FY 1999 proposal 199705900

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
199705900 Narrative	Narrative
199705900 Narrative	Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Securing Wildlife Mitigation Sites - Oregon
Proposal ID	199705900
Organization	ODFW, OWC, CTWSRO, CTUIR, BPT, USFWS, TPL, TNC, ONHP (ODFW, OWC, CTWSRO, CTUIR)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	John Beck
Mailing address	P.O. Box 59 Portland, OR 97207
Phone / email	5038725260 / john.s.beck@state.or.us
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycle	FY 1999
Province / Subbasin	Systemwide / Systemwide
Short description	Facilitate coordination and planning between Oregon wildlife managers via individual funding of wildlife planning and coordination staff for each of the parties involved.
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

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		$107,657
Fringe		$30,921
Supplies		$2,445
Operating		$3,220
Capital		$3,767,983
Travel		$36,262
Indirect		$51,512
Subcontractor		$0
		$4,000,000

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 cost	$4,000,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 1999 budget request	$4,000,000
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: Possible constraints might include delays due to extensive landowner negotiations, NEPA requirements, slow response times from regulatory agencies regarding issuance of permits for proposed enhancement work.

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Umbrella project encompassing projects 9106, 9130, 9140, 9705904-9705916

REVIEW:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)

Recommendation:
Not Rated (see individual Oregon wildlife proposals)

Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This looks like an umbrella for all the Oregon wildlife projects. Each of those was individually reviewed; consequently, the ISRP did not rate this proposal. This proposal does not clearly describe how it is linked to component projects. The proposal instructions are not followed -- too long a "short description", too long an abstract, no staff listed, and relationships to other projects are not in Section 3 (although in Section 8). The proposal needs to give specific objectives in addition to general, administrative objectives. The history of wildlife mitigation administration in the Fish and Wildlife Program, which is found in all the Oregon wildlife mitigation projects, is well stated. The methods are general, but good, and the proposal is well referenced. The programmatic need is nearly all administrative, but plans and reports are referenced. It is a marginal quality proposal for the high cost. (9705914)