FY07-09 proposal 200725600
Jump to Reviews and Recommendations
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Physical and Biological Testing of a Flow Velocity Enhancement System |
| Proposal ID | 200725600 |
| Organization | Natural Solutions |
| Short description | Natural Solution’s patented Flow Velocity Enhancement System has been developed to provide migration cues using mechanically generated iturbulent-flow fields. It is proposed that strategic placement of these flow fields will enchance smolt migration. |
| Information transfer | Knowledge of fish response to mechanically generated flows will be used to enhance guidance efficiancy at hydroelectric and irrigation dams regionally, nationally and internationally. |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Contacts
| Contact | Organization | |
|---|---|---|
| Form submitter | ||
| Jean Johnson | Natural Solutions | smolts@msn.com |
| All assigned contacts | ||
| Jean Johnson | Natural Solutions | smolts@msn.com |
Section 2. Locations
Province / subbasin: Mainstem/Systemwide / None Selected
| Latitude | Longitude | Waterbody | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cowlitz River | Upper end Riffe Lake |
Section 3. Focal species
primary: Chinook Lower Columbia River ESUsecondary: Anadromous Fish
secondary: Resident Fish
Section 4. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishments |
|---|
Section 5. Relationships to other projects
| Funding source | Related ID | Related title | Relationship |
|---|---|---|---|
| BPA | 198806500 | Kootenai R White Sturgeon Inve | A Flow Velocity Enhancement System may be utilized in the Kootenai River to augment spawning flows for adult sturgeon. |
| BPA | 200101000 | Induced Turbulence Assist Salm | Similar Concept |
| BPA | 200005700 | Eval Hydraulic Turbulence | Similar Concept |
Section 6. Biological objectives
| Biological objectives | Full description | Associated subbasin plan | Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enchance fish guidance | Document the capablity of a Flow Velocity Enhancement System to direct fish to specific locations through the use mechanically induced flow and turblence in reservoir environments. | None | Potential for SYSTEM WIDE applications of improved fish passage. |
Section 7. Work elements (coming back to this)
| Work element name | Work element title | Description | Start date | End date | Est budget |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Acquire permits, coordination & scheduling | coordinate efforts with the cooperating agencies, outline equipment needs, make travel arrangements, and collate information on river flows, weather, and migration timing to establish a start date;apply for the following permits: Project Use Agreement (Cowlitz Falls Public Utility District No. 1 of Lewis Co. Washington), a Hydraulic Project Approval, State Environmental Policy Act, and Joint Aquatic Resource Permits Application (Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife). | 1/1/2007 | 5/15/2007 | $8,948 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Acquire permits, coordination & scheduling | coordinate efforts with the cooperating agencies, outline equipment needs, make travel arrangements, and collate information on river flows, weather, and migration timing to establish a start date;apply for the following permits: Project Use Agreement (Cowlitz Falls Public Utility District No. 1 of Lewis Co. Washington), a Hydraulic Project Approval, State Environmental Policy Act, and Joint Aquatic Resource Permits Application (Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife). | 1/1/2008 | 5/15/2008 | $10,738 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling | Populate a fluid dynamics model with all field data collected to date on nozzle velocity and plume information. Use calibrated model to optimize eductor size and orientation including comparison of single units to arrayed units. | 1/1/2008 | 5/15/2008 | $45,000 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Deployment of the Flow Velocity Enhancement System | The FVES system consists of a mounting platform, ballast for the platform, an eductor, pump or pumps, hose from the pumps to the eductor, a pitch & roll indicator, and a remote read compass. The deployment system consists of: (A) A 28 ft. work barge that has a 3x7 ft. work well, a gantry crane and hoist, and is powered by an outboard motor; and (B) A 20 ft. pontoon boat used as a service craft to deliver fuel, perform routine maintenance, and repair work to pumps and the FVES. Both are owned by Natural Solutions. Deployment of a Flow Velocity Enhancement System will be accomplished in the following manner: (A) The service barge with the fuel tank, pump, and service tools on board will be launched at the public boat launch located at Taidnapam Park at the head of Riffe Lake. (B) The work barge and gantry crane will be fitted with the fuel cells and the motive water pumps and launched at the same facility. (C) The mounting platform will be suspended over the work well on 4x4 in. supports and fastened to the hoist cable. (D) Concrete curb ballast will be placed on the platform and fastened in place. (E) The eductor will be placed in position on the platform and fitted with a pitch & roll device and a remote read compass. (F) The work barge and service barge will motor to the test site and the work barge will be anchored over the site selected in Task 1 using global positioning system (GPS) for precise positioning. The work barge will be anchored at all four corners to provide stability throughout the project. (G) The eductor previously mounted to the platform will be fitted with 4 in. spiralock hoses, with the hoses laid out behind the platform. (H) The platform, eductor, and hoses will be lifted using the crane-mounted hoist, the 4x4 supports removed, the work well covers removed, and the now-complete FVES will be lowered through the work well to the bottom. As the FVES is lowered, the hoses will be “hand fed” through the work well. (I) Once on the bottom, the FVES will be checked for the proper angle to the bottom using the pitch & roll device, and for direction towards the trap using the compass. If adjustments are necessary, the FVES will be lifted slightly to facilitate moving by a scuba diver and lowered again, once the proper position is achieved. (J) Once the FVES is positioned, the motive water pumps are moved into position and the hoses from the FVES are attached. The fuel lines from the fuel cells are connected and batteries are attached. (K) A 3/32nd “screening” basket is next lowered into the work well and fastened to the deck so that approximately 2 in. of the basket is above the water line. The basket prevents debris and more importantly small fish from being entrained in the pump suction. (L) The suction hoses for the pumps are attached to the pumps with one end placed in the screen basket. (M) The motive water pumps are started and the current “plume” visually checked for the proper alignment with the lead nets and the trap. (N) If any adjustment is necessary, the motive water pumps are shut off and Step I is repeated until the proper alignment is achieved. | 6/1/2008 | 7/15/2008 | $10,981 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Deployment of the Flow Velocity Enhancement System | The FVES system consists of a mounting platform, ballast for the platform, an eductor, pump or pumps, hose from the pumps to the eductor, a pitch & roll indicator, and a remote read compass. The deployment system consists of: (A) A 28 ft. work barge that has a 3x7 ft. work well, a gantry crane and hoist, and is powered by an outboard motor; and (B) A 20 ft. pontoon boat used as a service craft to deliver fuel, perform routine maintenance, and repair work to pumps and the FVES. Both are owned by Natural Solutions. Deployment of a Flow Velocity Enhancement System will be accomplished in the following manner: (A) The service barge with the fuel tank, pump, and service tools on board will be launched at the public boat launch located at Taidnapam Park at the head of Riffe Lake. (B) The work barge and gantry crane will be fitted with the fuel cells and the motive water pumps and launched at the same facility. (C) The mounting platform will be suspended over the work well on 4x4 in. supports and fastened to the hoist cable. (D) Concrete curb ballast will be placed on the platform and fastened in place. (E) The eductor will be placed in position on the platform and fitted with a pitch & roll device and a remote read compass. (F) The work barge and service barge will motor to the test site and the work barge will be anchored over the site selected in Task 1 using global positioning system (GPS) for precise positioning. The work barge will be anchored at all four corners to provide stability throughout the project. (G) The eductor previously mounted to the platform will be fitted with 4 in. spiralock hoses, with the hoses laid out behind the platform. (H) The platform, eductor, and hoses will be lifted using the crane-mounted hoist, the 4x4 supports removed, the work well covers removed, and the now-complete FVES will be lowered through the work well to the bottom. As the FVES is lowered, the hoses will be “hand fed” through the work well. (I) Once on the bottom, the FVES will be checked for the proper angle to the bottom using the pitch & roll device, and for direction towards the trap using the compass. If adjustments are necessary, the FVES will be lifted slightly to facilitate moving by a scuba diver and lowered again, once the proper position is achieved. (J) Once the FVES is positioned, the motive water pumps are moved into position and the hoses from the FVES are attached. The fuel lines from the fuel cells are connected and batteries are attached. (K) A 3/32nd “screening” basket is next lowered into the work well and fastened to the deck so that approximately 2 in. of the basket is above the water line. The basket prevents debris and more importantly small fish from being entrained in the pump suction. (L) The suction hoses for the pumps are attached to the pumps with one end placed in the screen basket. (M) The motive water pumps are started and the current “plume” visually checked for the proper alignment with the lead nets and the trap. (N) If any adjustment is necessary, the motive water pumps are shut off and Step I is repeated until the proper alignment is achieved. | 6/1/2007 | 7/15/2007 | $9,151 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Determine if the FVES can guide migrating smolts to a Merwin trap and increase collection efficiencies compared to collection efficiency without the induced flow. | utilize a random-block study design. Each block will be two days long, consisting of (1) one day “off” and one day “on.” There will be 14 blocks of two days per block. Fish captured in the traps will be collected at the same time each day and enumerated by WDFW (John Serl) and transported below Mayfield Dam according to normal transport procedures. It is expected that significant numbers of radio tagged fish from trapping experiments at the Cowlitz Falls dam will be present in the system during this experiment. To the extent possible the movement of these fish will be monitored during the study period. | 6/20/2007 | 8/15/2007 | $108,997 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Determine if the FVES can guide migrating smolts to a Merwin trap and increase collection efficiencies compared to collection efficiency without the induced flow. | utilize a random-block study design. Each block will be two days long, consisting of (1) one day “off” and one day “on.” There will be 14 blocks of two days per block. Fish captured in the traps will be collected at the same time each day and enumerated by WDFW (John Serl) and transported below Mayfield Dam according to normal transport procedures. It is expected that significant numbers of radio tagged fish from trapping experiments at the Cowlitz Falls dam will be present in the system during this experiment. To the extent possible the movement of these fish will be monitored during the study period. | 6/20/2008 | 8/15/2008 | $130,796 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Establish the ability of an FVES-generated turbulent flow to encourage migrating smolt to enter a trap and thereby reduce transit delays. | The Didson camera mounted to the Merwin trap entrance for Task 9 will be utilized to perform Task 10. It will be operated during both “on” days of the random block study design to record smolt behavioral response to the FVES-generated turbulent flow. Evaluation of these recordings will provide an insight into smolt behavior at two levels of turbulence intensity as fish enter the trap. Individual fish will be timed, using that feature of the Didson camera, from when they approach the trap entrance until they enter the trap and compared to individual fish times recorded in Previous work element | 6/20/2007 | 8/15/2007 | $2,783 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Establish the ability of an FVES-generated turbulent flow to encourage migrating smolt to enter a trap and thereby reduce transit delays. | The Didson camera mounted to the Merwin trap entrance for Task 9 will be utilized to perform Task 10. It will be operated during both “on” days of the random block study design to record smolt behavioral response to the FVES-generated turbulent flow. Evaluation of these recordings will provide an insight into smolt behavior at two levels of turbulence intensity as fish enter the trap. Individual fish will be timed, using that feature of the Didson camera, from when they approach the trap entrance until they enter the trap and compared to individual fish times recorded in Previous work element | 6/20/2008 | 8/15/2008 | $3,340 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics * Does the structure remove or replace a fish passage barrier?: |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Final site sizing of (eductor) FVES | Based on CFD modeling efforts chose and deploy the appropriate size eductor for expected hydraulic conditions for the year. | 6/20/2008 | 7/15/2008 | $12,088 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Final site sizing of (eductor) FVES. (Task 6 in narrative out of order on list due to limits of online form editor) | Select a 12 in. or 16 in. eductor for a turbulent flow to alter a river flow of 2,000 – 3,000 cfs under site specific conditions. Local current patterns and bottom conditions will affect the natural flow conditions so on-site calibrations and sizing will be required. | 6/20/2007 | 7/15/2007 | $10,073 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Installation of trap net and lead | (A) The trap flotation ring will be assembled at the site and anchored at all four corners to concrete anchors deployed from the work barge. These anchors will be placed using the gantry crane and hoist on the work barge. (B) The net trap will be installed on the flotation ring to fasteners provided by the manufacturer with the entrance to the trap closed until commencement of the Phase I project. (C) The guiding leads to the trap will be fastened to the Merwin trap at one end with the other end deployed at an angle from the trap and anchored to the bottom. | 6/1/2008 | 7/15/2008 | $15,632 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Installation of trap net and lead | (A) The trap flotation ring will be assembled at the site and anchored at all four corners to concrete anchors deployed from the work barge. These anchors will be placed using the gantry crane and hoist on the work barge. (B) The net trap will be installed on the flotation ring to fasteners provided by the manufacturer with the entrance to the trap closed until commencement of the Phase I project. (C) The guiding leads to the trap will be fastened to the Merwin trap at one end with the other end deployed at an angle from the trap and anchored to the bottom. | 6/1/2007 | 7/15/2007 | $13,027 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Mobilization and storage of project equipment | transporting equipment to their secure work and storage area, preparation for deployment | 5/1/2007 | 6/10/2007 | $39,022 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Mobilization and storage of project equipment (Task 3 Phase II - out of sequence due to limits of online editor) | transporting equipment to their secure work and storage area, preparation for deployment | 5/1/2008 | 6/10/2008 | $46,826 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Site Mapping and micro site selection | Generate Bathymetric data, overlay existing telemetry data, identify local currents, inspect bottom substrates. | 1/15/2007 | 3/15/2007 | $13,470 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics * Does the structure remove or replace a fish passage barrier?: FVES will guide fish to safe migration route |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Sonar observations | Determine if migrating smolts approaching a trap entrance during existing river flows exhibit an avoidance response or milling behavior, thus causing transit delays. | 6/20/2007 | 8/15/2007 | $3,454 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Sonar observations | Determine if migrating smolts approaching a trap entrance during existing river flows exhibit an avoidance response or milling behavior, thus causing transit delays. | 6/20/2008 | 8/15/2008 | $4,145 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Statistical analysis, evaluation, and report | The statistical analysis of enumerated collection results will be performed by Natural Solutions | 9/30/2007 | 12/30/2007 | $42,621 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
| Install Fish Passage Structure | Statistical analysis, evaluation, and report | Generate reports | 8/30/2008 | 12/30/2008 | $51,145 |
|
Biological objectives |
Metrics |
||||
Section 8. Budgets
Itemized estimated budget
| Item | Note | FY07 | FY08 | FY09 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personnel | employees and Contractors | $97,630 | $154,380 | $0 |
| Fringe Benefits | [blank] | $25,348 | $28,317 | $0 |
| Supplies | [blank] | $5,875 | $6,390 | $0 |
| Travel | [blank] | $19,965 | $22,248 | $0 |
| Overhead | [blank] | $53,228 | $59,956 | $0 |
| Other | USGS consultation - WDFW Trap operations | $49,500 | $59,400 | $0 |
| Totals | $251,546 | $330,691 | $0 | |
Total estimated FY 2007-2009 budgets
| Total itemized budget: | $582,237 |
| Total work element budget: | $582,237 |
Cost sharing
| Funding source/org | Item or service provided | FY 07 est value ($) | FY 08 est value ($) | FY 09 est value ($) | Cash or in-kind? | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Natural Solutions | 28' boat | $7,500 | $9,000 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | 20' boat | $4,500 | $5,400 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | Eductors | $4,500 | $4,500 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | Pumps | $6,000 | $7,200 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | Misc. Equipment & tools | $6,000 | $7,200 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | Computers, GPS, Sonar, Cameras, and Science Equipment | $3,500 | $4,200 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | Personel | $29,000 | $34,800 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Natural Solutions | Fringe | $7,884 | $9,461 | $0 | In-Kind | Confirmed |
| Totals | $68,884 | $81,761 | $0 | |||
Section 9. Project future
|
FY 2010 estimated budget: $0 FY 2011 estimated budget: $0 |
Comments: |
Future O&M costs:
Termination date:
Comments:
Final deliverables:
Section 10. Narrative and other documents
Reviews and recommendations
| FY07 budget | FY08 budget | FY09 budget | Total budget | Type | Category | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPCC FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Oct 23, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Expense | Basinwide | Do Not Fund |
| NPCC DRAFT FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS (Sep 15, 2006) [full Council recs] | ||||||
| $0 | $0 | $0 | $0 | Basinwide | ||
ISRP PRELIMINARY REVIEW (Jun 2, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: The problem regarding migrational passage problems of juvenile salmonids at hydroelectric projects is extensively described, and the rationale for potential passage benefits of an effective system is well defined. The “low flow” fish passage problem is identified in several subbasin plans. The proposal makes good use of studies in the basin that have described behavior of juvenile salmonids in response to flow, and identifies a device that might produce flows for guiding them to appropriate passage routes. There is nothing quite comparable being funded through the Fish and Wildlife Program. The proposal includes reference to an existing research project, the Cowlitz Falls Fish Collection Facility (presumably funded by Tacoma Power Public Utility District (PUD)), which includes radio tagged juvenile salmonids used to evaluate the effectiveness of a trap above Cowlitz Falls Dam. Fish that escape the trap will be available for use in evaluation of the device’s (eductor) effects on migrating fish. The trap is operated by WDFW. The operators will provide data on timing of fish migrations and other elements. The phased, systematic development of the eductor technology is good. They propose to set up the turbulence-generating eductors, characterize the flows, observe fish-flow interactions with a Didson camera, and enumerate the guidance of fish into a trap. It is not clear how they will express the flows and the turbulence intensity, or what aspect of the generated flows will be related to fish behavior. For example, if they see a fish response, will they know what precise aspect of the flow field caused it? Unless they are able to focus on particular parameters (e.g., velocity difference between the spot where fish reacted and that in reservoir, or turbulence intensity or size), they will not know what to manipulate experimentally in Phase II. There is a need to get away from trial-and-error that characterizes many of these studies. The proposal was responsive to earlier concerns (ISRP comment in 2003) that shear-related mortality might be a factor in this experimental system. This research has potential of facilitating or improving effectiveness of juvenile fish passage facilities in the basin such as the removable spillway weir (RSW).
ISRP FINAL REVIEW (Aug 31, 2006)
Recommendation: Fundable
NPCC comments: The problem regarding migrational passage problems of juvenile salmonids at hydroelectric projects is extensively described, and the rationale for potential passage benefits of an effective system is well defined. The “low flow” fish passage problem is identified in several subbasin plans. The proposal makes good use of studies in the basin that have described behavior of juvenile salmonids in response to flow, and identifies a device that might produce flows for guiding them to appropriate passage routes. There is nothing quite comparable being funded through the Fish and Wildlife Program. The proposal includes reference to an existing research project, the Cowlitz Falls Fish Collection Facility (presumably funded by Tacoma Power Public Utility District (PUD)), which includes radio tagged juvenile salmonids used to evaluate the effectiveness of a trap above Cowlitz Falls Dam. Fish that escape the trap will be available for use in evaluation of the device’s (eductor) effects on migrating fish. The trap is operated by WDFW. The operators will provide data on timing of fish migrations and other elements. The phased, systematic development of the eductor technology is good. They propose to set up the turbulence-generating eductors, characterize the flows, observe fish-flow interactions with a Didson camera, and enumerate the guidance of fish into a trap. It is not clear how they will express the flows and the turbulence intensity, or what aspect of the generated flows will be related to fish behavior. For example, if they see a fish response, will they know what precise aspect of the flow field caused it? Unless they are able to focus on particular parameters (e.g., velocity difference between the spot where fish reacted and that in reservoir, or turbulence intensity or size), they will not know what to manipulate experimentally in Phase II. There is a need to get away from trial-and-error that characterizes many of these studies. The proposal was responsive to earlier concerns (ISRP comment in 2003) that shear-related mortality might be a factor in this experimental system. This research has potential of facilitating or improving effectiveness of juvenile fish passage facilities in the basin such as the removable spillway weir (RSW).