CALFEDs 2002 Proposal Solicitation Package Public Meeting April 11, 2002

1
CALFEDs 2002 Proposal Solicitation
PackagePublic MeetingApril 11, 2002
2
Agenda

• Introduction and review process
• Initial funding recommendation
• Public comment procedures
• Q A

3
Purpose of Meeting

• To describe the results of the review process and
  how the initial recommendation was developed.
• To describe how public comments may be made.
• Note Comments on individual projects will not be
  taken at this workshop.

4
2002 ERP Plan Process
5
Draft Stage 1 Implementation Plan

• Priorities for -
• Four regions Sacramento Valley, San Joaquin
  Valley, Delta, Bay
• Multi-regional landscape
• 1 or more actions for each priority

6
Program Integration

• State Proposition 204 13
• Federal CVPIA
• -- Anadromous Fish Restoration Program
• -- Anadromous Fish Screen Program
• -- Habitat Restoration Program
• -- San Joaquin River Riparian Program
• -- Gravel Replenishment Program
• Iron Mountain Mine Program

7
Overall Statistics

• 260 proposals received
• 472 million requested
• Request range 28,000 to 32,500,000
• Average request 1.8 million

8
Types of Proposals

• 112 Restoration
• 105 Research
• 25 Fish screen and ladder construction
• 16 Education

9
Proposal Review and Selection Process
10
Administrative Reviews

• Assess prior performance
• Assess next-phase funding
• Assess environmental compliance needs
• Evaluate budget
• Involved contract managers and other staff from
  CALFED and CVPIA agencies.

11
Land Acquisition Review

• Staff review to
• Highlight projects ecological value
• Assess conformance with ROD commitments
• Highlight time-sensitive acquisitions

12
Regional Reviews

• Assess regional priority linkages
• Assess local feasibility
• Assess local involvement
• Involved over 50 regional experts including
  stakeholders, agency staff, and scientists.

13
External Review

• Evaluate goals, objectives and hypotheses
• Assess approach and justification for project
• Evaluate technical feasibility and value of
  products
• Comment on cost/benefit
• Generated nearly 800 independent reviews by
  technical and scientific experts from across the
  country

14
Technical Panel Review

• Rate proposals technical quality
• Consolidate External and Panelist Scientific
  reviews
• Consider Regional and Administrative reviews
• Recommend possible conditions
• Involved over 50 technical experts and
  scientists, many from outside California

15
Selection Panel

• Provide strategic funding recommendations among
  the high quality proposals
• Consisted of a panel of 15 scientists, agency
  leaders and stakeholders

16
Funding Strategy

• Contribute to regionally significant, large-scale
  restoration efforts
• Complement other restoration efforts already
  underway
• Improve understanding of key uncertainties
• Sustain worthy efforts (next-phase funding)

17
Initial Recommendation

• Fund
• as is
• in part
• with conditions
• Consider as a Directed Action
• Not recommended

18
Initial Recommendation

• Fund 55 proposals totaling about 57 million
• Consider including an additional 36 proposals
  totaling about 129 million as directed actions
  in annual work plans
• Do not fund remaining 166 proposals totaling
  about 265 million

19
2002 ERP PSP Initial Recommendation
20
Funded Proposals by RegionTotals 56.8 million
for 55 projects
21
Funded Proposals by Topic Area Totals 56.8
million for 55 projects
22
Funded Proposals by Project Type Totals 56.8
million for 55 projects
23
Funded Proposals by Applicant Type Totals 56.8
million for 55 projects
24
Access to Recommendation and Reviews

• Initial recommendation and reviews associated
  with all proposals are available via the web.
• CALFED website
• http//calfed.water.ca.gov/ecosystem_rest.html
• Click on Selection Panel Initial
  Recommendation

25
Timeframe for projects Recommended for Funding
Selection Panel develops initial recommendation
Selection Panel develops final recommendation
Funding package approved
Public Comment
Policy Review
Proposal Review
Jan 2002
Feb
March
April
May
June
26
Public Comment Procedures

• The main purpose is to provide local governments
  and tribes time to review potential actions
  within their jurisdiction
• Applicants may only clarify information already
  in proposal, but may not submit new information

27
Public Comment Procedures

• Public comment period April 11 - May 10
• Written comments only
• Must be received by 3p.m. Friday May 10
• Send comments to
• Dan Ray
• CALFED Bay-Delta Program
• 1416 9th Street, Suite 630
• Sacramento, CA 95814

28
Conditions for Funded Projects

• Work commences only when agreement is signed by
  contracting agency
• Project must comply with applicable laws and
  regulations
• Permission for access is obtained

29
Next Steps

• Conduct directed action process
• Identify gaps and revise priorities based on
  regional and other input
• Develop Year 3 Annual Work Plan and Budget

30
Timeframe for projects toConsider as Directed
Actions

• Request revised proposal by late summer
• Conduct additional review
• Selection Panel considers and makes
  recommendation in late fall
• Funding approval expected by early 2003