Within-Year Modification Request Form for FY 2008

 
Access CBFWA's Status of the Resource (SOTR) website or BPA's Report Center for more information on
Project 200731800 (Province: Columbia Cascade Subbasin: Entiat )
SOTR Province View
Status & Trends Projects Interactive Map Report
SOTR Subbasin View
Status & Trends Projects Interactive Map Report
SOTR Project & Correspondence
Project
Pisces Report
Project Status Work Funded

View Modification

Table of Contents
Part 1. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative Information
Section 2: Description
Section 3: Related Projects
Section 4: Planning and Design
Section 5: Construction/Implementation
Section 6: Operations and Maintenance
Section 7: Monitoring and Evaluation
Section 8: Total Budget
Section 9: Project Documents
Part 2. Current Status of Modification Request
Part 3. Comments on this Modification Request


Part 1 of 3. Administration and Budgeting
Section 1: General Administrative Information
Process Information:
Date Proposal Submitted & Finalized Status BOG Meeting Date
May 27, 2009 Finalized June 3, 2009

Modification Type: FY 2008 Within-Year Ongoing
BPA Project Number: 200731800
BPA Project Name: UPA Knapp-Wham Hanna Detwieler Irrigation Consolidation
COTR/BPA Project Manager: Cecilia Brown
Agency, Institution or Organization Requesting Rescheduling: Cascadia Conservation District
Funding Type: expense
Project Leader: Mike Rickel
Province: Columbia Cascade
Subbasin: Entiat
 
Contact Person
First Name: Mike
Last Name Rickel
Address: 215 Melody Lane
City, State Zip: Wenatchee, WA 98801
Phone: 509.664.9345
Fax: 509.664.1778
Email: mike.rickel@wa.nacdnet.net

Administrative Contacts
Primary Administrative Contact Secondary Administrative Contact:
Name Peggy Entzel Name
Address: 215 Melody Lane Address:
City, State Zip: Wenatchee, WA 98801 City, State Zip:
Phone: 509.664.9318 Phone:
Fax: 509.664.1778 Fax:
Email: peggy.entzel@wa.nacdnet.net Email:
Note: Note:

Section 2a: Description (Species Information)
Target Species Oncorhynchus mykiss (steelhead)
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (chinook)

Provide explanations as to why the following alternative funding solutions are not feasible and will jeopardize the project:
Reduction in existing scope of project: If the scope is reduced and we stop work now, we no longer have the ability to assist landowners with the system improvements required to adapt to the well sources rather than the ditch. In addition, Keystone Ranch is a significant water right holder in this project. Their needs cannot be served without either improving their current diversion or leaving them on the HD ditch. As agricultural producers with water rights and irrigation needs, access to water must be maintained, whether from the existing ditch or through the upgrades. If the project scope is reduced to eliminate the Keystone component, the opportunity is lost to decommission the HD ditch. The Keystone Ranch is the final water user that will need to be converted before the HD ditch can be closed, thus resulting in the lost opportunity to save surface water though HD ditch decommissioning.

We are requesting additional funds so that we can complete the work necessary for four (4) remaining landowners who switched to wells and/or for upgrading an existing diversion, which will allow us to close the Hanan Detwiler ditch. Specifically, if work is stopped now, several landowners will be left with insufficient delivery systems for their well connections. They have already been disconnected from the ditch system and the cost to reconnect would be greater than what is necessary to complete the system improvements. A third landowner is in the process of moving from HD to KW, and additional costs to complete this work are approximately equivalent to reconnecting to the old system (ditch). The fourth landowner is currently operating from a smaller diversion in addition to the HD ditch. The original plan included wells for this landowner. However, when it was realized that the wells would not produce the amount of needed water for the Keystone Ranch, we submitted a no-cost scope of work update. At that time, the amount of work needed to upgrade the existing irrigation diversion was underestimated.

Funding is needed to complete the final connection of the Knapp Wham Hanan Detwiler Irrigation ditch consolidation. We have currently completed about 70% of the project. The contractor has been issued a stop work order until we can secure enough funds to complete the project.

The consolidation of the KW and HD ditches is a large, complex project. Other funding has been secured for a number of the components. Improvements to the KW diversion are being funded by the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the diversion structure for the Keystone Ranch will be improved through a Washington State Salmon Recovery Funding Board project this fall, along with habitat and riparian components. Other contributors to the overall consolidation include the PUD Tributary Committee for the Rocky Reach Habitat Conservation Plan, the Priest Rapids tributary fund, and US Fish & Wildlife Service. A significant partner in this effort is the US Bureau of Reclamation, which has contributed both design services and technical support. Contributions by other partners are providing significant "cost share" to the BPA funds when viewed as an aggregate effort. This project was identified as a priority in the Entiat Watershed Plan, and has the approval of the Entiat Watershed Planning Unit.

The broad support of the overall goal of consolidating these systems among both private and public partners is another reason that reduction or deferral at this time would be unfortunate.

Deferral of existing work elements to later date: Deferral of final well conversion work would leave landowners with inadequate water delivery for their crops. Deferral of the Keystone component could be managed, but would not be ideal given the shared nature of work at this site that is to be completed under other funding. We expect construction material and labor costs to increase over time. It will be detrimental if we must delay. In addition, improved conditions (stream flow) will not be fully realized until the project is completed. Although some surface water users have been moved to wells, the HD will continue to leak and use water inefficiently until such time as the Keystone Ranch water needs can be served elsewhere and the ditch can be closed.

Section 2b: Description (Location Information)
Location(s) at which the action will be implemented
Latitude Longitude Location Description
No Locations Entered

Is this/Are these the same study location(s) that was/were identified in the original proposal? Yes

Condition/situation creating the need for the modification:
Is the situation the result of a catastrophic event that occurred within the existing location? No
Has a habitat/population/mechanical/structural dilemma developed in the proposed study location since the contract was signed with BPA? Yes

Section 2c: Description (Work Element Information)
What work elements in the existing proposal does the proposed modification address?
Work Element Work Element Title

Proposed action to achieve the objective(s) In order to still achieve the biological objectives identified for the Entiat River we are modifing the original approach. We will upgrade the existing Keystone instream diversion to meet the irrigation needs rather than continue drilling wells that are not producing the amount needed. Specifically, Keystone #1 well only produced 30 gallons per minute. Keystone #2 well produced 115 gallons per minute (GPM). These two wells scheduled to produce greater than 250 GPM and therefor the decision was made to not drill any more wells since it was unlikely that they would produce the amount of water needed.

The Keystone Ranch does have an existing instream water diversion that will be upgraded to ESA compliance for fish screening and fish passage while providing the amount of water needed. The Keystone diversion was not part of the original Knapp Wham irrigation diversion project since there was no need to alter the diversion if the wells were going to produce the expected water supply. We propose to enlarge the existing Keystone diversion from 800 GPM to 1,500 GPM.


Does not implementing this modification jeopardize the ability to achieve existing biological objectives of this project, as well as other projects? Yes

Explain: Very much so. This project is nearly 75% complete but the last few tasks needed to complete the project need additional funding. Developing wells and connecting them to existing irrigation infrastructure has proved to be more expensive than anticipated as we have encountered items that have resulted in cost increases (such as the length of pipe needed to hook into the existing sprinkler system was longer and/or had to be conncted into numerous lines, upgrading sprinkler heads to more water efficient nozzles to get by with the amount of water produced from wells, upgrading power supply at the wells and/or new ditch connections). As we continue developing the upgrade of the Keystone Irrigation diversion additional items have been encountered that has increased the cost. Specifically, a larger pump is needed, an electrical upgrade for the larger pump, new bypass pipe and settling basin, a new fish screen.

Section 2d: Description (BiOp Information)
NMFS and/or FWS Biological Opinion that this funding request addresses Strategy
NMFS &/or USFWS
How proposed actions will address the BiOp
(i.e., substrategy / limiting factor / metric to be achieved)
nmfs 2004 habitat

Section 2e: Description (Objectives)
Objectives of this proposed project
Objective
(abbreviation)
Full Description
unchanged THe objective of this project is unchanged from the orginal proposal

Section 3: Is This Funding Request Related to Other Projects in the Basin?

Other projects that are related to this request
Project # Project Title/Description Nature of Relationship

Section 4: Estimated Budget for Planning & Design phase for this request (request amount only)

Work element-based estimated budget
Planning & Design
Objective Work Element Work Element Title Work Element Description Description of Metrics Task Duration
in FYs
Estimated Budget Subcontractor?
unchanged Develop Alternative Water Source Well Development - New Lines [Not Entered] [Not Entered] $ 0 Yes
unchanged Develop Alternative Water Source Increasing existing irrigation flows [Not Entered] [Not Entered] 2009 $ 0 Yes

Outyear work element-based estimated 2009 - 2012 budget for this proposal
Planning & Design
Work Element Work Element Outyear Description Starting FY
numbers only
Ending FY
numbers only
Estimated cost

Outyear totals
Planning & Design

Section 5: Estimated Budget for Contruction/Implementation phase for this request (request amount only)

Work element-based estimated budget
Contruction/Implementation
Objective Work Element Work Element Title Work Element Description Description of Metrics Task Duration
in FYs
Estimated Budget Subcontractor?
unchanged Develop Alternative Water Source Well Development - New Lines Drill wells in up to 10 locations with the assistance of the BOR hydrogeologist and landowners. Water saved from these wells (8-10 cfs) will be left in the river and placed in trust through the State of Washington River Conservation Program (Rich Malinowski, pers. comm. to Cecilia Brown, October 5, 2007). [Not Entered] 2009 $28,100 Yes
unchanged Develop Alternative Water Source Increasing existing irrigation flows This is a new work element as of August 2008. The wells proposed for the Keystone property did not produce the quantity of water required to allow the owner to irrigate at full capacity after the Hanan-Detwiler ditch is abandoned. Therefore, we are proposing to increase the owner's irrigation capacity at another existing ditch, the Keystone Ditch. Currently, the Keystone irrigation diversion system consists of a wing dam, diversion channel, trash rack, settling basin, fish screen, by-pass pipe and 75 hp pump. Its current capacity is 800 gallons per minute (gpm). The system will be surveyed in order to design and build a system that will accommodate the Keystone property's additional 700 gpm irrigation need. The new system will be capable of producing up to 1500 gpm for irrigation. The new source will be accomodated with mainline and lateral pipe connections. A new fish screen will be installed at the diversion (see work element K for details). The antiquated 30 feet by 10 feet wooden settling basin will be updated with a concrete settling basin structure and will provide the appropriate amount of water for the new fish screen and by-pass pipe. A new 75hp pump and electrical upgrade will be installed on the downstream end of the settling basin to provide 700 gpm of irrigation water. The new diversion settling basin is located outside of OHWM (in orchard) and will require approximately 400 square feet excavation to place the new concrete vault structure (30'x10'). A Cultural Resources survey will be completed once design has been completed. No excavation will occur in the irrigation channel, as the existing channel is large enough to convey the increased irrigation flows. [Not Entered] 2008 $109,812 Yes

Outyear work element-based estimated 2009 - 2012 budget for this proposal
Contruction/Implementation
Work Element Work Element Outyear Description Starting FY
numbers only
Ending FY
numbers only
Estimated cost

Outyear totals
Contruction/Implementation
FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012
$137,912 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

Section 6: Estimated Budget for Operations & Maintenance phase for this request (request amount only)

Work element-based estimated budget
Operations & Maintenance
Objective Work Element Work Element Title Work Element Description Description of Metrics Task Duration
in FYs
Estimated Budget Subcontractor?

Outyear work element-based estimated 2009 - 2012 budget for this proposal
Operations & Maintenance
Work Element Work Element Outyear Description Starting FY
numbers only
Ending FY
numbers only
Estimated cost

Outyear totals
Operations & Maintenance

Section 7: Estimated Budget for Monitoring & Evaluation phase for this request (request amount only)

Work element-based estimated budget
Monitoring & Evaluation
Objective Work Element Work Element Title Work Element Description Description of Metrics Task Duration
in FYs
Estimated Budget Subcontractor?

Outyear work element-based estimated 2009 - 2012 budget for this proposal
Monitoring & Evaluation
Work Element Work Element Outyear Description Starting FY
numbers only
Ending FY
numbers only
Estimated cost

Outyear totals
Monitoring & Evaluation

Section 8: Total Budget Modification Request

Itemized Estimated Budget
Item Note FY 2008 Cost

Total Estimated Budget Modification
Total FY 2008 budget modification $ 0
Total FY 2008 budget for this project, including modification request $ 0

Outyear Budget Totals
  2009 2010 2011 2012
Construction & Implementation $137,912 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Total Outyear Budgets $137,912 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0

Cost sharing associated with this modification
Organization Item or Service Provided Amount ($) Cash or in-kind?

Section 9: Narrative, Maps and Project Documents
No documents are associated with this request

Part 2 of 3. Current Status of Modification Request
Meeting Date Status Record Entry Date Decision Group Adjustment Category Urgency Status Budget Impact Reconsider Date
6/3/2009  5/27/2009  NA      Submitted  $ 0   
Decision Comments Next Steps
   
6/3/2009  6/3/2009  BOG  Budget  CAT-4: Lost Opportunity  Under BOG Review  $137,912  8/15/2009 
Decision Comments Next Steps
Moving site of diversion to a more fish friendly site. Need to reflect past BOG activity for this project and recommendation.  This request will be pooled up for the third quarter review for a decision in mid August. 
6/3/2009  8/12/2009  BPA  Budget    BPA Approved  $137,912   
Decision Comments Next Steps
BPA approved with Council concurrence to add $137,912 to the FY09 budget.   

Part 3 of 3. Comments on this Modification Request
There are no comments on this proposed modification.