- About the Project
- Technical Work
ABOUT THE PROJECT
Technical Work
In order to perform the technical work, local and outside expertise was hired to work in coordination with WRIA 1 Watershed Management Project participants. The United States Geological Survey (USGS) conducted the initial work related to water quantity. The USGS also participated in scoping discussions leading up to work with Utah State University (USU). USU has been responsible for conducting the majority of the technical assessment work for each component (water quality, water quantity, instream, flows, and fish habitat) and developing the Decision Support System (DSS). Contract staff with Public Utility District No. 1 (PUD 1) provided key support in a number of areas including state-based water rights, watershed delineation, and a water storage evaluation.
The USU technical work began in June 2000 and was conducted in phases – Phase I, Phase II, Early Data Needs, and Phase III. The phased approach was taken for two primary reasons: 1) it could be scheduled to accommodate budget cycles, and 2) it provided for opportunities to adjust or modify technical work in an upcoming phase based on what was being learned and the evolving understanding of relevant issues by WRIA 1 participants.
The first phase of USU work (Phase I) was an initial scoping phase. Phase I provided the USU scientists and WRIA 1 participants information needed to develop the scope of work for the Phase II technical studies. Work under Phase II focused on accumulating, evaluating, and analyzing the available data for surface water quality and quantity, ground water quality and quantity, instream flows, fish habitat, development of a database management structure, and preliminary structure of a decision support system.
Key elements of USU’s Phase III work are: 1) completing the analytical models and tools for each area of the study, and 2) tying the models together into the DSS. A “checkpoint” was built into the Phase III scope of work that enabled USU staff and WRIA 1 Project participants to evaluate progress and determine if any changes were needed to the Phase III work. Based on the outcomes of the checkpoint evaluations, recommended revisions were made to the Phase III scope of work and approved by the Planning Unit in December 2003 and the Joint Board in March 2004.