Show new navigation
On
  • Help
    • Help
    • Help Center
    • Data dictionary
    • EF&W Program documents
    • Request support
    • Send feedback
      • View all help topics
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
  • Mitigation work
    Mitigation work View all mitigation work topics
  • Reporting
    Reporting View all reporting topics
  • Funding
    Funding View all funding topics
  • Search

Assessment Summary

View the details of the Council Recommendation for this project as part of the RME / AP Category Review.

Project 2002-013-01 - Water Entity - CBWTP
Assessment Number: 2002-013-01-NPCC-20110113
Project: 2002-013-01 - Water Entity - CBWTP
Review: RME / AP Category Review
Proposal: RMECAT-2002-013-01
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 6/10/2011
Recommendation: Fund (Qualified)
Comments: Implement with condition through FY 2016: Sponsor to address ISRP qualifications in 2012 contract.
Publish Date: 08/23/2011 BPA Response: Agree
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 Qualifications: The Water Transaction Program should complete the development of compliance, implementation, and effectiveness monitoring protocols as soon as possible. Given the lead entity is the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, the proponents should be able to develop their monitoring program fairly quickly. Cost monitoring is needed. Thirty six percent of the budget is to support QLEs. This is a big investment, and CBWTP should systematically evaluate how to keep acquisition and administration costs as low as possible. They could provide some analytical evidence of why this amount is needed to implement the project, because NFWF as the lead entity should be able to assess the cost-effectiveness of the various approaches. This could be summarized in the annual meetings so that each QLE can learn from the experiences of other QLEs. The Consultant’s evaluation report did not address the question of administrative efficiency or cost per acre foot of leased or acquired water under different acquisition strategies. This could include a comparison of the annualized costs for a lease (with the accompanying multiple transaction costs) and outright permanent acquisitions (with the one-time accompanying transaction).
BPA Response to Council Condition #1: Accept CBWTP is working on the development of monitoring protocols during the next year. Cost monitoring and analysis of transactional strategies is also underway, along with systematic analysis of costs and implementation of water transactions. Cost comparisons under different acquisition strategies is expected as part of the transactional analysis. It is BPA's goal to maintain a cost effective program.