FY 2001 High Priority proposal 23078
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 |
|---|---|
| 23078 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Walla Walla Basin Flow Restoration Project |
| Proposal ID | 23078 |
| Organization | Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Douglas M. Parrow |
| Mailing address | 158 - 12th Street NE Salem, OR 97301-4172 |
| Phone / email | 5033788455 / douglas.m.parrow@state.or.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | Mike Ladd |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Walla Walla |
| Short description | Support restoration and protection of instream flows in the Walla Walla River by improving streamflow and water use measurement and more intensive water management and monitoring of water use which will be essential to the success of other projects. |
| Target species | Bull trout, steelhead |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.0624 | -118.9393 | Walla Walla River |
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
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|---|
| $4,750 | $7,125 | $11,875 |
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
| FY 2003 | FY 2004 | FY 2005 |
|---|---|---|
| $275,498 | $286,518 | $297,979 |
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 4 | $278,976 |
| Fringe | @ 41 percent | $114,380 |
| Supplies | $73,920 | |
| Travel | $57,600 | |
| Indirect | @ 12.17 percent | $63,878 |
| Capital | gaging stations, headgates, measuring devices | $362,500 |
| $951,254 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $951,254 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $951,254 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hudson Bay and Walla Walla Irrigation Districts and patrons | 50 percent cost share on headgates/measuring devices | $237,500 | cash |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This proposal to improve streamflow and water use measurement through the construction of gaging stations, and installation of headgates and measuring devices does not provide enough detail to ensure success. The proposal does not identify the amount of instream flows to be gained from the project. Although this proposal meets some of the high priority criteria, specifically enforcement issues, it does not address imminent risks to ESA stocks by offering direct on-the-ground benefits with one-time funding.Comment:
The proposal does not identify an action plan that it would implement. The priority of this project should be determined in a province review.