FY 2002 Mountain Snake proposal 198740700
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 |
|---|---|
| 198740700 Narrative | Narrative |
| 198740700 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
| 198740700 Powerpoint Presentation: 2003 Update | Powerpoint Presentation |
| Mountain Snake: Clearwater Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
| Mountain Snake: Clearwater Subbasin Map with BPA Fish & Wildlife Projects | Subbasin Map |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Dworshak Integrated Rule Curves/M&E |
| Proposal ID | 198740700 |
| Organization | Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | David P. Statler |
| Mailing address | 3404 Highway 12 Orofino, ID 83544 |
| Phone / email | 2084767417 / daves@nezperce.org |
| Manager authorizing this project | Jaime Pinkham |
| Review cycle | Mountain Snake |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Clearwater |
| Short description | Refine the Dworshak Rule Curve Evaluation Model, use the model as a tool to help dentify appropriate integrated operation (Integrated Rule Curve), and develop a comprehesive long-term monitoring and evaluation plan for Dworshak Reservoir. |
| Target species | bull trout, westslope cutthroat trout, kokanee, smallmouth bass |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.509 | -116.2875 | Dworshak Reservoir |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
| Hydro RPA Action 34 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|---|
| 1988 | Annual Report: Dworshak Investigations: trout, bass and forage species. Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management, Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Contract DE-AI79-87BP35165, Project 87-407, Portland, OR. |
| 1989 | Annual Report: Dworshak Investigations: trout, bass and forage species. Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management, Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Contract DE-AI79-87BP35165, Project 87-407, Portland, OR. |
| 1990 | Annual Report: Dworshak Investigations: trout, bass and forage species. Nez Perce Tribe Department of Fisheries Resources Management, Annual Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Contract DE-AI79-87BP35165, Project 87-407, Portland, OR. |
| 1991 | Culminated data collection on a three-year creel survey for Dworshak Reservoir. |
| 1991 | Project Leader accepted request from System Operation Review Interagency Team (USACE, BPA and USBR) to be a member of the Resident Fish Work Group, to provide expertise to scope fishery issues and to construct alternative screening models. |
| 1992 | Project Leader performed as a contributing member of the SOR Resident Fish Work Group for full-scale alternative analysis. |
| 1993 | Project Leader performed as a contributing member of the SOR Resident Fish Work Group for full-scale alternative analysis and preparation of the Resident Fish Technical Appendix to the Columbia River System Operation Review EIS. |
| 1993 | Final Report: Dworshak Dam impact assessment and fishery investigation and trout, bass, and forage species. Final Report. Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR. |
| 1993 | Interim contracted report: Juul T.J and William H. Funk. 1993. Primary productivity evaluation of Dworshak Reservoir: first interim report. Prepared for the Nez Perce Tribe, WSU Project Number 11W-3815-2857, Pullman, WA. |
| 1994 | Coauthured paper with Dr. Steve Juul entitled "Using Dworshak Reservoir Water to Enhance Lower Snake River Flows: The Benefits and Tradeoffs" presented at North American Lake Management Society 14th Annual International Symposium, Orlando, Fl. |
| 1994 | Temperature monitoring detected a potential thermal blockage for kokanee emigrating upstream to spawn, caused by the deep summer drawdown of the Dworshak pool for salmon flow augmentation. |
| 1995 | Contributing member of the Columbia River SOR Resident Fish Work Group for full-scale alternative analysis, Final Resident Fish Technical Appendix preparation and response to public comments. Final SOR EIS released November 1995. |
| 1996 | Contracted report completed: Juul T.J and William H. Funk. 1996. A limnological reevaluation of Dworshak Reservoir, Idaho, Pullman, WA. |
| 1q | Provided public presentation of project summary and update for the Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority 1997 Review of Projects, Portland, OR. The abstract of this presentation is included in Document DOE/BP-3006 JULY 1997 350. |
| 1998 | Proposed Dworshak in-season operational plan to the NMFS's sponsored Regional TMT to reserve Dworshak flow augmentation until needed in the summer to cool the Snake River, reducing impacts to rearing Clearwater River fall chinook and reservoir resources. |
| 1998 | Provided public presentation of project summary and update for the 1998 Clearwater Subbasin Review of Projects, Lewiston, ID. |
| 1999 | Initiate subcontract approval process with University of Washington to develop a PC based Dworshak rule curve evaluation model, after receiving HRMOD model and updated source codes from Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. |
| 2000 | Finalize subcontract with Washington State University to develop a PC based Dworshak rule curve evaluation model, after receiving HRMOD model and updated source codes from Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks. |
| 2001 | Provided public presentation regarding Dworshak operational needs at the Regional Flood Control Workshop, February 13, 2001, sponsored by Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Portland, Oregon. |
| 2001 | Report with Dworshak Rule Curve Evaluation Model (DRCEM) received form subcontractor: Barber, Michael E. and Steve T.J. Juul. 2001. Development of biological system operating curves for Dworshak Reservoir, Idaho. |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 198709900 | Dworshak Dam Impacts Assessement and Fisheries Investigation | Defines Dworshak Dam operational criteria to minimize or prevent kokanee entrainment, and monitors the Dworshak kokanee population. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 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 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
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 2002 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 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Refine the Dworshak Rule Curve Evaluation Model (DRCEM) based on recommendations from Barber and Juul (2001). | a. follow-up on modeling and data issues identified by Barber and Juul (2001) | 2 | $30,000 | Yes |
| b. Identify data needs based on what is currently known regarding limiting factors and other conditions specific to Dworshak reservoir | 1 | $16,064 | Yes | |
| c. Identify and develop additional subroutines needed for effective biological assessments. | 2 | $46,064 | Yes | |
| 2. Identify and update appropriate integrated Dworshak operations (Integrated Rule Curve) | a. Use regional hydrologic modeling resources to simulate the effect of an additional 20-foot annual summer drawdown of the Dworshak pool. | 1 | $12,129 | |
| b. Analyze how the resultant reservoir pool elevations effect other uses and needs by comparison with individual operational rule curve criteria. | $12,129 | |||
| c.Continue to coordinate with management and regulatory agencies regarding appropriate integrated operations. | $18,194 | |||
| 3. Institute appropriate integrated operations. | a. Promote recognition and adoption of appropriate integrated operations through participation in NMFS’s Regional Forum (TMT, IT). | $18,194 | ||
| 4.Develop a comprehesive long-term monitoring and evaluation plan for Dworshak Reservoir. | a. Coordinate with federal, state, and private entities associated with data collection activities on Dworshak Reservoir to identify short- and long-term monitoring and evaluation data needs. | $18,194 | ||
| b. Compile the data needs identified in Task a. to develop a coordinated and comprehensive monitoring and evaluation plan with appropriate entities. | $18,194 | |||
| c.Identify a strategy to implement the comprehensive monitoring and evaluation plan. | $12,129 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Refine the Dworshak Rule Curve Evaluation Model (DRCEM) based on recommendations from Barber and Juul (2001). | 2003 | 2006 | $120,000 |
| 2. Identify and update appropriate integrated Dworshak operations (Integrated Rule Curve) | 2003 | 2006 | $280,000 |
| 3. Institute appropriate integrated operations. | 2003 | 2006 | $280,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| $170,000 | $170,000 | $170,000 | $170,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 1 | $66,000 |
| Fringe | $19,800 | |
| Supplies | $3,800 | |
| Travel | $5,188 | |
| Indirect | $20,449 | |
| Subcontractor | $80,000 | |
| Other | operations | $6,054 |
| $201,291 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $201,291 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $201,291 |
| FY 2002 forecast from 2001 | $212,180 |
| % change from forecast | -5.1% |
Reason for change in scope
BIOP 2000 operations for Dworshak Reservoir and accommodate needs identified in the Clearwater Subbasin Summary.
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.
Recommendation:
Do not fund - no response required
Do not fund - no response required
Date:
Sep 28, 2001
Sep 28, 2001
Comment:
Do not fund; no response is called for. The reviewers concerns are similar to those expressed in the FY2000 review. In addition, evidence was presented that reservoir operation is driven by the BiOp and by the power system emergency, rather than being regulated by a rule curve. It will not be useful to undertake the proposed efforts (which were not clearly expressed) to adjust a process that is already burdened by too many conflicting influences. No significant improvement is likely.Comment:
The RFC suggests that past investments in this project would be lost if the model were not completed. The resulting tool will be useful in assessing tradeoffs between biological impacts in Dworshak Reservoir and the river downstream. Although the federal Biological Opinions (BiOps) and electrical generation tend to drive the system, models of this type have been useful in the development and implementation of BiOps on the operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System.Comment:
Not fundable. A response was not requested. The reviewers concerns are similar to those expressed in the FY2000 review. In addition, evidence was presented that reservoir operation is driven by the BiOp and by the power system emergency, rather than being regulated by a rule curve. It will not be useful to undertake the proposed efforts (which were not clearly expressed) to adjust a process that is already burdened by too many conflicting influences. No significant improvement is likely.Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUBenefits are indirect. The proposal is to develop biological and integrated rule curve for Dworshak Dam and Reservoir. It would construct a model to resolves issues dealing with the thermal, hydrologic and biological production model components that could then be used to integrate operations to achieve compatibility with as many needs as possible.
Comments
The purpose of the model is to regulate flows from Dworshak to lessen the impact on resident fish. We agree with the ISRP comments that the operations during fish passage are already highly regulated for mainstem salmon passage, power production and other needs. It may be difficult to incorporate additional operational constraints on an already complex operating plan for the project.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? No
Comment:
Recommend funding to obtain data gathered to date and a final report. Then recommend terminating the project pending the comprehensive and consolidated plan for Dworshak Reservoir. BPA RPA RPM:
--
NMFS RPA/USFWS RPM:
--
Comment:
Council recommendation: The Council is recommending that this project be funded for $95,000 in Fiscal Year 2002 to complete the rule curves and final report (with conditions stated below). This is consistent with Bonneville's comments. The Council notes that it conditioned its funding recommendation for this project in Fiscal Year 2000 on the development of a report and rule curves and providing those products to the Council. It appears that Fiscal Year 2001 funding was provided notwithstanding those conditions not being fully met. The ISRP recommended that the project not be funded. The Council has taken the ISRP's comments into account, but is largely deferring to Bonneville's comments that additional funding is necessary to wrap up work previously funded, and to deliver products. In light of the Council's past record and the funding history, the Council asks Bonneville to confirm that it desires to fund this project for $95,000 in Fiscal Year 2002. Further, if Bonneville provides that confirmation, the Council recommends that payment on the contract be withheld until all final reports and the rule curves are provided. The Council also recommends that during contracting for Fiscal Year 2002 the sponsor be required to explain in writing what Fiscal Year 2000 and 2001 Bonneville funds were used for.Comment:
"Fund to obtain data gathered to date and a final report. The project will be developed with performance timelines and deliverables to assure completion of project as funds are expended. FY2002 funds will need to be carried forward into FY2003 because the current contract performance/budget period goes through December 2002. "Comment:
Comment: