For more information:
Chip McConnaha, Manager Program Analysis and
Evaluation 1-800-452-5161

Transition Board to finalize legislative package on transmission and stranded cost recovery on August 13th

For more information: Dick Watson, Power Division Director 1-800-452-5161

After reviewing nearly 400 project proposals representing more than $200 million in funding requests - approximately $127 million is available - the scientists reported that about 40 percent were inadequate. The scientists made no recommendations for those projects, mainly because the project proposals did not contain enough technical information for a thorough scientific review.

The report speculates that "? some project managers were not informed of or misunderstood the importance of their annual proposal." Projects without ISRP recommendations still could be recommended by the Council for funding. The ISRP committed to work with the region's fish and wildlife managers to improve the quality of project proposals in future years.

"The report clearly shows scientific scrutiny of these ratepayer-funded projects is increasing, and that we are serious about conducting a thorough annual review," Council Chairman John Etchart said.

Meanwhile, the ISRP supported a number of the project-funding recommendations of the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority, an association of the region's state, tribal and federal fish and wildlife managers that also reviewed the project proposals. The ISRP also deferred a number of project proposals having to do with fish hatcheries. As with the inadequate proposals, the scientists were not commenting on the value of the projects but, regarding artificial production, withholding funding recommendations until a comprehensive review of all Columbia River Basin artificial production is completed by the Power Planning Council next summer.

In their report, the scientists recommended a number of ways to improve 1) annual project selection for the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, and 2) annual program implementation.

Regarding project selection, the ISRP identified seven questions that should be asked as project proposals are reviewed by the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority and considered by the Council for inclusion in the mix of projects that make up the program. These are:
1. Do the projects fit together into a coordinated and coherent program?
2. Has the program worked as currently implemented?
3. Is there reason to believe the program will work?
4. Is deployment on the correct scale?
5. Are the right measures of performance being monitored?
6. Is the right spectrum of interventions being tested?
7. Are the right questions being asked?

According to the report, "the ISRP believes the answers to these questions are critical to the successful implementation of the Fish and Wildlife Program."

The ISRP plans to address these questions in future reports. The ISRP also recommended a number of ways to improve program implementation. Among the key recommendations:
? Create a multi-year funding process for specific ongoing projects or groups of similar projects so that each doesn't have to be reviewed anew each year. For example, coordinate all white sturgeon studies, from the mainstem of the Columbia to headwaters tributaries such as the Kootenai River.
? Tie staff funding requests to specific project proposals, justify the need for staff positions, and define the work, costs and results in terms of project objectives.
? Within two or three years, require a watershed assessment as a prerequisite for habitat enhancement projects. In the meantime, fund only those habitat projects that include a clear technical justification using existing watershed information.

The ISRP review is a key step toward funding fish and wildlife recovery projects. The ISRP review had a significant impact on the Council's fish and wildlife program last year when, based on the scientists' recommendations, the region scaled back measures including law enforcement, predator control and gas bubble monitoring. Also, the Council initiated a rigorous process for selecting watershed restoration projects and launched the review of fish hatcheries, the first comprehensive assessment of the role of hatcheries in the Columbia basin.

The Independent Scientific Review Panel's report is available from the Council's office at 800-452-5161 (request document ISRP98-1 [420k PDF]). An appendix, document ISRP98-1A, includes the panel's comments about individual projects. The Council will accept public comments on the project proposals through August 12. The project proposals also are available at the Council's web site.

At its June 23rd meeting, the Northwest Energy Review Transition Board heard public comment on its June 11th draft proposal for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulation of Bonneville's transmission system and a contingent cost recovery mechanism. The views expressed during the meeting were varied, but all offered constructive suggestions on how the draft proposal could be improved. To ensure that all the comments are considered adequately, the Board's next meeting has been rescheduled from July 23rd to August 13th. It is the Board's intention to finalize its recommendations to the four Northwest governors at that time.