Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 1 of 16

Response to IWQP PEP Recommendations:

Susan Hueftle, Bill Vernieu and Barry Gold

Grand Canyon Monitoring & Research Center

2255 N. Gemini Dr.

Flagstaff, AZ 86001-1600

I. Introduction:

The Integrated Water Quality Program (IWQP) Protocol Evaluation Panel (PEP) met in Flagstaff and on 

Lake Powell and the Lees Ferry reach from November 27 – December 3, 2000. The PEP spent time in the 

field and received technical presentations on the IWQP. A presentation was made to the TWG by the 

Chairman of the IWQP PEP, Jim Ruane on February 13, 2001. The PEP provided GCMRC with their final 

report on February 23, 2001.

In this document, the PEP’s findings and recommendations have been summarized in a table. Page 

numbers are provided so the reader can locate the complete PEP finding and recommendation in the PEP 

final report. GCMRC’s response to each paraphrased finding and recommendation is incorporated in the 

same table. The table is organized according to the PEP’s categories of 1) technical, 2) programmatic, and 3) 

institutional issues. Implementation of many of the recommendations is dependent on further analysis and 

review of existing data, development of a revised IWQP 5-yer plan, and discussions with TWG/AMWG.

Few recommendations could be adopted or rejected entirely. Many recommendations will have resource 

impacts in terms of funding levels, contracted assistance or cooperative agreements.

The greatest repeated themes for high prioritization were: 

• Develop appropriate models for up- & downstream, collecting appropriate data to calibrate & 

validate models. Start with physical components and work toward biological modeling. Obtain 

appropriate assistance and consider convening an expert panel for modeling efforts.

• Use the models to revise the 5-year IWQP and guide AMP decision-making

• Drive integration efforts with focused testable hypothesis

• Shift efforts from uplake to downstream as models are developed and provide predictability

Following discussion with the TWG, GCMRC will develop its draft FY 2003-2008 IWQP plan based on 

the PEP recommendations and GCMRC’s proposed responses. The changes suggested by the PEP report 

will require modifications to the IWQP while allowing adequate replication to ensure a smooth transition 

without compromising the Lake Powell long-term data set. Some of the changes will take several years to 

accomplish, consistent with the phased approach recommended by the PEP. 
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 2 of 16

II. Technical Findings and Recommendations

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Response

Data Collection

• Reactivate USGS water-quality sampling stations at 

Green, Cisco, and Bluff. Analyze samples for TP, 

TN, TOC, TDS and SS. Compare data from these 

stations with “inflow” data obtained on the Lake to 

provide best estimates of inputs to the model. 

Concur. GCMRC will initiate as soon as possible with the USGS 

collection of these data at the recommended gage sites. Collection of 

inflow parameters at sampling stations on the Lake will also 

continue. After two years of concurrent data collection a comparison 

/ evaluation of the measurements will be made to determine which 

sampling locations provide the best data and parameter estimates. 

Following this evaluation final inflow sampling sites to be 

incorporated into the long-term monitoring program will be made.

Inflow 

sampling

(pp. 14-15)

• In addition to continuous streamflow measurements, 

continuous measurements of water temperature & 

specific conductance should be collected and 

telemetered to GCMRC.

• Disagree. The data is required but non-telemetered data is sufficient 

for current needs. A monitoring plan specific to TCD 

implementation and testing may require telemetered data.

Develop a 

long-term 

reservoir 

monitoring 

program 

(pp. 26-27)

IWQP should develop a long-term monitoring plan that 

can be maintained every year for about 20 years.

Untouchable elements

• Monthly forebay, dam, tailwater samples

• Downstream & inflow samples for model calibration

• IN's driven research & monitoring 

• Meteorological data up & downstream 

• Essential parameters: TP, TN, Chl, TOC/POC, 

temperature, conductivity, DO, pH, turbidity

Lower priorities:

• Up-lake quarterly sites

• Side-arms of the reservoir

• Major ion collections

• Plankton collections

• Concur

• As suggested, these alterations will proceed as driven by a calibrated 

model

• Those changes required to drive modeling efforts will be given 

higher priority for adoption. 

• Some to the lower priorities may be traded off prior to model 

conclusions to allow progress for higher priorities, as IWQP 

judgment allows.

Chlorophyll 

profiling

(pp. 15-16, 20, 

26)

• The lack of complete chlorophyll profiles and TOC 

(total organic carbon) measurements is a major 

shortcoming in the current program. These 

measurements are needed for model calibrations, 

upstream-downstream linkages and to evaluate long-

• Concur. 

• Vertical resolution of lab samples has been enhanced and will be 

evaluated.

Instrument detection sensitivity and longevity of an in-situ chlorophyll 
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 3 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Response

upstream-downstream linkages and to evaluate longterm changes in productivity and trophic status. In situ 

chlorophyll should be measured in conjunction with 

profiles and existing lab samples should be maintained 

or increased. 

profiling program system would need to be evaluated prior to 

implementation.

TOC analysis

(pp. 14-15, 18, 

24)

• (See above) TOC should be taken in conjunction with 

regular chemical sampling from the inflows to below 

the dam to establish a carbon budget for the reservoir 

& tailwaters.

Concur

• TOC sampling has been added to match current DOC sampling of 

inflows and forebay-tailwaters since 1998. As these and previous 

DOC values are evaluated, a more extensive lake-wide sampling of 

TOC replacing DOC may be phased in.

Seabird 

profiling

(pp. 16-17, 21)

Use of a Seabird SBE-19 or SBE-25 should be 

vigorously pursued to replace current Hydrolab 

profiling. It is more appropriate for a lake of Powell’s 

size, enabling increased lake-wide and vertical 

measurement resolution while significantly reducing 

station time. It can also be fitted with a fluorometer for 

chlorophyll profiling. Station time could be reduced 

from 30-90 minutes to 15 minutes or less.

• Evaluation required prior to adoption

This instrumentation could be evaluated on a test basis prior to 

commitment. As chlorophyll values are generally low in Lake Powell, 

a Seabird or any automated profiler must provide suitable detection 

sensitivity. It could greatly reduce time on station and even trip length 

if capable of the vertical accuracy needed to suit our program and 

integrate with the existing database. A long-term commitment to the 

program would be necessary to overcome investment costs.

The current Hydrolab system provides adequate profiles though it 

lacks chlorophyll capability.

Plankton 

sampling

(pp. 15-16, 21, 

26)

• Phytoplankton & zooplankton collections help explain 

lake structure, trophic interactions and identify the 

presence of undesirable taxa, but current efforts could 

be reduced to evaluate effects of dam operations. 

Forebay collections could be reduced from monthly to 

quarterly, uplake stations reduced to one mid-lake and 

one up-lake site on the main channel. 

• Data should be formatted for a peer-reviewed 

publication on trophic dynamics.

• Concur in part

Most of the plankton samples have been analyzed and tabulated. 

Preliminary analyses and statistics have been performed but not 

extensively integrated. Major changes in the program should await 

some of this basic integration. This should be accomplished by 2002.

Based on the variation seen between stations to date, it is 

questionable that 3 lake stations would meaningfully describe lake 

trends. Similarly, quarterly sampling at the forebay station may not 

adequately describe annual trends, particularly in light of TCD 

operational concerns. However, reducing the number of tows taken at 

each station and reducing the number of stations can reduce sample 

volume without overly compromising the usefulness of the program, 

and that can be instigated as data analysis is completed.

Data is being integrated with fisheries and water quality studies.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 4 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Response

Meteorological 

data

(pp. 16-17, 22, 

26)

• The absence of meteorological data is considered a 

major shortcoming of the existing data set for the 

purpose of providing key input to the reservoir model. 

• A full on-water forebay station should include air 

temperature, wind speed & direction, incident 

radiation, precipitation, and relative humidity. In 

addition, several uplake stations should include wind 

speed & direction stations.

• Concur

We strongly support this effort and would seek cooperative agreements 

with GCNRA, USBOR-UCR to purchase and maintain these stations, 

as required by the CE-QUAL model, at several locations on Lake 

Powell.

• The monthly Wahweap forebay station be considered 

differently that other lake stations as it represents the 

upper boundary conditions for reservoir release water 

quality and provides forecasting of potential water 

quality problems. 

• This station should be placed in the “White Category”.

• Review the vertical chemical sampling resolution to 

ensure it is sufficient.

• Design and calibrate a “smart model” to integrate and 

predict riverine water quality based on the forebay and 

operating conditions of the dam. Installing a 

permanent thermistor chain in the forebay would 

provide calibration for temperature.

Concur in part 

• The forebay station is sampled on a monthly basis instead of 

quarterly and tailwater sampling is coordinated with forebay 

sampling. However, it also represents reservoir conditions in the 

deepest and most downstream location of the reservoir and must be 

comparable with other reservoir stations. Furthermore, upstream 

reservoir stations can also provide valuable predictive capability for 

water quality patterns moving through the reservoir. 

• Increased vertical resolution is implemented already and being 

evaluated for differences. Differences may not be manifested under 

current conditions, which are unusually mixed and somewhat dilute.

• A thermistor chain has been implemented for a 1 year period. 

This effort should be integrated with model development to assure 

relevance of the data collection and to calibrate a thermal “smart 

model” when available.

Wahweap 

sampling

(pp. 15-17, 20)

• A telemetered programmable in-situ multi-parameter 

station profiling station should be considered, 

particularly as part of the TCD program.

• Telemetry to GCMRC & Glen Canyon Dam would 

provide needed feedback during TCD operation.

• TCD priority

A programmable station would be of greatest use during special 

releases or TCD operation. This is not likely for implementation except 

as part of TCD monitoring and operation.

At the present time, the addition of such a station is not necessary to 

meet the long-term monitoring objectives.

Station 

selection and 

sample timing 

& frequency

(p. 21)

• The quarterly sampling trips should be scheduled to 

represent lake processes–maximum inflow, minimum 

temperatures, maximum summer temperatures, etc. 

• Lake process driven: 

• Previous efforts to replicate seasonally driven trips frustrated by crew 

availability and timing conflicts

• Closer evaluation of significant lake processes and annual timing of 

event will be assessed to determine timing and width of sampling 

windows.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 5 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Response

Draft tube 

measurements

(pp. 17-18, 27)

• GCMRC should consider accessing current 

monitoring of selected draft tubes for differences 

between withdrawal zones of the 8 penstocks due to 

their location and orientation on the dam face. This 

could answer questions of release quality in the 

tailwater and might provide an informational backdrop 

for future operational responses due to the proposed 

temperature control device.

• Concur

This assessment should proceed in a step-wise fashion to be efficient. 

Evaluating for significant differences in draft tubes is ongoing, 

however, current mixed and diluted conditions above the dam do not 

offer a favorable scenario for detecting these differences beyond 

detection limits of instruments, and the experiment may need to be 

repeated in the future when such stratification does exist. Assessment 

should be restricted to preliminary physical evaluation with Hydrolab 

or YSI instruments and strongly indicated before any chemical 

sampling is instigated.

The Panel believes that the current location of the 

continuous monitor in the GCD tailwater (in an eddy 

along the wing wall below the jet-tubes) is not 

representative of the water released from the dam. The 

heterogeneity of the river below the dam should be 

assessed under available release scenarios from the 3 

release structures as well as the 8 powerplant draft 

tubes.

• Installation of an in-channel monitor may be required 

and should be sampled monthly for water quality. 

• Agree with need to access heterogeneity of flows. 

• Preliminary evaluation of the current site could proceed in a 

progressive fashion, again, with physical parameters used to indicate 

the heterogeneity of the site, first identifying differences between eddy 

vs. steady current sites, then evaluating downstream mixing of any 

differences found in the draft tube evaluations.

• If releases from Glen Canyon Dam include operation of river outlet 

works or spillways, monitors could be placed in each release structure 

and augmented with stations downstream of the zone of mixing.

• Assessment should be restricted to preliminary physical evaluation 

with Hydrolab or YSI instruments and indicated before additional 

chemical sampling is instigated.

• Tests should be conducted to see if draft tube data are 

representative of actual river flows downstream.

• The IWQP believes that the most representative sampling location, 

for an upper boundary condition of water quality released downstream, 

is within the powerplant draft tubes. The station immediately below 

the dam experiences significant dissolved oxygen artifacts of reaeration from atmospheric exposure and powerplant operations, such 

as when generating units are condensing, or placed on spinning 

reserve. For this reason, locations for continuous monitors have been 

established at the draft tubes of the individual generating units.

Tailwater 

measurements

(pp. 15-17, 20, 

26, 32-33)

• Improve spatial resolution

• The value of added spatial sampling should first be evaluated with 

short-term experiments to determine the heterogeneity of the 

outflows.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 6 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Response

Tailwater 

productivity 

studies

(pp. 18, 33)

• Tailwater productivity is of such fundamental 

importance that we suggest that the IWQP devise a 

sampling program that addresses the specific issue of 

the biological functioning of the system between Glen 

Canyon Dam and Lee’s Ferry.

• As emphasis shifts from descriptions of reservoir 

processes, effort can be re-invested downstream through 

special studies to address information needs identified 

by the TWG and in support of the water qualityecosystem model. An understanding of the relationship 

between operational change and organic production will 

be essential for addressing management issues 

associated with downstream biological resources since 

this reach is important for food base production 

downstream. Such a study would involve establishing 

material budgets based on upstream (afterbay) and 

downstream (Lee’s Ferry) water quality data. The 

objective would be to monitor the productivity and 

respiration of the system using the water quality model. 

The study would establish linkages between operational 

impacts (e.g., flow and stage, nutrient supply, physical 

perturbation, light regime) and primary/secondary 

production. Other similar studies addressing knowledge 

requirements of the water quality-ecosystem model 

should be designed. 

• Conduct respiration & productivity analysis

• Utilize model

• Integrate with other studies

• Existing data & greater integration may provide some of these 

answers and will be pursued. 

• These studies and integration with the ecosystem model will receive 

higher priority, particularly as upstream efforts are reduced.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 7 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Response

Downstream 

measurements 

and 

Model 

calibration

(pp. 15-16, 23, 

33)

• The temperature data collected by continuous 

monitors at selected locations through out the 

downstream reach are invaluable data for calibrating a 

water quality model for the Colorado River.

• While the logistics of sample collection are difficult, 

every effort should be made to increase the sampling 

efforts in this reach of the system, as needed to calibrate 

a water quality model or to address hypotheses posed by 

fisheries managers and investigators. Coordination & 

integration with other efforts should be explored. Such 

sampling be linked to operational seasons that reflect 

climatic changes, reservoir and release water quality, 

and operations-related changes in hydrology. Sampling 

and special, focused studies should be linked to the 

needs of the water quality-ecosystem model. 

• Continuous physical (DO, conductivity, and pH) 

monitoring along with periodic chemical sampling such 

as that used for the tailwater is not likely to be needed in 

the downstream reach. If physical data are needed for 

water quality modeling, monitors can be deployed for 

short periods (7-10 days). Automatic water samplers 

(e.g., ISCO samplers) can be used to track water quality 

through the downstream system. 

• Without specific information needs specified, a general sample 

collection program is not indicated. If needed, ISCO automated 

samplers may become a part of specific research program in the future.

• Short-term DO-pH-conductivity deployments to calibrate models 

could be an extremely useful project for evaluating in-stream 

metabolism and addresses existing downstream information needs. 

IWQP strongly supports instituting small-scale tests, initially tested in 

upper reaches, progressing downstream as successful results are 

indicated.

• The present research paradigm of collecting assorted 

water quality variables at a few scattered points within 

the GC cannot meet the INs of the AMG. 

• Institute in response to ecological needs

• As necessary for calibrating models

Energetics &

Community 

succession

(pp. 23, 33)

• The community has been going through succession 

and cause is unknown but could be important. 

Integration and collaboration with existing studies should be pursued to 

determine linkages and provide a basis for further research.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 8 of 16

Water Sample preservation and analytical 

procedures

Major ion 

sampling

(pp. 20, 26)

• The collection of major ion samples should be 

considered of lower priority. Sufficient information on 

these samples has been collected.

• Adoption conditional on evaluation of existing data

• IWQP recommends elimination of Ca, Na, Cl, SO4, CO3, HCO3

Many elements of the current major ion sampling plan have been 

measured since the filling of Lake Powell; this includes calcium, 

magnesium, potassium, sodium, chloride, sulfate, and carbonate 

species. Regression analyses of these elements indicate that 

conductivity closely tracks these elements as they make up the major 

portion of the dissolved component. The existing 35 year history is 

adequate to evaluate these components and their collection should be 

suspended. The history of silica and iron is shorter (3-5 years) and 

could be biologically important, therefore, we should extend their 

collection until they can be better evaluated for significance to the 

biotic system. In terms of serving clients, there have been no inquiries 

for any of the parameters recommended for suspension in at least 10 

years.

Nutrient 

sampling

(pp. 14, 19-21)

• Levels of the nitrogen and phosphorus in Lake Powell 

are within the oligotrophic to mesotrophic range. These 

moderate concentrations are easily measured by contract 

chemistry labs prepared for low level analyses and 

rigorous QA/QC protocols. Some of the variation in 

phosphorus values in Lake Powell over the recent past 

call to question some of the reported measurements 

from this lake. Specific persulfate oxidation techniques 

for TP and TN measurements were suggested, as well as 

special field procedures for remote collections that did 

not require chemical preservation.

• TN rather than TKN analysis was suggested as a more 

reliable measurement of nitrogen.

• Dissolved constituent analysis should be reduced to 

forebay & inflow samples.

• No preservative for monthly samples if possible

• Adopted in part 

Extensive efforts have been made in the past to find a lab that met our 

analysis needs and fit within budgetary constraints. This effort was 

frustrated by issues such as high salinity values that many fresh-water 

labs were unequipped to deal with. We will pursue this effort with 

contacts from the PEP members. Procurement of TN over TKN 

analyses is recognized as superior and will also be pursued. However, 

nitrate-nitrite analysis has provided some of the most consistent 

nitrogen series results over time, and discontinuing this N-species 

would be ill-advised. Nor should ortho-phosphate be discarded as we 

are still gathering meaningful trends even though there are still 

significant numbers of samples below detection limits. Ammonia may 

be negotiable pending search results with other labs.

• We will pursue Dr. Jones’ offer to evaluate TN/TP methods
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 9 of 16

• Detection limits may be superior with other labs

Preservation 

techniques

(pp. 20-21)

• Monthly nutrients samples from the forebay might be 

left unpreserved and shipped express to reduce transport 

time.

• Chlorophyll samples should be filtered out of direct 

light and the filters should be desiccated in the field 

with granular silica gel.

• Adopted in part

• Monthly forebay-tailwater samples are processed quickly, but 

express shipment from Page takes 2 days. Results from monthly 

samples need to correspond to lake-wide quarterly samples, therefore 

inconsistent preservation techniques could be problematic, but should 

be evaluated.

• Shaded filtration and the silica-gel desiccation method have been 

adopted and will be evaluated.

QA-QC 

analysis

(pp. 19-20, 34)

• We strongly encourage that no less than 15% of all 

samples be duplicates (two laboratory samples from a 

particular lake site), replicates (replicate laboratory 

samples from a particular lake sample), spikes (standard 

additions to lake samples) and blind samples (known 

concentrations sent to the lab as blind samples).

• peer reviewed products

Our program meets or exceeds the 15% quality control samples for the 

chemical suites outlined in the document.

Biological samples are duplicated at a level of approximately 10-15%.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 10 of 16

III. Programmatic Findings and Recommendations:

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Responses

Adequacy of 

IWQP for 

MOs and INs

(pp. 29 –30)

• The IWQP appears to be collecting data in 

response to the current INs. Integration of 

information across program elements to support 

future decision-making should be initiated. GCMRC 

should have input into the activities of other agencies 

to better logistically and financially support the 

activities of the GCMRC. GCMRC should obtain 

feedback and guidance from the TWG and AMWG 

on how modeling and other integration approaches 

could best be structured to address their information 

needs. 

• Documents should be prepared that explain the 

program to the public.

• The IWQP will seek to integrate its efforts with other GCMRC 

program areas through determining the water quality information 

needs of these other programs and by preparing brief quarterly and 

annual reports for providing data to other programs and the TWG. 

The IWQP is already working more closely with BOR and will 

continue strengthening this relationship to ensure that BOR activities 

support and complement IWQP efforts. The IWQP will explore with 

the TWG the creation of an Ad hoc water quality group similar to the 

Ad hoc sediment group to foster interaction between the IWQP and 

the TWG.

• The IWQP will be included in AMP and GCMRC public outreach 

efforts. 

Downstream 

Data Needs 

(pp. 31-32)

• The Panel considers that the evaluation of the 

effects of dam operations on downstream resources 

can best be understood and data needs best identified 

within a modeling framework. 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 and validation 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. The program should 

progress from a reservoir data collection / 

summarization phase, to a reservoir simulation phase, 

to a downstream data collection / summarization 

phase, and finally to a downstream simulative / 

assessment / predictive phase.

• The IWQP concurs with this recommendation and views the 

convening of the PEP as the first step in developing a revised longterm monitoring plan for the IWQP. The proposed phase and time 

frames will be incorporated into a revised long-term (5-year) IWQP 

plan.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 11 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Responses

Importance of 

Reservoir 

Ecosystem

(pg. 32)

• The Panel considers an understanding of the 

reservoir ecosystem to be important to the overall 

goal of the AMWG. The Panel recommends that the 

program focus on consolidating their understanding 

of reservoir processes using the CE-QUAL-W2 

model in coordination with BOR. A well developed 

model could lead to identification of reservoir 

processes important to downstream resources, 

consolidation of information needs, and a reduction 

of the reservoir program to the minimum necessary to 

obtain boundary conditions and validate model 

output.

• The IWQP concurs with the guidance of using a modeling 

framework as a means of organizing current understanding. Efforts 

to consolidate existing data will be increased. The IWQP will work 

with BOR by providing data to their modeling efforts. As the model 

is developed and validated, the monitoring program will be revised to 

focus more effort on downstream resources. The revised IWQP plan 

will describe a time frame for achieving the Panel’s recommendations 

while addressing relevant MOs and INs. 

Downstream 

sampling

(pp. 32- 33)

• The Panel believes that the present sampling 

program for downstream reaches is inadequate. The 

Panel recommends that the IWQP develop an 

overarching rationale for downstream data collection. 

Downstream data should be collected to support a 

model of the river and to support specific experiments 

targeted at addressing specific knowledge gaps. The 

IWQP should devise a sampling program that 

addresses the specific issues of the biological 

functioning of the Lees Ferry reach.

• The IWQP will utilize the report from the aquatic foodbase and fish 

PEP as well as the revised INs to determine the appropriate focus on 

downstream resources. As noted above, IWQP efforts to integrate 

with other studies conducted downstream will partially address this 

recommendation. The level and extent of the ability to address 

downstream needs will be driven by the development of the reservoir 

model and the ability of the IWQP to shift more attention to the 

downstream resources, and the revised INs.

Contracting vs. 

In-house

(pg. 33)

• IWQP senior staff should move to more of an 

integrating and interpreting role within the program. 

Then their more routine tasks, such as collection of 

monitoring data, could be back-filled by contracts or 

by staff from sister agencies. The current level of 

quality field work needs to be maintained under any 

new arrangement.

• The IWQP will explore the potential of contracting out basic data 

collection as a means of freeing up the staff time for analysis and 

synthesis. This review will be based on an evaluation of costeffectiveness and consistent quality. Under any future scenario it is 

anticipated that IWQP staff will maintain some field presence to 

ensure the quality and compatibility of future data collection with 

past efforts. 

Program 

Management 

(pg. 34)

• Program management could be improved for 

efficient and scientific execution of the program. 

Program management should emphasize program 

linkage / integration, formulation of hypotheses 

consistent with AMP MOs and INs, and integration 

• This recommendation will be addressed once the new Biology 

Program manager is in place and decisions are made about the overall 

organization and structure of the biology program including the 

IWQP. Since the IWQP performs most of its work in-house it has 

not experienced problems with access to data.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 12 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Responses

and technology transfer within GCMRC.

• GCMRC contractors should be required to release 

all the data they collect or GCMRC should collect the 

data. All data collected by GCMRC should be 

available for anyone to evaluate on their own.

Integration of 

Interagency 

Data and Peerreviewed 

Publications 

(pg. 34)

• Integration of information and interagency data 

must be among the program’s highest priorities. 

GCMRC should incorporate peer review as part of a 

QA/QC procedure for their end products. 

• An emphasis on synthesis of existing IWQP data and integrating 

with data from other studies will be addressed in the revised IWQP 

plan. For FY 2002, GCMRC is placing a major emphasis on 

completing an integrated Oracle data base that will include the IWQP 

data. Working with BOR to develop the CE-QUAL-W2 model 

should also contribute to increased integration. Attention will be 

given to symposia presentations and publishing in peer-reviewed 

journals.

Prioritization 

of Future 

Efforts 

(pg. 35)

• The establishment of testable hypotheses about the 

system and the expected impacts of operational 

changes at Glen Canyon Dam, and the application of 

models to the water resource issues of the AMP is 

key to GCMRC meeting its mission for the AMP.

• Model development will be addressed in the revised long-term 

IWQP plan. The rationale for proposed future monitoring efforts will 

be driven by hypotheses and revised INs.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 13 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Responses

Additional 

Findings and 

Recommendations

(pp. 35 – 36)

The IWQP personnel are technically capable, 

conscientious, energetic, and experienced. They 

have professional products on the results of the ir 

monitoring using state-of-the-art data analyses.

• The staff desires to develop and/or apply tools 

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

in making management decisions.

• The staff desires to determine linkage between 

Lake Powell inflows and effects on water quality in 

the forebay and downstream from Glen Canyon 

Dam.

• The Panel recommends that GCMRC hire someone 

with an academic background in water quality 

modeling. 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 for 

establishing a premier modeling organization within 

the GCMRC.

• The panel agrees with the following NRC report 

findings: 

1.Clear articulation of the core adaptive management 

experiment is needed to guide science and 

monitoring and to focus discussions among 

stakeholders. 

2.Scientific basis for trade-off analysis and decision 

support systems. 

3.Development and implementation of a detailed, 

long-term monitoring program should be a high 

priority for the Center.

• The GCMRC appreciates the recognition of the professional 

quality of the IWQP staff.

• The recommendation to hire a modeler will be discussed with the 

new biology program manager. Other options such as a detail of 

BOR or other USGS water quality modeling staff or obtaining an 

NRC post-doc will also be considered.

• Efforts by the AMWG / TWG to develop a Vision, Mission, Goals 

and Objectives as well as the Narrative of Desired Future Resource 

Conditions are good efforts to define the core adaptive management 

experiment. Together with the work of the experimental flows group 

the IWQP should have adequate guidance.

• GCMRC has made a proposal to the USGS for support in 

developing a Decisions Support System. This is probably something 

to be considered in out-years following model development and 

completion of the integrated database. 

• The IWQP is working to revise and maintain a high-quality longterm monitoring program. Convening the PEP panel was the first 

step in this process. Developing a revised plan for review by the 

TWG and the Science Advisors is the next step.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 14 of 16

IV. Institutional Findings and Recommendations:

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Responses

Comments on 

INs and the 

Role of the 

GCMRC

(pp. 37–38)

• GCMRC should consider the cost, feasibility, costeffectiveness, level of significance in decisionmaking, “critical path” considerations, and potential 

for success in developing plans for addressing the 

INs. All planning by GCMRC needs to give major 

consideration to the original goal in the ROD for 

selecting a preferred alternative. 

• The IWQP’s position within the AMP calls for it to 

play a servant-leader role. GCMRC needs to play a 

major leadership role within the AMP. The IWQP 

should broaden the scope of their present activities so 

that they are in a better position to offer assistance to 

the AMWG and TWG regarding their decisionmaking.

•The Panel recommends that the GCMRC promote 

the concept of “cost of science” to the AMP. From a 

total “cost of science” standpoint, it is more 

defensible to understand upstream limnological 

processes and downstream riverine 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. The 

benefits foregone if science is not conducted in an 

efficient and timely fashion is not presently given the 

priority it deserves within the AMP.

• The current effort by GCMRC to develop INs recognizes many of 

the comments made by the IWQP PEP, including the “cost of 

science” concept.

• The IWQP will increase its efforts to develop quarterly and annual 

reports and provide these to the AMWG and the TWG in a timely 

manner. These reports will serve as a vehicle for providing advice. 

In addition, IWQP staff will participate in future TWG Ad hoc groups 

as needed.

• The IWQP will work independently and with BOR on model 

development. The IWQP cautions that model development can be 

costly and encourages the experimental flows group and the TWG to 

examine the benefits to learning through a series of future 

experiments as compared to initiating them through triggering criteria 

that provides little lead time to organize rigorous scientific data 

collection.

Forebay 

Monitoring 

(pg. 38)

•The forebay (Wahweap) station should be 

considered as belonging in the “White category”. The 

forebay profile represents in many ways the best 

approximation to the upper boundary condition of the 

downstream river. Another main reason is that 

potential water quality problems for the downstream 

• The existing IWQP monitoring plan has been developed utilizing 

the white, gray, and black categories developed by the TWG. During 

the development of those categories the IWQP presented information 

on the relative importance of the forebay. The IWQP concurs with 

the Panel’s recommendation. At the same time, the current structure 

appears to be working and could be continued. If it is, it should be 
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 15 of 16

Issue Findings and Recommendations GCMRC Responses

can be forecasted and therefore possibly avoided 

using data only from the forebay. Additionally, IN 

5.4 is in the “white category” and calls for a very wide 

range of information on the lake that can only be 

addressed if data are collected on the lake.

done with recognition of the importance of the forebay station and the 

higher level of data collection that is recommended to be conducted 

at this station.

Modeling 

Approach with 

BOR

(pp. 38–39)

•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 CE-QUAL-W2 

model, but that each organization apply the model 

based on their respective organizational objectives 

(some objectives are suggested for the IWQP). It is 

recommended that they exchange inputs, runs, 

findings, etc., to save time and money to meet their 

respective objectives as well as to review the basis for 

each other’s findings.

•GCMRC concurs with this recommendation and will continue to 

coordinate with BOR on model development.

Agreement 

with NRC 

Downstream 

Report

(pg. 39)

The panel agrees with the following NRC findings: 

1. The Center should work with the TWG to develop 

a revised set of MOs and INs. These should be 

linked with testable hypotheses and situated 

within an internally consistent understanding of 

the ecosystem. 

2. Decisions about geographic linkages with adjacent 

areas and larger scales should be made on a caseby-case basis, considering ecosystem processes, 

management alternatives, funding sources, and 

stakeholder interests.

• GCMRC’s current effort to develop INs is consistent with the 

NRC’s recommendation.

• GCMRC also concurs with the NRC’s recommendation regarding 

geographic scope. This position has been reiterated in the Loveless 

guidance document and generally has been used to determine what 

work is done within the AMP.
Attach_10a 06/25/2001 Page 16 of 16