FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29031
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 |
---|---|
Response in Opposition from Okanogan Wilderness League | Response |
29031 Narrative | Narrative |
29031 Sponsor Response to ISRP | Response |
29031 Powerpoint Presentation | Powerpoint Presentation |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Out Year Operations and Maintenance Costs Required to Implement/Carry out MVID Rehabilitation Project |
Proposal ID | 29031 |
Organization | Yakama Nation (YN) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Lynn Hatcher, Fisheries Program Director |
Mailing address | PO Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 |
Phone / email | 5098655121 / lynn@yakama.com |
Manager authorizing this project | Lynn Hatcher |
Review cycle | Columbia Cascade |
Province / Subbasin | Columbia Cascade / Methow |
Short description | Proposal requests O & M support for MVID Rehabitation Project (MVID_RP). Assured long-term funding for O&M costs is essential for MVID_RP completion and realization of its water conservation, in-stream flow and habitat benefits. |
Target species | spring chinook, summer steelhead. bulltrout |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|---|---|
48.3717 | -120.1783 | Lower Twisp River and Methow River near confluence |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
RPA |
---|
Action 149 |
Action 150 |
Action 152 |
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
---|---|---|---|
NMFS | Action 149 | NMFS | BOR shall initiate programs in three priority subbasins (identified in the Basinwide Recovery Strategy) per year over 5 years, in coordination with NMFS, FWS, the states and others, to address all flow, passage, and screening problems in each subbasin over 10 years. The Corps shall implement demonstration projects to improve habitat in subbasins where water-diversion-related problems could cause take of listed species. Under the NWPPC program, BPA addresses passage, screening, and flow problems, where they are not the responsibility of others. BPA expects to expand on these measures in coordination with the NWPPC process to complement BOR actions described in the action above. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Year | Accomplishment |
---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Project ID | Title | Description |
---|---|---|
199603401 | Methow Valley Irrigation District Rehabilitation Project: Rehabilitation of MVID's distributing system and mitigation of remaining environmental concerns associated with the system. | This proposal requests support of the O & M costs associated with the MVID Rehabilitation project. Without funds for O & M costs, the implementation of the MVID Rehabiliation project is in jeopardy |
Replacement of laterals needed to promote water conservation | This subcontract of the MVID Rehabiliatioin project has been completed. The O &M costs requested will help assure that the maximum benefits are realized from this project. | |
Development of conceptual plan for MVID Rehabiliation Project | A conceptual plan for a revised MVID Rehabilitation project was prepared by Fred Ziari. O & M funds requested are required for the results of this work to be realized. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
not applicable | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
not applicable | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|---|---|---|---|
not applicable | $0 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
not applicable | $0 |
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
1. Provide power to new MVID system implemented through MVID rehabilitation project in order to conserve water, protect/restore habitat and provide instream flow | 2004 | 2007 | $120,000 |
2. Fund operation/maintenance/repair of new MVID system referenced above | 2004 | 2007 | $60,000 |
3. Replacement of pumping stations and all related infrastructures at end of first 20-25 years fo the MVID rehabitated system | 2004 | 2007 | $60,000 |
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 | FY 2007 |
---|---|---|---|
$60,000 | $60,000 | $60,000 | $60,000 |
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2003 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
---|---|---|---|
Objective 1. Assess habitat conditions for salmonids and salmonid usage below the MVID West diversion. | 2004 | 2006 | $20,000 |
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
FY 2004 | FY 2005 | FY 2006 |
---|---|---|
$10,000 | $5,000 | $5,000 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
Item | Note | FY 2003 cost |
---|---|---|
$0 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2003 cost | $0 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 2003 budget request | $0 |
FY 2003 forecast from 2002 | $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.
Fundable only if response is adequate
Mar 1, 2002
Comment:
A response is needed. This project is a logical extension of the existing project (199603491), rather than a new project. It is unclear whether the ongoing project will be implemented. The proposal is for out year costs, not FY 2003. It is anticipated that the pumping station will be constructed by 2004 as a product of the NWPPC mandated facilitation process with the Methow Valley Irrigation District and WDOE, BPA, the Yakama Nation, NMFS, WDFW, and the Colville Tribe. Pumping would replace a push-up dam in the Twisp River and reduce use of Methow River water as a result of a new distribution system. The present proposal is tied to installation and construction of the pumping station and distribution system in that the MVID will only agree to the change in their withdrawal system if the operating and maintenance costs are covered. Approval of this proposal would provide the guarantee that the MVID seeks for covering the O&M costs.Procedures for implementation monitoring need to be described in detail as part of the O&M project. Objectives 2 and 3 include long-term monitoring and evaluation methods that are not adequately described. The specific sample areas, methods, and sampling frequency and intensity (i.e., how many samples of what type where and when) need to be specified to ensure that statistical inferences can be drawn to the study areas. For example, it is not sufficient to say that the "The Hankin and Reeves (1988) methodology will be used to measure and record data."
What are the potential fish benefits from this project?
Comment:
M&E not adequately described and may be funded from other sources if project goes forward. Funding may not be needed. NMFS has identified this project as a BiOp project.Comment:
Not Fundable. The response was not adequate. The proposal is incomplete because a final design is not available. This proposal may need to be submitted anew (and separate from the provincial review) now that a settlement has been reached with NMFS over MVID's system.ISRP Preliminary Recommendation and Comments: A response is needed. This project is a logical extension of the existing project (199603491), rather than a new project. It is unclear whether the ongoing project will be implemented. The proposal is for out year costs, not FY 2003. It is anticipated that the pumping station will be constructed by 2004 as a product of the NWPPC mandated facilitation process with the Methow Valley Irrigation District and WDOE, BPA, the Yakama Nation, NMFS, WDFW, and the Colville Tribe. Pumping would replace a push-up dam in the Twisp River and reduce use of Methow River water as a result of a new distribution system. The present proposal is tied to installation and construction of the pumping station and distribution system in that the MVID will only agree to the change in their withdrawal system if the operating and maintenance costs are covered. Approval of this proposal would provide the guarantee that the MVID seeks for covering the O&M costs.
Procedures for implementation monitoring need to be described in detail as part of the O&M project. Objectives 2 and 3 include long-term monitoring and evaluation methods that are not adequately described. The specific sample areas, methods, and sampling frequency and intensity (i.e., how many samples of what type where and when) need to be specified to ensure that statistical inferences can be drawn to the study areas. For example, it is not sufficient to say that the "The Hankin and Reeves (1988) methodology will be used to measure and record data."
What are the potential fish benefits from this project?
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUProject could substantially improve summer flow conditions in the lower 4 miles of the Twisp River and replace two problematic irrigation diversions with structures that would better enable fish passage across a range of flows. Project could result in increased spawning and rearing survival rates.
Comments
Proposal is a placeholder pending final agreement on the configuration of this conservation project. Project has been in the Council's program since 1996. While BOR is expected to play a substantial role in resolving flow and passage problems in the Methow, in that this project has been under consideration so long that it may be best to retain as BPA responsibility. Funding, however, should be contingent on the final agreement including substantial gains in Twisp River flows.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? Yes
Comment:
Do not recommend. Should be considered in context of existing projects.Comment: