FY 1999 proposal 199700400
Contents
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 |
|---|---|
| 199700400 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Resident Fish Stock Status Above Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee Dams |
| Proposal ID | 199700400 |
| Organization | Kalispel Tribe of Indians (KNRD) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Jason R. Scott |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 39 Usk, WA 99180 |
| Phone / email | 5094451147 / osterman@povn.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Upper Columbia / Pend Oreille, Spokane, Upper Columbia Mainstem |
| Short description | Coordinating, collecting, assessing, and making recommendations based on blocked area fisheries information. |
| Target species | All species in the blocked area. |
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 |
|---|---|---|
| 5528100 | Lake Roosevelt kokanee net pens | Blocked area coordination |
| 8503800 | Colville Tribal fiish hatchery | Blocked area coordination |
| 9001800 | Habitat improvements-Lake Roosevelt | Blocked area coordination |
| 9104600 | Spokane Tribal hatchery (Galbraith Springs) O&M | Blocked area coordination |
| 9104700 | Sherman Creek hatchery O&M | Blocked area coordination |
| 9404300 | Lake Roosevelt Monitoring/data collection program | Blocked area coordination |
| 9500100 | Kalispel Tribe resident fish | Blocked area coordination |
| 9501100 | Chief Joseph kokanee enhancement project | Blocked area coordination |
| 9502800 | Assessment of fishery improvements in Moses Lake | Blocked area coordination |
| 9506700 | Lake Roosevelt rainbow trout net pens | Blocked area coordination |
| 9700300 | Box Canyon Watershed project | Blocked area coordination |
| 8810804 | Streamnet | Resident fish and region wide coordination. |
| 9106001 | Pend Oreille WetlandsII | Subbasin coordination |
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 | $125,000 | |
| Fringe | 33% | $41,250 |
| Supplies | $20,000 | |
| Capital | $30,000 | |
| Travel | $12,000 | |
| Indirect | 28.7% | $65,507 |
| Subcontractor | Washington DFW; Spokane Tribe of Indians, Spokane Tribal Fish & Wildlife; Confederated Tribe of the Colville Reservation, Fish and Wildlife Division; Unidentified subcontractor | $100,000 |
| Other | $11,250 | |
| Other | $11,250 | |
| Other | $11,250 | |
| Other | $11,250 | |
| $438,757 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $438,757 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $438,757 |
| 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: It is impossible to identify all constraints and problems that may occur. While we will make every attempt to stay on schedule, unforseen assignments, bad weather, equipment failure, etc. will delay progress.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Presentation: This project addresses the need for a centralized database and formalizes the coordination between the Spokane Tribe, the Colville Tribe, the Kalispel Tribe and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The project has several phases: Phase 1 (slated for completion in 1998) will set up central office space, acquire central computers, establish links to satellite offices and Streamnet, coordinate data collection system, and formalize the coordination between the co managers. Phase 2 (1999 - 2001) will develop analysis tools, input and assess data, identify data gaps, and recommend management efforts for the blocked area. StreamNet will link templates and data for spatial representation. Phase 3 will begin in 2002 and will implement, monitor and evaluate recommendations.Questions/Answers:
Why doesn't the proposal include resumes? Answer: Some people are not hired yet. The Kalispel Tribe position is that the personnel we hire fall under the guidance of the Tribe.
Is this a data management project? Answer: Not entirely. When the data gaps have been identified, the project will move to implementation. The data will be displayed spatially.
How will data compiled by this project modify management actions in the Pend Oreille system? Answer: The management agencies will use this information. It will also be available to the FERC re-licensing proceedings. The Forest Service has land in this area that the other management entities do not have access to. This project brings information together for all of the co-managers to share. FERC license holders are contributing to the project.
What would happen if the BPA funding ran out? Will the database be maintained? Answer: Maintaining the database can be done by the Kalispel Tribe. The tribe has a strong commitment to do this. Funding for implementing the management recommendations would have to be addressed at that point.
Screening Criteria: Yes
Technical Criteria: Yes. Data management tasks not aligned with objectives in FY 2000 and beyond.
Programmatic Criteria: Yes
Comment:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)
Inadequate proposal, adequate purpose
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
It is a good idea to conduct a resident fish stock status project, but this proposal does not ensure that the project will be well implemented. The proposal lacks both methodological detail and a clear conceptual framework. The objectives are not consistent. BPA should examine the budget.NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $540,000 | $540,000 | $540,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website