Chairman Ralph Morgenweck called the meeting to order. Introduction of Governance Committee members and audience attendees followed. An attendance sign-in sheet is attached.

Approval of September 2 Meeting Notes

Executive Director Dale Strickland presented suggested changes to the draft minutes. The October 7, 1998 minutes were then approved, as amended. A copy of the final minutes from the October 7 meeting is enclosed with these draft minutes.

The Executive Director's Report

The Executive Director indicated that he had been working on committee schedules and comparing them to the EIS schedule. There are some scheduling problems and some gaps exist. He will work with committee chairs to coordinate the schedules and will have a report back to the Governance Committee for the January 6 meeting.

Expense checks should be mailed to committee members later this week. It has taken quite some time to have the vouchers prepared properly and this is the first round of checks during the six month trial period.

Water Management Committee

Water Conservation/Supply Study and Milestone W14-1

Committee Chair John Lawson reported that the time period for the study has been provided to the Water Conservation/Supply study consultant in accordance with the time period that was approved by the Governance Committee. The consultant has completed nearly all the existing flow conditions (bullet 1, Milestone W14-1) and will provide them to the Water Committee in early December. The development of a water budget for the study (bullet 2, Milestone W14-1) is also nearing completion. A report on both work products will be finalized for the committee's next meeting on January 5, 1999, and will be provided to the Governance Committee at the January 6, 1999, meeting.

The consultant prepared a report on the method for definition of hydrologically connected groundwater (bullet 3, Milestone W14-1) and the Water Committee concurred with the method. A report on the method will be made available to the Governance Committee on January 6. The above three items are major work items for the consultant and will be used in the identification of water conservation/supply alternatives (bullet 4, Milestone W14-1). The work products are being provided to the Governance Committee for their information. Comments on the products may be forwarded to Chair Lawson.

A Water Budget Workshop was held on November 15 and an Alternatives Workshop was held on November 12. At the Alternatives Workshop the consultant requested guidance on a cost ceiling for screening alternatives. The Water Committee is recommending a $50,000,000 cap on alternatives (i. e., a single project or a combination of projects) for use as a screening tool. The derivation of this screening tool (attached) is based on the money available for the program and the cost of other program activities. The justification of the cap recognizes that screening alternatives should be broad enough to allow development of a viable program without eliminating potentially excellent alternatives from further evaluation. It was pointed out that if the objective of 60,000 acre-feet of reduced depletions can not be met for $50,000,000, additional funding may be necessary.

The Water Committee and the consultant have held six workshops in addition to participating in regular Water Committee meetings.

The Water Committee will begin working on a water accounting system (bullet 5, Milestone W14-1) following the January 5, 1999, meeting.

Charter

The Water Committee Charter is nearly completed. Some minor modifications are still necessary; however, the Water Committee has concurred with the overall document. The Charter will be transmitted to the Executive Director and ready for the Governance Committee on January 6.

Public Outreach

Outreach related to water management issues was discussed. Public outreach ties in closely with the discussion of alternatives. The consultant will have a short list of alternatives by late February. Lawson suggested that there should be facilitated meetings in each state to explain the alternative selection process and to obtain public input. The meetings should include the consultant, members of the Water Committee, and members of the Governance Committee. These meetings should be held in late February or early March 1999

Work Schedule

The Water Committee is developing a detailed work plan that will be provided to the Executive Director and the Governance Committee.

Budget

John Lawson presented the Water Committee's proposed budget. Budget estimates were developed for public meetings, peer review, and committee expenses. The budget for public outreach meetings discussed above is estimated at $30,000 for three or more professionally facilitated meetings. Another $30,000 may be needed for a similar round of meetings once the action plan is done in December 1999. A budget estimate was made for peer review of the Water Conservation/Supply Study. Lawson pointed out the accounting procedure may need peer review but the committee budget estimate does not contain these costs.

Vernon Nelson asked if there would be a peer review on target flows. Rodell Jameson indicated that many water issues were placed before the Land Committee including target flows and other issues such as flooding. A lengthy discussion of the target flows ensued. Ralph Morgenweck indicated that the original target flows were peer reviewed and as new information becomes available, they should be peer reviewed again. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provided a brief history of the development of target flows (see attachment).

Regarding the flooding issue, Ralph Morgenweck requested that Vernon Nelson, Rodell Jameson, Curt Brown, John Lawson, and Dale Strickland determine if there is information we can collect to help address this problem. Ralph requested a report to Governance Committee at the January 6, 1999 meeting.

John Lawson indicated that he would work with Dale Strickland to assure linkage between the Water Committee and other committees.

Response to the Colorado Water Depletion Plan

Lawson will work with Colorado and individuals on the committee that have further comments on the plan. He hopes to have any conflicts resolved and a recommendation ready for the Governance Committee at the January 6, 1999 meeting.

Land Committee

Land Committee Charter

Vernon Nelson reported on Land Committee activities. He indicated that 200 to 250 people attended the Land Committee meeting on November 16 in Grand Island, Nebraska. Most of the meeting was spent talking about the charter for the Land Committee. No consensus could be reached on the charter but a vast majority of the people present did not favor a charter. Other majority positions included that only landowners should be allowed to vote on committee issues and that federal and state employees be excluded from voting. Nelson noted that the Land Committee would be unable to work with the charter as it currently reads and suggested allowing the committee to function by consensus with membership consisting of individuals attending each meeting (i. e., no set membership). Rodell Jameson echoed the fact that the committee should not be asked to spend more time on a charter as the sub-committees are working well and hopefully the committee can do its job without a charter.

A lengthy discussion of the need for a Land Committee charter ensued. Ralph Morgenweck proposed that the Land Committee operate without a charter indefinitely, that the Co-chairs make recommendations on milestones to the Governance Committee, that committee recommendations developed through consensus, and that Co-chairs bring majority and minority opinions to the Governance Committee when consensus is not reached. The proposal was adopted by consensus.

It was further noted that the Land Committee and the Governance Committee might not have the same understanding on some of the milestones that have been laid out for the Land Committee. It was recommended that the Land Committee report in January to clear up any differences in understanding of milestones and provide more precise information of what has been accomplished.

Third Party Impacts

The Third Party Impact Subcommittee is working on issues and one of the biggest potential problems appears to be potential flooding of private property in an effort to create/restore wet meadows. The Land Committee is getting close to having a request for proposal (RFP) ready to provide assistance for the third party impact study. A discussion ensued on the need for listing of more potential positive impacts in the RFP. Doug Robotham will offer language improving the RFP in this area. The Land Committee agreed by consensus that the study should be conducted in cooperation with the EIS study of the same issue. The contractor would work jointly for the EIS Team and the Land Committee on data collection and analysis and directly for the Land Committee on development of recommendations for the Governance Committee on the Proposed Program. It was also recommended that the contractor be paid from the EIS budget and that the Department of Interior receives credit for one third of the cost of the study against the federal "fair share" contribution. The cost estimate for the project ranged from $50-$75,000. The time period suggested was a year from beginning to completion.

Mapping Subcommittee

The Mapping Subcommittee continues to coordinate with other mapping efforts to insure committee, USGS, and the EIS Team is working together on mapping

Habitat Criteria Subcommittee

The subcommittee has been waiting for guidance from the Land Committee on whether they are going in right direction. A meeting is planned in the near future to wrap up the committee report. A workshop is planned to deal with the evaluation of past management practices.

Land Ownership Entity Subcommittee

A meeting is planned for December 8 to finalize a discussion outline to be used at a workshop for the purpose of developing a proposed land ownership entity. The outline will be presented to the Land Committee on December 14 for review. The subcommittee hopes to submit the proposed outline to the Governance Committee on January 6 along with a request for approval of the workshop. The subcommittee proposes to prepare a request for proposal for the services of a facilitator for the workshop. The workshop is proposed for March or April 1999.

Technical Committee

Research and Monitoring Protocols

Committee Chair Jay Maher gave the Technical Committee Report. Jay reported that the committee continues to work on Milestone R2-1. The next committee meeting is planned for 2 days, December 10-11, and will focus on this milestone. Regarding Milestone R5-1, Jay indicated the districts will coordinate their monitoring activities with the Technical Committee and will use common protocols with the program. A final recommendation to the Governance Committee on R2-1 is planned for April 1999.

Ralph Morgenweck suggested that monitoring was very important and will provide the information needed when the program is evaluated after the first increment. This evaluation will determine if the program is viable. He asked for a rough estimate for costs of research and monitoring. He voiced some concern that the research list was longer than the monitoring list. Doug Robotham suggested that the best way to approach this is to look at habitat functioning rather than individual species. Ralph also suggested that peer review should be made while the process is in operation rather than waiting until the end. Jay indicated that "informal peer review" was being conducted as the protocols are being developed.

Peer Review

Peer review guidelines are complete (Milestone R4-1) and accepted by the Governance Committee. A peer review plan has not been completed.

Charter

The committee does not have a charter but will have a draft for the Governance Committee by the February meeting.

Outreach Committee

Committee Chair Jim Cook noted that two things have happened since the last meeting. First, a technical working group has been set up to provide the materials and make contacts with the press. Next, the Land Committee meeting on the March 16 helped to provide focus on outreach needs. It is obvious that the outreach effort needs to go back to some very basic things that are not understood. He urged everyone to give thought to this effort and get questions back to Mary Jane Graham. Graham noted she was the person on the Outreach Committee that volunteered to assemble the questions people are asking. She asked that questions be sent to her through e-mail: mjg@vnf.com or call 202/298-1824. She would like the comments in a week and she would then send them back to various individuals to prepare answers. She emphasized the need for better information flow to the public.

Cook noted that the committee budget had been forwarded to the Finance Committee.

Finance Committee

Mike Besson gave the Finance Committee report and noted that the subcommittee budgets are in draft form and have requested the following amounts (amounts rounded).

Besson noted that the committee had held two meetings since the last Governance Committee meeting, one full committee meeting in Denver and one conference call. A recommendation on the budget will be made at the January 6 meeting of the Governance Committee. Two foundations have been contacted, the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation and the Nebraska Community Foundation, to explore possibilities for an agreement to manage Governance Committee funds. The Bureau of Reclamation is preparing a draft cooperative agreement for use in these negotiations. A discussion ensued on the Governance Committee's financial management process.

The Land Committee asked for budget approval as quickly as possible and their high priority item was a secretary and an office. The Kearney Area Community Foundation will make available a secretary and an office on a half-day basis for $60. Larry Todd indicated a willingness to help with funding of projects on a temporary basis until budgets are finalized and offered to temporarily fund the Land Committee request for clerical assistance. It was agreed that Interior would receive credit toward their "fair share" commitment for this activity.

Besson also pointed out the need to work on the ratio of funding the Executive Director's contract. He indicated that the 50-20-20-10 split currently in the contract resulted in an overpayment by the states.

Milestones

Ralph Morgenweck reminded the states that they are to provide written reports on milestones every three months. January will be the month to provide the written report.

Wyoming

Wyoming reported no change in their milestones. Wyoming will need a law change to protect program water developed through conservation. The state is waiting for the Water Conservation/Supply study to determine if there is the need for such a law change.

Nebraska

Nebraska has completed most of their first year milestones. Although, they have not selected a pilot project to test their ability to protect "new" program water resulting from Colorado or Wyoming projects. Colorado has two wells pumping water into the South Platte, but the water has been contracted, so the pilot project will not be possible in that area. Jim Cook will work with Doug Robotham to determine if a small pilot project could be initiated to see how the Nebraska statute works. The state is working on a process to identify and begin to evaluate options for the mitigation of or offset for new depletions under a program.

Colorado

Doug Robotham reported on the Colorado milestones. The population estimates are available for a 1997 baseline and the potential increases in population through the year 2002. He noted that there was a yearlong lag on population information and estimates were made in the meantime. He indicated he would be presenting the monthly depletion method (Milestone W8-1) in January and would like Governance Committee action at that time. Colorado is waiting for the Water Committee's review of the method. Colorado will also provide a report to the Governance Committee in January on methods Colorado will use to measures new water activity. The environmental assessment for Tamarack is being developed and there should be a draft environmental assessment by January.

Department of Interior

Curt Brown summarized the EIS team's effort. The team met with CPAC, an organization of county supervisors from seven counties in the central Nebraska area, on November 16 and described the EIS process. The team is also working with the Land Committee on a statement of work for third party impacts. The team is evaluating flood issues. The draft screening report will be ready for review in February. The team has included all suggestions given by the public in the screening process.

An important consideration is definition of the no action alternative. Curt Brown will make a follow-up report on the no action alternative at the January 6 meeting. The EIS Team is drafting a paper on a framework for the no action alternative that will be distributed to the Governance Committee under separate cover. The team hopes to have all alternatives described in early 2000.

Jim Lutey reported that Woodward Clyde Consulting (WCC) is helping the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with Milestone R1-1, habitat and species baseline. The Service received four comments on the plan of study distributed at the October 7 Governance Committee meeting. The plan of study is a part of the consulting firm's contract and will not be changed. The comments were forwarded to WCC and will be considered as they prepare the final report. The Governance Committee will have an opportunity to review the draft report on baseline, expected by the end of December.

Colorado's Future Depletion Plan

Doug Robotham handed out the Colorado future depletion plan for review and provided each member of the Governance Committee a disk containing the plan utilizing an Excel spread sheet. He noted that the program on the disk was designed to allow the user to evaluate different assumptions in determining depletions. He said it was mainly an accounting tool, with some very fundamental engineering estimates.

Future Meetings

The schedule for the next three months was discussed. The next meeting will be in Cheyenne on January 6 and the following meeting will be in Denver on February 10. The subsequent meeting was tentatively set for Nebraska on March 30.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.