Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00471 <br />TWG Budget Ad hoc Group <br />GCMRC FY 06 Non-Experimental Budget and Work Plan Development <br />Question/Response Table <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />22 <br />(Norm <br />Henderson) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />GCMRC's <br />Response to <br />Comment <br />#22 <br /> <br />23 <br />(WAPA) <br /> <br />GCMRC's <br />Response to <br />Comment <br />#23 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br />. FY05 $315,000 + 59,000 + burden = $430,00 <br />. FY06 $400,500 + burden = $460,575 (this is $17,675,00 more than <br />the COLA at 3%) <br /> <br />In past years, the salary for the aquatic biologist was shared between fishery work <br />and the aquatic food base program. In FY06 the salary is tied solely to the aquatic <br />food base, <br /> <br />This project is being put out in FY2005 as an RFP. As such the project will receive <br />proposals from outsides sources that will be subject to peer review, The review is <br />anticipated to occur in August 2005, [Need to re-distribute the Terrestrial Biologist <br />salary to other projects where time will be spent in FY 2006, such as Downstream <br />Integrated QW programs, The May IS'h Knowledge Assessment workshop will <br />focus on a presentation by GCMRC recounting the status of knowledge related to the <br />CRE with res ect to food web process and linkage with ecolo y,] <br />Line 88 (Foodbase) - The budget and workplan indicates that funds have been <br />or will be expended (in '04 and '05, respectively) yet the description of the <br />project indicates that the RFP will be issued in '05 and implemented in '06. It is <br />unclear how the '04 funds were utilized and if the RFP is obligated in '05, how <br />will the '06 funds be utilized? <br />In FY2004 the budget for food base monitoring was reduced to support experimental <br />flows work which included primary production and carbon flux, food base impacts <br />of fluctuating flows and experimental high flows (EHF), The program manager at <br />the time, Steven Gloss, initiated a research program for a carbon budget that utilized <br />a portion of these funds to test methods to measure productivity, The total budget in <br />FY04 associated with food base work was $367,000, The EHF money and <br />remaining money in the food base monitoring project was intended for carry forward <br />into FY05, As a result of shortfalls associated with overhead rates, this money was <br />used to cover these expenses in FY04, In FY05 the budgeted amount for food base <br />work is 315,000, The funds in FY05 are being allocated for the RFP and to cover <br />the aquatic biologist position, In FY06, the proposed budget is intended to support <br />the RFP that is funded in FY05 for a second year. This is a multi-year project <br />involving 2 field seasons to account for variability. Funds to be available to <br />researcher/coo erators is a roximatel 200,000/ ear for a roximateI two ears, <br />82, line 88, Should be RES not CM. It is unclear bow 05 S were spent and how <br />06 will be spent if issuing an RFP in 08. For 06, are there any river trips? How <br />much will it cost to develop the long term monitoring protocols? Please show <br />bow the S460k is divided b ro'ect com onents. <br />We can change the CM to RES, <br />In 05 the dollars are being spent to pay salary for the aquatic biologist's position at <br />GCMRC and to be obligated to a research team following the release of an RFP in <br />May and subsequent review and award in August of2005, The intent of this <br />initiative is to develop monitoring protocols so that an RFP for monitoring of food <br />base can be released in FYOS, The money budgeted in FY06 will support a multi- <br />ear effort to develo a monitorin roach, This would be the second ear of <br /> <br />Documenr Reference: FY06 Master Draft AMP Budget - BOR GCMRC 02117105 11,05 AM <br />