FY 1999 proposal 199607706

Additional documents

TitleType
199607706 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleRestore Lolo Watershed
Proposal ID199607706
OrganizationUSFS, Clearwater National Forest (USFS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameAnne H. Connor
Mailing address12730 Highway 12 Orofino, ID 83544
Phone / email2084764541 / aconnor/r1_clearwater@fs.fed.us
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 1999
Province / SubbasinLower Snake / Clearwater
Short descriptionRestore the Lolo Creek Watershed by continuing to obliterate excess roads that are a current or potential source of sediment delivery and stream degradation.
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 $24,200
Fringe $6,344
Tag $1,878
Travel $7,213
Indirect $48,000
Subcontractor $0
$87,635
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost$87,635
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 1999 budget request$87,635
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: Existing schedules for Fiscal Year 1999 may change due to weather conditions. All on-the-ground projects occur in mountainous areas at elevations up to 5500 feet above sea level where unpredictable weather patterns may occur.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Pass (Fundable)
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Technical Issue: Explain how this project matches with the FY98 project – is this misnumbered?

Management Issue: Management flag of whether this is and in-lieu issue for overhead and personnel costs.

Management Issue: Explain how this project is coordinated with 9607702.

Technical Issue: Explain the "logistic restrictions" referenced in the proposal.


Recommendation:
Fund (low priority)
Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Defer
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

These proposals (199607702 and 199607706) adequately describe the problems and the likely benefits to fish and wildlife. However, each also has some negative aspects, as detailed below. Methods for measuring reduced sediment delivery to the stream are not adequately described. This proposal lacks a good monitoring plan. The watershed analysis should be done before the restoration activities, not after. The roads that will be de-commissioned are not well described. Do these roads cause the sediment problems?