Lapwai Basin Steelhead Density Monitoring (CESU) | Apply Online

Lapwai Basin Steelhead Density Monitoring (CESU) Grant (R14AS00044) - FAQs

1) What is the Lapwai Basin Steelhead Density Monitoring (CESU) grant opportunity?

It is a discretionary cooperative agreement offered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, to fund annual monitoring of steelhead density at six established sites in Idaho's Lapwai Basin. The opportunity is identified by Funding Opportunity Number R14AS00044 and is associated with CFDA 15.517 (Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act).

2) What is the Funding Opportunity Number (FON) for this program?

The Funding Opportunity Number is R14AS00044.

3) Which federal agency offered this opportunity?

The opportunity was offered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation.

4) What CFDA program is this opportunity tied to?

It is tied to CFDA 15.517, under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act.

5) What is the main purpose of the project being funded?

The purpose is to support annual steelhead density monitoring in the Lapwai Basin by collecting consistent, long-term data at six established monitoring sites. The data are intended to help address key uncertainties about steelhead status and response over time.

6) How many monitoring sites are included in the scope of work?

The monitoring is expected to occur at six established sites in Idaho's Lapwai Basin.

7) Why is this monitoring required?

The monitoring is compliance-driven and stems directly from federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) obligations tied to the Lewiston Orchards Project. The monitoring supports implementation of measures and conditions associated with ESA consultation outcomes.

8) What ESA process is connected to this monitoring work?

The work traces back to a Biological Opinion issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act. That Biological Opinion evaluated effects from operation and maintenance of the Lewiston Orchards Project on ESA-listed species.

9) When did Reclamation receive the Biological Opinion from NMFS?

Reclamation received the Biological Opinion on April 15, 2010.

10) What did the Biological Opinion include that relates to this grant?

It included "reasonable and prudent measures" and detailed terms and conditions intended to reduce and manage impacts from any incidental take associated with the Lewiston Orchards Project, which in turn drove development of monitoring requirements.

11) What monitoring plan is specifically referenced?

The 2011 Critical Uncertainties Monitoring Plan for Steelhead Densities and Critical Uncertainties, developed jointly by Reclamation and NMFS.

12) What does the 2011 monitoring plan call for?

It specifically calls for annual steelhead density monitoring in the Lapwai Basin and treats the resulting data as necessary for addressing key uncertainties about steelhead status and response over time.

13) Is this intended to be a one-time study or an ongoing effort?

It is intended as an ongoing, multi-year monitoring effort rather than a one-off study. Reclamation stated it must continue monitoring steelhead densities through 2020.

14) Why does the opportunity emphasize an independent scientific entity?

The published description indicates the monitoring is expected to be conducted by an independent scientific entity, supporting scientific independence and credibility for the annual density data used in compliance and management contexts.

15) Which organization is explicitly identified as fitting the independent scientific role?

The description explicitly identifies the University of Idaho as fitting that role.

16) What background experience is noted for the University of Idaho?

The University of Idaho had been working in the Sweetwater and Lapwai basins since 2008 on research related to steelhead growth and survival, positioning it to provide continuity, scientific independence, and basin-specific expertise.

17) What type of award mechanism was used?

This was a discretionary cooperative agreement, which typically involves more hands-on federal involvement and coordination than a standard grant.

18) How many awards were anticipated under this opportunity?

The opportunity anticipated a single award.

19) What was the estimated total funding amount?

The estimated total funding amount was $194,204.

20) What was the award ceiling?

The award ceiling was $194,204.

21) What was the award floor?

The nominal award floor was $1.

22) Was cost sharing or matching required?

No. The opportunity stated there was no cost sharing or matching requirement.

23) Who was eligible to apply?

Eligible applicants were limited to public and state-controlled institutions of higher education.

24) Why was eligibility limited to those institutions?

The eligibility limitation aligns with the expectation that a university partner would carry out the work as an independent scientific entity under a cooperative agreement structure.

25) When was the opportunity posted?

The announcement was posted on April 28, 2014.

26) What was the application closing date?

The application closing date was May 16, 2014.

27) When was the opportunity archived?

The opportunity was archived on April 28, 2015.

28) Who was the point of contact listed for access and assistance?

The listed point of contact was Melinda Ritacco, Financial Assistance Specialist at the Bureau of Reclamation.

29) What contact information was provided for the point of contact?

Phone: 208-378-5103. Email: mritacco@usbr.gov.

30) What project or federal action is this monitoring associated with?

The monitoring is tied to the Lewiston Orchards Project, specifically to ESA compliance obligations associated with operation and maintenance of that project.

31) What is the core outcome this grant is meant to support?

The core outcome is consistent annual steelhead density data from six sites in the Lapwai Basin to support ESA consultation outcomes and ongoing management decisions associated with the Lewiston Orchards Project.