GCDAMP BAHG Page

The Budget Ad Hoc Group Page Originally established November 12, 2003. Re-established June 22, 2009. Status Active Latest Charge The Budget Ad Hoc Group (BAHG) will work with the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) to develop an annual budget recommendation for TWG consideration. This is to include an initial budget recommendation during the spring TWG meeting and a final recommendation during the summer TWG meeting.

Background Information	Budget Page	USBR Link to TWG Ad-Hocs and Membership

Group Members Chair: Craig Ellsworth Members: Jan Balsom, Cliff Barrett, Richard Begay, Charley Bulletts, Peter Bungart, Rob Billerbeck, Shane Capron, Winkie Crook, Kurt Dongoske, Craig Ellsworth, Michelle Garrison, Paul Harms, Brian Healy, Ken Hyde, Leslie James, John Jordan, Vineetha Kartha, Jakob Maase, Ryan Mann, Jessica Neuwerth, Theresa Pasqual, Craig McGinnis, Bill Persons, Ben Reeder, Peggy Roefer, Seth Shanahan, Larry Stevens, Jim Strogen, Steve Wolff, Kirk Young. Invited technical advisors: Helen Fairley, Mike Moran, Clayton Palmer, Dave Rogowski, Scott Vanderkooi. Upcoming Meetings Hello, BAHGers! Here is your call-in number for all the BAHG calls listed below: 1-877-932-7704 Passcode: 8410783# Budget Process Timeline [1] 2019 (Planning for Fiscal Year 3 = 2020) January: Annual reporting meeting and information synthesis (2 days) followed by 1-day TWG meeting to review initial results and findings of TWP. Potential TWP changes may be identified. February: BAHG/agencies/tribes meetings to consider mid-work plan adjustments to TWP, February through March. March: April: Consider mid-work plan adjustments at TWG meeting. BAHG and TWG considers potential changes to the Fiscal Year 3 TWP based on criteria in section 2.7. May: June: TWG considers and recommends mid-work plan adjustments to TWP and a recommendation for Fiscal Year 3 budget. July: August: AMWG meets and considers mid-work plan adjustments to TWP recommended by TWG and recommends Fiscal Year 3 budget to the SOI. September: October: Fiscal Year 3 begins under the TWP guidance. November: Consumer Price Index becomes available. Science and management meeting with DOI and cooperators. New TWP development meeting within DOI. December: USGS produces GCMRC annual project reports document for prior year work. 2020 (Planning for Fiscal Year 1 = 2021) January: Annual reporting meeting and information synthesis (2 days) followed by 1-day TWG meeting to review budget and provide initial guidance to GCMRC and Reclamation. TWG reviews progress in addressing Information Needs and research accomplishments. February: GCMRC meets with tribes and DOI agencies. GCMRC follow-up with BAHG on priorities and areas of emphasis on TWP. GCMRC meets with cooperators to develop projects. AMWG meeting to discuss initial priorities. DOI and Federal family input. March: GCMRC and Reclamation will develop an initial TWP based on DOI priorities and input from scientists, the TWG, and DOI/DOE family. Initial TWP presented to DOI and Secretary’s Designee. April: GCMRC meets with tribes and DOI agencies. April TWG meeting to consider draft TWP, including anticipated funding sources. Unresolved issues or conflicting priorities will be resolved by DOI in consultation with the DOI Family. GCMRC begins development of second draft TWP. May: GCMRC and Reclamation provide a second draft TWP to the BAHG, Science Advisors, DOI agencies, and tribes for their review and comment. GCMRC meets with tribes, BAHG, to get input on TWP. GCMRC develops third draft of TWP. June: GCMRC and Reclamation finish third draft for review. TWG meets to provide input on the draft GCMRC and Reclamation TWP and provide a recommendation to the AMWG. July: GCMRC and Reclamation provide a final draft TWP to the AMWG for their review. August: AMWG meets to provide input on the GCMRC and Reclamation draft TWP and provide a recommendation to the SOI. September: SOI reviews the budget and work plan recommendation from AMWG. October: Fiscal Year 1 begins under the TWP guidance. November: Consumer Price Index becomes available. Science and management meeting with DOI and cooperators. December: Budget is finalized. USGS produces GCMRC annual project reports document for prior year work. 2021 (Planning for Fiscal Year 2 = 2022) January: Annual reporting meeting (1-2 days) followed by 1-day TWG meeting with a primary emphasis on reporting results/findings/scientific advances on previous work plan. February: March: April: BAHG and TWG considers potential changes to the Fiscal Year 2 TWP based on criteria in section 2.7. May: June: TWG recommends Fiscal Year 2 budget of TWP to AMWG. July: August: AMWG recommends Fiscal Year 2 budget of TWP to SOI. September October: Fiscal Year 2 begins under the TWP guidance. November: Science and management meeting with DOI and cooperators. December: GCMRC produces annual project reports document. 2022 (Planning for Fiscal Year 3 = 2023) January: Annual reporting meeting and information synthesis (2 days) followed by 1-day TWG meeting to review initial results and findings of TWP. Potential TWP changes may be identified. February: BAHG/agencies/tribes meetings to consider mid-work plan adjustments to TWP, February through March. March: April: Consider mid-work plan adjustments at TWG meeting. BAHG and TWG considers potential changes to the Fiscal Year 3 TWP based on criteria in section 2.7. May: June: TWG considers and recommends mid-work plan adjustments to TWP and a recommendation for Fiscal Year 3 (2023) budget. July: August: AMWG meets and considers mid-work plan adjustments to TWP recommended by TWG and recommends Fiscal Year 3 budget to the SOI. September: October: Fiscal Year 3 begins under the TWP guidance. November: Consumer Price Index becomes available. Science and management meeting with DOI and cooperators. New TWP development meeting within DOI. December: USGS produces GCMRC annual project reports document for prior year work.

Links GCDAMP Budget Page 2017 Knowledge Assessment (KA) GCDAMP Planning Page DOI Direction GCDAMP and NPS River Trips and Field Activities Documents and Direction GCDAMP Triennial Budget and Workplan Protocol Paper (10-6-2016) Memo from Dr. Petty re: Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Program Guidance (8-14-19) Triennial Budget and Work Plan -- Fiscal Years 2018-2020 Triennial Budget and Work Plan -- Fiscal Years 2021-2023 Long-term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) LTEMP Record of Decision (ROD) LTEMP Biological Opinion (BO) LTEMP Science Plan LTEMP Programmatic Agreement (PA) ADHOC Group Information Needs CRAHG SEAHG Monitoring and Research High Priorities TAHG Information Needs (Appendix C) Current TWP BAHG Meeting Notes Papers and Presentations 2016 Attachment 9a: Triennial Work Plan Budget Process ppt Priorities and Funding of the GCDAMP LTEMP ROD Sec 6.1.b. (page 12): The GCDAMP priorities are set by the GCPA of 1992, the LTEMP FEIS, and ROD, and related mitigation requirements for endangered species and cultural resources. The GCDAMP priorities include the management and experimental actions; mitigation and environmental commitments; and research and monitoring identified in the LTEMP FEIS and ROD, and these will be the highest priorities for GCDAMP over the term of the LTEMP. The GCDAMP activities that are eligible for funding from power revenues are those actions related to dam operations or the mitigation of dam operations within the CRE. These will be funded in compliance with Section 204 of Public Law (PL) 106-377. Appropriated funds or other sources of funding may also be used for GCDAMP activities as specified in Section 1808 of the GCPA and Section 204 of PL 106-377. Program Areas for TWP Based on ROD Resource Categories (see page 6 of the ROD) Archaeological and cultural resources Humpback chub Hydropower and energy Other native fish species Recreational experience Sediment Tribal Resources Rainbow trout fishery Riparian vegetation Water quality and food base (added, part of KA) Invasive fish species (added, part of KA) Natural Processes: Not used (is an evaluation of above resources as related to “natural” benchmarks)