FY 2000 proposal 199303701

Additional documents

TitleType
199303701 Narrative Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleStochastic Life Cycle Model Technical Assistance
Proposal ID199303701
OrganizationPaulsen Environmental Research Ltd (PER Ltd.)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameCharles M. Paulsen
Mailing address16016 SW Boones Ferry Rd Suite 4 Lake Oswego, OR 97035
Phone / email5036994115 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinMainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide
Short descriptionProvide technical assistance to PATH participants in statistical analyses of hypotheses regardings past declines of ESA-listed stocks, design of adaptive manegement actions, and the future effects of salmonid management actions
Target speciesColumbia-basin salmonids
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment
1996 Performed data reconnaissance, acquisition and refinement prior to completion of retrospective analyses of specific hypotheses
1997 For Snake River spring and summer chinook salmon, performed detailed retrospective analyses for hypotheses related to hydrosystem decisions, and the relevant hypotheses concerning climate, habitat, harvest and hatchery factors.
1998 Performed and documented a Snake River Spring/summer chinook Decision Analysis for hydrosystem management alternatives

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription
9600800 State, Tribal and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Participation in PATH PATH scientific support
8910800 Modeling PATH/ BPA technical support Univ. of Washington PATH scientific support
9203200 USFS modeling support PATH scientific support
9601700 Hydrosystem Work Particiption A. Giorgi PATH scientific support
9600600 Facilitation, Technical Assistance And Peer Review Of Path was in umbrella table

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel $150,000
Fringe $0
Supplies $3,000
Travel $7,000
Subcontractor $20,000
$180,000
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$180,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$180,000
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Litigation among agencies. Unexpected delays in 1999 decision on Snake River. uncertain. Unexpected problems with run reconstructions and model development.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Do not fund. PATH, in its present form, with its present mission, should be phased out. A simpler process could be created to meet the continuing need for evaluation of the limited data now available to address management questions relative to the hydro biological opinion. A more ambitious and comprehensive scientific consensus process should be developed, somewhat along the lines of PATH, to address data collection design issues for the basin, to identify data needs that are critical to the actual management questions, and to ensure that data needs are met, to the extent practical, as quickly as possible, in a coordinated and efficient manner.

Comments: The proposal is well written and clearly identifies the link between the objectives and programmatic needs. It is clear what he is doing and intends to pursue. He does a good job documenting his previous efforts but it is not clear how these efforts have been applied to the PATH effort. The absence of publications, given the significance of the topics that are claimed to have been addressed, is of concern. He should publish his results in peer reviewed literature. He seems to have the only proposal that addresses the recommendations of the SRP to simplify the modeling.


Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

PATH projects reviewed in detail last year, little has changed. Question amount of hours. Needs to be related through an umbrella. Due to budget constraints, AFM suggests holding these projects to the FY99 funding level.
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Criteria all: Met? Yes - Part of 9600600 umbrella. 3% budget increase over FY99
Recommendation:
Fund for the transition period
Date:
Oct 29, 1999

Comment:

Fund for transition period. See the programmatic recommendation in project 9600600.
Recommendation:
Fund for transition
Date:
Nov 8, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Money placed in BPA Tech Support Project Placeholder
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 12-7-99 Council Meeting]; Funding subject to independent review: BPA non-discretionary (Technical Support Project Placeholder)