Return to Proposal Finder FY 2000 Proposal 199503300

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 O&M of Yakima Phase II Fish Facilities
BPA Project Proposal Number 199503300
Business name of agency, institution,
or organization requesting funding
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
Business acronym (if appropriate) BOR

Proposal contact person or principal investigator

Name Jim Faith
Mailing Address P.O. Box 1749
City, State, Zip Yakima, WA 98907-1749
Phone 5095755848 215
Fax 5094545612
Manager of program authorizing this project
Review Cycle FY 2000
Province Columbia Plateau
Subbasin Yakima
Short Description Operate and maintain BPA owned Yakima River basin Phase II anadromous fish passage, protection and trapping facilities.
Target Species Spring & fall chinook, steelhead, bull trout.

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: 7.4K.1
FWS/NMFS Biological Opinion Number(s) which this project addresses: N/A
Other Planning Document References N/A

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
Sucessful O&M of facilities from 1992 through present.

Section 3. Relationships to Other Projects

Project ID Title Description Umbrella
9107500 Yakima Phase II Screen Construction Funding source for design and construction of Phase II facilities by USBR. No
9200900 Yakima Screens - Phase II O&M Funding source for O&M of Phase II facilities by Washington Dept of Fish & Wildlife. Phase II facilities O&M is done through a cooperative effort between USBR and WDFW. No
9105700 Yakima Phase II Screen Fabrication Funding source for fabrication of Phase II facility drumscreens by Washington Dept of Fish & Wildlife. No
8506200 Passage Improvement Evaluation Funding source for monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of Phase II facilities by Battelle Pacific NW Laboratories. No

Section 4. Objectives, Tasks and Schedules

Objectives and Tasks

Objective Task
1. Perform facility O&M to quickly pass and protect fish moving through facilities, to maximize the useful life of facilities, and to protect BPA's capital investment. a. Closely monitor facilities for proper operation, and make corrective equipment and flow adjustments as needed to maximize fish passage efficiency and protection.
1. b. Provide a comprehensive facility maintenance and repair program.

Objective Schedules and Costs

Objective Start Date End Date Measurable Biological Objectives Milestone FY 2000 Cost %
1 10/01/99 09/01/00 N/A N/A 100.0%

Section 5. Estimated Budget Summary

Itemized Budget

Item Note FY 2000 Cost
Personnel 1 FTE $ 41,600
Fringe 20% of personnel costs $ 8,320
Supplies $ 5,000
Indirect 25% of personnel costs $ 10,400
Other Utilities $ 2,500
Subcontractor Wapato Irrigation District $ 25,000
Subcontractor Roza Irrigation District $ 2,000
Subcontractor Athanam Irrigation District $ 4,700
Total Itemized Budget $ 99,520

Total estimated budget

Total FY 2000 project cost $ 99,520
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA Funds $ 0
Total FY 2000 budget request $ 99,520
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

Not applicable

Outyear Budget Totals

2001 2002 2003 2004
All Phases $105,000 $110,000 $115,000 $120,000
Total Outyear Budgets $105,000 $110,000 $115,000 $120,000

Other Budget Explanation

Schedule Constraints: Phase II facility construction will continue until the year 2003. USBR's actual O&M work schedule and associated costs will depend on how quickly new facilities are added.

Section 6. References

n/a or no information

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 project proposal is the weakest of the set of screen proposals. It was often short and to the point and lacked important detail and documentation. Technical background needed to be better developed and documented. Objectives were very general and could have been broken down into specific tasks or schedules. It was difficult to determine how the performance of the project might be measured. Although monitoring and evaluation were addressed, the project history provided little information on the success of this program or the results of past monitoring. Much of the work is subcontracted to local irrigation districts, but the proposal provided little detail on the quality control for this work.

The information provided is not adequate to evaluate the budget. Won't the personnel costs continue to increase as more projects are completed? How were personnel costs estimated? How do past/future budgets relate to the number of sites requiring O&M? It is not clear how O&M costs for Phase II projects will be estimated as more projects come on line. The proposal does not list measurable biological objectives but indicates biological results will be monitored and reported by other agencies. But if these results will measure the success of O&M, then the objectives and evaluation criteria should at least be defined here. It is appropriate to include this project with the other screening proposals and place the whole set on a four year funding track. The difficulties noted must be corrected for the next review.

CBFWA Funding Recommendation Recommendation:
Aug 20, 1999

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? No
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?

NWPPC Funding Recommendation , NWPPC 2000-6 Recommendation:
Mar 1, 2000
$ 99,520
[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:
FY06 NPCC Staff Preliminary:
FY06 NPCC July Draft Start of Year:
Sponsor (US Bureau of Reclamation) Comments (Go to Original on NPCC Website):

Return to top of page