19 TWG meeting or as provided in the agenda. Each person will be given up to 10 minutes 

20 to address the TWG members at the time specified on the agenda for public comment. 

21 Greater consideration will be given to individuals submitting discussion issues and/or 

22 requesting time in advance of the meeting to the Chairperson. The Chairperson will 

23 control adherence to the time limit so the meeting is not unduly prolonged. Each speaker 

24 will be expected to provide their name and affiliation for the meeting minutes. The 

25 Chairperson will accept written comments from the public, and will allow their

26 distribution if copies are available for all members (40 copies required). Written

27 comments will be attached to the meeting minutes if they are identified with the name, 

28 address, and affiliation of the provider.

29

30

31

32

33

34 Adopted by vote of the TWG on , Phoenix, Arizona.

35

36

37 Approved: 

38 Chairperson Date

39

40

41

42 Updated: 2/13/01

43

44
44

1 GLEN CANYON DAM ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

2 AMWG FACA COMMITTEE GUIDANCE 

3

4 Purpose of this Document 

5 During the first two years of implementing the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive 

6 Management Program, it has become apparent that several aspects of the program, 

7 specifically relating to the Record of Decision, the Glen Canyon Dam EIS and the Grand 

8 Canyon Protection Act need to be clarified in order to facilitate and focus the activities of 

9 both the Adaptive Management Work Group Committee (AMWG) and its subcommittee, 

10 the Technical Work Group (TWG). It is the purpose of this document to provide that 

11 direction. The following guidance represents the Department=s understanding and intent 

12 concerning the purpose and role of the AMWG Committee and the scope of work given 

13 to the Committee in its Charter, pursuant to all relevant law and Departmental policy. 

14 This guidance has been assembled with the assistance and legal guidance of the Office of 

15 the Solicitor and has been shared with all members of the AMWG prior to finalization.

16

17 Background

18

19 During the past century, there have been numerous developments affecting the 

20 Colorado River that have led to the present juncture. On November 24, 1922, the 

21 Colorado River Compact was signed at Santa Fe, New Mexico, allocating the water of 

22 the river between the Upper and Lower Basins, as defined therein, as well as establishing 

23 the rules, rights, and obligations governing the use of that water among the seven 

24 respective states within the Colorado River Basin. The United States also has a treaty 

25 with the United Mexican States (Mexico) guaranteeing Mexico 1.5 million acre feet 

26 annually from the Colorado River. Among the other obligations established in the 

27 Compact was that of the Upper Basin not to deplete the flow of the river at Lee Ferry 

28 “below an aggregate of 75,000,000 acre-feet for any period of 10 consecutive years.”

29 Earlier, in 1908, Congress set aside the Grand Canyon as a national monument 

30 and in 1919 expanded the reservation and redesignated it as a national park. There are 

31 only about fifteen river miles separating the outlet works of Glen Canyon Dam and the 

32 upstream boundary (on the northerly side of the river) of Grand Canyon National Park. 

33 Later, Congress also established the area surrounding Lake Powell and extending down 

34 river to the Park boundary (except for the area within the pre-existing Navajo 

35 Reservation) as the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area, also managed by the 

36 National Park Service. 
45

1 In large part in order to assure that the rights and obligations in the Colorado River 

2 Compact and the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact could be met without jeopardizing the 

3 water uses of the Upper Basin states in the future, Congress passed the Colorado River Storage 

4 Project Act on April 11, 1956, which provided the authority for the construction of the four 

5 “initial units” of CRSPA, namely Flaming Gorge, Aspinall, Navajo, and Glen Canyon dams. 

6 Glen Canyon Dam, storing more than 26 million acre feet, over 24 million of which represent 

7 active capacity, is situated immediately above Lee Ferry, the delivery point to the Lower Basin. 

8 In 1968 Congress passed the Colorado River Basin Project Act which among other things 

9 provided for coordinated operations of Colorado River Basin reservoirs. Until recently, Glen 

10 Canyon Dam has been operated with essentially two functions in mind: compact deliveries to the 

11 Lower Basin, and hydropower generation. Compact deliveries from Glen Canyon assure that the 

12 Upper Basin can meet its delivery obligations to the Lower Basin states and effectively manage 

13 other Upper Basin reservoirs to meet Upper Basin water supply needs. Hydropower generation 

14 provides the revenues necessary to cover operation and maintenance costs as well as the 

15 revenues needed to assure repayment of CRSP projects.

16 During the 1980s, it became apparent that the existing pattern of dam operations was 

17 adversely affecting some of the riparian resources in the Park and the Recreation Area below the 

18 dam. The Department began studying the situation, initiated the preparation of an EIS, and then 

19 Congress passed the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992 to attempt to address this problem. 

20

21 Authority (Questions 1a, 1b, 1c, 2a, 3, 4c, 5a, 5c, 5e, 6a, 6b, 7a, 7c, 8, 12c, 13a, 14)

22

23 Grand Canyon Protection Act, Legislative History, and Law of the River

24

25 It is quite clear that when Congress enacted the Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992, 

26 106 Stat. 4669 (GCPA), it intended to maintain all that had gone before B the Compacts, the Park 

27 units, and Glen Canyon Dam B and to find a way to operate the dam so as to “protect [sic], 

mitigate adverse impacts to and improve”128 downstream NPS resources without interfering with 

29 the “Law of the River,” including compact and treaty obligations for water delivery (GCPA, 

30 section 1802(a) and (b)). The Senate Report on the bill puts it quite simply: AThe primary 

31 purpose of this title is to authorize changes in the operation of Glen Canyon Dam to prevent 

32 damage to downstream resources, principally the dam=s power operations.@ The Secretary’s 

33 responsibilities for water storage, allocation and delivery act as limits on the Secretary’s 

34 discretion in implementing the GCPA. It is also clear that Congress understood that these 

35 objectives would have certain costs in the form of lost incremental hydropower generating 

36 opportunity (GCPA, section 1809) and that the existence of the dam was to be taken as a given. 

37 The basic question Congress was addressing was how Glen Canyon Dam operations 

38 might be modified within the provisions of existing law so as to improve conditions for 

39 downstream NPS resources (with similar benefits certainly occurring on other similarly situated 

40 lands). The GCPA itself does not direct consideration of cultural resources within the 

41 boundaries of Native American reservations, only “the values for which Grand Canyon National 

42 Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were established,” although all federal agencies 

 

1

 The GCPA as printed contains a typographical error, using “project” instead of “protect.” The 

legislative history makes clear that “protect” is what was intended; that word will be used 

throughout this document.
46

1 have similar obligations under other law. The entire adaptive management program (AMP), 

2 including the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center and the Adaptive Management 

3 Work Group, must be understood within this context. In accordance with section 1804 of the 

4 GCPA, the EIS was conducted to attempt to find an answer to that question, and the 1996 ROD 

5 was the Department=s best first answer. Recognizing that more experience and knowledge with 

6 operations might enable further refinements in operations and might further improve downstream 

7 resource conditions, however, Congress added section 1805 to the GCPA. This section required 

8 the Secretary to “establish and implement long-term monitoring programs and activities that will 

9 ensure that Glen Canyon Dam is operated in a manner consistent with section 1802,” namely, “to 

10 protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon National 

11 Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were established,” within the parameters of 

12 other applicable law and the physical constraints of the dam. Accordingly, the Department 

13 included in the EIS and in the ROD the provisions setting up the AMP, thereby allowing for 

14 further refinement of and changes to dam operations to better meet the GCPA objectives.

15 The charge given to the AMWG in its Charter is to “facilitate the AMP, recommend 

16 suitable monitoring and research programs, and make recommendations to the Secretary as 

17 required to meet the requirements of the Act.@ The scope of the AMWG responsibility, 

18 therefore, is to identify aspects of dam operations that can be modified to beneficially affect the 

19 downstream resources identified as the focus of study (i.e. “the target”) in the EIS. This covers 

20 flow rates, ramping rates, periodicity of peak flows, monitoring sediment input rates and the 

21 relation of sediment movement to water release and ramping rates, chemical content and 

22 temperature of releases, among possible others -- any aspect of dam operations, in other words, 

23 which has a reasonably demonstrable effect on the downstream resources sought to be improved 

24 by the GCPA. The key to the scope of AMWG=s responsibilities is whether a specific desired 

25 resource effect downstream of the dam can be achieved through some manipulation of dam 

26 operations. Under the ROD, the upper limit of planned release level is 45,000 cfs. Long-term 

27 monitoring and research, including test flows within the current range of authorized operations, 

28 are intended to enable finer and finer tuning of operations over time, as additional knowledge 

29 and experience are gained, to better achieve the target mix of resource benefits, as outlined in the 

30 EIS, pages 54-65.

31 Without losing track of this primary focus on improving conditions for downstream 

32 resources, the Charter also specifies that the AAMWG may recommend research and monitoring 

33 proposals outside the Act which complement the AMP process, but such proposals will be 

34 funded separately, and do not deter from the focus of the Act.@ This would include anything the 

35 AMWG committee considers relevant but tangential or attenuated in its effects on riparian 

36 resources downstream of the dam, as identified above. The relevant Senate Report language 

37 says, after the discussion of the primary purpose of the Act, that: Aother reasonable remedial 

38 measures may be available to the Secretary. The phrase >exercise other authorities under existing 

39 law= means that the Secretary should consider and may implement non-operational measures to 

40 address downstream effects of Glen Canyon Dam if such other remedial measures meet this 

41 title=s goal of protecting, mitigating damage to, and improving the resources downstream of the 

42 dam.@ Again, as emphasized in the Senate Report, “the water storage, allocation and delivery 

43 requirements of the Law of the River place substantial limits on the Secretary’s ability to change 

44 other elements of GCD operations. All measures undertaken pursuant to the authority of this Act 

45 have as their focus the improvement of conditions for downstream resources within the two Park 

46 Service units.” The TWG=s responsibility is similarly limited, but even more so; it is to carry out 
47

1 only specific assignments within the scope of the AMWG=s responsibility, as directed by the 

2 AMWG. 

3 The AMWG was set up pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) and 

4 must comply with FACA=s requirements for notice and public meetings, etc., as laid out in the 

5 GSA regulations at 41 CFR Subpart 101-6.10. The AMWG and TWG may establish their own 

6 internal operating procedures as they wish, so long as they comply with the specific requirements 

7 of FACA and its implementing regulations. 

8 One area that has been a source of recent discussion has been the question of planned 

9 high releases from Glen Canyon Dam for such purposes as “beach habitat building flows.” The 

10 Department expects the AMWG to work and provide its recommendations within the following 

11 context. Since the GCPA is clear that it was not intended to modify the compacts or “the 

12 provisions of the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956 and the Colorado River Basin 

13 Project Act of 1968 that govern allocation, appropriation, development, and exportation of the 

14 waters of the Colorado River Basin” (GCPA, section 1802(b)), any operational changes under 

15 the auspices of the GCPA are clearly subordinate to and must fit within the constraints of those 

16 provisions. Historically, there have been differences of legal opinion over some related issues, 

17 such as whether releases of water above powerplant capacity, if made for authorized purposes, 

18 can be considered as not constituting “spills” within the meaning of section 602(a) of the 

19 Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968 and the Operating Criteria implemented pursuant to 

20 section 602, and more recently over whether the GCPA “amends” existing law by adding 

21 additional authorized purposes for the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. These legal issues have 

22 not been finally resolved, but given the limitations provided in the ROD, the Glen Canyon Dam 

23 operating criteria, and the 1996 agreement between the Department and the Basin States, it is 

24 believed that they have been adequately addressed. Clearly, section 7 of the CRSPA, which 

25 directs the Secretary “to produce the greatest practicable amount of power and energy that can be 

26 sold at firm power and energy rates” provided that the primary purposes of compact deliveries 

27 and state compact allocation development are not precluded or impaired, remains in effect, even 

28 though the GCPA (section 1809) authorized, and the EIS/ROD implemented, an incremental 

29 reduction in the value of the hydropower resource. Under the conditions of those documents (the 

30 ROD, the operating criteria, and the 1996 agreement), flows above powerplant capacity would be 

31 conducted utilizing reservoir releases required for dam safety purposes. The Department is 

32 currently focusing on operational modifications at release levels below 45,000 cfs. 

33 Modifications to the operating criteria involving flows above 45,000 cfs would require additional 

34 NEPA compliance.

35

36 EIS/ROD (Questions 1b, 4c, 5a, 5c, 7b, 7c, 12a, 12b, 12c, 13a, 13b, 13c, 13d, 13e, 

37 13f, 15)

38

39 As mentioned above, the EIS conducted on Glen Canyon Dam operations contains the 

40 Department=s selection of a mix of targeted resource benefits and its attempt to balance these 

41 benefits against costs to hydropower generation. As stated in the ROD: 

42
48

1 The goal of selecting a preferred alternative was 

2 not to maximize benefits for the most resources, but 

3 rather to find an alternative dam operating plan that 

4 would permit recovery and long-term sustainability of 

5 downstream resources while limiting hydropower 

6 capability and flexibility only to the extent necessary to 

7 achieve recovery and long-term sustainability.
49

1

2 The ROD represents the Department’s “first cut” on providing an answer as to how that 

3 target might be achieved. The EIS and ROD are relevant to the AMP process in several respects. 

4 First of all, the EIS identifies the specific downstream resources sought to be benefitted (i.e. 

5 Aprotected, mitigated for, or enhanced@) by changes in dam operations (see EIS, pp. 54-57 and 

6 Table II-7). Secondly, its discussions and analyses of various alternatives provide a starting 

7 point for the state of the science at the time the decision was made to implement the Amodified 

8 low fluctuating flow@ pattern of operations with a commitment for long-term modifications in 

9 response to further research. In the language of the ROD, “the Modified Low Fluctuating Flow 

10 Alternative was selected as the preferred alternative because it would provide the most benefits 

11 with respect to the original selection criteria, given existing information.” 

12 The monitoring, research and experimental programs are intended to develop additional 

13 information, working with the AMWG recommendations, “which could result in some additional 

14 operational changes.” The selection criteria against which such changes are to be measured, 

15 however, remain unchanged. Elsewhere the ROD amplifies that this alternative was selected 

16 because it “meets the critical requirements of the sediment resource by restoring some of the pre17 dam variability through floods and by providing a long-term balance between the supply of sand 

18 from Grand Canyon tributaries and the sand-transport capacity of the river” with corresponding 

19 benefits to habitat. The ROD, in part in conjunction with the EIS, also describes in detail the 

20 decision made, including modifications to the selected alternative, specific environmental and 

21 monitoring commitments, the scope and objectives of the AMP, the role and function of the 

22 Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC), and the role expected for the 

23 AMWG and TWG. It is important to understand that before either the targeted resource blend or 

24 the operational pattern in the Glen Canyon Dam operating criteria can be changed materially, 

25 additional NEPA work would have to be done.

26 Among the environmental commitments made in the ROD was the commitment to 

27 restrict Glen Canyon Dam release upramp rates to 4,000 cfs per hour and downramp rates to 

28 1,500 cfs per hour. Consistently with interagency agreements between BOR and the Western 

29 Area Power Administration (WAPA) both prior and subsequent to the 1996 ROD, these figures 

30 should be understood to represent a firm limit on changes in release rates integrated over each 

31 hourly interval, to be enforced by the Secretary, subject to being exceeded only in times of 

32 emergency unless and until changed by subsequent decision of the Secretary. 

33 As part of the adaptive management process, studies and information needs specified in 

34 the EIS/ROD are expected to be completed and to result in the identification of new information 

35 needs or definitions of effects, impacts and mitigation requirements. 

36 All applicable federal laws must be complied with, including NEPA, NHPA, ESA, 

37 FACA, and the APA, in addition to the federal laws considered part of the ALaw of the River.@ 

38 It is not expected that the Adaptive Management Program will result in additional required 

39 NEPA compliance unless additional resources (i.e. “management objectives”) are identified and 

40 targeted for inclusion in the revised dam operations beyond those identified in the existing EIS. 

41

42

43 Organization (Questions 8, 9, 10, and 11)

44

45 Prior to the EIS and ROD various Federal Agencies (i.e., BIA, WAPA, BOR, 

46 NPS, FWS) had various statutory responsibilities for compliance with laws involving such areas 
50

1 as the environment, historical and cultural resources, and threatened and endangered species. 

2 These agencies have frequently entered into agreements among themselves to take specific 

3 actions to meet those statutory requirements. It was assumed when the AMP was adopted by the 

4 Secretary that it would include all studies necessary to determine the effects of GCD operations 

5 on the designated resources selected in the ROD. Some of these studies meet scientific needs 

6 and also meet statutory requirements under NEPA, ESA and NHPA. In fact the EIS identified 

7 some specific studies that would be a part of the AMP, such as the study of low steady flows. 

8 The Secretary of the Interior established the AMP with four key elements: 

9 AMWG, TWG, GCMRC, and the IRP (Independent Review Panel). The four have distinct roles, 

10 but ultimately the Secretary of the Interior is responsible for seeing that the monitoring and 

11 necessary research is done to evaluate the impacts of adjustments made to dam operations. The 

12 EIS document prepared by the Secretary envisioned the AMP program to be a somewhat all13 encompassing investigation of impacts, while still respecting the statutory obligations of each of 

14 the Departmental agencies. One of the mechanisms chosen by the Secretary to receive feedback 

15 through the AMP is the AMWG, which is to provide recommendations on the content of the 

16 various budgeting and planning documents. The AMWG can recommend studies and priorities 

17 for implementing individual studies during those reviews, preferably by consensus. In doing so, 

18 all members of the AMWG are assumed to be equal in importance when voting on 

19 recommendations, including federal agencies. However, final decisions as to the management of 

20 Interior facilities and resources, what studies to implement, when, and using funds from which 

21 sources remain, by statute, with the Secretary of the Interior and the appropriate Interior 

22 agencies.

23

24

25 Funding (Questions 2b, 4a, 4b, 5b, 5d, 6a, 7a, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21) 

26

27 Funding for any federal effort comes from the statutory authorities provided by 

28 enacted laws. In the case of the AMP, several funding authorities can come into play -- the most 

29 visible being the Grand Canyon Protection Act (GCPA) of 1992. The GCPA makes several 

30 statements with regard to potential sources of funds and also imposes some restrictions. With 

31 regard to the use of revenues generated from the sale of electric power, section 1807 is specific 

32 and restrictive. The hydropower revenues may be used for preparation of the EIS, including 

33 supporting studies, and the long-term monitoring programs and activities described in section 

34 1805. Both hydropower revenues and appropriated funds can be used for administrative 

35 expenses to implement the specified work. However, the use of such funds to pay expenses of 

36 non-government employees may be covered under FACA and other fiscal regulations and must 

37 be treated on a case by case basis. The GCPA also authorizes such sums to be appropriated as are 

38 necessary and encourages use of other authorities under existing law to determine the effect of 

39 the Secretary's actions under section 1804 (c) and 1805 (b) on the natural, recreational, and 

40 cultural resources of Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area. 

41 The activity and its authorization determine the funding. To date, hydropower revenues have 

42 been the source of funding for almost all AMP activities because they meet the definition above. 

43 Research and monitoring proposals outside the Act which complement the AMP process are to 

44 be separately funded. 

45 As stated in the authorities section above, the focus of the GCPA is downstream 

46 of the dam and primarily on the operations of the powerplant. The existence or construction of 
51

1 the dam and its associated impacts is not a focus. This is clear in both the EIS and ROD, i.e. in 

2 the EIS at page 2, top of page, right hand column ASince the dam has long been completed, 

3 alternatives to the dam itself have been excluded from the scope of the analysis.@ 

4 To illustrate the range of activities and associated funding, some examples are 

5 provided below:

6

7 o Studies of control sites in Cataract Canyon or on reservation lands, for example, 

8 may be supported by revenues, if the studies are determined through scientific peer 

9 review to be necessary for determining the effects of the Secretary's actions downstream 

10 within the park units under 1804(c).

11

12 o Studies of water quality in Lake Powell are allowable if necessary to determine

13 the effects on downstream resources. Studies of the effects on cultural resources around 

14 the rim of Lake Powell are not allowable under AMP (GCPA) funding.

15

16 o It is reasonable to assume that while the primary focus is on powerplant releases 

17 the releases from the bypass tubes and spillway outlet works also fall into the operational 

18 category and funding could be used to conduct experiments and study impacts from their 

19 operation. In fact, this has already occurred to a degree during the 1996 beach habitat 

20 building test flow when the bypass tubes were used.

21

22 All Federal agencies have a special responsibility to Native Americans by law, including 

23 statutes, treaties, and executive orders. With the Secretary of the Interior being trustee, 

24 Department of the Interior agencies have a special role. Certainly the direct impacts of the dam 

25 operations on the Native American trust resources within the park units can and should be 

26 funded from hydropower revenues, but such impacts outside the boundaries of the river corridor 

27 in the park units must be studied using other appropriated funds. Participation in the AMP or 

28 education activities should be funded from appropriate sources. For instance education activities 

29 may come under self-governance and self-determination programs and be funded from BIA 

30 funds, activities surrounding general NPS requirements may be funded from NPS funds, and 

31 participation in AMP work group activities may be specific enough to be funded by revenues or 

32 appropriations from BOR. Funding of Native American activities should be a shared 

33 responsibility.

34

35 Other Compliance and Consultations (Questions 11, 16, and 21)

36

37 Prior to passage of GCPA and formation of the AMP, federal agencies had many 

38 responsibilities embodied in existing law. Those responsibilities remain today. The GCPA, 

39 EIS/ROD, and AMP did not take over responsibility for nor remove the legal obligations of the 

40 agencies to fulfill existing legal mandates. The GCPA states as much in several places. The 

41 AMP is a process by which the Secretary of the Interior has chosen to include all studies and 

42 other compliance activities necessary to determine the effects of GCD operations on designated 

43 resources and to modify operations to meet the purposes of the GCPA. 

44 It is possible that some of the studies recommended and performed under the AMP and 

45 the AMP budget will coincide with and help to satisfy obligations of the federal agencies under 

46 other laws, such as the Endangered Species Act. The obligations imposed by other laws must be 
52

1 complied with by the responsible agencies, whether they are funded as part of the AMP process 

2 or separately. The AMP budget does not imply that these compliance functions will 

3 automatically be assumed or raised to a higher priority through the AMP process, although 

4 where reasonable, the AMP process may assist or even satisfy such functions in a given instance 

5 -- “two birds with one stone,” so to speak.

6 While the AMWG and TWG should be aware that the involved federal agencies face 

7 these responsibilities, those factors should not detract from the committee’s focus as described in 

8 the GCPA, EIS, ROD, and Charter. The committee’s recommendations for studies and their 

9 relative priorities should remain on the effects of dam operations on downstream resources 

10 within the park units. The implementation of such studies, their timing and funding and the like 

11 remain the decision of the Secretary and the federal agencies, as noted earlier. 

12 Embodied in the NEPA process is the requirement to comply with ESA and cultural laws

13 in order to discuss and present the impacts on all resources and eventually arrive at a preferred 

14 alternative. For example, the AMWG is not chartered to be a formal participant in ESA 

15 consultation processes. However, the AMP does not prevent AMWG members from 

16 participating as members of the public or in their other official capacities. In this regard, 

17 AMWG should focus on helping Reclamation determine how to apply the reasonable and 

18 prudent alternatives within the area of concern of the GCPA. In regards to the consultation 

19 requirements under NHPA, the action federal agencies and affected tribes have signed a 

20 programmatic agreement (PA) document and hold periodic meetings. Parties not signatory to the 

21 PA are welcome to attend and comment. Here too, however, the ultimate decision on how to 

22 proceed rests with the Secretary of the Interior and the federal agencies delegated the 

23 responsibility for management of the resources.

24

25 Other Program Relationships

26

27 While programs in other areas of the Colorado River do not require direct input from the work 

28 performed for the GCPA, it is certainly envisioned that information will be shared and that 

29 participants will keep abreast of other relevant basin activities. The GCPA requires compliance 

30 with existing laws and consultations with a variety of groups. To meet that requirement it is 

31 important that all members share knowledge obtained from activities arising from i.e., the upper 

32 basin recovery program, the salinity control program, and the lower Colorado multi-species 

33 conservation program.

34

35
53

1

2

3

4 APPENDICES:

5

6 QUESTIONS

7

8 Scott Loveless has responded to and the TWG has discussed a list of questions which was 

9 prepared by Bob Winfree on December 15, 1998, and which was attached to Steve 

10 Magnussen’s memo of December 29, 1998. Those discussions generated the following 

11 additional questions for Scott from TWG. The following numbered list embodies the 

12 questions that led to the above guidance document. 

13

14 1. (a) What is the scope of the AMWG Charter?

15

16 (b) How do the EIS, the ROD, and the Act impact the scope?

17

18 (c) Can the AMWG charter expand upon the scope and authorities in the Act? 

19 (EIS & ROD)

20

21 2. (a) Is the AMP limited by section 1804? Can AMWG recommend changes in 

22 the operating criteria? 

23

24 (b) Can the program expend funds to study (research) impacts of proposed 

25 (recommended) changes that are clearly beyond the limitations of Sec. 1804(c)?

26

27 3. What constitutes the target?

28

29 4. (a) Can funds as designated in 1807 be used to fund studies outside the effects 

30 of dam operations (outside the operational confines of the dam)?

31

32 (b) How direct must the impacts be to allow funding under 1807?

33

34 (c) Where does the burden of proof lie for determining the effects of dam 

35 operations?

36

37 5. (a) Is the AMP limited to powerplant operations when hydrologic triggering 

38 criteria are not met? (paraphrase, Can you do an experimental flood when 

39 not required for dam safety purposes.)

40 (b) Does the GCPA authorize funding to be used for mitigation of powerplant 

41 operations, or is it broader; i.e., mitigate for spillways, bypass tubes, dam 

42 existence (Furnace Flats)? (i.e., Can AMP funding be used to mitigate sediment 

43 reduction, temperature averaging effects due to the existence of GCD.)

44

45 (c) Does NHPA require mitigation for damage to properties eligible for listing 

46 on the National Register of Historic Sites as a result of the dam’s existence? 
54

1

2 (d) Does the law allow for funding mitigation activities related to construction 

3 [existence] of the dam versus operations of the dam?

4

5 (e) Were powerplant spills other than those hydrologically induced authorized 

6 by the Act?

7

8 6. (a) Does the monitoring program allow for research and monitoring of 

9 potential effects of releases up to 256,000 cfs? 

10

11 (b) What is the legal boundary for lateral extent for all resources?

12

13 7. (a) When is it appropriate to propose experiments outside the preferred 

14 alternative?

15

16 (b) Can experiments be performed which are outside of the ROD?

17

18 (c) What are the limitations when performing an experiment outside the 

19 ROD?

20

21 8. What are the TWG responsibilities relative to review and editing of the 

22 monitoring and research plans prepared by GCMRC? 

23

24 9. What organization is responsible for developing needed AMP planning 

25 documents and reports other than science program reporting?

26

27 10. Do recommendations of all stakeholders represented in TWG and AMWG carry 

28 equal weight in [TWG/AMWG] decisions? 

29

30 11. The AMP has only been in place for a few years. Before the AMP, the various 

31 Federal Agencies involved had certain statutory responsibilities for 

32 environmental, historical and ESA compliance and they entered into agreements 

33 to take specific actions. Does the existence of an AMP budget automatically 

34 assume these compliance responsibilities for the agencies; and if so, do the 

35 agencies compliance responsibilities automatically become the dominant focus of 

36 the program? (i.e., Biological Opinion, Cultural Resources, etc.)

37

38 12. (a) Can the management objectives as outlined in the EIS be changed and, if 

39 so, how much can they be changed?

40

41 (b) Are the management objectives as outlined in the EIS different from the 

42 expected changes in management goals adopted by the Secretary when he 

43 selected the preferred alternative?

44

45 (c) Were the recommended changes in powerplant operating criteria made to 

46 achieve the desired changes in management goals?
55

1

2 13 (a) What is the force and effect of the ROD? 

3 . 

4 (b) What limits does it put on our actions? 

5 

6 (c) Are there any parts of the paper, prepared by Reclamation and WAPA and 

7 distributed at AMWG, which are illegal? 

8 

9 (d) Are the numbers in the ROD hard and fast?

10

11 (e) Is it possible to exceed them? 

12

13 (f) What is the penalty for exceeding limits specified in the ROD? 

14

15 14. Does the GCPA authorize activities on Native American reservation lands (for 

16 example, above 124,000 cfs outside Grand Canyon National Park on Hualapai 

17 land)?

18

19 15. When is it appropriate to propose experiments outside the ROD?

20

21 16. Are there any prohibitions about AMWG contributing to the formal consultation 

22 on BO for Kanab Ambersnail? 

23

24 17. What are the limits of the use of GCPA funds on other areas outside those 

25 specified in the GCPA, Grand Canyon National Park and the Glen Canyon 

26 National Recreation Area? For example, what is the restriction on the use of 

27 funds on tribal lands? Further, what about the effects that are caused by the action 

28 but do not have a resultant influence downstream? For, example what if there 

29 were effects of dam operations in Lake Mead? Could GCPA funds be used to 

30 study impacts to Lake Mead caused by operational impacts of Glen Canyon Dam? 

31 I’m thinking here of whether these funds could be used to study the effects of 

32 operations on an endangered bird species in delta area of Lake Mead.

33

34 18. Can GCPA funds (nonreimbursable power revenues) be used for agency 

35 compliance responsibilities related only to the operation of Glen Canyon Dam? 

36 Specifically, can they be used to pay for continuing activities related to BOR or 

37 NPS NHPA, Endangered Species Act Biological Opinion requirements, NEPA 

38 compliance etc. The BOR has made a very strong argument in the past that these 

39 activities are strictly an agency responsibility and outside the purview of the AMP 

40 (The AMWG makes no recommendations to the secretary on these issues). If so, 

41 and because they are not related directly to section 1804 or 1805 of the GCPA 

42 how can GCPA funds be used to support them?

43

44 19. Can GCPA funds be used to support salaries, travel, per diem etc. not directly 

45 related to Section 1804 and 1805 activities? For example, it would seem that there 

46 is a fundamental question related to the legitimacy of the use of GCPA funds for 
56

1 agency or stakeholder salary costs related to administration of the AMP. Sections 

2 1804 and 1805 make no mention of administration costs for an AMP, and AMP is 

3 not directly related to research, studies, or the preparation of the EIS

4

5 20. Can GCPA funds be used to assist tribes to attend and participate in the AMP 

6 process?

7

8 21. If the BOR has legal obligations as a result of the Biological Opinion, are these 

9 obligations automatically the obligation of the AMWG?

10

11 AMWG OPERATIONS

12

13 FACA Overview

14

15 AMWG Member List and statement of their constituency and mission, including 

16 potential conflicts

17

18 AMWG Charter

19

20 Proposal for Renewal of AMWG Charter

21

22 AMWG Operating Procedures

23

24 Appropriations Committee language re: budget

25

26 Budget (current)

27

28 Issues papers and AMWG Guidance Document

29

30 Other issues yet to be resolved

31

32 TWG OPERATIONS

33

34 TWG Member List

35

36 TWG Operating Procedures, Proposal to Modify OP, Ground Rules, Consensus 

37 Definition,

38 Recommendations regarding travel payments to TWG members

39

40 Ground rules for meetings

41

42 Code of conduct

43

44 Definition of consensus

45

46 GCMRC OPERATIONS
57

1

2 Letter Establishing GCMRC

3

4 GCMRC Monitoring and Research Center Guidelines

5 Center Protocols

6 RFP's and AMWG input

7 Peer Review

8 Administrative review (focus on priority information needs, permitting 

9 and compliance

10 responsibilities

11 Awarding contracts, competition

12 Information transfer (reports, workshops, etc.)

13

14 Annual Plan (current)

15

16 Strategic Plan (current)

17 LAWS, AGREEMENTS

18

19 Law of the River synopsis

20

21 Colorado River Compact, November 24, 1922

22

23 Colorado River Storage Project Act, April 11, 1956

24

25 Colorado River Basin Project Act, September 30, 1968

26

27 Long-Range Operating Criteria, 1970

28

29 Long-Range Operating Criteria, October 30, 1992

30

31 National Environmental Policy Act (Section 7 consultation)

32

33 Grand Canyon Protection Act, October 30, 1992 and Legislative History

34

35 National Historic Preservation Act (Sections 106 and 110)

36 Programmatic Agreement on Cultural Resources, August 30, 1994

37

38 Historic Preservation Plan

39

40 Endangered Species Act

41

42 36 CFR 2.5 (research and specimen collection in National Park Service 

43 areas)

44

45 Record of Decision, Glen Canyon Dam Final Environmental Impact 

46 Statement. 10/25/96
58

1

2 BOR-WAPA Operating Agreement

3

4 Biological Opinions

5 Final GCD EIS (included by reference)

6

7 Rebecca Tsosie article on trust responsibility

8 GLEN CANYON DAM OPERATING CRITERIA

9

10 Operating Criteria for Glen Canyon Dam In Accordance with the GCPA, 

11 2/24/97

12

13 Operating Guidelines Associated with Glen Canyon Dam Operating 

14 Criteria 7/7/97

15

16 Operating Criteria and other Operating Parameters (C. Palmer 7/97)

17

18 Annual Operating Plans

19

20 AMP REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:

21

22 TWG Position Paper - Glen Canyon Dam Spillway Gate Extensions

23

24 Integration of Programmatic Agreement with AMP, Federal/Tribal Trust 

25 Responsibilities

26

27 BHBF Triggering Criteria

28

29 Spill avoidance

30

31 Glen Canyon Dam release issues recommended for further study, and 

32 GCMRC reply

33

34 Report of the NEPA/ESA Issues Subgroup

35

36 Recommendations to the TWG for expediting environmental compliance 

37 and improving coordination on Biological Opinion Issues

38

39 Letter to Secretary Babbitt from non-federal members

40

41 Management Objectives (current)

42

43 Information Needs (current)

44

45 Resource Criteria (current)

46
59

1 Report to Congress (current)

2

3 State of Natural and Cultural Resources in the Colorado River Ecosystem 

4 (current)

5

6 Lake Powell Assessment

7

8 BHBF Flow alternatives

9

10

11 TWG, TWG, AND AMWG 

12 MEETING AGENDA AND MINUTES

13 1995, 1996, 1997

14

15

16 TWG, TWG, AND AMWG 

17 MEETING AGENDA AND MINUTES

18 1998

19

20

21

22

23

24

25