1.0 Agency Round-Table Reports
Thomas and Melanie briefed the group on MnDOT activities related to hydro data management and facilities management.

Mark provided updates on the GC activities. He also presented the results of discussions with federal representatives related to surface water quality reporting, and related data integration issues. PCA intends to perform reporting (305b) using NHD, and related EPA support for the process.

Susanne reported that the new clearinghouse node is coming on line soon.

The group discussed the metro streams data and issues related to doing additional value added work on it.

Robert reported progress on the Minnesota River Valley work via SCSU, and hopes for completion of the unified statewide streams base layer for mid-July.

Thomas also discussed MnDOT’s "watershed upstream" application (via USGS). They have been satisfied with it. He would be willing to provide a demo of this in conjunction with one of our future meetings. He also mentioned that he has statewide bridge data set, and offered to assist in stream data validation.

Susanne reported that USGS is planning on mapping/recognizing level six watershed delineations, including efforts conducted at the state level.

Joe talked to the watershed delineation issue by comparing the old manual interpretation effort with the new DEM-based effort. He also briefly discussed the current methodologies. Mark mentioned that someone at USGS has developed an alternative application for automated watershed delineation. Mark will report back to the workgroup with more specifics about the USGS tools.

Joe stated that DNR is coalescing around the NHD stream numbering standard. The group talked about issues surrounding reach numbering and extensions to NHD.

Jim and the group talked about STORET and changes to the program. The national database has been undergoing some changes, and is being recreated in a web-based client server environment.

Mark encapsulated the work that was done by the group over the last two meetings. Four basic features were identified to standardize around. Three basic elements were identified that were necessary to characterize the features of interest. The group discussed how these elements would be incorporated into data standards documentation.

Susanne provided some of the original definitional materials on basin and watershed hydrographic features. The group reviewed the materials and generally agreed that they are good descriptions of the features.

The group decided to explore basins first.

3. Basin Discussion
The group discussed some of the nuts and bolts associated with developing the actual standard. Robert suggested that we keep an exchange paradigm when proceeding. Jim talked about some of the issues on sub-basin numbering. Joe talked about the process of assigning new numbers. The group debated the merits of including or excluding the sub-basin numbers from the standard.

The group decided that we should proceed with creating a standard around the basin definitional information prepared by Susanne. Joe volunteered to prepare the draft standard and provide it to the group within a couple of weeks.

4. Watershed Discussion
Susanne began the discussion with the issue of the term "watershed", and whether a minor watershed is in fact a watershed. The group agreed that they are not, and suggested a number of alternative names. Thomas suggested "hydrologic drainage unit".

The group discussed the issue of HDU numbering, including activity at the federal level, where committees are actively reviewing and revised watershed numbering schemes. Joe suggested that the existing scheme is not especially entrenched. The group needs to revisit the issue of HDU numbering.

Attendees:
Carrie Bartz, MPCA
Jim Porter, MPCA
Mark Olsen, MPCA
Robert Maki, DNR
Joe Gibson, DNR
Thomas Martin, MnDOT
Melanie Olsen, MnDOT
Susanne Maeder, LMIC