Agenda and Minutes

Mike Besson, Governance Committee Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. Mike suggested adding a discussion of vice-chair as the last agenda item. No other changes to the agenda were indicated.

The draft minutes of the July Governance Committee(GC) meeting were reviewed. Dale Strickland read suggested changes to the minutes. Other GC members and participants indicated suggested changes and the minutes were approved by consensus.

Executive Director's Report

Dale Strickland reported that the Finance Committee (FC) and GC had delegated authority to approve invoices to the Nebraska Community Foundation (NCF) to Larry Schulz and himself. Two invoices had been received since the last meeting. One was for $1,210.50 for administrative assistance through the Kearney Area Community Foundation and the other was from the Executive Director's office. Because Dale is unable to approve invoices from his own office, the four parties contributing funds to the Cooperative Agreement will be sent forms that they can sign and fax to the NCF to approve the Executive Director's invoices.

Dale gave a brief presentation outlining expenditures through the first 2 years of the Cooperative Agreement, budgeted items for year 3, and funds still available for activities such as demonstration projects. Dale discussed budgetary requests from each committee, the amounts that they had spent and the amounts still available through those requests. He noted that the Outreach Committee will likely need additional funds as more activities are asked of them, and that the Technical Committee would like not utilize all of their budget. Dale also addressed Boyle Engineering's budget and the EIS budget. Of the $9.7 million budgeted at the beginning of the Cooperative Agreement, there is a balance of $2.45 million available for activities not yet defined. Some of these activities will likely be demonstration projects.

Demonstration Projects

John Lawson noted that the Water Management Committee (WMC) had formed a subgroup to identify potential demonstration projects. That subgroup identified five possible projects. Mike Drain distributed draft descriptions of the five projects and spent some time describing the projects to the GC (see attachment). Some of the topics that can be addressed by the projects are reducing uncertainty in particular issues, testing Nebraska laws for new water, building local support, testing the idea of "willing" participants, and each of the projects are potentially scalable. Estimated costs for implementation and operation of all five projects for two years was estimated at less than $400,000. The subcommittee asked for comments on the projects, specifically if any of the projects were unacceptable and which projects were preferable.

The GC and participants spent considerable amount of time discussing the topic of demonstration projects and asking Mike and John questions. Major points of discussion were permitting, costs associated with permitting, third party impacts, who will conduct the projects, proportionality of the costs and water, and potential environmental effects of the projects.

John Lawson indicated that other groups are encouraged to suggest demonstration projects to the WMC and that the WMC and subgroup should be viewed as a forum for discussion of projects. John noted several topics that need to be addressed before implementation of any project. Some of these topics were a thorough analysis of effects, NEPA issues - including who will be the lead federal agency, ESA consultation, who will conduct the research and do the analysis, and how will crediting be handled for water.

This led to a discussion regarding the need for NEPA documents for demonstration projects and the size of the documents if they are required (i.e., EIS, EA, or CE). Points made during this discussion include the NEPA documents will likely be small (EA or CE), need to be careful not to spend lots of time and money trying to answer questions that the demonstration project itself is to answer, and need to be careful not to let the NEPA work grow too large.

John noted that the two main question that the subgroup need answers to at this point were 1) does Cooperative Agreement spending constitute a federal action and 2) who will the lead federal agency be for projects such as these. Ralph Morgenweck responded that yes, the spending does constitute a federal action and that the subgroup should make recommendation on which federal agency should be the lead in their proposals for each project.

Land Aspects

Rhodell Jameson and Vernon Nelson addressed the land aspects of the demonstration projects that they were familiar with and also suggested other demonstration project dealing primarily with land. Both indicated that they did not know of major land issues that would arise from the projects and they also felt that there were opportunities for including more lands in some of the projects.

Vernon indicated that many farmers in the region have "unused" portions of their water rights and many would be willing to lease those rights to the Program. Larry Wells had suggested a ground water demonstration project and there are other landowners that would be willing to work with the Program. Vernon also suggested utilizing an on-farm demonstration project in which a portion of the land does not receive irrigation water (i.e. change in farming practices). If the Program can show that there are not dramatic declines in revenue, some farmers may be willing to proceed in this fashion. Dale suggested that agencies and others develop land demonstration projects and bring them to the Land Committee for review. Lisa McDonald noted that it would be a good idea to address third party impacts in the demonstration projects.

Mike Besson and others asked what the expectation of the demonstration projects was. Responses included that the GC needs to commit to demonstration projects, many projects could be long term with an open end date, and starting projects soon is needed.

Monitoring and Research Aspects

Paul Tebbel briefly addressed how monitoring and research activities could be incorporated into demonstration projects. Several topics could be addressed through demonstration projects including testing of protocols, better estimates of costs, evaluation of methods, and effects of projects on target and non-target species. It would be best if "pre-monitoring" of areas was done prior to implementation of projects. The Technical Committee was encouraged to get involved earlier rather than later in developing the demonstration projects.

Crediting Aspects

Mike Besson updated the group on a meeting that was held to discuss crediting and he discussed how crediting would likely relate to demonstration projects. There will need to be a project by project recommendation brought to the GC through the Finance Committee. Credits of land and water will happen at inception of the Program and credits for money spent will occur during the Cooperative Agreement. The issue of crediting entities with future depletions will need to be discussed.

Sandhill Crane Presentation

Ralph Morgenweck introduced Gary Krapu from the USGS office in Jamestown, North Dakota. Gary has worked on sandhill cranes and the Platte River since the early 1970's and has a vast amount of knowledge regarding both topics. Gary gave a slide presentation in which he outlined potential problems regarding dietary needs of sandhill cranes in the Platte valley and also his work using satellite transmitters to track crane movements throughout the year. After Gary's presentation there was a short discussion period.

Committee Reports

Water Management Committee

Mike Drain informed the GC their license article 402 requires them to coordinate with the GC regarding the amount of water to be made available to the EA. CNPPID will prepare an estimate and provide the information to the GC and WMC for comment. The final report to FERC will include the GC and WMC comments.

John Lawson gave the full WMC report. He noted that the Tracking/Accounting portion of the Cooperative Agreement continues to be addressed. John updated the GC on progress to date on peer review of the Water Conservation/Supply Report. He noted that six proposals were submitted and that the subgroup had selected a group from Washington State University. However, the subgroup felt that additional groundwater and agricultural water experience was needed on the team so they also selected two individuals from University of Nebraska Lincoln. After further consideration, it was decided that the individuals from UNL had a possible conflict of interest. The peer review will proceed with the group of four individuals from Washington State. There will be a kick-off meeting September 2 and the review will be complete by September 24. Larry Todd reported that the FC was comfortable with the selection and budget and that the peer review process should proceed. The review is coming in under budget

Water Action Plan Committee

The Water Action Plan Committee (WAPC) had its first official meeting August 17. John Lawson, Chair of the Committee, reported on the meeting. The committee spent a large portion of the meeting discussing a wide variety of topics in an attempt to narrow the discussion to what is needed first. It was decided that Boyle will prepare a list of options for the WAPC to consider. The five main options are 1) least cost, 2) equal cost/state, 3) equal water/state, 4) fair share per state for entire 130-150 KAF, and 5) fair share on the amount of money required. There was no commitment from the WAPC on any of the options.

A schedule for the Action Plan was also discussed. The draft is still intended to be done by December 13, however, the final will likely not be done until late-February. Another topic that was discussed was how the information will be presented to the public. Possible options include public meetings sponsored by the GC, Outreach Committee, or the states. At the end of John's presentation it was decided to approve/amend the minutes from the July 13 GC/WMC workshop at the next GC meeting.

Land Committee

Vernon Nelson and Rhodell Jameson reported on Land Committee (LC) and LC subcommittee activities. A contract has been signed with Lisa McDonald to continue Phase II of the Third Party Impacts analysis and she has provided a schedule. The Habitat Criteria Subcommittee forwarded the latest draft of the Recommendation of Criteria for Program Habitat Conservation onto the LC and GC for review (see attachment). The subcommittee feels that it has done as much work on the document that it can at this point. The Habitat Management Practices document has been delayed because of late survey returns, but work is continuing.

Members of the LC and Technical Committee will be working on a Habitat Acquisition Plan. The first meeting is planned for August 27. The Plan will be based on criteria for dividing the initial 10,000 acres of habitat for the three bird species.

Conservation Partners has completed the first draft of the Land Ownership Entity White Paper. The subcommittee has narrowed the pool of facilitators to two for the facilitated workshop to be held in November. Comments will be received on the white paper until August 27 and the final copy will be ready September 10.

Technical Committee

Jay Maher announced that Paul Tebbel is the new chair of the Technical Committee (TC) and will be giving the report. Paul asked that the GC recognize Jay for his work as chair of the TC for the past 2 years. Paul asked for and received approval from the GC to add himself, John Shadle, Rocky Plettner, Martha Tacha, Dave Zelenka, Phil Ogle, and a TBD for Tri-Basin to the official TC membership.

Paul reported that the TC has drafted documents outlining the relationship of R1-1, R2-1, R3-1 for least terns, piping plovers, whooping cranes, and pallid sturgeon. A similar document will be draft for "other species" shortly. These documents will be used to identify protocols, describe the research and monitoring for the EIS Team, and as a starting point when developing the Program. As part of identifying protocols, the TC is estimating costs and will start deciding on writing assignments shortly. Other items discussed at the last meeting were the Cottonwood Ranch Management Plan, EA, and Baseline Document.

Dale Strickland noted that a major point of discussion at the previous TC meeting was the interpretation of the Program's responsibility regarding pallid sturgeon. A memo was circulated prior to the GC meeting describing the different viewpoints (see attachment). The TC needed an interpretation of the responsibility from the GC before it could proceed with developing the monitoring and research program. The goal identified in the proposed Program is different than goals identified in the Cooperative Agreement. The goal in the proposed Program is simply a research topic ("Test the assumption"). The goals in the Cooperative Agreement appear to be aimed more at providing direct benefits to pallid sturgeon. Ralph Morgenweck and other agreed that the crafters of the Cooperative Agreement meant that if the Program conducts activities that are beneficial for terns, plovers, and cranes in the central Platte valley, the Program might also benefit pallid sturgeon in the lower Platte River. Significant discussion ensued in which each opinion was explained. The advice to the TC from the GC is to look at "testing the assumption that it is possible to improve habitat for the pallid sturgeon by managing flow in the central Platte River…"

Outreach Committee

Jeff Buettner, Outreach Committee (OC) Chair, reported that Wyoming and Colorado are pursuing revising the Nebraska newspaper insert for use in their respective states. These will likely be in papers late September or October. Another round of question and answer brochures are currently being printed and TV and newsletters are continuing to be used for outreach.

Finance Committee

Mike Besson introduced Larry Todd as the new Finance Committee (FC) chair. Larry asked that the GC recognize Mike for his work as FC chair. Most items discussed at the previous meeting were already discussed today. These items included crediting, Boyle document peer review, facilitation of the Land Ownership Entity workshop, and the availability of funds for demonstration projects or other projects. Larry also noted that the Nebraska Community Foundation contract is in place and invoices are being sent.

Milestone Reports

Nebraska - Dayle Williamson reported that they received many applications for the position to assist his department with Platte River issues. A person will be hired shortly and will likely be working before the next GC meeting. Dayle's office has met with the Platte River advisory board that was appointed by Governor Johanns. Jim Cook continues to lead a team to explore Nebraska's future depletions and Jim has briefed the Governor on the subject.

Colorado - Peter Evans indicated nothing new to report.

Wyoming - Mike Besson indicated nothing new to report.

Department of the Interior - Jim Lutey reported that the Baseline Document was circulated to the TC, GC, and other interested parties June 18. Comments were requested by August 20. However, there have been discussion within the TC and others that more time is needed to thoroughly comment on the document. One reason for needing additional time is that the hydrology, sediment, water quality, and GIS portions have not been provided. Jim encouraged everyone to continue review the document without those portions, as they will likely be able to stand-alone. The FWS realized the importance of a complete review given the documents importance in the relationship of R1-1, R2-1, and R3-1.

There have been two ideas expressed as to what the document is to accomplish. One idea is that it should document existing conditions and the other idea is that it should be the baseline for monitoring and research. As the document stands now, it can not serve as a baseline for monitoring and research. Jim requested a consolidated comment from the TC as soon as it can be provided. The TC is reserving decision on need for peer review until their review is complete.

Other Issues

Mike Besson asked that time be spent at the next meeting discussing a vice-chair and/or having a rotating chair. Dale Strickland asked that individuals email him suggestions for an issue for discussion at the next meeting.

Future Governance Committee Meetings

September 16 - Water Action Plan, Hampton Inn, Lakewood CO, 9 a.m. - 5 p.m.

September 17 - Regular GC meeting, FWS third floor conference room, Lakewood CO, 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.

October 14 - Field Trip to view restored sites, meet at Holiday Inn, Kearney NE, 1 - 5 p.m.

October 15 - Regular GC meeting, Holiday Inn, Kearney NE, 9 a.m. - 4 p.m.

November 17 - Water Action Plan, site to be determined in Wyoming

November 18 - Regular GC meeting, site to be determined in Wyoming

December 15 - Water Mgmt Committee meeting, FWS third floor conference room, Lakewood CO

December 16 - Water Action Plan, FWS third floor conference room, Lakewood CO

December 17 - Regular GC meeting, FWS third floor conference room, Lakewood CO

Adjourn

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 3:45 p.m.