FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 199601100
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 199601100 Narrative | Narrative |
| 199601100 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| Columbia Plateau: Walla Walla Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Columbia Plateau: Walla Walla Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Walla Walla River Juvenile and Adult Passage Improvements |
| Proposal ID | 199601100 |
| Organization | Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Brian Zimmerman |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 638 Pendleton, OR 97801 |
| Phone / email | 5412764109 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | Gary A. James |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Walla Walla |
| Short description | Provide safe passage for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin by constructing and maintaining passage facilities at irrigation diversion dams and canals. |
| Target species | Spring chinook, summer steelhead, and bull trout. Summer steelhead are part of the listed Mid-Columbia ESU and bull trout are part of the listed Columbia River population segment. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.17 | -118.43 | Burlingame Dam and canal located near College Place |
| 45.95 | -118.38 | Nursery Bridge Dam in Milton-Freewater |
| 45.93 | -118.38 | Little Walla Walla River headworks in Milton-Freewater |
| Projects may occur anywhere in the Walla Walla River Basin including Touchet R and Mill Ck |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS | Action 153 | NMFS | BPA shall, working with agricultural incentive programs such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, negotiate and fund long-term protection for 100 miles of riparian buffers per year in accordance with criteria BPA and NMFS will develop by June 1, 2001. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 1997 | Removed Marie Dorian Dam on the Walla Walla River |
| 1998 | Removed Maiden Dam on the Touchet River |
| 1998 | Constructed Burlingame Dam fish ladder on the Walla Walla River |
| 1999 | Constructed Burlingame Canal fish screens and bypass on the Walla Walla River |
| 1999 | Preliminary design for Hofer Dam screens and fishway on the Touchet River |
| 2000 | Constructed Little Walla Walla River fish screens, juvenile trap, and fishway on the Walla Walla River |
| 2000 | Constructed Smith-Nelson screens on the Walla Walla River |
| 2000 | Completed feasibility study on additional passage needs in the Walla Walla Basin |
| 2001 | Cost shared construction of Nursery Bridge Dam fish ladder on the Walla Walla River |
| 2001 | Designed Garden City/Lowden II screens and ditch consolidation on the Walla Walla River |
| 2001 | Designed Milton Ditch consolidation |
| 2001 | Cost shared construction of new intake screens for City of Walla Walla water supply on Mill Creek |
| 2001 | Contracted for operation and maintenance of BPA funded passage facilities in Walla Walla Basin |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 20139 | Walla Walla River Fish Passage Operations | Project 20139 identifies passage improvements to be completed under the proposed project. Project 20139 also provides technical input on facility designs and operational criteria and is involved in operation and maintenace of facilities after completion. |
| 8805302 | NEOH Walla Walla Hatchery Facility | After completion of hatchery, proposed project will provide improved passage for adults and juveniles produced from the facility. |
| 9604601 | Walla Walla Basin Fish Habitat Enhancement | Proposed project provides improved passage for adults and juveniles to and from natural production areas. |
| 20127 | Walla Walla Basin Natural Production M&E | Proposed project provides improved passage for natural adults and juveniles to and from natural production areas. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin | a. Complete final planning and design for Bergevin-Williams diversion screens | 1 | $141,000 | Yes |
| 1. | b. Complete final planning and design for Old Lowden diversion screens | 1 | $115,000 | Yes |
| 1. | c. Complete final planning and design for Titus Creek screens | 1 | $60,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin (Gose St.) | 2003 | 2003 | $250,000 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
| FY 2003 |
|---|
| $250,000 |
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin | d. Construct juvenile screens and adult fishway at Hofer Dam | 1 | $715,000 | Yes |
| 1. | e. Construct Milton Ditch consolidation | Ongoing | $1,500,000 | Yes |
| 1. | f. Provide cost share funds for small project construction | 1 | $100,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin (B/W, Old Lowden, Titus Ck in FY2003 and Gose St in FY2004) | 2003 | 2006 | $2,950,000 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $1,650,000 | $1,100,000 | $100,000 | $100,000 |
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin | g. Provide O&M at BPA funded passage facilities in the Walla Walla Basin | Ongoing | $200,000 | Yes |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin | 2003 | 2006 | $985,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $200,000 | $250,000 | $260,000 | $275,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin | h. Monitor and evaluate newly constructed fish passage facilities in the Walla Walla Basin. | 5 | $25,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Provide safe passage at diversion structures for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin | 2003 | 2006 | $100,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $25,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Indirect | 34% | $0 |
| Capital | $2,315,000 | |
| Subcontractor | All design, O&M, and M&E work is subcontracted to various entities | $541,000 |
| $2,856,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $2,856,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $2,856,000 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $1,657,500 |
| % change from forecast | 72.3% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
Three primary reasons account for the increase in budget over the FY2001 forecast; cost inflations over those identified in the planning process, implemention deferrals, and additional projects being implemented. Since ESA listings of summer steelhead and bull trout in the basin, projects have been reprioritized for maximum benefit to these groups. This has resulted in implementation deferrals and delays which have led to increased construction costs. Also, additional projects have been identified for implementation for the same reason.
Reason for change in scope
The project has not changed in general scope (improving passage conditions). However, there has been an increase in both the number of projects to be implemented and resulting time frame for completion of those projects. Again, this is related to the ESA listings.
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Various - as yet to be identified | Small projects implemented by public and private groups may qualify for funds from the "small project cost share fund" - at a minimum 50% cost share would be required | $100,000 | cash |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable provided further assurance is given that monitoring and evaluation of fish passage will be conducted whether or not the separate proposal is funded (#20139), and a mechanism is established for written annual reports of progress.
This is a good proposal on a subject that is important for the Walla Walla River subbasin. The need to repair problems generated by irrigation was clear. The Subbasin Summary provides the integration requested in previous ISRP reviews. The main drawback in this proposal is the lack of functional monitoring and evaluation of the biological success of passage improvements (dam removal or improved passage routes and intake screening). The only monitoring is to see if biological criteria of the newly engineered structures are met. See the ISRP's general comments in this report for information on monitoring (effectiveness monitoring for fish—Tier 1—seems needed as well as the planned monitoring of the equipment functioning). This deficiency appears to be partly addressed by a new project proposal (#20139) but there is no assurance that this new proposal will be funded (what monitoring would be done if that proposal is not funded?). Also, there is no plan for written reporting of results, which should be included in the response.
The species involved are identified to ESU. There is a good list of engineering accomplishments (Part 1) and discussion of them in Part 2, but no indication of monitoring results that indicate any benefit was obtained. The proposal states that it is "assumed" that benefits accrue. The narrative specifically states that no progress reports are filed, which seems to be a major deficiency. Results must be demonstrated via mechanisms other than the brief summary in the renewal proposal three years later. The costs are well laid out, including the increase if funding requested compared to the estimate from last year. There is minimal cost sharing, except for a few unspecified small projects. Objectives, tasks, and methods are fine, considering the actual work will be subcontracted. Reference list is adequate. Resumes for proposer staff are fine. However, a bit more information on the qualification criteria for subcontractors would be helpful. Bottom line is to fund with qualifications to cover deficiencies.
Comment:
Project addresses NMFS RPA 149.Comment:
Fundable. The response provided further assurance that monitoring and evaluation of fish passage will be conducted and written annual reports of progress will be provided.This is a good proposal on a subject that is important for the Walla Walla River subbasin. The need to repair problems generated by irrigation was clear. The Subbasin Summary provides the integration requested in previous ISRP reviews of this project. The species involved are identified to ESU. There is a good list of engineering accomplishments (Part 1) and discussion of them in Part 2. The costs are well laid out, including the increase if funding requested compared to the estimate from last year. There is minimal cost sharing, except for a few unspecified small projects. Objectives, tasks, and methods are fine, considering the actual work will be subcontracted. Reference list is adequate. Resumes for proposer staff are fine.
The main drawback in the written proposal was the apparent lack of functional monitoring and evaluation of the biological success of passage improvements (dam removal or improved passage routes and intake screening). The only monitoring within this project is to see if biological criteria of the newly engineered structures are met. See the ISRP's general comments in the preliminary report for information on monitoring (effectiveness monitoring for fish—Tier 1—seems needed as well as the planned monitoring of the equipment functioning). This deficiency was addressed in the response, which indicated that subbasin monitoring already in place (current project 200003300) will cover the results of this project. It will be important for this project to link its work to the results of that monitoring, both in annual reports and in subsequent proposals. This project should be tied to a watershed assessment. Also, there was no plan for written reporting of results, which the response indicated would be remedied.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUprovide safe downstream passage at irrigation diversions in the Wall Walla Basin
Comments
Proposal is strong. ISRP states that it is important to the subbasin. Not a BiOp priority subbasin.
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? yes
Comment:
This is a very expensive undertaking that does not sufficiently discuss its relationship to necessary stream flows. There also does not appear to be any cost sharing with irrigation entities. BPA will likely consider a criterion for funding that requires cost sharing on the part of the project sponsor; otherwise BPA recommends awaiting the preparation of a Walla Walla Subbasin Plan.Comment:
Walla Walla tributary screening program (Project 199601100). ISRP "fundable" recommendation.
Project intends to provide safe passage for migrating juvenile and adult salmonids in the Walla Walla Basin by constructing and maintaining passage facilities at irrigation diversion dams and canals. BPA considers this a very expensive undertaking that is not linked to the streams flows as they exist in the subbasin. BPA recommends that this effort be defined and presented in the subbasin planning effort.
Staff Recommendation: Council staff concurs with BPA's findings that continuing the implementation of the project should be addressed as part of the subbasin planning effort. Therefore, funding for this project should address anticipated cost share needs of the COE, O&M, M&E and (FY 2002 Section 5, objective 1 task f; Section 6, objective1 task g, and Section 7, objective 1 task h.
Budget effect on base program (Project 199601100):
| FY 2002 | FY 2003 | FY 2004 |
|---|---|---|
| No effect | No effect | No effect |
Comment:
Fund O&M only at this time - BPA will work with the Council, CTUIR and CBFWA to address needs for additional FY02 construction funds through the Council's Within-year reallocation process.Comment:
Has an expense and capital component. 03 had a within year allocation that increased accrual. 1.67M in capital includes Milton (04 in council recommended column reflects expense). Check the capital plan. BPA would like to see separate project for the expense O&M piece. Capital would be 1.9M and would have to be a scope change. 05 O&M includes Milton.Comment:
Has an expense and capital component. 03 had a within year allocation that increased accrual. 1.67M in capital includes Milton (04 in column reflects expense). Check the capital plan. BPA would like to see separate project for the expense O&M piece. CapComment:
Increase in funding for FY 04 includes facility operation & maintenance, monitoring & evaluation, small project cost share, design Bergevin-Williams screen, design Old Lowden screen and finish design & construct Hofer ladder screen. FY 05 increase in funding includes; facilities operation & maintenance, monitoring & evaluation, small project cost share construction of Bergevin-Williams screen and construction of Old Lowden screen.Comment:
In FY 03 CTUIR is seeking an increase of $9,509 to cover previous years of unfunded increases in Indirect rates. FY 03 Sponsor Recommended level would increase to from $228,000 to $237,509. Previous year budgets were submitted with a 34% Indirect rate because the Department of Interior hadn't yet issued new approved rates for BPA to consider. Unfunded 2002 Indirect Rate Increase @ 37.2% = $418. Unfunded 2003 Indirect Rate Increase @ 39.64% = $9,027.NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $317,000 | $317,000 | $317,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website