FY 2000 proposal 20049

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Cost sharing

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: None foreseen.

Reviews and recommendations

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

Comment:

Comments: This is a new proposal by the U.S. Geological Survey to characterize sediment in the mainstem Kootenai River white sturgeon spawning areas, (apparently) downstream of Libby Dam. The proposition is that sediment delivery and movement in the channel system has been significantly modified by Libby Dam, but specifics of the effects on sturgeon habitat are not well known.

Despite problems with sturgeon egg incubation success, the proposal does not make a compelling argument nor present sufficient evidence that this problem is caused by sedimentation. There may well be a justification for the proposed work, but it needs to be made in conjunction with other elements of the Program (and in particular, it needs to be an element of an appropriate umbrella proposal). CBFWA itself recommends that the project be absorbed as a sub-contract (to proposal No. 8806400) and substantially reduced in scope and budget. As written, the proposal is of questionable benefit to fish.

The proposal quality was in the mid-range of proposals reviewed. The proposal adequately addresses the FWP and FWS white sturgeon recovery plan, relates the work to other Kootenai River studies, and notes that this team was a subcontractor in earlier stream velocity studies. Past accomplishments as the subcontractor are given, including indication of sediment differences that suggested the proposed work. Schedule and costs seem reasonable. Background, rationale, and project relationships are brief but acceptable. Objectives are good, and resumes are fine. This project seems worthwhile, although not especially well justified in terms of white sturgeon biology. One reservation is about its status as a stand-alone project that might better be included as part of the ongoing tailwater studies (as the earlier velocity work had been). At a minimum, the work should be better justified and more closely linked to other work through the umbrella proposal. Aspects of the proposal are extremely sketchy, and indicate only minimally how the proposed work would fit into the broader scheme of Kootenai River fisheries mitigation and enhancement efforts.

This proposal is somewhat symptomatic of the relatively poor connection between work dealing with physical and biological aspects of the Program, but the disconnect in this case seems especially apparent. There may well be a justification for the proposed work, but it needs to be made in the context of other elements of the Program (and in particular, it needs to be an element of an appropriate umbrella proposal).

Comment:

Comment:

Technical Criteria: yes

Programmatic Criteria: yes

Milestone Criteria: no- It is a one and ½ year research project.

General Comments: This should be absorbed as a sub-contract into 8806400 and substantially reduced in scope and budget.

Comment:

Is it appropriate for BPA to fund USGS work?

Comment:

Discussion/Background: Enhance understanding of pre- and post-Libby Dam substrate habitat conditions in the Kootenai River, Idaho. This information may be key to understanding limiting factors for the endangered Kootenai River sturgeon. Information gained from this study will be utilized to guide future actions, such as habitat rehabilitation, or changes in hydro operations. The study area will include sturgeon spawning area. Council member Karier asked that additional information be gathered on this project, particularly since the ISRP did seem to encourage that it be resubmitted in the near future.

ISRP Review: Do not fund. The proposal was for a new project, and was not reviewed in the "fix-it-loop" review. Initially, the ISRP recommended that this project not be funded, but it encouraged submission in Fiscal Year 2001 (perhaps as part of another proposal), addressing the ISRP's concerns. The ISRP was primarily supportive, writing in their review of this project, "The proposal adequately addresses the FWP and FWS white sturgeon recovery plan, relates the work to other Kootenai River studies, ...Schedule and costs seem reasonable... Background, rationale, and project relationships are brief but acceptable... Objectives are good, and resumes are fine."

Sponsor Policy Response: Because the project proponents were not included in the category of projects reviewed a second time by the ISRP, they were not included in the list of proponents from whom the Council requested a policy response. The Kootenai Tribe of Idaho did circulate to Council members a justification for this project on October 29th, 1999. Subsequent to the October 29th memorandum, the Kootenai Tribe has maintained phone contact regarding this project. The ISRP was primarily concerned with a lack of connection of this project to an umbrella proposal. Therefore, the tribe stated that the ISRP did not oppose their project on the grounds that it was not scientifically sound, or of questionable benefit to fish, and thus met policy criteria 'a'. It should be noted that this project is well coordinated through the Kootenai River Sturgeon Recovery Team. Criteria 'b' is also met in Measure 10.8B.22 of the Council's program, which directs the Kootenai Tribe of Idaho to perform an ecosystem evaluation, to include the identification of hydropower effects and solutions to ecosystem problems, such as hydropower effects.

Council Recommendation: This project is low cost and of a short duration. The ISRP indicated that the work was valuable, and suggested that it be proposed again next year. The ISRP criticisms seemed to center around concern about the relationship of this project to an umbrella proposal, and can easily be resolved by incorporating this project as a subcontract to project 8806400 'Kootenai River Sturgeon Studies and Conservation Aquaculture," which is the research component for much of the sturgeon work. The sponsor has indicated that this can be done. The Council recommends funding this project at the level recommended by CBFWA for Fiscal Year 2000 at $96,550 and for Fiscal Year 2001 at $18,000 for creation of the report.

Comment: