1 3/3/01

Report of the Protocol Evaluation Panel on the Integrated 

Water Quality Program 

Prepared For: The Biological Resources Program of Grand Canyon Monitoring 

and Research Center

Panel Members: Jack Jones, Bob Kennedy, John Nestler, Dale Robertson, Jim 

Ruane (Chair), Geoff Schladow
2 3/3/01

GCMRC Mission Statement

n "To provide credible, objective scientific 

information to the AMP on the effects of 

operating Glen Canyon Dam on the 

downstream resources of the Colorado River 

ecosystem, as well as other information 

needs specified by the Adaptive 

Management Work Group, utilizing an 

ecosystem science approach."
3 3/3/01

Key considerations for 

IWQP under the Record of 

Decision (ROD)

n “The goal of selecting a preferred alternative 

was not to maximize benefits for the most 

resources, but rather to find an alternative dam 

operating plan that would permit recovery and 

long-term sustainability of downstream 

resources while limiting hydropower capability 

and flexibility only to the extent necessary to 

achieve recovery and long-term sustainability.”
4 3/3/01

Key considerations for 

GCMRC under the Record of 

Decision (ROD)

n “If impacts differing from those described in the 

final EIS are identified through the AMP, a new 

ramp rate criterion will be considered (and/or 

the maximum flow restriction will be reviewed) 

by the Adaptive Management Working Group 

(AMWG) and a recommendation for action will 

be forwarded to the Secretary.”
5 3/3/01

Additional issues 

confronting GCMRC

A TCD is being considered for the hydropower 

releases from GCD.

Cost impact of 2000 steady flow operations 

was $25 million (this figure was questioned by 

Barry Gold) in just one year.

• The water and energy situation in the West is 

likely to alter the current water use regime for 

Lake Powell and result in revised operations of 

GCD. 
6 3/3/01

Current IWQP 

• Addressing Information Needs established 

by the TWG 

• Reservoir:

• Tailwater:

• Downstream:

• Results: reports, graphical analyses
7 3/3/01

This Panel was tasked to review and assess 

current and future plans and protocols for water 

quality studies designed to address the INs 

developed by the TWG. 

The Panel also was provided the opportunity to 

comment on the appropriateness of the specific 

objectives in the context of the overall program. 

The Panel was asked to address a series of 

questions that were put forth by the GCMRC. 

This report addresses the following main issues: 

technical, programmatic, and institutional. 
8 3/3/01

MAJOR FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS regarding plans 

for IWQP

n • Shift emphasis from Lake Powell to 

downstream

n • Employ water quality-ecosystem models in 

Lake Powell and the Colorado River to link GCD 

operations and physical/chemical/ecosystem 

responses in a timely manner using the best 

information available.
9 3/3/01

MAJOR FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS regarding plans 

for IWQP, cont.

n • Work with other programs in the GCMRC 

Biological Resources Program in the integration 

of results to allow decision-making by the TWG 

and AMWG by linking operations of GCD and 

various ecosystem responses (RBT, ESA, etc.)

n • Develop “proactive” long-range water 

quality monitoring strategy to prepare for a wide 

range of possible management actions
10 3/3/01

MAJOR FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS regarding plans 

for IWQP, cont.

n • GCMRC should work with TWG to improve 

MO/IN process

n • Lake Powell forebay station should be 

changed to the White Category

• It is imperative that the GCMRC provide 

critical information in a timely manner to 

allow cost-effective and environmentallyeffective decisions for the AMP.
11 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

1. Inflows:

· Colorado River near Cisco, Utah; Green 

River at Green River, Utah; and San Juan River 

near Bluff, Utah

· IWQP reactivate the water-quality sampling 

of these three tributaries near where they are 

gaged for flow
12 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

In Lake:

n • The existing program has produced a 

sound basis upon which a general 

understanding of the lake dynamics has been 

established. 

n • Current CE-QUAL-W2 modeling results by 

the BOR and additional sensitivity analyses 

should be used to determine additional primary 

data needs as soon as possible.
13 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

n • The absence of complete 

chlorophyll profiles and TOC 

measurements is a shortcoming of the 

present sampling program. 

n • IWQP should review the adequacy 

of the number of samples that are 

currently collected at the Wahweap 

station to ensure they are sufficient.
14 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

n • The USGS Seabird SBE-19 profiler should 

be considered. Also, consideration should be 

given to purchasing a Seabird SBE-25. 

n • Phytoplankton and zooplankton sampling 

could be cut to quarterly collections at the 

Wahweap site, a mid-lake site in the main 

channel, and at an up-lake site until it is 

determined if this information is needed for 

modeling efforts.
15 3/3/01
16 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

n • The absence of meteorological data at 

several locations on the lake could be a major 

shortcoming of the existing data set. 

n • The Panel believes that a timescale of one 

to two years will be required to collect sufficient 

inflow, meteorological, chlorophyll, and organic 

data to produce the desired data set for model 

calibration and application. 
17 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

n • The forebay profile represents the 

best approximation of lab parameters for 

the river model. This profile also allows 

forecasting potential water quality 

problems for the downstream. Water 

quality in the forebay varies in response 

to hydrology and GCD operations.
18 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

n • A multi-parameter profiling station should 

be considered for the forebay. These data, 

together with data from the tailrace, would be 

telemetered to GCMRC and GCD in real time. 

These data will define the linkage between the 

lake and the river as well as provide the basis 

upon which a TCD is operated. An “intelligent 

model” could be developed that would define 

tailwater water quality based on the water 

quality profile in the lake and operating 

conditions at GCD. The panel recommends that 

the inclusion of such a station be considered as 

part of the TCD project. 
19 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

Tailwater:

n • The current location of the tailrace 

Hydrolab does not provide representative data. 

More representative locations are needed.

n • This reach of river is very important for 

supplying organic matter and a food base for 

the Colorado River down to Lake Mead. 

Productivity in this reach needs to be 

monitored using Howard Odum’s “upstreamdownstream approach.”
20 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Collection

n 1. Downstream:

n • The temperature data collected by 

continuous monitors at selected locations in the 

downstream reach are invaluable data for 

calibrating a water quality model. 

n • Additional sampling should be linked to the 

needs of the water quality-ecosystem model and 

miscellaneous biological assessments. 
21 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water Sample 

Preservation And Analytical Procedures

n • Chemical Parameters

n • Preservation Techniques

n • Sample Analysis QA/QC

n • Phosphorus Analyses
22 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Data Management

n • Use USGS WRD data 

management systems
23 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • A cursory review of the INs that have a 

ranking of medium or high priority indicates that 

all of them can best be addressed using 

reservoir and river models.

n · Future management decisions will need to 

be made in the context of a very different set of 

operating conditions than what has prevailed in 

the past. Different lake levels, the possible use 

of a TCD, different flow regimes, different power 

demands may all make the value of past 

correlations questionable. 
24 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • The Panel is concerned that there is 

insufficient linkage between the physical 

processes that are initiated at the dam and the 

present modeling of ecosystem effects 

downstream. 

n • Emphasis should be placed on applying the 

model to assist scientists and engineers in 

GCMRC, TWG, and AMWG in sufficiently making 

decisions, not on developing a model that 

represents all aspects of the real system. 
25 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • It is strongly recommended that a model 

be developed for those variables that are readily 

predictable using current, deterministic 

engineering models (the time varying values of 

flow, stage, temperature). This model would 

then provide a vehicle upon which to attach a 

light model, a water quality model, an ecological 

model, etc. The present “conceptual model”

could well provide many of these latter 

components. 
26 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • GCMRC should consider convening 

another panel to assist them in 

determining the best modeling approach 

for the river. Ideally, however, an 

experienced person responsible for the 

reservoir model might be suitably 

qualified to take the lead role in directing 

the river modeling activities.
27 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • The order of accuracy for river water quality 

models is as follows: 

n 1. 1-D flow regime (flow and stage), 

n 2. temperature, 

n 3. other water quality parameters (e.g., DO, 

turbidity and light, carbon, phosphorus, nitrogen, 

photosynthesis), 

n 4. biological effects of water quality, 

n 5. biological effects of habitat, and

n 6. biological effects of competitive fish species
28 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • Many decisions on water resources 

management in the United States have been 

based on models that only include the first two 

or three types of models, with biological 

considerations being addressed either externally 

to the model or through water quality and 

ecological models that are attached to the 

physical model.
29 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Water QualityEcosystem Modeling

n • Based on a cursory review of “steady flow”

decision for operating Glen Canyon Dam in the 

year 2000, an unsteady state model of flow and 

temperature for the Colorado River between 

Glen Canyon Dam and Lake Mead would have 

proven extremely useful and may have resulted 

in a more cost-effective decision for operations 

at Glen Canyon Dam without jeopardizing the 

biological objectives.
30 3/3/01

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

0:00 4:00 8:00 12:00 16:00 20:00 0:00 4:00

Hour

Mean Depth (ft)

WRM 418.4 WRM 414.00 WRM 410.0 WRM 400.0
31 3/3/01

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0 4000 8000 12000 16000 20000 24000

Bull Shoals Dam Release (cfs)

Surface Area (Acres)

 WRM 418.5 to WRM 417.5 : Dam Spawning Area

 WRM 412.6 to WRM 411.6 : Three Chutes White Hole

 WRM 410.2 to WRM 409.6 : Narrows Island

 WRM 403.1 to WRM 402.5 : Bayless Island

 WRM 397.0 to WRM 396.6 : Rim Shoals
32 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Priorities For Sampling

n • Long-term monitoring is a major need due 

to the decadal nature of the hydrologic cycle for 

this system in addition to considering that this is 

a managed system that is still undergoing 

engineering and operational modifications.

n • The Panel recommends that IWQP develop 

a long-term monitoring plan that can be 

maintained annually for about 20 years. 
33 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Additional Findings 

And Recommendations

n TCD Withdrawal Zone Considerations--

Withdrawal zones for hydropower intakes often 

are higher in the water column than might be 

assumed and result in the discharge from the 

project being warmer than might otherwise be 

expected. The Panel recommends that the 

GCMRC inquire about the considerations that 

the BOR has given to the withdrawal zone for 

the TCD designs being considered. 
34 3/3/01

Buford Dam Intake Velocity Profiles

Between Units 1 & 2, 50' Upstream of Intake

910

920

930

940

950

960

970

980

990

1000

1010

1020

1030

1040

1050

1060

1070

1080

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Horizontal Velocity Toward Intake (ft/sec)

Elevation (ft)

Units 1, 2, & 3

Units 2 & 3

Unit 3

U3 centerline El. 920

U1 & U2 centerline El. 927
35 3/3/01

SPECIFIC TECHNICAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Additional Findings 

And Recommendations

n The Panel recommends that GCMRC consider 

using an ADCP to measure the withdrawal zone 

for the current intakes for 

n • several representative operating 

conditions, 

n • several representative turbine units, 

n • the most important period of the year with 

respect to thermal stratification, and

n • appropriate timing for the desired 

temperature increases for the 

downstream fisheries. 
36 3/3/01
37 3/3/01

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMATIC FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS-- Adequacy of IWQP 

for MOs and INs

n • IWQP appeared to be collecting data in 

response to the INs

n · However, it is unclear how findings from 

individual studies will be integrated either within 

the subject program or how information will be 

integrated between the subject program and 

other programs within the larger GCMRC. 
38 3/3/01

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMATIC FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS-- Adequacy of IWQP 

for MOs and INs

n • Science-based water resources decisionmaking can be envisioned as an information 

pyramid 

n • GCMRC program management should 

consider discussions with the TWG and AMWG 

to obtain feedback and guidance on how 

modeling and other integration approaches 

could best be structured to address their INs.
39 3/3/01

Decision-making Pyramid

Information Acquisition Through Scientific Specialties:

 Engineers, Biologists, Hydrologists, Planners, etc

Inter-disciplinary Summarization and Integration

Stake Holder Consultation

Trade-off Analysis

Decision

Model Development

Iterative Trade-off Analysis

Decision Support

Model Concept Development

Knowledge

Transfer Program

Review
40 3/3/01

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMATIC FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS-- Five-Year Plan

n • The Panel recommends that program 

management consider a five-year program time 

frame formally starting in 2002 (the interval 

between program reviews), but actually getting 

underway during 2001. The primary goals 

would be the collection of a full model data set, 

the calibration of a reservoir model, and the 

transition to a mode of operation in which 

model results can supplant much of the present 

upstream data collection. 
41 3/3/01

P Reservoir Research

H |-----------------------------|

A Calibrate W-2

S |--------------------------------|

E Validate W-2

S |----------------|

Increase Downstream Sampling/Calibrate Water Quality Model

|---------------------------------------------------------------------------| 

Develop & Use Tradeoff Framework

-----------|----------------------------------------------|

Decision-Support 

--------------------------------------|---------------------|

FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06

YEARS ‡
42 3/3/01

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMATIC FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Additional Findings 

And Recommendations

n • The IWQP personnel are technically 

capable, conscientious, energetic, experienced, 

as well as professionally and personally 

interested in the Glen Canyon/Grand Canyon 

system

n • The IWQP has produced good products on 

the results of their monitoring and analyses. 

Their reports are professionally prepared using 

state-of-the-art data analyses.
43 3/3/01

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMATIC FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Additional Findings 

And Recommendations

n • The staff desires to develop and/or apply 

tools (e.g., models) and collect data needed to 

assist AMP in making management decisions

n • The staff desires to determine linkage 

between Lake Powell inflows and effects on 

water quality in the forebay and downstream 

from Glen Canyon Dam
44 3/3/01

SPECIFIC PROGRAMMATIC FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Additional Findings 

And Recommendations

n Hire A Modeler And Consider Convening A PEP 

To Assist The IWQP In Developing Management 

Principles For Modeling 

n This individual should be capable of providing 

direction on model selection criteria and 

approaches as well as providing a foundation of 

operating principles and philosophies 
45 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—GCMRC should 

propose restructured INs 

n • There is no indication that the cost, 

feasibility, cost-effectiveness, level of 

significance in decision-making, “critical path”

considerations, and potential for success were 

taken into account in developing the individual 

INs. 

n • The Panel believes the GCMRC should 

consider these factors in developing plans for 

addressing the MOs and the INs and provide 

feedback to the TWG and AMWG. 
46 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—GCMRC should 

propose restructured INs

n • The GCMRC’s position within the AMP calls 

for it to play a servant-leader role: the GCMRC 

plays the main role as the service provider for 

the AMP; they also are the organization with the 

most resources, most information on linkages 

between Glen Canyon Dam operations and 

environmental effects, and highest stake. 

Hence, they need to play a major leadership 

role within the AMP.
47 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—GCMRC should 

propose restructured INs

n • The Panel recommends that the GCMRC 

promote the concept of “cost of science” to the 

TWG. It is more defensible to understand water 

quality and ecosystem processes to the level 

that they can be simulated using models. It is 

less defensible to have a surface understanding 

of these processes and then use “operational 

experiments” to select optimum dam operations. 
48 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Forebay Monitoring 

Proposed For The White Category

n • The forebay (Wahweap) station needs to 

be considered differently than other lake 

stations. The forebay profile represents in many 

ways the upper boundary condition of the 

downstream river (from both data collection and 

modeling perspectives.) 

n • Another main reason is that potential 

water quality problems for the downstream can 

be forecasted and therefore possibly avoided 

using data only from the forebay. 
49 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Forebay Monitoring 

Proposed For The White Category

n • Additionally, IN 5.4 is in the “white 

category” and calls for a wide range of 

information on the lake that can only be 

addressed if data are collected on the lake. 

n • Finally, the Panel agrees with the NRC 

“Downstream” report that rigid definitions of 

geographic scope will hinder the 

accomplishment of AMP objectives.
50 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Modeling Approach 

With BOR

n • The GCMRC needs a model for Lake 

Powell, and it is only prudent that they 

use the model that the BOR is applying 

to Lake Powell. The Panel recommends 

that the two organizations use the CEQUAL-W2 model, but that each 

organization apply the model based on 

their respective organizational objectives. 
51 3/3/01

SPECIFIC INSTITUTIONAL FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS—Modeling Approach 

With BOR

n The following is a list of reasons the GCMRC 

needs to use the model:

n • To develop and evaluate monitoring plans, 

n • To establish and test hypotheses, 

n • To develop cause/effect linkages between 

operations of GCD and environmental 

effects in Lake Powell, 

n • To provide information that the AMWG and 

TWG needs for making decisions 

about operations and design 

considerations for Glen Canyon Dam.