FY 2000 proposal 199105700
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 |
|---|---|
| 199105700 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Yakima Phase 2 [Fish] Screen Fabrication |
| Proposal ID | 199105700 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Yakima Screen Shop (WDFW/YSS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | John A. Easterbrooks |
| Mailing address | 3705 W. Washington Ave. Yakima, WA 98903-1137 |
| Phone / email | 5095752734 / eastejae@dfw.wa.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Plateau / Yakima |
| Short description | YSS fabricates and installs fish screens and all miscellaneous metalwork for Yakima Basin Phase II screen projects. New fish screens prevent mortality and/or injury of juvenile anadromous and resident fish in gravity irrigation diversions. |
| Target species | spring and fall chinook, steelhead, coho, bull trout, rainbow trout, whitefish |
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 |
|---|---|
| 1998 | Screen fabrication/installation completed for: Old Union Canal and Younger Ditch irrigation diversions; shop fabrication of Johncox, Fogarty screens for 1999 install |
| 1997 | Screen facilities fabricated/installed: Bull, Ellensburg Mill, Clark, Lindsey, Union Gap, Upper WIP (install) |
| 1996 | Facilities fabricated/installed: Fruitvale, Naches-Selah, Emerick, Stevens, Anderson, Tennant, Sinclair-Cobb, Gnavaugh, Peterson |
| 1995 | Facilities fabricated/installed: Toppenish Pump, Upper WIP fabrication |
| 1994 | Facilities fabricated/installed: Bachelor-Hatton, Congdon, Kelly-Lowry |
| 1993 | Facilities fabricated/installed: Gleed, Holmes, Lower WIP, New Cascade, Snipes-Allen, Taylor, |
| 1992 | Facilities fabricated/installed: Naches-Cowiche, Kiona |
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 9107500 | Yakima Phase II Screens - Construction (USBR) | mandatory linkage with screen facility civil works construction |
| 9200900 | Yakima Screens - Phase II - O&M (WDFW, YSS) | operation & preventive maintenance of completed screens |
| 9503300 | O&M of Yakima Fish Protection, Mitigation & Enhancement Facilities (USBR) | screen & fish passage O&M and preventative maintenance |
| 8506200 | Evaluate the Effectiveness of Fish Screens (Battelle, PNNL) | post-construction and periodic biological/hydraulic evaluation of completed Phase II screens |
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 | fabrication/installation labor costs | $89,370 |
| Fringe | @ 31% of labor costs | $27,705 |
| Supplies | includes: metered/non-metered equipment charges; WA sales tax @ 7.8% | $110,731 |
| Capital | None in FY2000 | $0 |
| NEPA | Not Applicable | $0 |
| Travel | vehicle mileage costs for installation/field testing | $6,700 |
| Indirect | YSS indirect costs @ $300/man-month | $9,755 |
| Other | Admin. overhead @ 20% of above subtotal | $48,852 |
| $293,113 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $293,113 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $293,113 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| Not Applicable | $0 | unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Delays in screen civil works construction caused by diversion water rights uncertainty (on-going court adjudication) or property acquisition delays (easements, rights-of-way, fee title) may affect the Yakima Screen Shop fabrication schedule.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Recommendation: Fund. Group the fish screening projects into a set (8506200, 9105710, 9107500, 9200900, 9503300) and fund for four years. The ISRP should review again in 2003.Comments: This proposal did a convincing job of describing the need and benefits of the project. The relationship to other projects and project history was brief but adequate. The proposal objectives were specific and measurable. The methods section, however, was vague and could have used better development. In particular, the writers included little information on provisions for delays, cost overruns, or expected long-term maintenance needs. This project is tightly linked to project #9105700 and closely related to project #920900. All the project descriptions shared the same introductory material. This suggests that these proposals could have been introduced under an umbrella proposal, which would have reduced the repetitive material and provided an opportunity to specifically describe the functional relationship among these projects.
The next time this project comes up for review the following areas should be improved:
1. The difference in activities between this and the screen construction project should be made clearer. Given the amount of overlap in the projects and the repeat of information in each proposal, it might be reasonable to combine these proposals.
2. More detail is needed in the budget and schedule. What are the estimated costs of the individual projects? Since delays last year had an affect on this year's proposal, how might delays in the civil works construction schedule affect the proposed fabrication plans and budget?
3. Additional detail is needed regarding the budgeted activities, sequence of work, and contingencies. The linkage to project 9107500 creates some problems due to the lack of specificity in that budget and schedule (see comments).
Comment:
Comment:
Although a long history of BPA funding exists for these projects, they should be funded under another source. For subsequent construction and O&M, we recommend transferring the responsibility to the Bureau of Reclamation starting in FY01.Technically Sound? Yes
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Consider integrating these projects to save money. Why do we need two O and M contracts?Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting]NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
capital
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $0 | $28,195 | $28,195 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website