Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 199105700

Proposal Table of Contents

Additional Documents

Section 1. General Administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Objectives, tasks and schedules
Section 5. Budget
Section 6. References
Section 7. Abstract

Reviews and Recommendations
Title Type File Size File Date

Section 1. General Administrative Information

Title of Project Proposal Yakima Phase 2 [Fish] Screen Fabrication
BPA Project Proposal Number 199105700
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Yakima Screen Shop
Business acronym (if appropriate) WDFW/YSS

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name John A. Easterbrooks
Mailing Address 3705 W. Washington Ave.
City, State, Zip Yakima, WA 98903-1137
Phone 5095752734
Fax 5094544139
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Columbia Plateau
Subbasin Yakima
Short Description YSS fabricates and installs fish screens and all miscellaneous metalwork for Yakima Basin Phase II screen projects. New fish screens prevent mortality and/or injury of juvenile anadromous and resident fish in gravity irrigation diversions.
Target Species spring and fall chinook, steelhead, coho, bull trout, rainbow trout, whitefish

Project Location

[No information]

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-Reported Relevant RPAs

Sponsor listed no RPAs for this project proposal

Relevant RPAs based upon NMFS & BPA Review

NMFS and BPA did not associate any reasonable and prudent alternatives with this project proposal

NPPC Program Measure Number(s) which this project addresses: 7.11B.1
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: NA
Other Planning Document References This project is a component of the Yakama Nation's anadromous fish restoration plan for the Yakima Basin; YIN was an original co-sponsor of the NPPC Program Measure this project addresses and has supported the project from its inception in 1990 and initial funding in FY1992.

CBFWA-Generated Information

Database Administrator notes on the history of this proposal form: None
Type of Project (assigned by CBFWA Analysts): anadromous

Section 2. Past Accomplishments

Year Accomplishment
1998 Screen fabrication/installation completed for: Old Union Canal and Younger Ditch irrigation diversions; shop fabrication of Johncox, Fogarty screens for 1999 install
1997 Screen facilities fabricated/installed: Bull, Ellensburg Mill, Clark, Lindsey, Union Gap, Upper WIP (install)
1996 Facilities fabricated/installed: Fruitvale, Naches-Selah, Emerick, Stevens, Anderson, Tennant, Sinclair-Cobb, Gnavaugh, Peterson
1995 Facilities fabricated/installed: Toppenish Pump, Upper WIP fabrication
1994 Facilities fabricated/installed: Bachelor-Hatton, Congdon, Kelly-Lowry
1993 Facilities fabricated/installed: Gleed, Holmes, Lower WIP, New Cascade, Snipes-Allen, Taylor,
1992 Facilities fabricated/installed: Naches-Cowiche, Kiona

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
9107500 Yakima Phase II Screens - Construction (USBR) mandatory linkage with screen facility civil works construction No
9200900 Yakima Screens - Phase II - O&M (WDFW, YSS) operation & preventive maintenance of completed screens No
9503300 O&M of Yakima Fish Protection, Mitigation & Enhancement Facilities (USBR) screen & fish passage O&M and preventative maintenance No
8506200 Evaluate the Effectiveness of Fish Screens (Battelle, PNNL) post-construction and periodic biological/hydraulic evaluation of completed Phase II screens No

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Fabricate/Installaton of Phase 2, Group 8 fish screens and miscellaneous metalwork a. Shop fabrication of screens and metalwork for sites designated by Yakima Basin Passage TWG
1. b. Install screens, structural and miscellaneous metalwork in civil works structure
1. c. Field testing, adjustment during initial operation of screen facility

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 02/01/00 02/01/01 Group 8 Phase II diversions upgraded to comply with regional fish screening criteria X 100.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel fabrication/installation labor costs $ 89,370
Fringe @ 31% of labor costs $ 27,705
Supplies includes: metered/non-metered equipment charges; WA sales tax @ 7.8% $110,731
Capital None in FY2000 $ 0
NEPA Not Applicable $ 0
Travel vehicle mileage costs for installation/field testing $ 6,700
Indirect YSS indirect costs @ $300/man-month $ 9,755
Other Admin. overhead @ 20% of above subtotal $ 48,852
Total Itemized Budget $293,113

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $293,113
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $293,113
FY 2000 forecast from 1999 $ 0
% change from forecast 0.0%

Reason for change in estimated budget

Not applicable

Reason for change in scope

Not applicable

Cost Sharing

Organization Item or service provided Amount Cash or In-Kind
Not Applicable $ 0 unknown


Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002
All Phases $150,000 $100,000
Total Outyear Budgets $150,000 $100,000

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: Delays in screen civil works construction caused by diversion water rights uncertainty (on-going court adjudication) or property acquisition delays (easements, rights-of-way, fee title) may affect the Yakima Screen Shop fabrication schedule.

Section 6. References

Reference Watershed?
Bates, K. and R. Fuller. 1992. Salmon fry screen mesh study. Wa. Dept. of Fisheries Rept., Olympia, Washington. No
Beecher, H. and G. Engman. 1995. Screen mesh size effectiveness for excluding trout fry from water diversions. Wa. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife Rept., Olympia, Washington. No
Blanton, S. L., D. A. Neitzel, and C. S. Abernethy. 1998. Washington Phase II Fish Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 1997. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington. No
Eddy, B. R. 1988. Wapatox Canal fish screen facility passage effectiveness evaluation: 1986-87. Pacific Power & Light Co. Rept., Portland, Oregon No
Mueller, R. P., C. S. Abernethy, and D. A. Neitzel. 1995. A fisheries evaluation of the Dryden fish screening facility. 1994 Annual Report. DOE/BP-00029-2, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon. No
Smith, L. S. and L. T. Carpenter. 1987. Salmonid fry swimming stamina data for diversion screen criteria. Fisheries Research Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. No

Section 7. Abstract


Reviews and Recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

ISRP Preliminary Review , ISRP 99-2 Recommendation:
Jun 15, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Recommendation: Fund. Group the fish screening projects into a set (8506200, 9105710, 9107500, 9200900, 9503300) and fund for four years. The ISRP should review again in 2003.

Comments: This proposal did a convincing job of describing the need and benefits of the project. The relationship to other projects and project history was brief but adequate. The proposal objectives were specific and measurable. The methods section, however, was vague and could have used better development. In particular, the writers included little information on provisions for delays, cost overruns, or expected long-term maintenance needs. This project is tightly linked to project #9105700 and closely related to project #920900. All the project descriptions shared the same introductory material. This suggests that these proposals could have been introduced under an umbrella proposal, which would have reduced the repetitive material and provided an opportunity to specifically describe the functional relationship among these projects.

The next time this project comes up for review the following areas should be improved:

1. The difference in activities between this and the screen construction project should be made clearer. Given the amount of overlap in the projects and the repeat of information in each proposal, it might be reasonable to combine these proposals.

2. More detail is needed in the budget and schedule. What are the estimated costs of the individual projects? Since delays last year had an affect on this year's proposal, how might delays in the civil works construction schedule affect the proposed fabrication plans and budget?

3. Additional detail is needed regarding the budgeted activities, sequence of work, and contingencies. The linkage to project 9107500 creates some problems due to the lack of specificity in that budget and schedule (see comments).

CBFWA: Subregional Team Comments Recommendation:
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Although a long history of BPA funding exists for these projects, they should be funded under another source. For subsequent construction and O&M, we recommend transferring the responsibility to the Bureau of Reclamation starting in FY01.

CBFWA: Watershed Technical Group Comments Recommendation:
Technically Sound? Yes
Aug 20, 1999
[There are no budget numbers associated with this review.]
Consider integrating these projects to save money. Why do we need two O and M contracts?

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Aug 20, 1999

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Mar 1, 2000
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]

NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review Funding category:
May 2005
FY05 NPCC Start of Year:
$ 0
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
$ 28,195
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
$ 28,195
Sponsor (WDFW - Olympia) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page