FY 1999 proposal 9045

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
9045 Narrative	Narrative

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Eliminate Gravel Push-Up Dams on Lower North Fork John Day
Proposal ID	9045
Organization	North Fork John Day Watershed Council (NFJDWC)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Robert Stubblefield
Mailing address	P.O. Box 95 Monument, OR 97864
Phone / email	5419342141 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycle	FY 1999
Province / Subbasin	Lower Mid-Columbia / John Day
Short description	Modify irrigation pumping stations by replacing above-ground suction screens with sub-surface collectors. Eliminate flow modification, migration impediments, and vegetation disruption and destruction inflicted during construction of gravel push-up dams.
Target species	Spring Chinook Salmon, Summer Steelhead, Resident Redband Trout.

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description

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 1999 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 1999 cost	Subcontractor

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 1999 cost	Subcontractor

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 1999 cost	Subcontractor

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 1999 cost
Personnel		$6,000
Supplies		$30,000
Operating	Primarily monitoring	$1,500
Travel		$500
Indirect		$1,000
Subcontractor	Monument Soil and Water Conservation District; Columbia Power Co-op; The Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon; Monument High School	$25,000
Other		$2,500
Other		$2,500
Other		$2,500
Other		$2,500
		$74,000

Total estimated budget

Total FY 1999 cost	$74,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 1999 budget request	$74,000
FY 1999 forecast from 1998	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind

Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Construction and installation pumping stations can most easily and effectively be accomplished during periods of low flows (normally beginning mid-July on the lower North Fork). May have to acquire brief extension on permits for instream work.

Reviews and recommendations

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

REVIEW:
CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments

Recommendation:
Pass (Fundable)

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

Technical Issue: Concerned that the only M&E is water temperatures behind the push-up dams. Need to provide more detail on the monitoring and evaluation plans.

Management Issue: Include an analysis of alternatives including transferring the water to an instream right.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
May 13, 1998

Comment:

REVIEW:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)

Recommendation:
Adequate

Date:
Jun 18, 1998

Comment:

This proposal would eliminate adult and juvenile fish passage problems. The goals are reasonable. The objectives, tasks, and subtasks are not clearly defined. The objective is to improve water quality, but there are no measurable end points. It lacks a fisheries context. It is not clear how this proposal relates to the Fish and Wildlife Program.