FY 1999 proposal 9119

Additional documents

TitleType
9119 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titlePublic-Private Cooperative Resource Mgmt in Lower Joseph Cr Watershed
Proposal ID9119
OrganizationWallowa Resources, Inc.
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameDiane Shetler
Mailing addressP.O. Box 274 Enterprise, OR 97828
Phone / email5414268053 / wallowar@orednet.org
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinLower Snake / Grande Ronde
Short descriptionDevelop a Coordinated Resource Management Plan (CRMP) for the lower Joseph Creek watershed; conduct a watershed assessment through public-private partnerships, utilizing the CRMP process…
Target species
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 1999 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 1999 cost
Personnel $20,500
Fringe $4,920
Supplies $3,500
Travel $1,800
Indirect $1,500
Subcontractor $0
$32,220
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$32,220
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$32,220
FY 1999 forecast from 1998$0
% change from forecast0.ToString("0.0%"))
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Outyear budget totals

(working on it)

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: No schedule constraints have been identified.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Return to Sponsor for Revision
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Management Issue: Explain how this position does not duplicate other southeast Washington coordination positions such as the Grande Ronde Model Watershed or Eastern Washington Model Watershed.

Technical Issue: Clearly explain why the watershed assessment is needed, and explain the other analyses that have been done on this watershed.

Management Issue: Explain if NRCS cost-sharing has been pursued; along with using the existing model watershed program to implement this work.

Technical Issue: Clearly describe the NPT work.


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

urgent. Proposed activities would not produce significant near-term survival improvement nor risk a lost opportunity within the next 1-3 years.

Duplicates ongoing work. Some or all of proposed activities are similar or identical to work already funded. Better knowledge or coordination of past or ongoing projects would have reduced or eliminated project need.

Did not respond adequately to technical criteria. Proposal was either incomplete but did not provide adequate information to determine whether technical criteria were met, or was complete but did not meet technical criteria.

Questionable management value. Proposal was either incomplete but did not provide adequate information to determine whether management criteria were met or complete but did not meet critical management criteria.


Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This appears to be a watershed council proposal. The proposal’s strengths include a good description of tasks and milestones, a quantifiable completion date of one year, and the use of a geomorphologist to provide needed expertise. The proposal does not describe how ecological inputs will be considered.