FY 2001 Action Plan proposal 26012
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 |
|---|---|
| 26012 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Evaluate Fish Passage Screening Systems During Low-flow |
| Proposal ID | 26012 |
| Organization | Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Corey A Duberstein |
| Mailing address | PO Box 999, K6-85 Richland, WA 99352 |
| Phone / email | 5093763801 / corey.duberstein@pnl.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | Corey A Duberstein |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Action Plan |
| Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / |
| Short description | Evaluate the biological and hydrologic effectiveness of juvenile fish passage facilities constructed at tributary irrigation diversions with respect to NMFS passage criteria during low flow scenarios brought about by the power emergency declaration. |
| Target species | Fish species that may be negatively impacted by irrigation diversion during the power emergency with emphasis on salmonids (chinook and coho salmon; rainbow, steelhead, bull, and cutthroat 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 2001 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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Initial assessment of screen evaluation needs | a. Contact irrigation districts to assess power emergency effects on screen operations | 1 | $3,896 | |
| b. Schedule site visit and obtain access | 1 | $3,321 | ||
| 2. Conduct on-site evaluations of screen facilities | a. Provide fisheries and hydrological evaluations of screen facilities during low flow conditions using NMFS juvenile fish screen criteria | 4 | $36,954 | |
| b. Provide initial assessment of screen operation and condition to identify potential problems of installation and maintenance. | 4 | $34,508 | ||
| c. Data analyses/report writing/feedback to facilities operation | 4 | $19,117 |
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 |
|---|
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 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 0.52 | $24,742 |
| Fringe | $8,738 | |
| Supplies | $3,943 | |
| Travel | $5,730 | |
| Indirect | $51,443 | |
| Capital | $0 | |
| NEPA | $0 | |
| PIT tags | # of tags: GSA Vehicle & Fuel | $3,200 |
| Subcontractor | $0 | |
| $97,796 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $97,796 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $97,796 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $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 Review (ISRP 2001-7)
ISRP Review (ISRP 2001-7)
Recommendation:
Not fundable under this solicitation
Not fundable under this solicitation
Date:
Jun 21, 2001
Jun 21, 2001
Comment:
Not Fundable under this solicitation. The proposal does not meet the solicitation criteria. It does not offer immediate on-the-ground benefits. This project proposes to survey ~20 screening systems and report problems to appropriate agencies. Although important problems with diversion screening may be detected, the proposal does not offer specific, direct, one-time, on-the-ground benefits. It is unclear what diversions (size, location, etc.) are involved and what proportion would be surveyed if only 20 are visited.