Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Construct Sediment Settling Basin |
Proposal ID | 9160 |
Organization | Kittitas Reclamation District (KRD) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
Name | Jack Carpenter |
Mailing address | P.O. Box 276 Ellensburg, WA 98926 |
Phone / email | 5099256158 / krd@eburg.com |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 1999 |
Province / Subbasin | Lower Mid-Columbia / Yakima |
Short description | Improve the quality of water discharged into the Yakima River from a major drainage channel within the KRD service area by constructing a sediment settling basin. |
Target species | |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost |
Personnel |
KRD Staff |
$3,000 |
Fringe |
|
$2,000 |
Subcontractor |
CH2M Hill |
$0 |
| $5,000 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost | $5,000 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 1999 budget request | $5,000 |
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: There are no known consrtaints.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Incomplete: This is primarily a watershed proposal and should be reviewed as such. The criteria used are insufficient to fully evaluate watershed proposals. Combine with 9161 and 9162, because these 3 proposals are so closely linked and overlap in their objectives; set strategies to focus on specific improvements to water quality and tell why these improvements are important to anadromous and resident fish; objectives are vague and not measurable (e.g. reduce turbidity from -- NTU to -- NTU) can't meet goals if don't set targets; not enough detail on resources needed.
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Incomplete
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Incomplete
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Incomplete
Recommendation:
Fund (low priority)
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
In-lieu funding issue. Proposed tasks appear to be "in lieu of other expenditures authorized or required from other entities under other agreements or provisions of law". (Section 4.(h)(10)(A) of PNW Power Act). Budget constraints. Proposal was found to be technically sound and appropriate but was deferred because other work was judged more urgent and funds were not adequate for all needed work.
Recommendation:
Inadequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
The expected results of the activity are not well described. There is no budget for the construction of the settlement basin. Relation to the Fish and Wildlife Program is not addressed.