|
TOPICS DISCUSSED:
Welcome and Administration
1. Introductions were made.
2. Lunch Arrangements were made.
3. Approval of Meeting Summary - June 15, 2004 teleconference: final version
distributed at today's meeting includes corrected name spellings. Jim
moved, Gary P. second approval of 6/15/04 meeting summary. Unanimously
approved.
4. Approval of Meeting Summary - July 6, 2004 meeting: Three changes needed:
1) Jim noted - Act 202 should read Act 220; 2) Leroy noted - insert "Understanding
Instream Flow Protection" to replace and correct the title of his
presentation; 3) Curtis noted - pg 2, Key outcomes, USGS tool, sentence
reading "Does not address areas where…" is incorrect; the
tool will address these areas. Strike "does not address areas"
and insert at end "other methods besides regionalization will be
developed". Jim moved, Leroy second approval of 7/6/04 meeting summary
with revisions noted. Unanimously approved.
5. "Guidelines for Subcommittee Activities" - was provided as
approved by Statewide Committee and was briefly reviewed.
6. Public comments - none.
7. Update on Responses Received to Subcommittee's Request to Regional
Committees and river basin commissions for "Locations/Areas of Concern"
- Sue passed out a compilation of responses received to date, plus separate
SRBC response. DRBC response embedded in Greg's presentation and will
be provided later.
8. Member assignment updates:
Preston L. - was asked to research water utility and water consumption
information. He provided handouts of 2 AWWA studies. Although neither
study included PA specifically, these provide useful information on residential
water use patterns and end uses of water from a nationwide perspective.
Preston was also asked to prepare an alternative organization of the DEP
discussion paper on criteria, which will be discussed later in the meeting.
Jim M. - was asked to research agricultural water use projections, and
has made a number of contacts. Not a lot of hard data are available for
future water use projections. Developing such projections is a key component
of Act 220. He has been referred to SRBC and DRBC for possible previous
work on projections and will follow up on this. A meeting is being held
today between DEP and PDA and USDA regarding Act 220 agricultural issues,
and will include discussion on water use projections.
Gary P. - was asked to research power electric generation projections,
and has made contacts including Electric Power Generators Assoc. and will
have a conference call with them next week. He is awaiting feedback on
generation projections.
Gary M. - was asked to research water use projections for the mining
industry. He has contacted the PA Coal Association and PA Aggregate and
Concrete Association and will continue looking into this and report back.
DEP noted that with Act 220, the PA legislature provided funding to SRBC
and DRBC to assist DEP with developing water use projections and these
agencies will be working together on this.
Overview of Ground Water Withdrawal Regulatory Criteria (Cavallo and
Brownell)
Greg Cavallo provided an overview of DRBC's experience in developing and
implementing the GWPA ground water withdrawal regulations and criteria,
focusing on use of the 1 in 25 year baseflow statistic. Greg indicated
that by applying the GWPA criteria and regulations, the Warminster, Upper
Reach Wissahicken, Ironworks Creek subbasins are "stressed"
in GWPA, based on net ground water withdrawals. DRBC will provide a list
of areas that reflects DRBC's response to request for basin-wide "potential
areas of concern" based on results of ongoing USGS analyses of Delaware
basin and will provide that to the Subcommittee.
Mike Brownell provided an overview of SRBC's approach to applying criteria
for ground water withdrawals in their jurisdiction, focusing on the 1
in 10 year average annual drought recharge rate. Mike and Bob Pody presented
a graph and table comparing various "criteria" to illustrate
the range of variation between different baseflow recurrence intervals
and discussed reasons why the curves become asymptotic.
Effects of Ground Water Pumping on Streamflows - French Creek , Southeastern
PA (Cavallo)
Greg provided an overview of the results of a recent USGS study on inter-relationship
(magnitude and timeframe) of ground water pumping and stream baseflow.
Critical Water Planning Area - Understanding of Definition
Brief review of Act 220, Sect. 3112 (A)(6) "The State
Water Plan and Regional Plan shall include (6) An identification of critical
water planning areas comprising any significant hydrologic unit
where existing or future demands exceed or threaten
to exceed the safe yield of available water resources."
Jim noted that commercial/industrial water uses have not been addressed
in our research. Bill Gast indicated that PADEP is researching this
via various industrial and commercial organizations, etc. Gary P indicates
that the commercial/industrial projections will be directly relevant
to the power generation projections.
Mike also noted that mining (which was second largest water withdrawal
in 1995 in Susquehanna Basin) uses and projections have not been addressed.
Bill indicated that PADEP is looking into mining uses as well. Gary
Merritt has been looking into this and has contacted PA Coal Assoc.
and PA Aggregate and Concrete Assoc. and will continue looking into
this and report back.
Pam noted that Act 220 defines "safe yield" as including
both "withdrawal" and "nonwithdrawal" uses and the
Act defines the latter to include, but not be limited to, "aquatic
resources, navigation, recreation," etc. PADEP is pursuing navigation
uses with USACE and on recreation uses with PA DCNR.
Bill also noted that DRBC and SRBC will be looking into these demands
data as well along with PADEP.
Jan noted that the timeframe for exceedance must also be addressed.
Review of organization of Criteria discussion papers. Consensus was reached
that the both outlines are useful and they will be merged as the content
is addressed.
Planning area size: initial concept - minimum size of the hydrologic
unit being nominated as a CWPA to be 15 sq. mi. Some concerns remain that
this may eliminate smaller areas that have a significant problem; further
discussion needed.
Timeframe in which the exceedance is likely to occur: initial concept
- 5 years (for nominations during preparation of plan) and 20 years (for
nominations identified through the planning process). This concept received
general consensus, but will be further discussed.
Bill, Leroy, Mike, and Greg agreed to work together to draft a "strawboss"
of the combined criteria document for the next meeting, taking into consideration
the previous drafts by both Bill and Preston, and the discussions of the
Subcommittee.
Sue distributed copies of the existing State Water Plan "Planning
Principles" for the Subcommittee's reference.
Bill anticipates that available methodologies for developing demand projections
will be collected by October 2004. Projections for a 20 year planning
period are desired by DEP.
Adjourned 3:10 p.m.
NEXT STEPS:
1. Greg Cavallo will provide a short written summary and map of DRBC's
list of "potential areas of concern" that includes areas of
potention GW withdrawal, surface water withdrawal, and/or water quality
concerns.
2. Jim M - will continue to pursue agricultural water use projections
information
3. Gary P - will continue to pursue electric power generation water
use projection information.
4. Gary M - will continue to pursue mining industry water use projection
information.
5. Bill, Leroy, Mike, and Greg will draft a "strawboss" of
this document for the next meeting, taking into consideration the previous
drafts by Bill and Preston, and provide this to Jan for distribution
to Subcommittee one week prior to next meeting.
6. PADEP (Bill and Pam) will try to review Preston's draft "process"
papers and provide their reaction on consistency with statute, etc.
for the next meeting.
NEXT MEETING: September 2, 2004, (10:00 to 3:00) USGS Offices,
New Cumberland, PA.
|