FY 1999 proposal 9049

Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary

Reviews and Recommendations

Additional documents

Title	Type
9049 Narrative	Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Feasibility Study for a State-Wide Water Quality Data Sharing Mechanism
Proposal ID	9049
Organization	Rachel Stein, MS, hydrologist
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Rachel Stein
Mailing address	2835 SE Yamhill Portland, OR 97214
Phone / email	5032329385 /
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycle	FY 1999
Province / Subbasin	Systemwide / Systemwide
Short description	Evaluate water quality data sources within the State of Oregon. Compile a data base of this information. Use information to recommend an efficient data sharing mechanism that would provide user-friendly, real-time access to state-wide water quality data
Target species

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
8810804	Streamnet	supplementary data

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 1999 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 1999 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 1999 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 1999 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 1999 cost
Personnel	professional time	$42,700
Fringe	health insurance, car insurance	$2,040
Supplies	office supplies, copying, faxing, printing	$1,190
Operating	computer lease, printer and fax lease, fax line, telephone line, internet service, office rent, telephone calls	$12,845
Capital	Software (Note: If a computer, printer and fax were purchased instead of leased, costs could be lowered)	$1,700
Travel	to agencies, organizations	$5,700
Subcontractor		$0
Other	order library materials	$200
		$66,375

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 cost	$66,375
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 1999 budget request	$66,375
FY 1999 forecast from 1998	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Constraints- possible difficulty in contacting parties Milestones- (1)- finish data collection, (2)- write report of results

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments

Recommendation:
Return to Sponsor for Revision

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Management Issue: Explain why this work is not redundant with many other projects (e.g., EPA, DEQ, StreamNet, FPC). True, currently there is a problem with data access, but existing agencies should fill the role.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund (low priority)

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Pending

REVIEW:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)

Recommendation:
Inadequate

Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This is a poor proposal ranked low in the set. It does not explain present databases and their inadequacies. The proposal does not describe specific plans to work with agencies such as EPA or ODEQ, in spite of support letters. The work may be needed, but the proposal is not technical enough to tell.