FY 2000 proposal 198902700
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 |
|---|---|
| 198902700 Narrative | Narrative |
| 198902700 Sponsor Response to the ISRP | Response |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Power Repay Umatilla Basin Project |
| Proposal ID | 198902700 |
| Organization | Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Jay Marcotte |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 3621, EWN-4 Portland, OR 97208 |
| Phone / email | 5032303943 / jgmarcotte@bpa.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Umatilla |
| Short description | Provide power or reimbursement for power costs for Bureau of Reclamation Umatilla Basin Project pumping plants that exchange Columbia River water for Umatilla River water. |
| Target species | Coho, Spring Chinook, Fall Chinook and Summer Steelhead |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
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 |
|---|---|
| 1995 | Provide power cost reimbursement for Umatilla Basin Project |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 8403300 | Umatilla Hatchery O&M | Provide passage flows for juveniles released |
| 8343500 | Umatilla Hatchery Satellite Facilities O&M | Provide passage flows for juveniles released |
| 9000501 | Umatilla Basin Natural Production M&E | Provide passage flows for adults and juveniles to and from natural production areas |
| 8902401 | Umatilla River/WEID Screens M&E | Provide flows for operation of Umatilla passage facilities |
| 9000500 | Umatilla Hatchery M&E | Provide flows for returning adult salmon and steelhead |
| 20516 | Umatilla River Tributary Fish Passage | |
| 8802200 | Umatilla River Fish Passage Operations (submitted separately) | |
| 8902700 | Power Repay Umatilla Basin Project (subject proposal) | |
| 8343600 | Umatilla Passage Facilities O&M (submitted separately) |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | This contract is for purchase of retail power only, from local utilities. No other line items apply | $0 |
| Fringe | $0 | |
| Supplies | $0 | |
| Other | Utilities (power) | $650,000 |
| $650,000 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $650,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $650,000 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| USBOR | Annual O&M and capital cost repayment | $0 | unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Funding projects 8802200 and 8343600 listed in Section 3 under Umbrella proposals significantly affects the effectiveness of the Umatilla Basin Project. In addition, annual flow conditions in the Umatilla Basin significantly affect the quantity of water t
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Recommendation: Delay funding until a thorough evaluation of success to date is completed. This project should be evaluated together with projects 8802200 and 8343600.Comments: This project belongs under an umbrella. It is not a stand-alone project. Its accomplishments need to be evaluated in terms of the subbasin objectives. Accomplishments are stated in terms of dollars spent to pump water from the Columbia River to (apparently) substitute for water that would have been withdrawn from the Umatilla River. No information is provided on the amount of water provided, or more particularly how much was left in the Umatilla River as a result of this project. No standards are mentioned for decisions about flow conditions that would call for decisions to pump or not to pump. The reviewer naturally wonders whether this pumping simply provides water to irrigators that otherwise might not even be available for withdrawal from the Umatilla River. The net effect could be zero benefit for fish. In fact, the proposal indicates that it was necessary to blast a channel in the river below Three Mile Dam in order to concentrate whatever water might reach that area.
Comment:
Comment:
Technical Criteria 1: Met? yes -Programmatic Criteria 2: Met? NA - Criteria don't work for this one.
Milestone Criteria 3: Met? NA -
Resource Criteria 4: Met? NA -
Comment:
10% increase over last year 's allocation. Potential excessive costs were reduced.Comment:
Fund existing operations. See programmatic recommendation for Umatilla and Walla Walla under project 8903500. The original ISRP comments included a statement that no information is provided on the amount of water provided, or more particularly how much was left in the Umatilla River to benefit fish as a result of this project. The response provides rather general information on the amount of water pumped, ".....exchange for approximately 23,000 acre feet of stored water in McKay Reservoir.", and a "bucket for bucket" exchange with irrigators for amounts left in the river. It is unclear what the benefits to fish are from this project and why this project is funded through the FWP. The response notes that funding is mandated by Congress. We also observe that the ISRP review is mandated by Congress. If the project was sold to Congress with the understanding that it would benefit salmon, we believe it appropriate to carry forward a technical review to determine to what extent it might benefit salmon. If the project is not targeted on salmon restoration, then it does not belong in the Fish and Wildlife Program. On the assumption that its intention is to benefit salmon, we recommend that it be reviewed in the context of the larger Umatilla program review, as noted previously.Comment:
Comment:
[Decision made in 11-3-99 Council Meeting]; Address ISRP comments in BPA contractNW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
expense
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $1,000,000 | $1,000,000 | $1,000,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website