1 / 13

Puget Sound Coordinated Monitoring and Assessment Program

Puget Sound Coordinated Monitoring and Assessment Program. April 15, 2008 Science Panel Update and Discussion. Problem. Current monitoring isn’t meeting needs Lack of overall integration Regulated community is concerned about increasing monitoring requirements and how data are used.

avalon
Download Presentation

Puget Sound Coordinated Monitoring and Assessment Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Puget Sound Coordinated Monitoring and Assessment Program April 15, 2008 Science Panel Update and Discussion

  2. Problem • Current monitoring isn’t meeting needs • Lack of overall integration • Regulated community is concerned about increasing monitoring requirements and how data are used Puget Sound Monitoring Consortium Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  3. New Business Model • Bottom-up and top-down approach • Recognize and build on existing efforts • Look at entire ecosystem • Coordinate and track all kinds of monitoring • Partner with Science Panel to achieve its mandates Puget Sound Monitoring Consortium Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  4. Proposed Functions • Existing, prioritized activities • Cross-topic synthesis • GIS and modeling • Data management and portals • Annual report measuring progress • Updates to science/monitoring plans Puget Sound Monitoring Consortium Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  5. Proposed Organizational Components • Includes all interested parties • Defined links to other entities • Ability to commission work • Process to gather input • Link with larger-geographic area coordination efforts • Established science-policy interface Puget Sound Monitoring Consortium Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  6. Puget Sound Partnership Ecosystem Coord. Board Leadership Council PS Salmon Recovery Council Science Panel Executive Director & Staff The Puget Sound Partnership has specific science/monitoring mandates – a cornerstone for a successful coordinated program – primary “client” of the program Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  7. Partnership ECB PSSRC LC Local, State, Tribal, Federal government agencies Science Panel ED & Staff Larger-scale State, Pacific Northwest, national monitoring coordination entities Other existing entities retain their authorities and mandates – key input/links for a successful program – also might be clients of the program Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  8. Partnership Partnership ECB ECB PSSRC LC LC Government agencies Science Panel Science Panel ED & Staff ED & Staff State, PNW, national monitoring coordination entities New and existing multi-agency efforts – needed to implement a successful program Work Groups * Storm-water * Hood Canal * Near-shore etc. * These are just examples Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  9. Partnership Partnership ECB ECB PSSRC LC LC Government agencies Science Panel Science Panel ED & Staff ED & Staff State, PNW, national monitoring coordination entities Oversight Structure and Staff – for coordination, integration and synthesis Work Groups Steering Committee etc. Technical Committee Staff Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  10. A “House” for the New Program • Researched 17 programs nationwide • Recognized the role the legislature gave to the Partnership • Narrowed down to 2 possibilities that can easily be implemented here: • A Restructured PSAMP at PSP • A Private Institute modeled after SFEI • Either model would add value to PSP Puget Sound Monitoring Consortium Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

  11. Puget Sound Partnership Model:Restructured PSAMP at PSP ECB ECB PSSRC LC LC Government agencies Science Panel Science Panel ED & Staff ED & Staff State, PNW, national monitoring coordination entities PSAMP plus Steering Committee Work Groups Technical Committee Staff etc. Relationships to define: Directs/reports Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I Requests other work Coordinates

  12. Model: Independent Private Institute Partnership Partnership ECB ECB PSSRC LC LC Government agencies Science Panel Science Panel ED & Staff ED & Staff State, PNW, national monitoring coordination entities PSEI Board and ED Work Groups Technical Committee Staff etc. Relationships to define: Directs/reports Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I Coordinates and requests other work Coordinates

  13. Next Steps • Respond to your input • Consortium meeting on Fri 5/9 • Return to Science Panel on 6/19 • Propose a Technical Committee/Work Group structure • Questions? contact Karen Dinicola kdin461@ecy.wa.gov or 360.407.6550 Puget Sound Monitoring Consortium Control of Toxic Chemicals in Puget Sound Phase I

More Related