1. CCAWWG LTdoc: Critical capability gaps re: characterizing future climate & hydrology Levi Brekke, Reclamation Climate/Hydrology Research Strategy Meeting – 5 February 2013, NCAR Mesa Lab, Boulder, CO

2. Defining User Needs… C-CAWWG February 2008 Workshop USGS Circular 1331 January 2009 CCAWWG User Needs Document January 2011 http://www.ccawwg.us/

3. Role of Climate Information in Water Resource Management Studies

4. Eight Technical Steps Preliminaries Summarize Relevant Literature Obtaining Climate Projections Data Making Planning Assumptions 3.Make Decisions about How to Relate Climate Projections Data to Planning 4.Assess Natural Systems Response 5.Assess Socioeconomic and Institutional Response Conducting Planning Evaluations and Supporting Decisions 6.Assess Systems Risk and Evaluate Alternatives 7.Assess and Characterize Uncertainties 8.Communicate Results and Uncertainties to Decision-Makers …to illustrate 

5. Eight Technical Steps for incorporating climate change Into Water Resource Management Studies

6. Prioritization of Research relative to Technical Step (Gap Category) Technical Step Technical Step (Gap Category)Average Priority Rankings 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents 1Summarize Relevant Literature1.5 2Obtaining Climate Change Information2.52.4 3Make Decisions About How To Use the Climate Change Information 3.02.7 4Assess Natural Systems Response3.01.9 5Assess Socioeconomic and Institutional Response 2.52.3 6Assess System Risks and Evaluate Alternatives 1.52.0 7Assess and Characterize Uncertainties2.02.6 8Communicating Results and Uncertainties to Decisionmakers 3.0 1 Averaged across gaps in a given Step (1 = low, 2 = medium, and 3 = high)

7. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 2 – Obtaining Climate Change Information 2.01 Improved skill in simulating long-term global to regional climate. High 2.02 Downscaled data at finer space and time resolutions and for different variables. High 2.03 Information on the strengths and weak-nesses of downscaled data and the down-scaling methodologies used to develop these data (including both statistical and dynamical methods and associated approaches for climate model bias-correction). High 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…) 2010 BCCA, 2011 WWCRA VIC-hydrology projections 2011-2013 NCAR Project #1 (Sensitivity of Impacts to Downscaling/Hydrology Methods)

8. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 2 – Obtaining Climate Change Information 2.04 Indication of conditions of where and when the stationarity assumption of statistical downscaling may not hold (defined above) and should motivate use of dynamical downscaling techniques rather than statistical. Medium 2.05 Synthesis of sea level projection information and guidance on consistent use in planning for all Reclamation and USACE coastal areas. Low 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…) 2011-2013 NCAR Project #1 (Sensitivity of Impacts to Downscaling/Hydrology Methods); NOAA NCPP (Dixon/Hayhoe)

9. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 3 – Make Decisions About How To Use the Climate Change Information 3.01 Understanding on observed climate variability from daily to multidecadal time scales, which underpins interpretation of future variability in climate projections and its relation to planning assumptions. High 3.02 Understanding how to interpret future variability in climate projections and relevance to operating constraints on shorter- to longer-term time scales (from daily to multidecadal). High 3.03 Basis for culling or weighting climate projections (if at all) when deciding which projections to use in planning. Medium 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…) 2006-2007 USGS/CA-DWR/SCU project (Brekke et al. 2008); tracking literature (2008- present), lots of studies/frameworks based on CMIP3

10. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 3 – Make Decisions About How To Use the Climate Change Information 3.04 Guidance on how to appropriately relate planning assumptions to either Period-Change or Time- Developing aspects of climate projections when deciding how to use projections in planning. LowMedium 3.05 Guidance on how to jointly utilize the longer-term climate variability from observed records, paleoclimate, and projected climate information when portraying drought and surplus possibilities in planning. MediumHigh 3.06 Method and basis for estimating extreme meteorological event possibilities, deterministically or probabilistically, in a changing climate. High 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…) 2008-2009 Reclamation/CU-Boulder project (Reclamation 2009); tracking literature PACE Mahoney; 2012-2013 NOAA/CIRES project #1

11. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 4 – Assess Natural Systems Response Watershed Hydrology (WH), Ecosystems (E), Land Cover (LC), Water Quality (WQ), Consumptive Use on Irrigated Lands (CU), and Sedimentation and River Hydraulics (SRH) 4.01 (WH) Guidance on strengths and weaknesses of watershed hydrologic models/methods to support scoping decisions in planning. Low 4.02 (WH) Understanding how climate change should impact potential evapotranspiration and how it is represented in watershed hydrologic models. High 4.03 (WH) Method and basis for estimating extreme hydrologic event possibilities, deterministically or probabilistically, in a changing climate. High 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…) 2009-2011 Reclamation/USGS/NWS project on models’ preferences; 2011-2013 NCAR Project #1; tracking literature 2011-2013 NCAR Project #1; tracking literature PACE Mahoney; 2012-2013 NOAA/CIRES project #1

12. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 4 – Assess Natural Systems Response Watershed Hydrology (WH), Ecosystems (E), Land Cover (LC), Water Quality (WQ), Consumptive Use on Irrigated Lands (CU), and Sedimentation and River Hydraulics (SRH) 4.04 (WH) Guidance on strengths and weaknesses of available versions of spatially distributed hydrologic weather data that may be used for both watershed hydrologic model development (Step 4) and in climate model bias-correction (Step 2). Medium 4.05 (WH) Understanding how climate change should impact groundwater recharge and groundwater interaction with surface water supplies. Medium 4.06 (E) Understanding how climate change should impact inland and coastal anadromous fisheries. MediumLow 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…) 2011-2012 Reclamation/NWS (Marketa); 2011- 2013 NCAR Project #1

13. Extras

14. Reclamation’s coalition building between Science & Management Goals: –stay abreast of new science, inform researchers on management needs Vehicles: –New (since 2010): DOI Climate Science Centers (CSCs) Landscape Conserv. Coops (LCCs) –Previous (since 2007): Climate Change and Water Working Group, or CCAWWG Members: NOAA, USGS, Reclamation, USACE, USEPA, FEMA, NASA Activities: –User Needs documents (motivate research to address needs) –Training Program (build trained practitioner capacity) –Approaches Workshop (develop guidance on methodologies)

15. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 1 – Summarize Relevant Literature 1.01 Access to a clearinghouse of climate change literature relevant to water management or access to a bibliography of recommended literature to represent in literature syntheses. Low 1.02 Region-specific literature summaries, regularly maintained and peer-reviewed. Medium 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

16. Description –FY2009 Reclamation Activity –Region-specific –“boiler plate” narratives for planning documentation –graphic resources for summarizing current climate projection information Review –Internal: five regions –External: five NOAA-RISAs Future Updates –Living document –Address “weak spots” (climate change and ecosystems, water demands, etc) Example R&D, Addressing Gap 1.1: Regional Literature Syntheses http://www.usbr.gov/research/docs/climatechangelitsynthesis.pdf

17. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 4 – Assess Natural Systems Response Watershed Hydrology (WH), Ecosystems (E), Land Cover (LC), Water Quality (WQ), Consumptive Use on Irrigated Lands (CU), and Sedimentation and River Hydraulics (SRH) 4.10 (WQ) Understanding how water quality characteristics depend on climatic variables and how dependencies may evolve in a changing climate. Medium 4.11 (CU) Understanding how climate and carbon dioxide changes should impact plant physiology, how impacts vary with crop type, and how impacts affect irrigation demand. Medium 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

18. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 4 – Assess Natural Systems Response Watershed Hydrology (WH), Ecosystems (E), Land Cover (LC), Water Quality (WQ), Consumptive Use on Irrigated Lands (CU), and Sedimentation and River Hydraulics (SRH) 4.12 (SRH) Understanding how climate and/or land cover changes will change watershed sediment yield, changes in sediment constituency, and the resulting impacts on water resources. Medium 4.13 (SRH) Understanding how climate, land cover, and/or sedimentation changes will affect river and reservoir ice-event potential. MediumLow 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

19. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 6 – Assess System Risks and Evaluate Alternatives 6.01 Guidance on how to conduct an adaptation evaluation that efficiently explores and ranks strategy options, potentially using optimization techniques. High 6.02 Guidance on how to portray realistic operator “learning” in evaluations supporting planning for climate change adaptation. Low 6.03 Guidance on how to assess the effect of planning proposals on climate. LowMedium 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

20. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 7 – Assess and Characterize Uncertainties 7.01 Uncertainty information on global climate projections data, including uncertainties about climate system science, portrayal in climate models, emissions scenario development, and simulation methods. High 7.02 Uncertainty information on regional climate projections data, including uncertainties from choice of bias-correction and spatial downscaling methods. High 7.03 Uncertainty in planning results stemming from method choices on how to use transient characteristics of climate projections in planning scenarios. Medium 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

21. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 7 – Assess and Characterize Uncertainties 7.04 For each response analysis on a natural system, uncertainty information on system science and associated ways of portraying this science in a system model and the observations used to customize a model for a specific system. MediumHigh 7.05 For each response analysis on a socioeconomic system, uncertainty information on system science and associated ways of portraying this science in a system model and the observations used to customize a model for a specific system. HighMedium 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

22. Summary of Gaps and Priorities Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 8 – Communicating Results and Uncertainties to Decisionmakers 8.01 Guidance on strengths and weaknesses of various methods for communicating results and uncertainties affected by using climate projection information. High 8.02 Guidance on how to make decisions given the uncertainties introduced by considering climate projection information. High 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange).

23. Climate Change and Water Working Group (CCAWWG) Provide Scientific Collaborations in Support of Water Management as Climate Changes Water Supply, Hydropower, Ecosystem Needs, Recreation, Etc. Surface Water, Groundwater, Ecosystems, Etc. Flood Control, Navigation, Hydropower, Etc.. Climate Change and Variability, Climate and Weather Predictability Water Quality, Air Quality, Etc… Emergency Management, Flood Risk Assessment, Etc.

24. CCAWWG Approach Work with the water management community to understand their needs. Foster collaborative efforts across the federal and non-federal scientific community to address their needs in a way that capitalizes on interdisciplinary expertise, shares information, and avoids duplication.

25. CCAWWG Activity: Defining User Needs and Developing Research Strategy Build on the foundation established by USGS Circular 1331 Provide collaborative forum to better define the critical capability gaps that face the water management community Facilitate collaborative research and development to address capability gaps

26. Two “User Needs” Documents Both address improvement of knowledge, methods and tools –“LTdoc” (Assessing Climate Change in Long-Term Water Resources Planning and Management) –“STdoc” (Use of Weather and Climate Forecasts in Near Term Federal Water Resources Management)

27. Section 1.1- Background –About Reclamation and USACE Section 1.2 – Purpose –Objectives and Strategy Section 1.3 – Document Audience LTdoc Overview: 1. Introduction

28. USACE and Reclamation have shared interest in Western water management Fig. Elke Ochs, USACE

29. Document Objectives Consolidate the Needs of the Water Management Community Inform the Scientific Community Teamwork Flexible and Inclusive

30. Broader Strategy Part I: Addressing Climate Change in Long-Term Water Resources Planning and Management (LTdoc) –Part 1-A: Needs Assessment (Reclamation and USACE leads) - COMPLETE (Jan 2011) –Part I-B: Research Strategy to address User Needs (NOAA and USGS leads) – ongoing, R. Webb’s comments

31. Broader Strategy Part II: Addressing Climate Variability in Short- Term Water Resources Planning and Management (STdoc) –Part II-A: Needs Assessment (Reclamation and USACE leads) - expected late 2011 –Part II-B: Research Strategy to address User Needs (NOAA and USGS leads) – expected early 2012

32. Audience Primarily entities in position to steer research to address capability gaps –CCAWWG Science Agencies (NOAA, USGS) –Broader community of federal and non-federal entities in position to support research Also the water management community on the matter of describing current capabilities, desired capabilities and gaps.

33. LTdoc Overview: 2. Capabilities Assessment Section 2.1- Longer-Term Water Systems Planning in Reclamation and USACE Section 2.2 - Role of Climate in Longer-Term Water Systems Planning Assumptions –water resource management studies –infrastructure safety and flood risk reduction

34. USACE and Reclamation make various types of decisions affected by Climate CategoryLook-AheadProcess Types Shorter-Term Reservoir Regulation (or Operations) Scheduling Days to Months (max. 12 months for MP/PN/GP; 24 months for LC/UC) Weekly to Hourly Release Schedules Annual Decisions for Supply Allocations (informed by current year supply and demand forecasts) Longer-Term Planning for changes in Resource Management and Engineering Design Years to Decades NEPA ESA Consultations Flood Control Rules Development Assessment of Infrastructure Safety Years to Decades Facility Reviews and Safety Issue Evaluations Today’s focus…

35. LTdoc Overview: 2. Capabilities Assessment Section 2.3 - Approaches for considering climate change in longer-term planning –various level of detail, qualitative to quantitative. Section 2.4 – Step-by-Step Capability Assessment for Quantitative Approaches –Desired capabilities –Current capabilities –Gaps (i.e. knowledge, methods, tools) An outline of Eight Technical Steps is adopted for the purpose of outlining gaps.

36. Role of Climate Information in Infrastructure Safety & Flood Risk Studies

37. Eight Technical Steps for incorporating climate change Into Infrastructure Safety & Flood Risk Studies

38. LTdoc Overview: 3. Perspectives… Section 3.1 – Process for gathering perspectives –Targeted other water management organizations –Invited to rate gaps in terms of research priority (low, medium, high) and offer general comment Section 3.2 – Key Themes Section 3.3 – Perspectives Summaries by Gap –Complimented by Appendices B-D. Section 3.4 – Additional Comments

39. Responding Entities Perspectives invited from broad community of federal and non-federal water management entities (Section 3.1) Comments received from: –various Reclamation region & area offices –various USACE division & district offices –9 Non-Federal entities ASCE, AWWA, AMWA, CA DWR, CWEMF, Family Farm Alliance, Seattle City Light, WUCA, WGA-WSWC) –5 other Federal entities FEMA, FERC, NOAA National Ocean Service CSC, WAPA, USEPA (ORD, OW, Region 8))

40. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 4 – Assess Natural Systems Response Watershed Hydrology (WH), Ecosystems (E), Land Cover (LC), Water Quality (WQ), Consumptive Use on Irrigated Lands (CU), and Sedimentation and River Hydraulics (SRH) 4.07 (E) Understanding how climate change may impact riparian ecosystems and vegetation that affect both longer-term water budgets and ecological resources. HighMedium 4.08 (E) Understanding translated into model frameworks for assessing climate change responses for fisheries, nonnative riparian vegetation, and other species or habitat conditions. HighMedium 4.09 (LC) Understanding how climate and/or carbon dioxide changes should impact land cover communities that control natural evapotranspiration and soil erosion potential. MediumLow 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…)

41. Technical Planning Steps and Associated Gaps in Tools and Information Priority Ranking 1 Reclamation/ USACE All Respondents Step 5 – Assess Socioeconomic and Institutional Response 5.01 Understanding how socioeconomic factors may affect flood risk reduction and reservoir regulation objectives in a changing climate (e.g., flood protection values, land management). MediumHigh 5.02 Understanding how socioeconomic factors may affect water and power delivery reliability, water allocations, as well as decisions on source of supply under a changing climate (e.g., ground-water pumping versus surface water diversion). High 5.03 Understanding how institutional realities currently control socioeconomic responses to climate variability and could control socioeconomic responses under a changing climate. MediumLow 1 Color shading indicates priority rating on research to address gaps: low (yellow), medium (light orange), and high (dark orange). Summary of Gaps and Priorities (Steps 2 through 5 highlighted…)

42. Feedback on additional Research Areas Monitoring and Data Collection: –Need for understanding adequacy of existing monitoring networks to support water management in a changing climate. Making Decisions Under Uncertainty: –Need for understanding the relative merits of various tools/concepts (e.g., adaptive management, robustness, resilience, flexibility) to support water management and development under a changing climate. –Need for understanding the compatibility of these tools/concepts with current influences on management (e.g., legislation, appropriations, policy).

43. Back to the Broader Strategy: NOAA/USGS Science Response Part I: Addressing Climate Change in Long-Term Water Resources Planning and Management (LTdoc) –Part 1-A: Needs Assessment (Reclamation and USACE leads) - COMPLETE (Jan 2011) –Part I-B: Research Strategy to address User Needs (NOAA and USGS leads) – ongoing, R. Webb’s comments

44. LTdoc Questions? Reclamation –Chuck Hennig (chennig@usbr.gov)chennig@usbr.gov –Levi Brekke (lbrekke@usbr.gov)lbrekke@usbr.gov USACE –Kathleen White (kathleen.d.white@usace.army.mil)kathleen.d.white@usace.army.mil