Critical Water Planning Area Subcommittee

March 1, 2005 Meeting

10:00, Rachel Carson State Office Building, 10th Floor Conference Room

Date Prepared: March 11, 2005

Prepared by:Jan Bowers, Chair

Attendees:

Subcommittee members: Jan Bowers, Mike Brownell, Greg Cavallo, Terry Dayton, Craig Kern, Julie Kiang, Preston Luitweiler, Jim McKenzie, Gary Merritt, Gary Petrewski, Robert Riechart, Bob Wendelgass, Leroy Young

Guests:

Mike Cavanaugh, Bill Davis, Rao Chitikela, Sue Weaver, Bill Gerlach, Todd Giddings, Curtis Schreffler, R.T. Weston, Mark Matthews, Jineen Boyle, Bill Gast, Leslie Sarvis, Barbara Schell-Magaro, David Jostenski, Bill Cesanek, Lori Mohr, Hoss Liaghat, Tom Yeager, Andrew Dehoff, David Sayers, Ken Najjar.

Introductions - were done.

Lunch arrangements - were made.

Public comments – there were none.

Approval of meeting summary from January 14, 2005 Subcommittee meeting –

Bob moved and Preston seconded a motion to approve the meeting summary for January 14, 2005 as prepared with name corrections indicated by Sue. The motion was unanimously approved.

Update on Statewide Committee activity –

Jan summarized the recommendations she carried forward to the Statewide Committee. The Draft Criteria were distributed for Regional Committee Review. Comments have been received on the Draft Process document, which has been transferred to the Policy and Integration Committee. PADEP has commented that it would like to open the nomination process without restriction based on technical data, so that all interested nominees can be received and evaluated by PADEP with data available to PADEP for review against the “designation criteria”. This will make it easier to get proposals in the door and make better use of limited resources to appropriately consider and review nominations, and proceed with qualifying designations within the remaining timeframe available under Act 220. Several committee members and other attendees provided comments to PADEP regarding several concerns and potential implications of this change in process that should be clearly addressed within the revised process document.

Jim moved and Bob seconded a motion that the CWPA Subcommittee requests that the P&I Subcommittee provide the draft Process document, as revised by PADEP, to this CWPA Subcommittee for review and comment prior to finalization. The motion was unanimously approved.

Draft CWPA Nomination Process Document – (see above).

Draft CWPA Criteria Document –

Jan explained that subsequent to the last CWPA Subcommittee meeting, PADEP staff had prepared a white paper summarizing their recommendation for further quantifying the draft criteria. The white paper was presented and discussed at length at the Policy and Integration Subcommittee meeting on March 7, 2005, and at that meeting PADEP agreed to revise the white paper to provide some clarifications and to provide a revised version of the Draft Criteria Document to illustrate how their recommended changes would be incorporated. Bill Gast provided all attendees with a copy of both the revised white paper and revised Draft Criteria Document for their review. Bill then explained the rationale and recommendations presented in the white paper to apply more protective quantitative criteria on streams designated as Class B, C and D and “other streams” in the Draft Criteria Document.

Hoss presented preliminary results of some PADEP preliminary analyses of the implications of these recommended “criteria” changes on potential “CWPA designation” of 4 watersheds (Laurel Hill, Spring Creek, Cocalico Creek, and Neshaminy Creek), with a presentation on detailed preliminary analysis of Neshaminy Creek.

Substantial discussion followed regarding the analysis and the proposed changes to the Draft criteria, raising both comments of issues and concerns with the changes, as well as comments of support of the changes. After substantial discussion, the Subcommittee concurred that the Sub-Subcommittee should reconvene to work with PADEP on further revisions to the Draft Criteria document.

DRBC/CDM Discussion of Potential Water Demand Analysis Methodologies –

DRBC and CDM presented information on the various approaches they are considering for developing nonresidential demand projections and requested that any suggestions of available data on use and projections be provided to CDM.

Next Steps –

  1. PADEP to revise analysis results table to include comparison to 50% of 1 in 10 year low baseflow and it will be distributed by email to CWPA Subcommittee for information.
  2. PADEP revisions of Draft Criteria will be re-visited by the Sub-Subcommittee and a further revised draft will be brought back to the CWPA Subcommittee. Jan and Mike will schedule this meeting with the Sub-Subcommittee.
  3. CDM requested any Subcommittee members who have suggestions of sources of nonresidential water use/demand data to please send those suggestions to Sue Weaver who will forward them to CDM.

Next Meeting –

June 14, 2005, 10:00am, location to be determined.

Meeting adjourned –