FY 2003 Mainstem/Systemwide proposal 199601900

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
199601900 Narrative	Narrative
199601900 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
199601900 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Second-Tier Database Support
Proposal ID	199601900
Organization	University of Washington (UW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	James J. Anderson
Mailing address	1325 - 4th Ave., Suite 1820 Seattle, WA 98101
Phone / email	2065434772 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project	David Askren, BPA
Review cycle	Mainstem/Systemwide
Province / Subbasin	Mainstem/Systemwide /
Short description	Provide single-point, internet-based access to a subset of information to guide and support BPA's independent decisions pertaining to its responsibilities under the Power Act and Endangered Species Act.
Target species

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
198
152

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS/BPA	Action 198	NMFS	The Action Agencies, in coordination with NMFS, USFWS, and other Federal agencies, NWPPC, states, and Tribes, shall develop a common data management system for fish populations, water quality, and habitat data.
NMFS	Action 198	NMFS	The Action Agencies, in coordination with NMFS, USFWS, and other Federal agencies, NWPPC, states, and Tribes, shall develop a common data management system for fish populations, water quality, and habitat data.
NMFS	Action 152	NMFS	The Action Agencies shall coordinate their efforts and support offsite habitat enhancement measures undertaken by other Federal agencies, states, Tribes, and local governments by the following:
NMFS/BPA	Action 180	NMFS	The Action Agencies and NMFS shall work within regional prioritization and congressional appropriation processes to establish and provide the level of FCRPS funding to develop and implement a basinwide hierarchical monitoring program. This program shall be developed collaboratively with appropriate regional agencies and shall determine population and environmental status (including assessment of performance measures and standards) and allow ground-truthing of regional databases. A draft program including protocols for specific data to be collected, frequency of samples, and sampling sites shall be developed by September 2001. Implementation should begin no later than the spring of 2002 and will be fully implemented no later than 2003.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
1995	Initial analysis, design, and implementation of DART 1,358 weekly accesses in December 1995 Designed DART main web page Inter-organizational contact and coordination Automated data acquisition Graphics design (joint effort with Dr. John Skalski's group)
1996	Interacted and coordinated with primary sites (PSMFC, USACE, FPC) 3,736 weekly accesses in April 1996 Added new river and PIT-Tag features Created numerous reports, scripts and web pages Created data processing scripts Added new databases
1997	Interacted and coordinated with primary sites (PSMFC, USACE, FPC) 10,010 weekly accesses in April 1997 Updated processing scripts Added adult features Added CWT data, USGS data Daily maintenance and backups
	BPA interface for Technical Management Team requests
	Automated reporting to USACE via BPA
1998	Interacted and coordinated with primary sites (PSMFC, USACE, FPC)
	10,643 weekly accesses in April 1998
	Updated processing scripts
	Added PNI Index, recreational fishing page
	Updated USGS data
	System upgrade and migration to data warehouse status
	Built PIT Tag ESU at the request of Technical Management Team
	Daily maintenance and backups
	Responded to 111,000 web customers via DART web services
1999	Interacted and coordinated with primary sites (PSMFC, USACE, FPC)
	10,590 weekly accesses in April 1999
	Added hourly water quality at the request of USACE
	Upgraded graphics
	Upgraded and added new reporting functions for USGS and USACE
	Rewrote scripts to process FPC and USACE data files
	Upgraded the system
	Upgraded ESU at the request of Technical Management Team
	Daily maintenance and backups
	Y2K conversion for all internal applications
	Responded to 238,000 web customers via DART web services
2000	Interacted and coordinated with primary sites (PSMFC, USACE, FPC)
	17,481 weekly accesses in April 2000
	Added oceanographic and climate data
	Upgraded DART to E-450 Solaris
	Gave ISRP review of DART and on-site demo at CBR/UW
	Tested conversion to Oracle capabilities with recommendations to BPA
	Added JavaDart (java graphics for advanced users)
	Upgraded coded wire tag database on the web
	Preliminary design for a spawner-recruit database for BPA
	Responded to 51,784 web customers (number for Jan-Apr) via DART web services
	Daily maintenance and backups
2001	Interacted & coordinated with expanded number of primary sites (PSMFC, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Grant County PUD,Douglas County PUD Chelan County PUD, USGS, PFEL, NWS, NCDC, NBR, SnoTel, NOAA, and Fish Passage Center)
	Acquired and assimilated USGS Historical water temperature data for the Snake River Basin
	Acquired and assimilated USACE mainstem turbidity data
	Extended current ESU definitions and reports to historical years
	Implemented Disc Mirroring and unloaded DB backup systems to improve recovery and reduce downtime from hardware and software failures
	Implemented archive of primary data sources
	Expanded Bonneville adult passage data set back through 1949
	Added coil specific PIT-tag data to allow CJS survival and travel-time analysis
	Launched release summary query at ISAB request
	Developed OLAP queries to provide user-selected CJS survival and travel time analysis
	Added Tag Coordinator as standard PIT-tag query selection
	Updated and improved DART's online help pages
	Obtained full year of oxygen saturation data for mainstem dams
	Responded to 405,884 web customers via DART web services
	Daily maintanence, backups, and performance tuning
2002	Integrated 3 climate information sources (USACE, NWS, Sno-Tel) with the NCDC historical records to provide extensive timeseries of climate records
	Adjusted data loads to accommodate modified USACE source files
	Acquired complete set of historical transport information
	Updated PNI to include 2001 data
	Assimilated Bonneville adult passage data from 1938-1948
	Adjusted USGS data collection procedures to access updates USGS server
	Added date restriction data selection capabilities to many of its query pages enabling researchers to select data from desired time windows
	Developed and launched hydrosystem performance measures of smolt exposures to temperature, spill, outflow and dissolved gas
	Upgraded DB server with 500MB RAM

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
	FISH passage CEnter	DART automatically downloades data from FPC
	STREAM NET	DART access stream net CTW and PIT tag data for use in DART's analysis tools for example the survival analysis tool

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 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 2003 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	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost
DART operations and regional support	2003-2007	$103,167
2. Real-time operations	2003-2007	$79,524
Tool development	2003-2007	$62,330
Planning and coordination	2003-2007	$30,090

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. DART operations and regional support	2004	2007	$201,103
2. Real-time operations	2004	2007	$155,017
3. Tool development	2004	2007	$121,500
4. Planning and coordination	2004	2007	$58,655

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$264,075	$272,200	$280,651	$287,946

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 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 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 8% faculty, 16% student, 50% system support, 100% data mgnt, 66% webprog, 25% admin.	$125,465
Fringe	Different rates applied according to UW benefit rates for faculty and staff categories.	$29,555
Supplies	Books, journals, misc. computer supplies	$8,000
Travel	Trips to regional meetings & conferences	$1,000
Indirect	26% (excl. student fees, equip, office lease)	$44,044
Capital	Upgrade processor for E-450	$22,000
Other	Services and office lease	$45,047
		$275,111

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$275,111
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$275,111
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$275,000
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2002-13)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Aug 2, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. This is a valuable project providing service to the scientific community in the region at relatively low cost. Previous concerns of the ISRP with overlap of responsibilities between database projects have been addressed. In fact, some degree of overlap of services provided by second tier database projects (modeling, projections, analysis, use of multiple first tier (primary) databases) is healthy for the region, because it promotes careful evaluation of assumptions made in analyses of primary data. The project history and technical background sections are informative, however the Section f. Proposal objectives, tasks and methods is too brief to allow scientific review. The response should provide specific tasks and detailed methods to accomplish each objective (some of the necessary material is in the other sections). Also, the project must have a monitoring and evaluation plan, including for example, lists of services provided. It is not acceptable for one of the most quantitative projects to not have a quantitative monitoring and evaluation plan in the proposal.

Only 4 objectives are identified, but in the text, it is stated that an FTE is needed for objective 5. Please clarify.

Action Agency/NMFS RME Group Comments:

DATA MANAGEMENT SUBGROUP -- Action 180:

The DART proposal is not considered a core contribution to a basin wide hierarchical monitoring program and appears to be more closely directed to reporting and tracking the effect of temperature, flow and gas changes on populations and passage.

Action 198

Apart from indicating general support and suggesting actions that should take place DART does not propose any particular actions.

Pros:

Identified as a non-discretionary work element by BPA
Project has created and maintains a number of mainstem FCRPS applications for TDG, flow operations and temperature.
Applications integrate data from Fish Passage Center, Corps of Engineers, tagging programs, StreamNet, EPA and others.
Will participate in Regional database integration using tools such as XML.
Provides tracking of performance standards for the hydro system called for under the BiOp.

Cons:

The DART proposals for RME are not specific enough to meet RME needs.

ISRP Remarks on RME Group Comments:

The ISRP is somewhat confused by comments on this and other proposals. In other cases, e.g., #35048, there is apparently strong support for analyses of primary data to be conducted in second tier databases, whereas there is weak support for similar analyses to be conducted under this project. The response should more clearly identify current and proposed tasks and services to meet the needs of RPA 198.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Oct 24, 2002

Comment:

The DART website is partially redundant to the Fish Passage Center website. BPA funds DART for an independent source of information and should fund the project through BPA Fish and Wildlife Division overhead.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-14)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Nov 5, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. Disagree with CBFWA's recommendation of Do Not Fund. This valuable project provides service to the scientific community in the region at relatively low cost. Specifically, it provides access to and analysis of data from multiple databases. Previous concerns of the ISRP with overlap of responsibilities between database projects have been addressed. In fact, some degree of overlap of services provided by second tier database projects (modeling, projections, analysis, use of multiple first tier (primary) databases) is healthy for the region, because it promotes careful evaluation of assumptions made in analyses of primary data. This project is also on the frontier in providing a prototype reporting and analysis application for access to distributed databases, a need that has previously been identified by the ISRP.

The project history and technical background sections are informative, and the sponsor provided careful and complete responses to the ISRP concerns with objectives, tasks, methods, and monitoring and evaluation. The sponsor understood and responded to the concern that quantitative projects that monitor and analyze data from other projects have an internal component for monitoring and evaluation of themselves. For example, a number of DART's tools report predictions of adult or juvenile passage, water quality and transport. These tools can be evaluated on the correspondence of predictions to observed data. Each year, DART provides an on-line, post-season analysis of the accuracy of these predictions.

Again, the ISRP would like to comment that we were somewhat confused by the Action Agency/NMFS RME Group Comments on this and other proposals. In other cases, e.g., proposal #35048, there is apparently strong support by the RME group for analyses of primary data to be conducted in second tier databases, whereas there is very weak support for similar analyses to be conducted by DART. The ISRP believes there is an inconsistency here.

The next proposal should include an evaluative summary of usage to date that indicates the distribution of use across different types of users, as well as the distribution of use across different products. It should include the details of a plan for how DART assesses demand for current and new products, the type of outreach that is done to assess demand, and methods used to inform and expand the user base.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Jan 21, 2003

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit
Indirect. This project will provide integration and direct and timely public access to Columbia Basin environmental, operational, fishery, administrative, and other information essential to aid operational and resource management decisions by the Federal Government.

Comments
Project overlaps with several other database projects but also has the potential to integrate data from numerous other sources.

Already ESA Required?
No

Biop?
Yes

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund (Tier 1)

Date:
Jun 11, 2003

Comment:

Category:
1. Council Staff preferred projects that fit province allocation

Comments:
Identified as Bi-op critical.

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision

Recommendation:

Date:
Aug 4, 2003

Comment:

Provides integrated data access for use in in-season management and hydrosystem performance tracking. Budget consistent with NPCC recommendation.

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

Budget gradually increase in anticipation of cost replacements increase for software/hardware in the future, as well as other contractual services.

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:
$264,075	$264,075	$264,075

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website