FY 2001 High Priority proposal 23060
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 |
|---|---|
| 23060 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Assess Stream Quality for Salmonid Recovery |
| Proposal ID | 23060 |
| Organization | Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (OR DEQ) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Rick Hafele |
| Mailing address | 2020 SW Fourth Ave, Suite 400 Portland, OR 97201 |
| Phone / email | 5032295349 / hafele.rick@deq.state.or.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | Rick Hafele |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / |
| Short description | Characterize stream habitat, water chemistry, and fish & macroinvertebrate communities at randomly selected and high quality reference sites to provide critical baseline data and appropriate targets for stream restoration and impovement projects. |
| Target species | Chinook, Steelhead, Bull Trout, Rainbow |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 44.65 | -122.72 | Willamette Subbasin |
| 45.61 | -122.55 | Columbia Lower Subbasin |
| 45.73 | -117.29 | Blue Mountain Province |
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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 4 | $161,784 |
| Fringe | $61,476 | |
| Supplies | $51,772 | |
| Travel | $39,320 | |
| Indirect | $47,464 | |
| Subcontractor | $8,000 | |
| $369,816 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $369,816 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $369,816 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| EPA | Site mapping & design assistance | $20,000 | in-kind |
| Oregong DEQ | Project Management & technical assistance | $80,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This proposal for an assessment does not address imminent risks to ESA stocks by offering direct on-the-ground benefits with one-time funding.Comment:
The effort appears to fund some of the ODEQ responsibilities and thus raises in lieu questions. It appears to duplicate work that the NPPC Program should be doing. This project will provide critical information for subbasin planning in the Lower Columbia (i.e. Willamette subbasin) and Blue Mountain provinces.