Difference between revisions of "Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG)"

Committees Official Designation. Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group (AMWG).

Authority. The Grand Canyon Protection Act (Act) of October 30, 1992. Public Law 102-575; Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. Appendix 2.

Objectives and Scope of Activities. The Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program (AMP) provides for monitoring the results of the operating criteria and plans adopted by the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), and for research and studies to suggest appropriate changes to those plans and operating criteria.

The AMP includes the AMWG. The AMWG provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary relative to the operation of Glen Canyon Dan, the Secretary's Designee is the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science who serves as the Chair. The AMWG recommends suitable monitoring and research programs and makes recommendations to the Secretary. The AMWG may recommend research and monitoring proposals outside the Act which complement the AMP process, but such proposals will be funded separately, and shall not deter from the focus of the Act.

Under Section 1802(a) of the Act, "[t]he Secretary shall operate Glen Canyon Dam in accordance with the additional criteria and operating plans specified in Section 1804 [of the Act] and exercise other authorities under existing law in such a manner as to protect, mitigate adverse impacts to, and improve the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were establish, including but not limited to, natural and cultural resources and visitor use." Under Section 1 802(b) of the Act, [t]he Secretary shall implement this section of the Act in a manner fully consistent with and subject to the Colorado River Compact, the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, the Water Treaty of 1944 with Mexico, the decree of the Supreme Court in Arizona v. California, and the provisions of the Colorado River Storage Project Act of 1956 and the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968 that govern allocation, appropriation, development, and exportation of the waters of the Colorado River basin.”

Description of Duties. The duties or roles and functions of the AMWG are in an advisory capacity only. They are to:

• Establish AMWG operating procedures.
• Advise the Secretary in meeting environmental and cultural commitments including those contained in the Record of Decision for the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experiment and Management Plan Final Environmental Impact Statement and subsequent related decisions.
• Recommend the framework for the AMP policy, goals, and direction.
• Recommend resource management objectives for development and implementation of a long-term monitoring plan and any necessary research and studies required to determine the effect of the operation of Glen Canyon Dam on the values for which Grand Canyon National Park and Glen Canyon National Recreation Area were established, including but not limited to, natural and cultural resources and visitor use.
• Review and provide input on the report identified in the Act to the Secretary, the Congress, and the Governors of the Colorado River Basin States. This annual report includes discussion on dam operations, the operation of the AMP, status of resources, and measures taken to protect, mitigate, and improve the resources defined in the Act.
• Annually review long-term monitoring data to provide advice on the status of resources and whether the AMP goals and objectives are being met.
• Review and provide input on all AMP activities undertaken to comply with applicable laws, including permitting requirements.

Agency or Official to Whom the Committee Reports. The AMWG reports to the Secretary through the Secretary’s Designee.

Support. The logistical and support services for the meetings of the AMWG will be provided by the Bureau of Reclamation.

Estimated Annual Operating Costs and Staff Years. The estimated annual operating costs associated with supporting the AMWG's functions are $400,000 including all direct and indirect expenses. It is estimated that four FTE’s will be required to support the AMWG.

Designated Federal Officer. The DFO is the Bureau of Reclamation, Upper Colorado Region, Regional Director who is a full-time Federal employee appointed in accordance with Agency Procedures. The DFO or alternate will approve or call all AMWG and subcommittee meetings, prepare and approve all meeting agendas, attend all AMWG and subcommittee meetings, adjourn any meetings when the DFO determines adjournment to be in the public interest and chair meetings when directed to do so by the Secretary.

Estimated Number and Frequency of Meetings. The AMWG is expected to meet approximately twice a year, and at such other times as designated by the DFO.

Duration. Continuing

Termination. The AMWG will terminate 2 years from the date the charter is filed, unless prior to that date, it is renewed in accordance with the provisions of Section 14 of the FACA. The AMWG will not meet or take any action without a valid current charter.

Membership and Designation. Members and alternate members of the AMWG appointed by the Secretary will be comprised of but not limited to the following:
Secretary’s Designee, who will serve as Chairperson for the AMWG.
One representative each from the following entities:

• The Secretary of Energy (Western Area Power Administration)
• Arizona Game and Fish Department
• Hopi Tribe
• Hualapai Tribe
• Navajo Nation
• San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
• Southern Paiute Consortium
• Pueblo of Zuni

One representative each from the Governors from the seven basin States:

• Arizona
• California
• Colorado
• Nevada
• New Mexico
• Utah
• Wyoming

Representatives each from the general public as follows:

• Two from environmental organizations
• Two from the recreation industry
• Two from contractors who purchase Federal power from Glen Canyon Powerplant

One representative from each of the following DOI agencies as ex-officio non-voting members:

• Bureau of Reclamation
• Bureau of Indian Affairs
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
• National Park Service

Members will be appointed to the AMWG by the Secretary, with input and recommendations from the above-referenced agencies, States, tribes, contractors for Federal power from Glen Canyon Dam, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders. Each member may also recommend an alternate member for appointment by the Secretary. Members and alternates of the AMWG will be appointed for a 3-year term.

Members of the AMWG serve without compensation, except that the DFO, in his or her sole discretion, may choose to allow compensation for the Technical Work Group subcommittee Chairperson according to applicable authorities. While away from their homes or regular places of business, members engaged in AMWG or subcommittee business approved by the DFO may be allowed travel expenses including per diem in lieu of subsistence in the same manner as persons employed intermittently in Government Service under Section 5703 of Title 5 of the United States Code.

A vacancy on the AMWG will be filled in the same manner in which the original appointment was made.

Ethics Responsibility. No AMWG member, alternate member, or subcommittee member will participate in any specific party matter including a lease, license, permit, contract, claim, agreement, or related litigation with the Department in which the member has a direct financial interest.

Subcommittees. Subject to the DFO’s approval, subcommittees may be formed for the purpose of compiling information or conducting research. However, such subcommittees must act only under the direction of the DFO and must report their recommendations to the full AMWG for consideration. Subcommittees must not provide advice or work products directly to the Agency. Subcommittees will meet as necessary to accomplish their assignments, subject to the approval of the DFO and the availability of resources.

Recordkeeping. The records of the AMWG, and formally and informally established subcommittees of the AMWG, shall be handled in accordance with General Records Schedule 6.2 or other approved Agency records disposition schedule. These records shall be available for public inspection and copying, subject to the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552.

• Reclamation AMWG page
• Roles Ad-Hoc Group (RAHG)

• AMWG Charter (2017)
• AMWG Operating Procedures (2016)
• AMWG Charter (2015)
• AMWG Operating Procedures (2011)
• Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group Charter (2010)

2009

• Motions and Votes from the last AMWG Meeting (August 12-13, 2009)
• Letter from the Seven Colorado River Basin States Representatives to the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group dated 2/23/09, Subj: Decision Making Process Associated with the Glen Canyon Dam Operations and GCAMP

AMWG role, authority, and relationships

The AMWG Charter makes it clear that AMWG’s role is to make formal recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior: The committee will provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior. (Kempthorne, 2008, p. 1). The duties or roles and functions of the AMWG are in an advisory capacity only (Kempthorne, 2008, p. 2). The Charter and AMWG and TWG Operating Procedures have been established to accomplish this role. The AMWG must follow the role established by the Charter, making formal recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior using the processes described in the Operating Procedures.

Collaboration

According to Yaffee and Wondolleck (2000), collaboration leads to better decisions that are more likely to be implemented and better prepares agencies and stakeholders for future challenges. By building interpersonal and inter-organizational linkages, managers are better informed and their choices about future direction are more likely to solve the problem at hand. Programs are more likely to be implemented successfully if they are supported by stakeholders. Collaborative approaches have also been adopted as a means of building trust and ending policy, institutional, scientific, and legal impasses.

Beginning in FY09, hold regular (annual or biennial) workshops/retreats to build trust among AMP participants and to address internal operations, roles, and effectiveness. At the AMP’s first retreat in 2004, the attendees defined the internal issues that they most wanted to address: clarification of roles, responsibilities, and interactions among the various parts of the AMP (AMWG, TWG, GCMRC, and Science Advisors). The FY09 retreat or workshop should continue the improvement of internal operations by focusing on the issues that resonate the most with the attendees. These may include some or all of the following topics:

Ensure that all parties clearly understand the interests of every other party. If collaboration involves making sure that every party’s interests are served, then everyone involved must understand the other parties’ interests.

Discuss whether there is a balanced range of interests willing and able to participate, and if not, how to ensure it. For a collaborative process to be perceived as legitimate, it must involve a balanced range of participants with diverse perspectives. Some AMWG members are able to (or choose to) participate more actively than others do. Are there impediments to active participation that could be addressed? In addition, some stakeholders feel disenfranchised

Establish a full time Executive Coordinator/Manager for the Program. A program as technically, politically, and structurally complex as the AMP needs a lot of focused attention to be successful. A full time Executive Coordinator/Manager is needed to lead the Program, facilitate timely resolution of differences among parties, and ensure that those operating protocols are fairly and consistently enforced at all levels of the Program. An Executive Coordinator/Manager would also relieve the Secretary’s Designee of the burden for day-to-day management of the AMP. Several models exist for this type of position that could be evaluated to determine what would best meet the needs of the AMP and the Department of the Interior. In addition, the specific duties and authorities of the position would need to be carefully defined.

Utilize facilitation and mediation expertise more broadly throughout the AMP. Sophisticated process design, facilitation, and mediation expertise is needed for a collaborative process to effectively address complex controversial issues involving the many diverse interests represented on the AMP and that have a long history of conflict. Currently the AMWG utilizes a professional facilitator for all of its meetings; a professional facilitator should be similarly utilized for TWG meetings.

The Secretary’s Designee will emphasize the development of consensus for motions proposed by AMWG members. A consensus decision means that the interests of all the members of the AMWG were taken into account. If consensus is emphasized, it will encourage AMWG members to look for ways to address all those interests. To put this into effect, the Secretary’s Designee will ask parties that disagree on a motion to resolve their differences before or during the meeting. In addition, all action items will be scheduled for the first day of the meeting, allowing time for stakeholders to resolve any remaining differences either over lunch or between the first and second days of the meeting. (Alternatively, longer meetings could be scheduled to allow much of this negotiation and discussion to occur during the meeting instead of before.)

Develop a process for evaluating tradeoffs among conflicting or competing goals. One of the biggest challenges of the AMP is to synthesize the large amounts of scientific and other technical information to evaluate the tradeoffs of alternative courses of action. Adequate time is needed to allow stakeholders to understand, discuss, and/or rank options. In addition, over the past decade,

AMWG distinction from TWG

The goal is to have TWG thoroughly discuss technical and scientific aspects of issues that will come before AMWG. The AMWG should not duplicate the work of the TWG, but rely on their efforts and technical expertise.

As a rule, technical reviews and deliberation will occur at the TWG meetings. As described in Issue 11, this will involve an evaluation of the technical pros and cons of reasonable options. This technical analysis will help AMWG understand the basis for the TWG recommendations and will serve as companion information to the AMWG evaluation of policy implications.

For each AMWG agenda item for which there is a TWG recommendation, the TWG chair or designee will present a summary of the TWG’s work and its recommendation before discussion or action by AMWG.

AMWG members should be adequately briefed by their TWG members before each AMWG meeting as described in Issue #17. This will allow AMWG to rely on the TWG for technical reviews and recommendations, and focus on policy options and tradeoffs as recommendations are evaluated.

Acting on TWG recommendations

The AMWG will discuss and consider all TWG recommendations.

Planning and scheduling work

A 1-year schedule will be developed for AMWG and TWG by the chairs of each group, which clearly shows all essential regular items that need to be addressed every year, plus other items that have been added by AMWG. This schedule will include the original timeframe for the tasks plus the status of each task.

Final approval of annual plans of work and meeting schedules for the AMWG, TWG, and SAs will be developed and incorporated into the AMP Biennial Work Plan (BWP), which traditionally has only contained the GCMRC Annual Plan of Work. Reclamation will have the responsibility to develop and update a composite annual meeting schedule and summary table of annual plans of work for all AMP entities. AMWG will approve the programs and schedule in its summer meeting.

Assignments to TWG and requests to GCMRC

The GCMRC Chief and TWG Chair will attend all AMWG meetings with a clear understanding of their workload and deadlines so they can respond during discussions to AMWG requests. The AMWG will focus on providing clear recommendations to DOI. As the AMWG considers recommendations or requests to the TWG or GCMRC, the TWG Chair and GCMRC Chief will review any actions that involve them to ensure the action and timeframe is clear. If possible, the GCMRC Chief and TWG Chair will determine at the meeting the feasibility of addressing the AMWG’s request. Recommendations that are not addressed directly at the meeting will be reviewed by the TWG Chair and GCMRC Chief and responded to after the meeting. Conflicts in workload that cannot be resolved by the GCMRC or the TWG within current budgeting or staffing will be reported to the Secretary’s Designee who will determine how best to respond to the AMWG request.

AMWG authority over agencies

The AMWG has no authority over any individual AMP member, including GCMRC.

The Secretary of the Interior established the AMP with four key elements: AMWG, TWG, GCMRC, and the IRP (Independent Review Panel). The four have distinct roles, but ultimately the Secretary of the Interior is responsible for seeing that the monitoring and necessary research is done to evaluate the impacts of adjustments made to dam operations. . . . The AMWG can recommend [emphasis in original] studies and priorities for implementing individual studies during those reviews, preferably by consensus. However, final decisions as to the management of Interior facilities and resources, what studies to implement, when, and using funds from which sources remain, by statute, with the Secretary of the Interior and the appropriate Interior agencies. (Loveless, 2000, p. 6).

The Congress finds and declares that the function of advisory committees should be advisory only, and that all matters under their consideration should be determined, in accordance with law, by the official, agency, or officer involved. (Federal Advisory Committee Act, 1972, Section 2(b)). AMWG does have authority to charge subcommittees or work groups, such as the TWG, with assignments.

The AMWG may have workgroups or subgroups that the Committee and the Secretary’s Designee deems [sic] necessary for the purpose of compiling information or conducting research. (Kempthorne, 2008, p. 4).

Individual comments, although appreciated and sometimes requested, are advisory only and do not constitute direction to GCMRC or TWG. No formal direction is given to TWG without consensus or a vote by AMWG. No formal direction is given to GCMRC without consensus or a vote by AMWG, and approval of such by the Secretary’s Designee.

Free-flowing discussion and interaction are important to the program, and informal, individual feedback to GCMRC is welcome, particularly when requested. However, GCMRC decides, as an agent of the Secretary of the Interior responsible for the AMP science program, what input to incorporate into its program, unless and until the input is an AMWG recommendation that has been accepted by the Secretary of the Interior.

This means that in order for AMWG to give direction to GCMRC, it must make a recommendation to the Secretary. See Issue # 10 for a new process for these recommendations.

Note that when TWG is given an assignment from AMWG, the GCMRC would also usually be involved. In these cases, an AMWG recommendation to the Secretary may be required to obtain GCMRC involvement. Actions by AMWG such as an assignment to TWG that would not include GCMRC involvement, or establishment of an Ad Hoc Group, would not need a recommendation to the Secretary.

AMWG decision making

The AMWG operating procedures require attempting consensus before going to a vote. After a motion is made and seconded, AMWG members will modify the motion as needed through discussion in order to attain consensus.

The Secretary’s Designee will eventually test if consensus has been attained by asking the group if there is any objection to consensus on the motion. If there is none, the motion will be recorded as adopted by consensus. If there is an objection to consensus, the Secretary’s Designee will either ask that the group continue to attempt to attain consensus, or will call for a vote. The vote will be by roll call.

According to Robert’s Rules of Order, a member who abstains has chosen not to vote, and abstentions do not affect the outcome of the vote (except that they reduce the number of persons voting on that particular motion, which reduces the number of votes needed to reach the 2/3 supermajority). Thus, abstentions do not block consensus recommendations, and if a roll call vote is taken and everyone who voted cast an affirmative vote, the vote will be considered unanimous even if there were abstentions.

Conflicts of interest

While it would be preferable that stakeholder groups have no financial interest in TWG or AMWG recommendations, in a practical sense this is impossible. To comply with Federal procurement regulations, the following approach will be used:

• AMWG will provide Federal agencies with broad program advice and recommendations through the organized FACA process.
• After program and budget approval by the Secretary of the Interior, GCMRC or Reclamation will issue requests for proposals (RFPs) to solicit specific monitoring and research proposals to meet program needs. However, in some cases, limited competition and sole-source contracts may be used. (See Issue #22 for more detail.)
• GCMRC will fund proposals based on an independent peer review and comment process. The Department of the Interior has recently promulgated new ethics guidelines for FACA committees, and the Charter and Operating Protocols have been modified to reflect these guidelines. In general, these guidelines state the AMWG, TWG, or subcommittee members are prohibited in participating in specific matters in which the individual member has a direct financial interest.

Measures of success

To clarify progress in meeting its responsibilities, the AMP will define measures of success. Adaptive Management: The U.S. Department of Interior Technical Guide (Williams, et al., 2007) suggests using the following four criteria for measuring success in an adaptive management program: A. Stakeholders are actively involved and committed to the process. B. Progress is made toward achieving management objectives. C. Results from monitoring and assessment are used to adjust and improve management decisions. D. Implementation is consistent with applicable laws.

In order to measure whether progress is being made toward achieving management objectives (B above), the AMWG will recommend to the Secretary targets (desired future conditions) for the management objectives in the AMP strategic plan. These targets, needed to guide and focus science and management activities as well as to measure success in the program, will be incorporated into the AMWG strategic plan.