Summary of Major Recommendations and Actions
Advisory Committee on Water Information
Mission and the Federal Advisory Committee Act
History of Advisory Committee on Water Information
Year 2001 Report Card on Ecosystem Health
Interstate Council on Water Policy's Position on the Stream Gaging Network
Information in Support of Watershed Activities
Sharing Water Information Through Electronic Media
Water-Quality Monitoring
Statements by Representatives
National Water Quality Monitoring Council
Ad Hoc Work Group on Stream Gaging and Water Quantity
Next Meeting and Closing Remarks
Attachments
Welcome, Opening Remarks, and Introductions
Mark Schaefer
The first meeting of the Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) convened on May 7, 1997, in the auditorium of the National Center of the U.S. Geological Survey at Reston, Virginia. At approximately 9:00 a.m., Chairperson Mark Schaefer, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, U.S. Department of the Interior, called the meeting to order. Participants included members of ACWI as well as other interested individuals.
Chairperson Schaefer welcomed the representatives to the ACWI and discussed the growing need for sound water information to meet natural resource management, environmental protection, and economic objectives nationwide. Growing demands for limited water resources and increasingly complex decision processes require innovative information and decision support systems. Exciting new technologies are now available to expand opportunities for developing and sharing information and ideas more effectively than ever before. Endorsing the importance of the ACWI, Chairperson Schaefer emphasized the commitment of the Department to work closely with the member organizations and others to improve water information for decisionmaking.
After attendees at the meeting introduced themselves, Chairperson Schaefer reviewed the agenda. He noted that the representatives were going to discuss a variety of topics and hear several presentations that would provide background for their deliberations. Noting the demonstrations and exhibits that organizations provided in the meeting room, he invited attendees to visit them during breaks and after the formal proceedings.
Summary of Major Recommendations and Actions
Advisory Committee on Water Information Mission and Federal Advisory Committee Act
Mark Schaefer
To provide context for ACWI deliberations and functions, Chairperson Schaefer reviewed the mission of the ACWI and briefly discussed the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) thatgoverns the activities of the ACWI. The ACWI represents the interests of water-information users and professionals by advising the Federal Government on activities and plans related to Federal water information programs and the effectiveness of those programs. For additional information, he encouraged the representatives to review copies of the ACWI Charter and the brochure describing the FACA .
History of Advisory Committee on Water Information
Robert Hirsch
Alternate Chairperson Robert Hirsch, Chief Hydrologist, U.S.Geological Survey (USGS),
presented a brief history of ACWI. The ACWI is a new mechanism that is part of the
implementation of the Water Information Coordination Program (WICP). Office of Management
and Budget Memorandum No. 92-01 establishes the WICP as a shared responsibility of the
executive departments and agencies of the Federal Government. The Memorandum designates
the U.S. Department of the Interior, through the USGS, as the lead agency for the WICP. The
purpose of the WICP is to provide water information needed to ensure effective decisionmaking
for natural-resources management and environmental protection at all levels of government and
in the private sector. A copy of the Memorandum and a short handout about the history of
ACWI are in Attachment 5. The new process combines representatives from all levels of
government and the private sector in one forum to work on shared issues and problems. On
behalf of the USGS, Mr. Hirsch expressed appreciation for the opportunity to work with the
distinguished ACWI representatives.
Year 2001 Report Card on Ecosystem Health
Jerry Melillo
Jerry Melillo, Associate Director, Environment, Office of Science and Technology Policy,
presented information about the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR).
The CENR focuses on five priority research areas that are: (1) Global change, (2) natural
disaster reduction, (3) tropospheric ozone, (4) endocrine disrupters, and (5) environmental
monitoring. The CENR's overall goal is: To better integrate and to improve the ground-based
and space-based monitoring activities and related research in the United States. Under the
Environmental Monitoring and Research Initiative, the current CENR activities include a report
card on the health of the Nation's ecosystems, regional pilot studies, and intensive research sites.
Vice President Gore identified the need to prepare a "Report Card on the Health of the Nation's
Ecosystems" in his letter dated September 24, 1996, to participants at a CENR workshop on
monitoring. Mr. Melillo described current thinking about the content of the Report Card. Copies
of the Vice President's letter and Mr. Melillo's overheads are provided in attachment 6.
The proposed Report Card is part of the CENR Environmental Monitoring and Research Initiative. The Vice President's deadline for completing the Report Card is 2001; however, CENR plans to produce an interim report on forests, cropland, and coastal/marine ecosystems within 18 months. To support the process, the CENR has contracted with the Heinz Center for Science, Economics, and Environment to provide third-party facilitation. The Federal Government and the private sector will each provide half the funding support for the project. Additional information is in Attachment 6.
Mr. Melillo entertained questions after his presentation. The representatives encouraged the CENR to include lakes, and particularly the Great Lakes, in the Report Card. Also, the representatives asked for a clarification of the purpose of the Report Card. Mr. Melillo indicated that the purpose is to provide consensus data and conclusions about ecosystem health. The intent is to produce facts without value judgements.
Interstate Council on Water Policy's Position on the National Stream Gaging Network
Tom Stiles
Mr. Thomas Stiles, Assistant Director, Kansas Water Office, presented the Interstate Council on
Water Policy (ICWP's) concerns and recommendations about the National Stream Gaging
Network. The ICWP prepared a position paper on stream gaging dated September 1996 that was
distributed with background materials for the ACWI meeting and is included in Attachment 7
with Mr. Stiles - overheads. For more than 10 years, states and other government agencies have
been concerned about the loss of stream gaging stations nationwide. Further funding reductions
and the loss of lives during 1996 flooding in Kentucky have increased the overall concern.
The ICWP position paper emphasizes the importance of streamflow data to a wide range of short-and long-term decision processes in both the public and private sector. The position paper covers several major topics including the characteristics of an ideal stream gaging network, funding responsibilities of all levels of government and the private sector, and recommended action items. The ICWP recommends that a nationwide network of index stations be identified for providing streamflow data on major rivers and tributaries. To maintain data quality and consistency, the ICWP stresses the need for common data standards. The ICWP recommended that the ACWI sponsor an interagency committee to develop consensus agreements that are needed to maintain an adequate National Stream Gaging Network. Later in the meeting the ACWI agreed to establish an ad hoc group, and several member organizations indicated an interest in participating on the group.
Information in Support of Watershed Activities
Jack Fischer
The Nation faces difficult water-quality and quantity problems. The public is increasingly aware of and interested in these issues. Citizens, especially at the watershed level, are determined to be involved in resolving water problems. The realization that watersheds provide a useful framework for public involvement has led to the establishment of more than a thousand watershed councils, ranging from four or five people sitting around a dining room table in the
evening, to several hundred in the Merrimac River Basin, in New England.
Among these councils, there is an increasing appreciation of the need for reliable water information. At the same time, the information age has created the ability to manipulate huge data bases and to visualize large and diverse sets of information using geographic information systems (GIS). The challenge for ACWI is to develop standards so that data can be accessed and used by a wide variety of people over time. Metadata and archiving issues need attention. There is a general need to coordinate water information management efforts. The ACWI is a forum to address these issues and provides a significant service to the Nation.
The Department of the Interior (DOI) is responding to the need for data in the watershed council community. The DOI program to make information more readily available to a variety of users
has four parts:
Specific actions that DOI has taken include initiating the development of a directory of agency programs. The DOI directory will contain program descriptions, points of contact, global contacts, partnership opportunities, products, and opportunities to share funding. Over 35 different programs will be part of this directory, which we hope to have published in June. Some specific examples include:
In addition, DOI is stimulating volunteer contributions by employees for activities in watershed councils. There are now over 100 councils in which DOI representatives are volunteering weekends and evenings. Also, we are working to publicize appropriate training in water resources and supporting the development of additional training for non-government groups. Both DOI and USEPA are working on draft documents to summarize training opportunities within their organizations and on a local basis. Watershed councils have difficulty, not so much in obtaining data, but in managing it. Therefore, we are working with the private sector to create a cooperative agreement to develop a generic GIS system that can be used by watershed councils to manage their information. This system will be accessible to nontechnical users.
In conclusion, this is an exciting time in water-information management. None of us can do the job alone, and each of us has a legitimate role. This committee can be a rich and rewarding forum because active participation in ACWI can benefit not only representatives, but also their organizations and the country.
Sharing Water Information through Electronic Media
Ken Lanfear
Ken Lanfear, USGS, did a presentation and live demonstration of selected water-resources
information that is available through the World Wide Web (Web). Search for water information here. The USGS is rapidly converting its water and other information systems to the Web in order to make the information holdings more widely and easily available. Mr. Lanfear began by showing USGS historical and real-time streamflow data. Using the realtime capability, he showed the morning hydrologic readings for the receding flood waters of the
Red River near Grand Forks. Mr. Lanfear then demonstrated a new capability developed by USGS and USEPA to link the USEPA "Surf Your Watershed" system with USGS flow, water use, and other information.
To assist people that do not frequently use watersheds as location identifiers, the USGS has developed software that allows users to locate the desired watershed location by naming any nearby landmark that is shown on a USGS quadrangle map. The system finds the latitude and longitude of the designated landmark and then identifies the watershed that contains the landmark. Mr. Lanfear demonstrated that capability using the National Arboretum as a landmark. In addition to watersheds, the systems can present information by county, state and other identifiers.
Regarding plans for the future, Mr. Lanfear reported that the USGS is working to convert the Master Water Data Index for use on the Web. Also, he indicated that agencies are working on the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) that will initially be developed at 1:100,000 scale. The NHD will be a digital file of stream reaches and attribute data for the United States. When it is available, Web applications will be able to use the NHD to navigate up and down streams and rivers. Also, many more sources of water information are available on the Internet and can be linked together to serve users more easily. Mr. Lanfear said that in the future more water data (actual measurements at field monitoring stations) will be shared through the Web. In closing, Mr. Lanfear reported that many other organizations besides the USGS are rapidly converting to the Web. As an example, he demonstrated a Web site maintained by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
The ACWI representatives were very interested in the demonstration and asked several questions. Representatives asked if USGS water-quality data are available through the Web. Mr. Lanfear answered not yet, but work is underway to include water-quality data. Staffing and funding are the limiting factors. The representatives also asked about how USGS was informing others about the new Web capabilities. Mr. Lanfear said that other organizations are publicizing its availability. The USGS distributed a news article to the traditional print media, and use of the site doubled in a month. For example, Webmaster Magazine listed the USGS site as one of the 50 most significant Internet sites.
Water-Quality Information and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council
Robert Perciasepe, USEPA
The year 1997 is the 25th anniversary of the Clean Water Act and reauthorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act. To implement these laws we need the best available information for several
purposes including:
Today, ACWI is meeting to establish the National Water Quality Monitoring Council. No one agency has all the information it requires; we need to pool our knowledge through partnerships. The USEPA strongly supports the metamorphosis of the ITFM into the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (National Council) because it is a successful partnership. The ITFM has been one of the most successful joint activities Mr. Perciasepi has seen. The ITFM produced--and its members are implementing-- nationwide water monitoring strategy, tools to implement the strategy, and pilots to test it. The proposed co-chairs of the National Council are John Klein (Associate Regional Hydrologist, Western Region, USGS Water Resources Division) and Elizabeth Fellows (Chief of the Monitoring Branch in USEPA's Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds).
It is time to put the ITFM partners together at the same table with other public and private interests to create an even more effective partnership to continue to implement the nationwide water-quality monitoring strategy. The additional interests participated in an associated, but separate, advisory forum. There are four good reasons to create a permanent National Council:
The best proof that ITFM was a success is the fact that the members actually signed their names to the strategy, and invited others to help implement it. Mr. Perciasepi urged ACWI to recommend establishing the National Water Quality Monitoring Council.
Finally, he highlighted two important water information activities USEPA has led while working with partners in ITFM. The ITFM partnership has been important in making them happen, and the National Council can help take them to the next step.
First, is the Index of Watershed Indicators (IWI). In June 1996, the USEPA, in concert with ITFM and others, published the first national water indicators report. In July began the effort to bring the indicators to the watershed level through the IWI. (The IWI was formerly named the National Watershed Assessment Project.) The IWI will depict the health of the 2111 watersheds in the continental United States (Alaska and Hawaii will come in Phase 2). For each watershed, IWI will also show background information and other information about specific indicators. The IWI was possible because of the close partnerships with ITFM and its members. The first draft of IWI went out for review in January 1997; the second draft went out. Mr. Perciasepi indcated that USEPA expects to make it available to the public in early fall.
Second is the Web program, "Surf Your Watershed (Surf)," that:
The ITFM partners worked closely together to make Surf a multiagency partnership opportunity. The USEPA provided the ACWI an opportunity to see the Surf in the demonstration area. Much of the data in both IWI and Surf is from ACWI agencies and organizations. Partnerships for sharing water information are critical to USEPA and to the country. Mr. Perciasepi looks forward to working closely with ACWI on the new National Water Quality Monitoring Council to improve the information that everyone needs.
Universities Council on Water Resources. (Duane Baumann) The Universities Council on Water Resources (UCWR) is a consortium of 98 Universities involved in research and education
on water issues. They try to select prominent issues, and communicate them to professionals, mainly biologists, physical scientists, and social scientists. He emphasized that there is a real cost in delay of disseminating water information. Prompt transmittal of the right information is critical. Some of the questions that ACWI should concentrate on answering are:
Groundwater Protection Council. (Rodney DeHan)
The water-resources community must get rid of some
"Sacred Cows":
He made several points as follows:
Electric Power Research Institute. (Robert Brocksen) The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is the research organization of the electric power industry, and is totally separate from the industry's lobbying organization. They are about to celebrate our twenty-fifth anniversary. The EPRI has a budget of more than half a billion dollars, of which $40-50 thousand is spent on water. For several years EPRI been looking for a vehicle through which to share the information that they generate. As an industry, they are interested in all aspects of water quality. This has been recognized, and the industry has made tremendous strides in cleaning up its act. The EPRI urges ACWI to consider international boundary issues in all of its deliberations. Factors that affect water quality and quantity cross the boundaries with Canada and Mexico. The EPRI also recommends that ACWI maximize its resources through cooperation with many organizations, public and private, that have an interest in water issues. The EPRI, for example, has many joint projects with federal agencies, including USEPA, USGS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and others.
National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement. (William Gillespie) The National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement (NCASI) is the research arm of the forest products industry, and it is separate from the industry's lobbying efforts. The NCASI's purpose in joining ACWI is to help ensure that water information is accurate, representative, and readily available. They are interested in making their information available to the larger community in a form that is usable and understandable.
American Society of Civil Engineers. (Steven L. Johnson) The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) represents 120,000 civil engineers, of whom 50 percent are in private practice, and the other 50 percent are in research, academia, and government. In fact, quite a number of ASCE members are employees of the agencies represented on ACWI. For a long time the ASCE has supported a strong, consistent stream gaging program, for both water quality and water quantity. Engineers need these data for flood control, flood hazard mapping, NPDES permitting, water supply, bridge and highway design, pollution control, ground-water supply, and more purposes. The ASCE members occasionally get a newsletter from their headquarters asking them to write Congress in support of funding for these studies. The ASCE welcomes the opportunity to be a member of ACWI and looks forward to helping in any way they can.
Association of State Drinking Water Administrators. (Vanessa Leiby) The Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA) represents 56 state drinking water administrators across the country, who are responsible for implementing the Safe Drinking Water Act. There are 186,000 water systems from which the States gather data. Systems currently monitor for 84 contaminants including inorganic compounds, organic compounds, and radiochemical element or compounds. Because the data are used for compliance purposes, data quality is a major concern. Ms. Leiby believes Drinking Water is the only environmental program that actually has a laboratory certification program to ensure data quality.
A lot of data resides in the States and is not readily available at the national level. Sharing this data is a major concern. The difficulty is that each State has a different kind of data base. Historically, ASDWA has had a narrow focus on finished water quality, so they haven't been as concerned about ambient water quality. With the recent reauthorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act, ASDWA members will be moving into the monitoring of source waters within a very short period of time. The USEPA has been mandated to develop a data base. Because of the mandates that the Act places on public water supply systems, and the lack of time and resources to meet the requirements, ASDWA members are searching for a variety of Federal, State and local partnerships to help obtain the information.
Association of State Flood Plain Managers. (David Carlton) The Association of State Flood Plain Managers (ASFPM) is an organization of flood-plain and surface-water managers, so they have a lot of members who are interested in water-quality as well as water quantity. They are very interested in monitoring to predict where flooding will occur and how extensive it will be. For example, flood-plain managers need to know not just that the Red River will reach 54 feet, but what that level will mean to the people who live there. They need good long term information, so that they can determine impacts. Flood plain managers are interested in everything from global climate change to flood-plain filling. They want to make the best use of resources and to prevent disasters from occurring.
American Association of State Geologists. (Emery Cleaves) From the State perspective, Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) needs to bring together two issues--stream gaging and ITFM. Mr. Cleaves said that he did not know whether Bob Hirsch would say that the stream gaging network is in crisis, but from a State perspective in Maryland, it is becoming an "endangered species". The funding base is slowly shrinking, and this is true in a number of other States, as well. Maryland has been a federal-state cooperator in stream gaging at least since the 1940's. Those who know about it actively support the stream gaging network, but there is a general lack of knowledge about what it is, what it does, and how it is supported.
Wearing his ITFM hat, Mr. Cleaves reported that Maryland has formed a State Water Monitorin Council, now in its second full year of operation. As the stream-gaging problem developed, he charged the Maryland planning committee to look at the series of networks the State has, their status, and how to address related concerns. This Maryland committee will be holding a workshop this fall to bring together people who are using water information from stream gages and those who need to be aware of how they get their information. There are many network objectives that have to be kept in mind. The data are used for estimating trends and condition, monitoring hazards, regulatory purposes, and (a growing concern in Maryland) ecosystem management. Mr. Cleaves said that as the information sources slowly dry up because support for the network is slowly declining, Maryland will reach a point where the needed information just isn't there. Maryland is trying to deal with this problem, and Mr. Cleaves encouraged ACWI representatives to talk to their constituencies about stream gaging. They need to know not only the need for the information, but also the need for financial support through state networks or cooperative programs with USGS.
Sierra Club. (Brett Hulsey) In many ways, members of the Sierra Club are users of water information. Sierra Club has been doing a lot of work on flooding and fish advisories, and Mr. Hulsey has been surfing a number of the Web pages described earlier in the meeting. Mr. Hulsey was amazed at how easily Mr. Lanfear found information on the Web. He still can't find it.
The Sierra Club Great Lakes Program, has four objectives:
Mr. Hulsey uses the USEPA data bases and converts the information into language that lay people can understand. For example, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) advises that if a person eats one wall- eye per week out of the lower Fox River, he/she has a 1 in 100 lifetime cancer risk. Of course, there are subsistence fishermen who eat much more that one wall-eye per week. They also eat carp and buffalo and many other kinds of fish, so they have a much higher cancer risk. Wisconsin is going to celebrate Mother's Day with a campaign called, "Protect your Kids, Release Your Catch," warning 800,000 anglers that they should release all fish caught in polluted waters. The Sierra Club believes that a person should be able to log onto the USEPA data base and get fish-warning information instantaneously. The U.S. Public Health Service information indicates that fish advisories are not getting out to the public. The Sierra Club wants to see much broader dissemination. They think that the polluters should pay to get the information out on television because the problem is becoming a public-health crisis.
Based on the material presented, Mr. Hulsey said that ACWI may not meet for another year. He said that each year, 125 people will die and $8 billion in property will be lost. Thousands of beaches will be closed. The USEPA and Great Lakes estimates that 38,000 lifetime cancers will be caused by PCBs in fish we eat, and 900 people will die of cryptosporidium and other parasites in drinking water. Mr. Hulsey recommended that ACWI be kept on the fast track.
Also, he said that tremendous strides have been made in water pollution. Great lakes pollution is down 90 percent, according to data on lake trout from Lake Michigan, although they are still 189 times too polluted to eat. We have come a long way, but we have far to go. Finally, he invited other representatives to Sierra Club's birthday party for the Clean Water Act on October 18 in Cleveland on the banks of the Cuyahoga River. It is called, "Come blow out the candles, not the river."
National League of Cities. (Vickie Perea) Ms. Perea is an elected official representing the 15,000 cities and towns in National League of Cities (NLC). She gave an example of why it is so important to have partnerships, and she said ACWI needs elected officials at its meetings to be informed of the work others are doing. Albuquerque, New Mexico, is a good example of partnerships to protect the water supply. The City is partnering with USGS to do the investigative reports on a city initiative. Albuquerque supplied $530,000 and USGS contributed $130,000 to fund a study in the Middle Rio Grande. As a result, Albuquerque is changing their philosophy about water supply. They have been depending on an aquifer, but now they are looking into using surface water, for which they obtained rights in the 1960s, but have never used. As a result of this study, citizens are taxing themselves $180 million to build a treatment plant to use the water they bought back in the 1960s. Is partnership important? Absolutely. Is education important? Absolutely. Do you need an elected official at the table to learn about what others have to offer and what needs to be done? Absolutely. Ms. Perea reported that she hears a lot about State and Federal cooperation, but not enough about local government involvement.
River Watch Network. (John Byrne) The River Watch Network (RWN) works with the citizen and student volunteer monitoring community that has grown up over the last 10 or 15 years. The RWN hopes that through the ACWI and through the National Water Quality Monitoring Council, two needs and two issues can be addressed. As RWN works to provide technical and organizational assistance to local groups, they see a large array of monitoring methods and approaches being used. It is chaotic, and there is a need for a better framework. Although it may not be possible to corral everyone into a common protocol, if ACWI can provide a framework for volunteer monitors (so they can describe what they are doing and the quality of data they are producing), then those data will be more useful. What the volunteer groups are doing is invaluable at the local level. People who live in local watersheds are developing basic scientific literacy. For example, when Mr. Byrne goes into communities, he sees information about bacterial levels in swimming holes. The data are published in the local paper and discussed in the checkout line at the grocery store. He hopes ACWI can accelerate that awareness process.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. (Richard Van Klaveren) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has a number of different water-information concerns. They are concerned about headwater areas of some streams and possible overgrazing, how runoff changes watersheds, and about sedimentation downstream. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is taking a new look at local land conservation. They are trying to get local communities and soil and water conservation districts to set priorities within local watersheds. It is very important to give them water information that is related to their local needs. The NRCS has a National Water and Climate Center. The NRCS uses water information on snowpack to predict seasonal stream runoff volume in the Western States. Now a lot of communities are using the Center's information, as well. The NRCS is using water information to suggest operational strategies in reservoirs. The Chief, NRCS, emphasizes looking at watersheds from a holistic perspective. The NRCS wants to get locally led conservation districts involved. In the past, a lot of NRCS's watershed efforts dealt with the operation of individual reservoirs. Today, NRCS is considering rehabilitation efforts within watersheds. They are evaluating existing structures and considering how the structures affect the watersheds.
Chairperson Schaefer led a brainstorming session on goal setting. The ACWI identified the following items during the brainstorming session:
After the brainstorming session, representatives considered the long list of issues the ACWI
could tackle and recognized that their future work on identified issues needs to be better
organized and focused. Significant discussion ensued about the best way to organize and focus
future work. The resulting consensus was that ACWI should begin by considering two major
topics related to water information--water quality and water quantity. Representatives
recognized that the two topics are interrelated and generally felt that two groups subordinate to
ACWI should develop ideas and suggestions about these two topics for the next ACWI meeting.
Within each of the two topics, the chairperson and representatives identified four "cluster" issues
that over-arch the brainstorming results. The four clusters are as follows:
Funding, policy, and technology issues cross-cut these clusters.
A discussion about the frequency of meetings reached no firm conclusion, but the group decided to hold the next meeting in 6 months.
To facilitate ACWI communications Lorna Kendrix, USGS, proposed a method of, communication for the members of the ACWI using electronic mail (email). Mailing lists would allow everyone to send email to all members of ACWI who have access to email. Periodically, Ms. Kendrix and staff would collect these communications into a Web page that everyone could access, to read summaries (slightly edited) of all comments. Hard copies would be made for those without email access. Some members expressed misgivings because they get so much email already that they can't read it. No agreement resulted.
National Water Quality Monitoring Council
Robert Wayland, USEPA
Mr. Wayland introduced this discussion with an analysis of the ITFM's "Strategy for Improving
Water Quality Monitoring in the United States." This ITFM product is available on the Web at
http://water.usgs.gov/wicp/itfm.html . Below is a summary of his remarks and ACWI's
action.
A relatively rare thing happened to the ITFM Strategy report--all the task force members signed it. Signing represents a real commitment on the part of these 20 individuals to a partnership for improving water quality monitoring and to the subsequent use of these data to make informed decisions.
The ITFM was a federal-state body, with an advisory committee to represent other players. The major change that is needed now is to bring other stakeholders to the same table with the Federal and State representatives. The primary objective is to make sure there is ongoing dialog in order to continue the momentum that has been established and to implement the recommendations. The dialog needs to include a wide variety of people who are collecting data or are making decisions at the local government level, the plant or facility level, or the state level. The proposal would continue the present level of 10 federal and 10 state members, but would augment the group with 15 additional members from a variety of other interest areas or sectors. The 15 additional representatives would have four-year terms. The USEPA Assistant Administrator for Water and the Director, USGS, would appoint 11 of the 15 members. The Council co-chairs would appoint the other four to ensure a balanced representation of interests and expertise. The members of ACWI and others would nominate organizations for consideration as members of the Council. Individuals are free to volunteer or to recommend others from their organizations to serve on the Council.
Members of ITFM have not been waiting idly for the Council to be established. They have continued to work on specific efforts and have established an agenda in anticipation of an initial meeting in the fall. That agenda includes:
Therefore, the members of the ITFM request that the ACWI endorse the National Council that ITFM has been naturally evolving toward. The National Water Quality Monitoring Council was supported by unanimous vote of the ACWI. For the next meeting, ACWI asked the National Council to prepare a paper describing its workplan and progress in carrying out the workplan.
Ad Hoc Work Group on Stream Gaging and Water Quantity
After intensive discussion, the ACWI decided to establish an ad hoc workgroup to develop recommendations on stream gaging and on more comprehensive water-quantity issues. This decision to address water-quantity issues more comprehensively was based on some representatives' strong statements that ground water must be considered along with surface water as an integrated system. Also, the ACWI representatives identified the need to consider water-use aspects of water quantity.
The ACWI asked the ad hoc group to draft recommendations for deliberation at the next ACWI meeting. Tom Yorke, USGS, and Tom Stiles, ICWP, will be co-chairs for the ad hoc group. The following organizations offered to serve on the ad hoc group:
Several members expressed concern that water quality and water quantity are not separable issues. There was general agreement that the ad hoc group and National Water Quality Council would work closely together to make the necessary connections. Both subgroups were asked tO concentrate their work on data needs and decision support systems including Web connections.
Public Comments
Mr. Hirsch invited comments from the public. There were none.
Next Meeting and Closing Remarks
Alternate Chairperson Robert Hirsch suggested that the next meeting of ACWI be held in about six months. No decision was reached on location, although Mr. Hirsch observed that because the ACWI met in the Washington, D.C., area, a number of senior administration officials were able to attend the meeting. Also, he expressed interest in meeting with local watershed interests. Mr. Cleaves suggested alternating meetings in Washington with meetings held elsewhere. Ms. Fellows noted the upcoming ITFM Conference on Water Quality Monitoring is scheduled in June 1998. Mr. Hirsch thanked everyone for attending and adjourned the meeting at 4:25 p.m.
Where ever possible we have provided a live link to documents that were previously referenced as attachments to these minutes. If you require a printed copy of these minutes to receive the remaining attachments write to:
Limited numbers of copies are available at no cost.
ATTACHMENT 1 - AGENDA
ATTACHMENT 2 - REPRESENTATIVES AND SPEAKERS
ATTACHMENT 3 - ACWI CHARTER
Linked to ACWI Charter.
ATTACHMENT 4 - FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT
Linked to FACA home page.
ATTACHMENT 5 - OMB MEMORANDUM NO. 92-01 AND HISTORY OF ACWI
Linked to OMB Memorandum No. 92-01 and the ACWI History page.
ATTACHMENT 6 - YEAR 2001 REPORT CARD ON ECOSYSTEM HEALTH
ATTACHMENT 7 - INTERSTATE COUNCIL ON WATER POLICY
POSITION ON THE NATIONAL STREAM GAGING NETWORK
ATTACHMENT 8 - WATER INFORMATION ON THE WEB
Linked to the Water Information home page.
ATTACHMENT 9 - TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE
NATIONAL WATER-QUALITY MONITORING COUNCIL
Linked to the Council home page.
| WATER | WICP |
This page is maintained by cilewis@usgs.gov http://water.usgs.gov/wicp/may97_Minutes.html 14:41:14 Fri 24Sep 1999 | |