Members Attendance

VISITORS:  Alyssa Douglas, Student UI; Fritz Fiedler, Prof UI; Dean Garwood, IWRRI - UI; Steve Gill, Terragraphics Environmental Engineering; Kent Keller, Prof WSU; Scott King, King Groundwater Science; Elizabeth Miles (interested UI employee); Jim Osiensky, Prof UI; Bill Prenoh; Eddy Teasdale, UI Grad Student; Kathleen Warnick.

1)     Call to Order AND APPROVAL of MARCH 21, 2002 Minutes
Jay Becker (Chair) called the meeting to order at 2:35 PM.  Minutes for the March 21, 2002 meeting were approved as presented.

2)      Latest on Palouse Basin Stratigraphy [John Bush] –
University of Idaho geology professor John Bush reviewed his own and general thinking on local geology, which included misconceptions about the Palouse Basin area stratigraphy prior to 1990.  Personal observations and conclusions from other studies brought about changes in John’s thinking concerning the stratigraphy of the Palouse Basin.  He documented the before and after with extensive drawings and slides.  After presenting the geological perspective, he ventured some opinions about the impact on Palouse Basin ground water movement as a consequence of the hypothesized stratigraphy below the basin surface.  When asked what he would recommend as the most helpful next step, John quickly expressed the need for completing detailed area geological mapping and making the maps available to researchers and others.  He also strongly recommended that we assume the subsurface is folded and work to document the details.
Highlights of the talk, slides and questions include the following:

a)     A review of the stratigraphy of the Columbia Basin:
 1.  There are 50 to 100 communities pumping ground water from Grande Ronde aquifers but there are different Grande Ronde rocks involved and many of the communities are separated by folds and barriers.
 2.  In most areas the stratigraphy is much more easily observed than in the Palouse because of readily accessible exposed rock.  The Palouse Basin is extensively covered with a relatively thick loess making geologic observations of the area stratigraphy much more difficult.
 3.  Most of the Columbia Basin from Grangeville to the Cascade Mt.  Range is folded with dipping synclines and anticlines.
 4.  There appears to be no flat basalt in the Columbia Basin when the stratigraphy is closely examined.  And that is very likely the case in the Palouse Basin as well.

b)     The 1990 assumed perspective of the Palouse Basin included the following:
1.  The basalts were flat over the basin.
2.  The Wanapum thinned as it approached Pullman.
3.  Water flowed from the Moscow Mt. Front through the Pullman area to the Snake River.

c)      In reality there is the following:
1.  On the Idaho side of the state line there are Miocene sediments up to 250 feet thick which thin to 15 to 20 feet under the Palouse Mall moving in a westerly direction.
2.  Much of this sediment is clay that is quite impermeable.  Water moving through these sediments needs to follow sand lenses and layers to the basalt.
3.  Union Flat Creek is in a syncline; the Snake River is in a syncline and Colfax and Glenwood Canyon are in a syncline.  John is guessing that the west edge of Pullman is on an anticline.  This means there is one or more synclines to the east of the Pullman anticline.
4.  The Imnaha basalt, which is readily visible in the Clearwater River canyon is the deepest Columbia River Basalt.  The basalt is dipping to the NW west of Pullman.
5.  It appears that ground water to the west of Pullman is moving NW from the Palouse Basin following a slight plunge in the syncline and anticline sequence.
6.  A fold between Pullman and Moscow may be blocking any direct connection between the Moscow and the Pullman ground water areas.
7.  It appears the basalts and sediments thicken and thin depending on where they are in the axes of the synclines and anticlines rather than proximity to the Moscow Mt. Range.
8.  The Rosa flow is 200 feet thick in the Colfax area.  It pinches out at Pullman.  This basalt flowed up against an anticline west of Pullman.  The Wanapum dips under the Rosa at Colfax.
The Rosa is also characterized by dikes, which could be the source of the suspected barrier to the west of Pullman. 
9.  Due to differential sinking and folding, it is possible and even probable that the folding is steeper down deeper.  Steep folds can be effective barriers to water movement across the axes of the folds.

d)     In the question and answer period it was pointed out that there is no indication of deep aquifer water from the Moscow-Pullman area aquifers making it to the Snake River.  The small amount of ground water that does make it from the Palouse Basin to the Snake River appears to be shallow aquifer and even perched aquifer waters.

 3)     Status on Proposed  Projects and Research Support

a)     Kirkland reported that budgets have been set up and work started on both the Moscow Mountain runoff study and the water chemistry and microbiology study.

b)     Minimal progress has been made toward identifying the best project which is acceptable to State of Idaho which also fits into the current sequence of studies.  An attempt is being made to fit a project in next fall after preliminary work is completed in support of a pilot connector well in the Moscow area.

c)     The Palouse Basin WRIA study is moving forward but slowly at this time.  No calls for meetings are anticipated before June.
 

4)     Assessments for Fiscal Year 2003 – Steve Bush moved and Mark Workman seconded that PBAC continue funding at the current level for the next fiscal year, which starts in July, 2002.  After a short discussion the motion was passed with no dissenting votes.  This means the university will invoice, on behalf of PBAC,  the 4 pumpers $8000 for PBAC operations and $20,000 for continuing research.  The two counties will be invoiced at $4000.   It was recognized that the two counties had not paid their full assessment in recent years but the invoice should still be for the originally agree amount.   Mark Storey, the new representative from Whitman County, said he could not speak to the issue of Whitman County’s assessment and/or payment.  He is still getting familiar with county operations as well as PBAC operations. 

5)     OLD BUSINESS

a)     Renewal of Intergovernmental Agreement –
 Jay Becker indicated that a consensus with two counties on the intergovernmental agreement wording had not been reached.   He suggested the 4 pumping entities finalize and sign the intergovernmental agreement and then work out the details with the counties for an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) that would let them continue to participate.  Because this would involve agreeing on and signing another document, Mark Workman suggested doing it as an addendum to the main agreement.  Everyone thought this was a good idea.  Jay and Larry will seek an MOU that can be attached as an addendum.

The meeting was concluded at this point in the agenda due to time constrains.  It was agreed that the next meeting should be May 16.

6)     NEXT MEETING DATE

The meeting was adjourned by consensus.

Respectfully Submitted,

Larry Kirkland