January 3, 2006
Yakima/Huntsville Screen Evaluation Project
Statement of Work and Budget 2006

BPA Project Number:  198506200
Yakima/Huntsville Screen Evaluation Project
Contract Number:
Contract Title:  1985-062-00 Yakima/Huntsville Screens Evaluation
Performance/Budget Period: 4/1/06-3/31/07

Mickie A. Chamness
Staff Scientist and Project Manager
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
P.O. Box 999, MS K6-85
Richland, Washington 99352
(509) 372-1202/Fax (509) 372-3515
mickie.chamness@pnl.gov

Julie L. Hughes
Senior Contracts Specialist
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
P.O. Box 999, MS K6-79
Richland, Washington 99352
(509) 372-3943/(509) 376-9317
julie.hughes@pnl.gov

Kathy Lavender
Financial Administrator
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
P.O. Box 999, MS K6-84
Richland, Washington 99352
(509) 376-1724/(509) 373-1153
kathy.lavender@pnl.gov

Project Goal

The goals of this project are to provide an evaluation of fish screen facilities on the Yakima and Touchet Rivers, Washington to ensure they are effectively protecting juvenile salmonids by meeting NMFS passage criteria.

Background

Evaluation of 7 Phase I sites in the Yakima Basin from 1985 through 1990 relied heavily on the use of release-and-recapture tests with hatchery fish to monitor major fisheries concerns such as the potential for injury, migration delay, and screen integrity.  Measurements of approach and sweep velocity in front of the screens and flow through the fish bypass system were completed at 8 sites to determine if screening facilities satisfied design criteria established to ensure safe fish passage conditions.  The methods and results of Phase I evaluations are presented in BPA annual reports (Abernethy et al. 1989, 1990; Neitzel et al. 1985, 1986, 1988, 1990 a,b,c). Due to the large number of Phase II screening facilities, the expense of conducting release-and-recapture tests with fish, and other constraints, such as gaining approval to acquire and release fish stocks for research, we developed new methods and strategies to evaluate Phase II fish screens.  Using the new methods and technologies, we determined if screening facilities protect fish by monitoring whether the sites were
1) were properly equipped to provide safe fish passage; 2) were operated within their design limits; and 3) were properly maintained in a "fish-tight" condition.  
Using these 3 benchmarks, we streamlined the evaluation process and documented the performance of 9 Phase II fish screening facilities in Washington and dozens more in Idaho in 1994 and up to 25 Phase II fish screening facilities in Washington in 1997 through 2004 (Blanton et al. 1998; 1999; 2000; Chamness et al. 2001; Carter et al. 2002; 2003).  Twenty-five screen facilities were evaluated in 2005. We also were able to identify fish species and monitor fish behavior, document sedimentation and debris buildup, and document aberrant flow patterns in the screen forebay by observing particle drift and eddies.  

PNNL will complete three objectives in FY 2006:
1. Conduct evaluations of up to 27 fish screening facilities in the Yakima and Walla Walla Basins (Table 1) using a 3-step approach that includes measurement of water velocities near the screen surface, an underwater video survey of the screens and seals, and general operational conditions.
2. Continue to implement a standardized protocol for identifying and following up on any problems that may be discovered during our evaluations.  
3. Evaluate proposed operational or design changes that might enhance the protection of juvenile salmonids by working closely with WDFW and BOR O&M staff to "fine-tune" some sites with consistent flow problems.

Location of Project

This project is being conducted at up to 26 Phase II fish screening facilities in the Yakima River basin and 1 on the Touchet River, all in Washington.

BPA-Furnished Property or Services

There are no BPA-furnished property or services on this project.

Work to Be Performed

The approach to evaluating Phase II screens includes three tasks; on-site evaluation of operating screens; implementation of a protocol for problem identification, correction, and follow-up, and communication of the findings.  

Task I-A, Field Evaluations - During 2006, we will examine up to 26 fish screening facilities in the Yakima River Basin and Touchet River and evaluate their operation using the 3-step approach (Table 1).  We will determine if sites are properly equipped to provide safe, efficient fish bypass by reviewing design drawings, operating procedures, and components installed and in use at the facility.  We will monitor approach and sweep velocities in front of the screens and in the fish bypass to determine if the facilities meet fish passage criteria.  Screen integrity will be monitored by completing "real-time" inspections of sites using underwater video technology.  The second and third evaluations may include a reduced number of sites, with emphasis being placed on those that showed some indication of problems during the initial round of evaluations, or that have shown problems later in the season in previous years.  Evaluation results will be documented in the annual report that will be placed on electronic networks linked to BPA and PNNL homepages (https://www.bpa.gov/ and https://www.pnnl.gov/ecology/Projects/Screen/Reports.htm, respectively).  

Task I-B, Problem identification protocol task - We will continue to implement a standardized protocol for identifying, correcting, and following up any problems that may be discovered during our evaluations.  As in the past, problems identified in the field will be reported to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) or U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) screen shop immediately via phone with email confirmation.  In addition, problems identified in the office during review of the underwater video tapes and velocity data will be reported to the appropriate O&M staff.  We will document problems on a problem-tracking form.  We will revisit the site within one to two weeks of being notified that changes have been made to correct the problem to confirm the effictiveness of the changes.  Timing of the follow-up evaluation will depend on the time of year, with more rapid follow-ups occurring when anadromous smolts are emigrating.  If O&M staff have not responded within one week, a repeat notification will be issued.  Response times and effectiveness of repairs/modifications will be included as a separate section in the annual reports.  Open lines of communication among cooperating agencies will result in a more rapid response to correct failures or deficiencies.

Task 1-C, Communication of Screens Evaluation information  - Evaluation results will be documented in the annual report that will be placed on electronic networks linked to BPA and PNNL homepages (https://www.bpa.gov/ and https://www.pnnl.gov/ecology/Projects/Screen/Reports.htm, respectively).  Information collected during the evaluation of fish screens in the Yakima Basin is of interest to fisheries and habitat managers within and outside of the Yakima River Basin. One PNNL staff member may attend meetings or workshops to present pertinent information obtained through the performance of this contract.  

Table 1. Phase II fish screens evaluated in the Yakima River Basin and Touchet River.

SITE NUMBER / LOCATION / SCREENS IN OPERATION / PNNL EVALUATIONS / SCHEDULED FOR EVALUATION
54 Bachelor/Hatton Screens / YES / 1994, 1997-2005 / 2006
66 Bull Diversion Screens / NO / 1997-2004 / Removed winter 2004
64 Clark Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
52 Congdon Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
68 Ellensburg Mill Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
78 Fogarty Ditch Screens / under construction / 2006
58 Fruitvale Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
43 Gleed Ditch Screens / YES / 1994, 1997-2005 / 2006
38 John Cox / YES / 2000-2005 / 2006
     Huntsville Mill Screens (Touchet River site) / YES / 2005 / 2006
53 Kelley/Lowry Screens / YES / 1994, 1997-2005 / 2006
41 Kiona Screens / NO / 1993  / Removed 1996
67 Lindsey Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
46 Lower WIP Screen/Ladder / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
42 Naches/Cowiche Screens / YES / 1994, 1997-2005 / 2006
56 Naches/Selah Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
44 New Cascade Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
75 Old Union Screens / YES / never evaluated before / 2006
     Packwood Screens / YES / 2004-2005 / 2006
82 Powell-LaFortune / YES / 2001-2005 / 2006
81 Selah-Moxee Screens / YES / 2004-2005 / 2006
48 Snipes/Allen Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
49 Taylor Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
47 Toppenish Pump Screen / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
59 Union Gap Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
65 Upper WIP Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
83 Wilson Creek / YES / 2001-2005 / 2006
57 Yakima-Tieton Screens / YES / 1997-2005 / 2006
20 Younger / YES / 1999-2004 / 2005
    
Deliverables

Information collected during field studies in 2006 will be presented to BPA as a technical report at the end of the year.  The report will include site descriptions, the methods we used to make our evaluations, the results and a discussion of our evaluations, and recommendations on how to improve monitoring methods, operating procedures, screen operations, and facility maintenance to address problems.  In addition, results of technical assistance efforts will be sent to BPA as letter reports, with copies going to the other agencies involved with the screening facility.  Reports will be placed at https://www.bpa.gov/ and https://www.pnnl.gov/ecology/Projects/Screen/Reports.htm.  Problems associated with operations and maintenance will also be reported verbally to the agencies responsible for daily operation of a screening facility. Status reports will be provided through Pisces, while budget summaries will be transmitted montlhy via email.

Budget

The period of performance and cost breakdown will be provided to BPA by Battelle contracts personnel.  

Schedule

The screen evaluations are planned for May, June/July and September.  Data summarization and analysis will occur throughout the entire time period of this contract and findings will be reported in the annual report in December, 2006.

Equipment and Facilities

List of Equipment available for use on this task:  

• Four-wheel drive pick-up or SUV
• Deep Sea Power & Light underwater camera
• Video recording system
• Video glasses
• Flow meter
• Personal computer

Modifications to this Statement of Work

If necessary, proposed modifications to this statement of work will be submitted to the Technical Representative.  Modifications will be made only after approval from the Technical Representative, and will be indicated in writing as an amendment to the existing statement of work.

Project Manager

Mickie Chamness, Staff Scientist, Ecology Group, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Post Office Box 999, MS K6-85, Richland, Washington, 99352, Telephone (509) 372-1202, FAX (509) 372-3515, email - mickie.chamness@pnl.gov

Collaborative Arrangements and Coordination  

For the field evaluation task, we will work primarily with the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife and the US Bureau of Reclamation.  Our work may also require some coordination with irrigation districts and the Yakama Nation.  For the technical assistance task, we will coordinate with and provide assistance primarily to the WDF&W and US Bureau of Reclamation, but also to any other fisheries agency approved by BPA, such as the NOAA Fisheries or fisheries agencies from Oregon or Idaho.

References
Abernethy, C.S., D.A. Neitzel, and W.V. Mavros.  1996.  Movement and Injury Rates for Three Life Stages of Spring Chinook Salmon Oncorhychus tshawytscha:  A Comparison of Submerged Orifices and an Overflow Weir for Fish Bypass in a Modular Rotary Drum Fish Screen.  Prepared by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington for the Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon.

Abernethy,  C.S., D A. Neitzel, and E.W. Lusty.  1990.  Velocity Measurements at Three Fish Screening Facilities in the Yakima River Basin. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Abernethy, C.S., D.A. Neitzel, and E.W. Lusty.  1989.  Velocity Measurements at Six Fish Screening Facilities in the Yakima River Basin.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Blanton, S.L., D.A. Neitzel, and C.S. Abernethy. 1998. Washington Phase II Fish Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 1997. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.  

Blanton, S.L., G.A. McMichael, and D.A. Neitzel. 1999. Washington Phase II Fish Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 1998. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Blanton, S.L., G.A. McMichael, and D.A. Neitzel. 2000. Washington Phase II Fish Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 1999. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.  

Carter, J.A., G.A. McMichael, M.A. Chamness. 2003. Yakima River Basin Phase II Fish Screen Evaluations, 2002. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Carter, J.A., G.A. McMichael, M.A. Chamness. 2002. Yakima River Basin Phase II Fish Screen Evaluations, 2001. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Chamness, M.A., E.V. Arntzen, G.A. McMichael.  2001. Washington Phase II Fish Diversion Screen Evaluations in the Yakima River Basin, 2000.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Mueller, R.P., C.S. Abernethy, and D.A. Neitzel.  1994.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Dryden Fish Screen Facility. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Neitzel, D.A., S.L. Blanton, C.S. Abernethy, and D.S. Daly.  1996.  Movement of Fall Chinook Salmon Fry Oncorhynchus tshawytscha:  A Comparison of Approach Angles for Fish Bypass in a Modular Rotary Drum Fish Screen.  Prepared by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington for the Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon.

Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, and E. . Lusty.  1990a.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Wapato, Sunnyside, and Toppenish Creek Canal Fish Screening Facilities, Spring 1988.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, and E.W. Lusty.  1990b.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Westside Ditch and Wapato Canal Fish Screening Facilities, Spring 1989.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, and G.A. Martenson.  1990c.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Westside Ditch and Town Canal Fish Screening Facilities, Spring 1990.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, E.W. Lusty, and S.J. Wampler.  1988.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Richland and Wapato Canal Fish Screening Facility, Spring 1987.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, and E.W. Lusty.  1986.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Richland and Toppenish/Satus Canal Fish Screening Facility, Spring 1986.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, E.W. Lusty, and L.A. Prohammer.  1985.  A Fisheries Evaluation of the Sunnyside Canal Fish Screening Facility, Spring 1985.  Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). 1984.  Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.  Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). 1987.  Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.  Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon.

Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). 1994.  Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.  Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland, Oregon.