FY 2000 proposal 199608300

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
199608300 Narrative	Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	CTUIR Grande Ronde Basin Watershed Restoration
Proposal ID	199608300
Organization	Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Allen B. Childs
Mailing address	P.O. Box 638 Pendleton, OR 97801
Phone / email	5412787626 / wildlife@ucinet.com
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycle	FY 2000
Province / Subbasin	Blue Mountain / Grande Ronde
Short description	Protect and enhance riparian, floodplain, and instream habitat with particular emphasis on the holding, spawning, and rearing areas of salmonid fishes, thus improving water quality and quantity and promoting natural ecological functions.
Target species	Threatended Snake River spring chinook salmon (Onchorhyncus tshawytscha), summer steelhead (Onchorhyncus mykiss), and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). Various non-game fish species and multiple wildlife 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
1998	Completed Phase I of McCoy Meadows Restoration Project - reintroduced McCoy Creek to historic meander channels, implemented bioengineering, riparian tree/shrub planting (5,500 + plants installed), installed/relocated floodplain livestock exclosure





1998	McIntyre Creek Road Relocation/Restoration Project
1999	McCoy Meadows Restoration Project
1999	Meadow Creek Restoration
1999	Mainstem Grande Ronde Habitat Enhancement Project Implementation

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
870001	Umatilla River Basin Anadromous Fish Habitat Enhancement Project	To minimize cost, this project shares personnel, vehicles, and equipment with CTUIR Umatilla Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project.
9604601	Walla Walla River Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project	To minimize cost, this project shares personnel, vehicles, and equipment with CTUIR Walla Walla Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement Project.
9402700	Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program (GRMWP)	was in umbrella

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost
Personnel		$80,510
Fringe	@28%	$22,543
Supplies		$13,580
Operating	O&M costs incorporated into personnel and subcontractor line items (manual labor/equipment rental)	$0
NEPA	NEPA/permitting/consultation costs incorporated into personnel line item	$0
Travel		$20,800
Indirect	34% of personnel, services, travel, and services/supplies	$46,717
Subcontractor	Includes equipment rental and labor contracts	$65,850
		$250,000

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 cost	$250,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2000 budget request	$250,000
FY 2000 forecast from 1999	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
To be determined		$0	unknown

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Potential constraints include: (1) the cooperation of private landowners; (2) timely processing of instream work permits by the DSL/COE; 3) completion of ESA-related consultation; 4) completion of cultural resource reviews/consultation w/ SHPO.

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 99-2)

Recommendation:
Fund for one year

Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Fund for one year. Subsequent funding contingent on clearly justified methods that are presented in more detail..

Comments: Watershed assessments are used to determine priority subbasins/stream reaches for habitat improvement projects. Results of projects funded in 1997 and 1998 suggest positive effects of these projects. The proposed work appears to coordinate well with 8402500. Monitoring and evaluation activities are conducted on all projects, but the results should be given in more detail. The proposal should report progress toward accomplishment of biological objectives. Also, more details about methods are needed. The descriptions of tasks and of methods used to achieve the objectives are very general. How specifically will these objectives be met, and how will success or failure to meet them be assessed? The budget is inadequately justified and detailed. For instance, what is the travel for? What do the technicians do, since all the major work is contracted? The projects appear to include a lot of hard engineering; this needs to be justified.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Subregional Team Comments

Recommendation:

Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Reduce Objectives 4 and 5. Potential duplicative efforts were reduced and/or coordination was improved. Objectives and costs were moved to a more appropriate project.

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments

Recommendation:
Technically Sound? No

Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Project seems to overlap (includes many of the same activities) the Grande Ronde Model Watershed Program. The objectives should be more specific and provide a better focus for the individual projects.

Budget should be more specific.

Proposal doesn't demonstrate how funding an additional person will result in meeting biological objectives. The same person is listed for multiple FTEs.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation (NWPPC 2000-6)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]

REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review

Funding category:
expense

Date:
May 2005

FY05 NPCC start of year:	FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:	FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$190,000	$190,000	$190,000

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website