FY 2002 Columbia Plateau proposal 25054
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 |
|---|---|
| 25054 Narrative | Narrative |
| 25054 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
| Letter from S. McNary (BPA) to L. Hatcher (YIN) RE: Revised attached copy of Wapatox Report | Correspondence |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Increase Naches River In-stream Flows By Purchasing Wapatox Hydroelectric Project |
| Proposal ID | 25054 |
| Organization | Yakama Nation (YN) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Paul J. Ward |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 |
| Phone / email | 5098656262 / ward@yakama.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | Lynn Hatcher |
| Review cycle | Columbia Plateau |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Yakima |
| Short description | Cost share with Bureau of Reclamation to purchase and retire PacifiCorp's Wapatox Power Plant to benefit salmon and steelhead by increasing instream flows and enhance spawning and rearing habitat in the Naches River. |
| Target species | Spring chinook, Bulltrout, coho, steelhead |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 45.2733 | -119.5083 | Naches RM 17.1 |
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 |
|---|---|
| 2000 | USBOR leased 100 cfs from PacifiCorp in this reach to conduct research in habitat value potential of increased flows during irrigation season. |
| 2001 | USBOR is adding storage water to augment flows in the Wapatox by-pass reach. |
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 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Provide funds to BOR as a cost share for the purchase of the Wapatox Hydroelectric Project | Provide cost share to purchase Wapatox Power diversion from PacifiCorp on Naches River. | 2002 | $3,500,000 | |
| $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | ||
| $0 | |||
| $0 | |||
| $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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | |||
| $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | ||
| $0 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | |||
| $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | ||
| $0 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | |||
| $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | $0 | ||
| $0 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | $0 | |
| Fringe | $0 | |
| Supplies | $0 | |
| Travel | $0 | |
| Indirect | $0 | |
| Capital | Cost share with BOR to purchase the Wapatox Hydroelectric Project. | $3,500,000 |
| NEPA | $0 | |
| PIT tags | $0 | |
| Subcontractor | $0 | |
| Other | $0 | |
| $3,500,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $3,500,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $3,500,000 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $3,500,000 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| USBOR | Acquisition costs | $3,500,000 | cash |
| USBOR | Canal redesign and construction | $1,000,000 | in-kind |
| USBOR | Operation and Maintanence | $200,000 | in-kind |
| USBOR | NEPA and Consultation | $500,000 | in-kind |
Other budget explanation
This project proposal is a cost share to assist USBOR with the acquisition of the Wapatox Hydroelectric Project. The BPA cost share dollars will be dedicated only as half of the acquisition costs which is not yet determined and in negotiation with PacifiCorp. All other costs incurred in this acquisition will be coverd by USBOR through Yakima River Basin Enhancement Project funding.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Jun 15, 2001
Comment:
Fundable only if an adequate response is provided.
As reviewers commented during the High Priority review process in which the project was ranked B, the project would benefit fish in that the portion of the river that is bypassed by the canal which at times is dry or otherwise inaccessible to spring chinook, steelhead and coho, as well as bull trout. Increased flow will lead to reconnection of the lower Naches River with upstream tributaries such as the American River. Costs will be shared with BOR. There are obvious policy issues of who should fund this that extend beyond the ISRP purview.
The project would clearly provide immediate and presumably substantial benefits to fish and wildlife, but the proposal does not provide a quantitative estimate of to what extent fish would be expected to benefit. Additional information on expected benefits (from EDT model, etc) is requested.
In addition, the monitoring and evaluation is not well described and needs to be clarified before being fundable (see ISRP General Comment on monitoring and evaluation).
Comment:
Fundable in the Columbia Plateau Provincial and the Action Plan reviews. The response makes the point that Wapatox is one part of a large program to significantly restore a large system whose ability to function naturally has been heavily reduced by a concerted human effort over a long period of time. As reviewers commented during the High Priority review process in which the project was ranked B, the project would benefit fish in the portion of the river that is bypassed by the canal which at times is dry or otherwise inaccessible to spring chinook, steelhead and coho, as well as bull trout. Increased flow will lead to reconnection of the lower Naches River with upstream tributaries such as the American River.As requested, the response attempts to clearly and quantitatively address benefits to fish. The reviewers were convinced that this project offers substantial and immediate gains for salmon and steelhead. The monitoring and evaluation component of the project was not adequately described in the response, perhaps this could be worked out by the Council and BPA in the Columbia Plateau project selection process.
There are obvious policy issues of who should fund this that extend beyond the ISRP purview.
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUProject would substantially increase instream flows in August and during the winter in an eight mile long reach of the Naches River, thereby enhancing spawning & rearing habitat
Comments
Project was funded under the spill mitigation action plan.
Already ESA Req? no
Biop? yes
Comment:
This proposal is being considered under BPA’s Action Plan solicitation as proposal no. 23028. Although the proposal is consistent with RPA #149, the Yakima is not a priority subbasin. The BOR and Pacificorp should fund this proposal.Comment: