Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Passage Improvement Evaluation |
| Proposal ID | 198506200 |
| Organization | Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Geoffrey A. Mcmichael |
| Mailing address | Richland, Washington 99352 |
| Phone / email | 5093720804 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | Ken Barnhart |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Ongoing |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Yakima |
| Short description | Evaluate the biological and hydrologic effectiveness of juvenile fish passage facilities constructed to correct structural problems at irrigation diversion dams, canals and ditches that interfere with the passage of anadromous fish |
| Target species | |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
|
1985-1996: Phase I screen eval, lab studies of modular screens/criteria development, tests of infrasound and strobes on fish behavior (see web page(s) for list of reports). |
| 1997 |
Phase II screens (a total of 19 sites) were evaluated: Balnton et al. 1998 (on BPA web page) |
| 1998 |
Phase II screens (a total of 19 sites) were evaluated: Blanton et al. 1999 (on BPA web page) |
| 1999 |
Phase II screens (a total of 20 sites) were evaluated: Blanton et al. 2000 (submitted 4/20/2000) |
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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
|
|
|
$0 |
|
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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
| 1.a. On-Site Evaluations Phase II Screens in the Yakima basin |
Provide fisheries and hydrological evaluations of new screens as they are installed. The criteria used to measure this goal are the screen criteria developed by the National Marine Fisheries Service. |
3 |
$0 |
|
| 1.b. |
Provide on site monitoring of operating screens. Monitoring criteria are: operating as designed, seals installed and maintained to prevent fish from passing through screens, and approach and sweep flows to NMFS criteria. |
3 |
$0 |
|
| 2. |
Support cooperating agencies to evaluate new or revised screen designs as they are developed and address site-specific concerns at Phase I or Phase II sites. Provide a laboratory facility for testing proposed changes to facility components. |
3 |
$0 |
|
| tasks 1 and 2 |
|
3 |
$100,000 |
|
| 3. |
Screen evaluation services have been requested by others (e.g., WDFW). We are requesting these additional funds to evaluate newly-constructed screens in the Wenatchee and Methow basins to determine whether these new sites are in compliance with NMFS crit |
3 |
$40,000 |
|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2004 | FY 2002 | FY 2003 |
|---|
| $140,000 | $140,000 | $140,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
FTE: based on FY2000 estimate 29% |
$40,600 |
| Fringe |
based on FY2000 estimate 19% |
$26,600 |
| Supplies |
based on FY2000 estimate 20.5% |
$28,700 |
| Travel |
based on FY2000 estimate 6.5% |
$9,100 |
| Indirect |
based on FY2000 estimate 25% |
$35,000 |
| $140,000 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $140,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $140,000 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $100,000 |
| % change from forecast | 40.0% |
Reason for change in estimated budget
The additional $40,000 would be used to evaluate newly constructed screens in the Wenatchee and Methow subbasins to determine whether they are operating as designed and in compliance with fish protection criteria adopted by the NMFS. These services were requested by WDFW.
Reason for change in scope
See above. The only scope change is the inclusion of 4 additional sites in the Wenatchee River subbasin (Tandy, Peshastin, Pioneer, and Chiwawa) and 7 sites in the Methow River subbasin (Chiwac, Barkley, Twisp Power, Early Winters, Folton, Skyline, and Wolf Creek). Each of these sites would be examined 2 times each during the irrigation season to determine whether they are meeting fish protection criteria. The Wenatchee and Methow subbasins contain imperiled ESA listed stocks of steelhead and chinook salmon. Ensuring that these fishes are protected from entrainment or injury/death at irrigation structures should be an important part of their conservation.
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.
Recommendation:
Ongoing Funding: yes; New Funding: yes
Date:
Jul 14, 2000
Comment:
This project has been focused in the Yakima Basin in previous years. Although the work is consistent with the intent of the project, moving into the other basins would be considered new work within those subbasins. The additional $40,000 would be used to evaluate newly constructed screens in the Wenatchee and Methow subbasins to determine whether they are operating as designed and in compliance with fish protection criteria adopted by the NMFS (Section 6, Objective 3).The scope change is the inclusion of four additional sites in the Wenatchee River subbasin (Tandy, Peshastin, Pioneer, and Chiwawa) and seven sites in the Methow River subbasin (Chiwac, Barkley, Twisp Power, Early Winters, Folton, Skyline, and Wolf Creek). Each of these sites would be examined two times each during the irrigation season to determine whether they are meeting fish protection criteria. The Wenatchee and Methow subbasins contain imperiled ESA listed stocks of steelhead and chinook salmon. Ensuring that these fish are protected from entrainment or injury/death at irrigation structures should be an important part of their conservation.
This project is supported by the WA SRT and should be earmarked as a potential ESA high priority project since ESA measures are being enforced in this area.
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
Sep 13, 2000
Comment:
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $110,551 |
$110,551 |
$110,551 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website