FY 2003 Lower Columbia proposal 31022

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
31022 Narrative	Narrative
31022 Sponsor Response to the ISRP	Response
Letter from T. Fitzsimmons (WA Dept of Ecology) and J. Koenings (WDFW) to F. Cassidy and T. Karier (NPCC) RE: State of Washington project proposals for the Columbia Cascade and Lower Columbia Provinces	Correspondence

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Establish a Water Cleanup Plan (temperature TMDL) for the East Fork of the Lewis subbasin
Proposal ID	31022
Organization	Washington Department of Ecology (WA Ecology)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Will Kendra
Mailing address	PO Box 47600 Olympia WA 98504
Phone / email	3604076698 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project	Bill Backous
Review cycle	Lower Columbia
Province / Subbasin	Lower Columbia / Lewis
Short description	Expedite development of a water cleanup plan-TMDL for the East Fork Lewis to identify sources of pollution related to temperature, DO and pH; allocate maximum allowable pollution from various sources; and develop strategies to improve salmonids habitat.
Target species	Chinook,chum, steelhead and bull trout

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
45.8661	-122.719	East Fork Lewis River

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
150
151

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS	Action 152	NMFS	The Action Agencies shall coordinate their efforts and support offsite habitat enhancement measures undertaken by other Federal agencies, states, Tribes, and local governments by the following:

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost
1. Accuratly assess water quality factors limiting salmonids	1. Characterize current temperaures through use of FLIR multispectral imagery	2003	$33,000
	2. Validate FLIR data with on the ground monitoring	2003	$32,000
	3. Digitize data for stream banks and riparian vegetation attributes for use in ArcView. The cost is included in task 1.	2003	$0
	4. Statistical analysis of data using predictive models to determine targets and establish TMDLs		$53,000

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
Objective 1, Task 4	2004	2004	$50,000

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

FY 2004
$50,000

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
Objective 2. See cost sharing section			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
Objective 2, See cost sharing section			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
see cost sharing section			$0

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
see cost sharing section			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 1 Analyst and field technician	$47,000
Fringe		$11,600
Supplies		$3,000
Travel		$1,400
Indirect		$22,000
Other		$33,000
		$118,000

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$118,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$118,000
FY 2003 forecast from 2002	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

REVIEW:
ISRP Preliminary Review (ISRP 2002-2)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Mar 1, 2002

Comment:

A response is needed. The sponsors propose to assess thermal heterogeneity using FLIR, validate the FLIR results using in-stream temperature data loggers, and input the data into a heat source model. The results will be used to inform stakeholders and develop a plan to improve water quality. The sponsors propose to involve stakeholders in plan development. The proposal would benefit from more detailed documentation of the problem. The sponsors should report what is known about thermal patterns in the East Fork and any evidence (data) they have that temperature is a major factor limiting salmonid production. The methodology needs to be more detailed. Why is FLIR needed rather than just using instream data loggers? When and often will the FLIR flights be undertaken? How many data loggers will be placed in the river and for how long? More detail is needed on the modeling component. What temperature model will be used? What are the inputs and outputs and how do these relate to the data that will be collected? At what spatial scale will the model be applied? What, specifically, will the model be used for? Some discussion of the potential for improving water temperature within the East Fork also would be helpful. Will it be practical to institute the needed land use and management changes? Is there a commitment from the USFS and private landowners to make the necessary changes?

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Recommended Action

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable, agree with CBFWA. The ISRP does not make a recommendation on priority, although this looks like a good approach. The sponsors propose to assess thermal heterogeneity using FLIR, validate the FLIR results using in-stream temperature data loggers, and input the data into a heat source model. The results will be used to inform stakeholders and develop a plan to improve water quality. The sponsors propose to involve stakeholders in plan development. The response was good and provided the requested detail and explanations on the data loggers, temperature model, and applicability to management to improve water temperatures on the East Fork. The explanation of the use of FLIR data was convincing. There is good potential for this project to be followed by interagency collaborations on a larger scale.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
None for chum because there aren't any adults or juveniles in the system during July and August when the water temperature exceedences occur

Comments
Sponsor proposes to begin with Lewis and Salmon/Washougal subbasins, which had historical spawning aggregations of chum so information gained through this monitoring network could benefit future efforts to restore historical habitat.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? No

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
C

Date:
Jul 23, 2002

Comment:

Recommend deferring to Subbasin Planning

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: