FY 2001 High Priority proposal 23088
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 |
|---|---|
| 23088 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Renovate Selway Falls Anadromous Fish Passage Tunnel |
| Proposal ID | 23088 |
| Organization | Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Tim Cochnauer |
| Mailing address | 1540 Warner Lewiston, ID 83501 |
| Phone / email | 2087995010 / tcochnau@idfg.state.id.us |
| Manager authorizing this project | Mr. Cal Groen |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 High Priority |
| Province / Subbasin | Mountain Snake / Clearwater |
| Short description | The Selway River anadromous fish tunnel was constructed in the late 1960's in an effort to provide improved passage conditions through the Selway Falls complex. Since that time the infrastructure of the tunnel has deteriorated and requires renovation. |
| Target species | Steelhead trout, chinook salmon |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.0513 | -115.3038 | Selway Falls |
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 | FTE: 3 mos biologists time | $12,000 |
| Fringe | @36.5% | $4,380 |
| Supplies | Miscellaneous; 60 radio tags; fixed-site receiver | $28,000 |
| Travel | Work site visits | $1,000 |
| Capital | Engineering contractor | $211,000 |
| Other | Administrative costs 20.5% | $52,558 |
| $308,938 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $308,938 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $308,938 |
| FY 2001 forecast from 2000 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| IDFG | On site administration of project; followup monitoring | $18,000 | in-kind |
| USFS | On site administration; followup monitoring | $10,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This short and to-the-point proposal justifies the potential benefits to be gained from the tunnel work. This is an important project to ensure access of fish to sections of the Clearwater River that are being improved under other projects. Discrete data on stock status are not provided.Comment: