FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29028

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
29028 Narrative	Narrative
29028 Sponsor Response to ISRP	Response
Datasheet: Foghorn Fish Screen	Narrative Attachment
29028 Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Fabricate and Install Three New Fish Screens on Wenatchee River Diversions
Proposal ID	29028
Organization	Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife, Yakima Screen Shop (WDFW/YSS)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Eric B. Egbers
Mailing address	3705 West Washington Avenue Yakima, WA 98903-1137
Phone / email	5095752733 / egberebe@dfw.wa.gov
Manager authorizing this project	Eric B. Egbers
Review cycle	Columbia Cascade
Province / Subbasin	Columbia Cascade / Wenatchee
Short description	WDFW, YSS proposes to fabricate and install 2 new fish screening facilities, and rehabilitate one existing screening facility, on 3 irrigation diversions on the Wenatchee River and tributaries. The facilities will be in compliance with current criteria.
Target species	All anadromous salmonids, as well as other resident fish species.

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
47.6789	-120.7271	Chiwaukum Creek
47.5692	-120.5875	Derby Canyon
47.7803	-120.4218	Shotwell Ditch (Jones-Shotwell diversion?)

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA
RPA Action 149

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS	Action 149	NMFS	BOR shall initiate programs in three priority subbasins (identified in the Basinwide Recovery Strategy) per year over 5 years, in coordination with NMFS, FWS, the states and others, to address all flow, passage, and screening problems in each subbasin over 10 years. The Corps shall implement demonstration projects to improve habitat in subbasins where water-diversion-related problems could cause take of listed species. Under the NWPPC program, BPA addresses passage, screening, and flow problems, where they are not the responsibility of others. BPA expects to expand on these measures in coordination with the NWPPC process to complement BOR actions described in the action above.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
1992	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Kiona (26 cfs) and Naches Cowiche (40 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1993	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Snipes Allen (29 cfs), WIP Lower (6.8 cfs), New Cascade (147 cfs), and Holmes (2.2 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1994	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Taylor (11.4 cfs), Congdon (43 cfs), and Kelly Lowry (29 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1995	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Pioneer (14 cfs), Chiwawa (14 cfs), Toppenish Pump (100 cfs), WIP Upper (58 cfs), and Naches Selah (135 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1996	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Peshastin (40 cfs), Fruitvale (39 cfs), Union Gap (58 cfs), Stevens (2.35 cfs), and Emerick (2.2 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1997	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Bull (30 cfs), Ellensburg Mill (40 cfs), and Anderson (2.75 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1998	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Clark (6.45 cfs), Lindsey (10.6 cfs), Younger (15 cfs), Chewuch (27 cfs) and Barkley (24 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
1999	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Johncox (17 cfs), Larson, Buttermilk (4.5 cfs), Eight Mile (4.5 cfs), and Wolf Creek (13 cfs) irrigation diversion sites.
2000	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Skyline (17 cfs), Fulton (35 cfs), Twisp Power (10 cfs), and 10 small (< 4 cfs) Beaver Creek irrigation diversion sites.
2001	Fabricate and install screens, gantry, and metalwork at Early Winters (20 cfs), Chapman Nelson (3.5 cfs), Lewis (2.6 cfs), Foghorn (20 cfs), and 4 small (<4 cfs) Beaver Creek irrigation diversion sites.

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	Subcontractor
1. Prevent anadromous and resident salmonids from entering the Jones-Shotwell, Derby Creek, and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions.	a. Design, permit, and fabricate 2 new fish screening facilities at the Derby Creek and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions, and rehabilitate the Jones-Shotwell screening facility.	1	$100,000

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 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Prevent anadromous and resident salmonids from entering the Jones-Shotwell, Derby Creek, and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions.	a. Construct and install 2 new fish screening facilities at the Derby Creek and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions, and rehabilitate the Jones-Shotwell screening facility.	1	$135,000

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

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Prevent anadromous and resident salmonids from entering the Jones-Shotwell, Derby Creek, and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions.	2004	2007	$32,135

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$7,500	$7,845	$8,206	$8,584

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2003 cost	Subcontractor
1. Prevent anadromous and resident salmonids from entering the Jones-Shotwell, Derby Creek, and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions.	a. Assess the effectiveness and "fish tightness" of the fish screening facilities at the 3 fish screening facilities by contracting with Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratory to conduct yearly biological and hydraulic evaluations.		$0	Yes

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Prevent anadromous and resident salmonids from entering the Jones-Shotwell, Derby Creek, and Chiwaukum Creek irrigation diversions.	2004	2007	$24,000

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

FY 2004	FY 2005	FY 2006	FY 2007
$6,000	$6,000	$6,000	$6,000

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Item	Note	FY 2003 cost
Personnel	FTE: 2.1	$77,465
Fringe	Employee benefits @ 31% of salaries	$24,014
Supplies	Fabrication and construction materials and supplies	$45,128
Travel	Includes mileage charges and subsistence	$19,763
Indirect	Includes administrative overhead (@ 25.2%) and fixed operating costs	$51,249
Capital		$0
NEPA		$0
PIT tags		$0
Subcontractor		$0
Other	Contingency @ 10% of subtotal to cover unanticipated costs	$17,381
		$235,000

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2003 cost	$235,000
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2003 budget request	$235,000
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. O&M plans and M&E plans for effectiveness monitoring should be given in detail. Monitoring and evaluation for overall biological effects should be included. The ISRP assumes that overall M&E is the responsibility of other projects, but this project should include pre-construction data from those projects and assure that data will be available post-construction to evaluate the cumulative effects of this and other projects.

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
May 17, 2002

Comment:

These are important diversions that need to be screened. There is no cost share represented in the proposed budget. The budget should be reduced by 15% in order to encourage cost share by the landowners or other responsible parties. A contingency of $17,381 is identified in the proposal. These funds should be removed from the proposal. The budget has been modified to reflect these changes. NMFS has identified this project as a BiOp project.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2002-11)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jun 7, 2002

Comment:

Fundable. The response adequately described the O&M plans and M&E plans for effectiveness monitoring. Specifically, that this project include pre-construction data and assure that data will be available post-construction to evaluate the cumulative effects of this and other projects. The proponents should have included mention of the WDFW basinwide monitoring strategy under development.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Jul 19, 2002

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Increase survival by providing passage protection for all species and life stages of anadromous and resident salmonids through the construction at a couple of diversions that do not have screens and bypass structures and to upgrade an existing screen facility.

Comments
In their recommendation, ISRP felt that a response was still needed in detail on O&M and M&E plans. Assuming those condition are met, this is another good WDFW and Yakima Screen Shop project.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? Yes

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
C

Date:
Jul 26, 2002

Comment:

Recommend deferral to Subbasin Planning. This kind of activity could support RPA 149.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund

Date:
Oct 30, 2002

Comment: