FY 2001 Action Plan proposal 26014
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 |
|---|---|
| 26014 Narrative | Narrative |
| Letter from J. Koenings (WDFW) to S. Wright (BPA) RE: Washington Action Plan Projects | Correspondence |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Design, Fabricate, and Install New Huntsville Mill Fish Screen |
| Proposal ID | 26014 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Eric B. Egbers |
| Mailing address | 3705 WEST WASHINGTON AVENUE YAKIMA, WA 98903-1137 |
| Phone / email | 5095752733 / egberebe@dfw.wa.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | ERIC B. EGBERS |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Action Plan |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Walla Walla |
| Short description | WDFW PROPOSES TO DESIGN, FABRICATE, AND INSTALL A NEW FISH SCREEN FACILITY (12 CFS) AT THE EXISTING HUNTSVILL MILL LOCATION WITHIN THE TOUCHET RIVER BASIN. THE NEW SCREEN FACILITY WILL COMPLY WITH CURRENT STATE AND FEDERAL CRITERIA FOR FISH PROTECTION. |
| Target species | ALL ANADROMOUS SALMONIDS, AS WELL AS OTHER RESIDENT FISH SPECIES. |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.2832 | -118.0865 | SITE IS LOCATED OFF OF US 12, BETWEEN WAITSBURG, WA AND DAYTON, WA, WEST OF LEWIS AND CLARK STATE PARK, ACROSS FROM THE TOUCHET VALLEEY AIRFIELD. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SW 1/4 NW 1/4 SECTION 5, TOWNSHIP 9 N, RANGE 38 E. |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
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 2001 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 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PREVENT ANADROMOUS AND RESIDENT SALMONIDS FROM ENTERING THE HUNTSVILLE MILL IRRIGATION DIVERSION | INITIATE THE DESIGN, PERMITTING, FABRICATION, AND INSTALLATION OF FISH SCREEN WHICH WILL COMPLY WITH CURRENT STATE AND FEDERAL FISH PROTECTION CRITERIA. | 30 | $255,292 |
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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 2.5 | $89,632 |
| Fringe | EMPLOYEE BENEFITS @ 31% OF SALARIES | $27,786 |
| Supplies | FABRICATION AND CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES | $56,779 |
| Travel | INCLUDES MILEAGE CHARGES AND SUBSISTENCE | $20,000 |
| Indirect | INCLUDES ADMINISTRATIVE OVERHEAD @ 25.2% AND FIXED OPERATING COSTS | $48,938 |
| Subcontractor | CONTINGENCY @ 5% | $12,157 |
| $255,292 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $255,292 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $255,292 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
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.
Comment:
Fundable, ranked at the top of the B list. This is a carefully prepared proposal. It includes a good background to describe the problem and, based on information from elsewhere, describes its likely benefit. The proposal includes a monitoring element to verify that small fish are in fact prevented entry to the irrigation withdrawal system. The need has been demonstrated and prioritized. Project includes initiation of design and will apparently take 30 months to complete; consequently, the benefits to the species affected by the power system emergency will be in the long rather than short term.Comment:
Comment:
Defer to Columbia Plateau since it did not appear to meet the time constraints for implementation within the next year.