WSP06393

• File Number: 8220.101.10.B
• Description: Colorado River-Water Projects-Glen Canyon Dam/Lake Powell-Glen Canyon Adaptive Management-TWG
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 2/17/2005
• Title: Budget Ad Hoc Group-GCMRC FY06 Budget and Work Plan Development Question and Response Table
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

00468

TWG Budget Ad hoc Group
GCMRC FY 06 Non-Experimental Budget and Work Plan Development
Question/Response Table

.

General 4

(Norm
Henderson)

GCMRC's
Response to
General
Comment
#4

.

GeneralS

General 6

.

3

burden and the GCMRC salaries are now included in the combined project that the
total cost for the project seems greater than the sum of the two projects described in
the FY 2005 work Ian and bud et.
GCMRC burden is listed as 15% in tbe '06 budget. In tbe past two years two
rates bave been used (15% and 6%), and in 2003, a flat 6% was used. GCMRC
bas indicated tbat it is requesting tbat tbe burden rate be reduced to a flat 6%
for 2006 and feels somewhat confident tbat tbe USGS Director may grant tbe
waiver. It would seem tbat GCMRC sbould identify tbe amount tbat would be
saved and wbere tbe funding would be used if a flat 6% burden rate were
allowed. Specifying tbe savings be used for experimental actions migbt be a
ood wa to 'ustif tbe reduced rate.
On the basis of the GCMRC's understanding of which project elements could
qualify for a special "pass-through" rate of 6%, the original draft work plan (March
2005, edition) budget included this reduced burden rate for only a subset of projects
and was not applied to GCMRC salaries or projected contract costs. To avoid
creating a false sense of fiscal relief, the GCMRC believes that the most
conservative approach to take in making budget projections, is to apply the special
rate to only those project costs that have previously been approved for the "pass-
through" until such time that a final decision is reached on whether or not the
reduced rate will be applied to all science costs (see response to General Comment
#1, above), However, in an attempt to provide the BAHG with additional budget
information relating to this sensitive and critical issue, the GCMRC has prepared two
additional versions of the budget spreadsheets using the proposed alternate burden
rate of6% for all of the GCMRC science funding, While there is a substantial fiscal
relief provided by making this change to the FY 2006, there is absolutely no basis at
this time for assuming that this discounted rate will be approved for use in FY 2006
on all science funds. These alternate versions are provided as means to promote
discussion among the BAHG, but in no way are indicative of a budget policy change
to an across the board reduction in the DOl burden rate for the 2006 fiscal c c1e,
I do tbink tbe Core Monitoring Team and GCMRC need to discuss wbat is
included in core monitoring. For example, is core monitoring just data
collection and looking at trends or is it also separate full data analysis? Sbould
tbe se arate full data anal sis sbow as se arate ro' ect com onents?
The core monitoring activities are focused on data collection and the required data
processing necessary to extend a time series for the resources in question,
Interpretive analysis or synthesis of the existing data must be done as a separate and
additional research activity, Annual updates included in future editions of the
SCORE report would be developed by GCMRC staff using the extended time series
for a given resource response. In this sense, there is a continuation of some level of
interpretive evaluation, Additional elements ofa time series tied to experimental
research would need to be reported within the context of the given treatment or
ro'ecl.
Please include for eacb line item wbetber or not it is power revenues and wbicb
is not. Example is line 94 vs. line 159.

Document Reference: FY06 Master Draft AMP Budget - BOR GCMRC 02lt 7/05 t I :OS AM