FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 200300100

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
25023 Narrative	Narrative
Overview Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Overview Powerpoint Presentation	Powerpoint Presentation
Columbia Plateau: Yakima Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map
Columbia Plateau: Yakima Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects	Subbasin Map

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal title	Yakima-Klickitat Fisheries Project - Manastash Creek Fish Passage and Screening
Proposal ID	200300100
Organization	Yakima-Klickitat Fisheries Project - Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife lead agency (YKFP/WDFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
Name	Brent Renfrow
Mailing address	201 N. Pearl Ellensburg, WA 98926
Phone / email	5099251013 / renfrbr@dfw.wa.gov
Manager authorizing this project	Ted Clausing
Review cycle	Columbia Plateau
Province / Subbasin	Columbia Plateau / Yakima
Short description	The project will provide fish passage and screening for 5 irrigation diversions and will enhance stream flow which is currently a limiting factor dowstream of these diversions. This project could restore access to approximately 30 miles of good habitat.
Target species	Steelhead, Coho, Spring chinook,

Project location

Latitude	Longitude	Description
46.9694	-120.6766	Kittitas County: Manastash Creek RM 1.3 to 5.7

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agency	Action #	BiOp Agency	Description
NMFS	Action 153	NMFS	BPA shall, working with agricultural incentive programs such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, negotiate and fund long-term protection for 100 miles of riparian buffers per year in accordance with criteria BPA and NMFS will develop by June 1, 2001.

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Year	Accomplishment
NA

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project ID	Title	Description
	Proposed Upper Yakima River Acquisitions	Part of WDFW plan to conserve functional Yakima River habitat
	Proposed Tanum Acquisition	Part of WDFW plan to conserve functional Yakima River tributary habitat
	Proposed Yakima Tributary Access and Habitat Program	Collaborative effort with Kittitas County Purveyors, Kittitas County Conservation District, North Yakima Conservation District, Ahtanum Irrigation District, and the US Bureau of Reclamation
	Proposed Big Creek Fish Passage	Part of YKFP plan to eliminate fish barriers in upper Yakima River Basin tributaries
	Yakima-Klickitat Fisheries Project / Collaborative effort with BPA, Yakama Nation, and WDFW to restore anadromous fish runs using hatchery supplementation	Provides new habitat needed to restore fish runs. Previously identified need to restore fish access to historically productive upper Yakima River Basin tributaries

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
1. Provide passage at barrier dams 2. Provide fish protection at diversions	1.a. final design and permitting of passage repair 2.a. Final design and permitting of screens	1	$0
3. Provide adequate instream flow	3.a. final design and permitting of alternative water sources		$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
22			$0

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
			$0
			$0
			$0
			$0

Outyear objectives-based budget

Objective	Starting FY	Ending FY	Estimated cost
1. Construct and install weirs/fishways for fish passage	2003	2004	$90,000
2. Construct and install screens for irrigation diversions	2003	2004	$685,560
3. Project Management - .5 FTE for 2 years	2003	2004	$67,470
4. Overhead at 25.2%	2003	2004	$212,443

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

FY 2003	FY 2004
$632,835	$422,638

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Objective	Task	Duration in FYs	Estimated 2002 cost	Subcontractor
NA			$0

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 2002 cost	Subcontractor
NA			$0

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 2002 cost
		$0

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2002 cost	$0
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds	$0
Total FY 2002 budget request	$0
FY 2002 forecast from 2001	$0
% change from forecast	0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

Reason for change in scope

Cost sharing

Organization	Item or service provided	Amount	Cash or in-kind
WDFW	Engineering, Design, and Permitting	$9,100	in-kind
WDFW	Technical Review and Monitoring 3 years	$11,620	in-kind
Manastash Creek Water Users	Cash 15% project construction costs	$116,334	cash
Manastash Creek Water Users	O & M Service Agreement 3 years	$10,000	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 2001-6)

Recommendation:
Fundable only if response is adequate

Date:
Jun 15, 2001

Comment:

Fundable only if an adequate response is provided. This project would fund actual construction of passage and screening facilities, with design currently being done under the YN ongoing safe access project.

A map describing the area is needed. This is a complex, expensive project that appears to have potential to increase salmonid production, but is difficult for reviewers to assess. It would appear that, based on the number of uncertainties that seem to exist, that this proposal is 1-2 years premature and should be deferred until the design is closer to completion and uncertainties are resolved.

In that framework, a response is requested to address the following issues:

why does this project deserve high priority? For example, what is its prioritization under the EDT process? What level of fish production gains are anticipated and is there reason to believe that the cost per "new" fish produced in upper Manastash Creek would be less than what might be achieved elsewhere?
will there be enough water in the lower 3-mile-long reach in question in future, following adjudication (or alternatively will fish passage in December through June satisfactory to sustain production) to make the project expense worthwhile?
if the project were to proceed, what potential impacts are expected on native resident fish stocks (if any exist) above the barrier?

REVIEW:
CBFWA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
High Priority

Date:
Aug 3, 2001

Comment:

M&E fits under the YKFP umbrella. This project is a placeholder for implementation of actions that will result from the development of the Manashtash Creek Water Management Plan being funded by the Yakima Nation and supported by the irrigators for the creek, WDFW, and the Washington Environmental Council. A plan should be in place prior to funding this project. There is an in-lieu concern regarding this project in that BOR facilities are involved in dewatering of the stream.

REVIEW:
ISRP Final Review (ISRP 2001-8)

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Aug 10, 2001

Comment:

Fundable. Good argument is put forth in support of funding this effort now rather than deferring to the next funding cycle. Because of uncertainties or limitations in future flow regimes and potential fish production, this seems a medium priority, lower than the Big Creek project. The map was helpful. It is evident that there would be no deleterious impacts on native resident fish stocks above the diversions.
See detailed ISRP comments on the YKFPs.

REVIEW:
NMFS Review

Recommendation:

Date:
Oct 1, 2001

Comment:

Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESU
Project would provide passage, screens and flow improvements into Manastash Creek. Upper Yakima sthd are excluded from most tributaries, including Manastash Creek by irrigation. Restoring passage into such tributaries is believed to be an essential feature of sthd recovery in the Yakima.

Comments
Pending lawsuit over lack of screens and passage. Substantial benefits if passage problems can resolved.

Already ESA Req? no

Biop? yes

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Rank C

Date:
Oct 16, 2001

Comment:

No budget for 2002. Waiting for Phase I to be completed, which will identify alternatives. Consistent with RPA #149, but Yakima is not priority in first year. Very expensive. Do not know what results would be. Restores production/access to blocked habitat. This project is sponsored by WDFW and duplicates activities that are planned in project 1998-034-00, Re-establish Safe Access. Under Re-establish Safe Access, the sponsor, in coordination with BPA, is funding a plan to identify water conservation opportunities for irrigators within the Manastash subbasin. Depending on the findings and recommendations from this plan, scheduled to be completed in early 2002, irrigation improvements may be implemented.

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Jan 3, 2002

Comment:

New proposals in the Yakima subbasin

As discussed in the general issues of this memorandum, there is not sufficient funding to initiate all of the new proposals that were rated as "fundable" by the ISRP and rated as "High Priority" by CBFWA in the Columbia Plateau province within the basinwide funding target of $186 million for Fiscal Year 2002. This is because funding all such proposals would not leave sufficient funds to initiate new proposals in the provinces that remain to be reviewed in the provincial review process. Therefore, the Council and its staff have worked with local entities to further prioritize new work, and asked them to put a premium on new work that represents consensus of the state and tribal resource managers that is consistent with Bonneville's BiOp needs. In the Yakima subbasin a collaborative effort was undertaken to prioritize Fiscal Year 2002 new needs along these guidelines. The following new proposals are those that were rated in this process as the highest priority at this time:

Project ID: 25023: Yakima-Klickitat Fisheries Project - Manastash Creek Fish Passage and Screening

NMFS has designated this project as consistent with the overall strategy of the BiOp off-site mitigation strategy and actions (assigned a"500" rating) as a flow, passage, screening or water acquisition/lease project. Funding for this project is not required until FY 03. The project will provide fish passage and screening for 5 irrigation diversions and will enhance stream flow, which is currently a limiting factor downstream of these diversions. This project could restore access to approximately 30 miles of good habitat. The ISRP finds a "Good argument is put forth in support of funding this effort now rather than deferring to the next funding cycle."

Budget effect on base program (Project 25023):

FY 2002	FY 2003	FY 2004
0	Increase $632,835	Increase $422,638

REVIEW:
BPA Funding Decision

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Mar 6, 2002

Comment:

Consistent with the Council recommendation, BPA does not intend to fund in FY02, but does intend to fund in FY03 and FY04

REVIEW:
NWPPC Funding Recommendation

Recommendation:
Fund

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

No request for 02. Everything has slipped a year. 55K that will be spent in 03. Planning and design work. 04 and 05 will spend the remainder. Capital project, look to capital plan.

REVIEW:
Project Sponsor Request for FY04-05

Recommendation:

Date:
Sep 20, 2003

Comment:

REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review

Funding category:
capital

Date:
May 2005

FY05 NPCC start of year:	FY06 NPCC staff preliminary:	FY06 NPCC July draft start of year:
$1,250,000	$800,000	$800,000

Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website