FY 2001 High Priority proposal 23023
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 |
|---|---|
| 23023 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Stormy Creek High Priority Culvert Replacement |
| Proposal ID | 23023 |
| Organization | Yakama Nation; (contact Bob Rose; brose@yakama.com; 509-865-6262) (YN) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Paula Cox |
| Mailing address | 350 Orondo Ave Wenatchee, Wa. 98801 |
| Phone / email | 5096645415 / PaulaH.Cox@co.chelan.wa.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | Lynn Hatcher (lynn@yakama.com) |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Cascade / Entiat |
| Short description | Culvert replacement on county road in the Entiat sub-basin known to be a barrier to passage for ESA "listed" Endangered species. |
| Target species | Spring Chinook Salmon, Steelhead |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 47.8221 | -120.4208 | Stormy Creek |
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 |
|---|
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 | $21,800 | |
| Fringe | $10,000 | |
| Capital | multiplate bottomless arch | $70,000 |
| Subcontractor | $21,000 | |
| $122,800 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $122,800 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $122,800 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| USFS / Chelan County Public Works | Labor: Chelan County - analysis , design and contract administration / USFS - preparation of Biological Assessment, site monitoring / WDFW restoration and monitoring | $0 | in-kind |
| USFS / Chelan County Public Works | Misc. Materials | $0 | in-kind |
| Moses Lake Conservation District | Native plant propagation | $0 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
The proposal to replace a culvert lacks adequate information on existing stream flows, stock status, and expected benefits from the proposed work. They should consider potential impacts on native resident stocks if any are present above the culverts.Comment:
While the Entiat Subbasin has less overall potential than others in the area, this proposal addresses a real problem/limiting factor - rearing habitat. Unfortunately, this proposal would open up only a small area.