1. Elements of project review
- Recognize differences in project types; for example: projects with long-term funding commitments; shorter-term implementation projects (e.g. habitat); and core program-support projects that focus on basinwide data and reporting. Each type may be set on different, but integrated, funding and review paths.
- The Council will work with Bonneville and project sponsors to develop appropriate end dates or review schedules for currently funded projects, based on milestones and deliverables.
- Allow the flexibility to incorporate Bonneville’s ESA requirements and relevant agreements including those identified in the biological opinions and accords as consistent with the Northwest Power Act, section 4(h)(10)(D)
- Utilize existing subregional organizations and their frameworks and annual science workshops to assist with project reviews
- Streamline review process as appropriate and communicate timelines, processes, and expectations as they are developed. The Council will prioritize reviews based on prior findings and oversight including follow through on projects with qualified or conditional Council recommendations. Work with interested parties in the basin to assist in the development of review processes.
- For the program areas that do not yet carry Bonneville funding commitments, the Council will work with Bonneville and the sponsors to develop targeted solicitations for new work.
- Solicitations for new work should take into account the priorities described in the investment strategy.
- To properly scale monitoring and evaluation efforts, the Council expects project sponsors and the ISRP to use the risk uncertainty matrix.