Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Program
RSS Feed for updates to Project 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Follow this via RSS feed. Help setting up RSS feeds?

Project Summary

Project 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Project Number:
1992-009-00
Title:
Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Summary:
To be updated
Proposer:
None
Proponent Orgs:
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) (Govt - State)
Starting FY:
2004
Ending FY:
2024
BPA PM:
Stage:
Implementation - Project Status Report
Area:
Province Subbasin %
Columbia Plateau Yakima 100.00%
Purpose:
Habitat
Emphasis:
Restoration/Protection
Focal Species:
Chinook - All Populations
Chinook - Lower Columbia River ESU
Chinook - Mid-Columbia River Spring ESU
Chinook - Snake River Spring/Summer ESU
Chinook - Upper Columbia River Spring ESU
Coho - Lower Columbia River ESU
Coho - Unspecified Population
Cutthroat Trout, Coastal - Resident Populations
Cutthroat Trout, Lahontan
Cutthroat Trout, Westslope
Lamprey, Pacific
Lamprey, River
Sockeye - All Populations
Steelhead - All Populations
Steelhead - Middle Columbia River DPS
Trout, Brook
Trout, Bull
Trout, Rainbow
Whitefish, Mountain
Species Benefit:
Anadromous: 100.0%   Resident: 0.0%   Wildlife: 0.0%
Special:
None

No photos have been uploaded yet for this Project.

Summary of Budgets

To view all expenditures for all fiscal years, click "Project Exp. by FY"

To see more detailed project budget information, please visit the "Project Budget" page

Decided Budget Transfers  (FY2023 - FY2025)

Acct FY Acct Type Amount Fund Budget Decision Date
FY2023 Expense $431,391 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) FY23 SOY Budget Upload 06/01/2022
FY2023 Expense $35,801 From: Asset Management FY23 Asset Management Decisions (7/19/2022) 07/20/2022
FY2023 Expense $35,801 To: Asset Management FY23 Asset Management Decisions (7/19/2022) 07/20/2022
FY2023 Expense $11,000 From: BiOp FCRPS 2008 (non-Accord) Budget Transfers (1992-009-00) 10/5/2022 09/30/2022
FY2023 Expense $187,250 From: Asset Management FY24 Asset Management Fund (projects) 10/19/2023
FY2024 Expense $461,856 From: General FY24 SOY Budget Upload 06/01/2023
FY2024 Expense $187,250 To: Asset Management FY24 Asset Management Fund (projects) 10/19/2023
FY2024 Expense $187,250 From: Asset Management FY24 Asset Management Fund (projects) 10/19/2023

Pending Budget Decision?  No


Actual Project Cost Share

Current Fiscal Year — 2024   DRAFT
Cost Share Partner Total Proposed Contribution Total Confirmed Contribution
There are no project cost share contributions to show.
Previous Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year Total Contributions % of Budget
2023 $252,766 29%
2022 $252,766 35%
2021 $215,000 29%
2020 $215,000 11%
2019 $215,000 20%
2018 $215,000 23%
2017 $385,000 42%
2016 $258,943 38%
2015 $258,943 36%
2014 $215,000 28%
2013 $279,549 56%
2012 $279,549 61%
2011 $279,549 61%
2010 $279,549 62%
2009 $279,549 62%
2008 $20,000 11%
2007

Contracts

The table below contains contracts with the following statuses: Active, Closed, Complete, History, Issued.
* "Total Contracted Amount" column includes contracted amount from both capital and expense components of the contract.
Capital Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
195 REL 2 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 YAKIMA-KLICKITAT PRODUCTION PROJECT PHASE II Terminated $163,808 10/1/2000 - 9/30/2001
Expense Contracts:
Number Contractor Name Title Status Total Contracted Amount Dates
4111 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-09-00 YKPP PHASE II FISH SCREEN O&M - WASHINGTON DEPT. Closed $444,036 3/23/2001 - 4/30/2004
17780 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 YAKIMA PHASE II FISH SCREENS O & M Closed $141,536 5/1/2004 - 4/30/2005
22595 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 YAKIMA PHASE II/HUNTSVILLE SCREEN O&M History $143,335 5/1/2005 - 4/30/2006
27152 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PHASE II/HUNTSVILLE FISH SCREENS O & M History $192,004 5/1/2006 - 4/30/2007
32674 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PHASE II / HUNTSVILLE FISH SCREENS O & M Closed $163,513 5/1/2007 - 4/30/2008
37644 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II/HUNTSVILL SCR O&M Closed $164,433 5/1/2008 - 4/30/2009
42336 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II/HUNTSVILL SCR O&M Closed $172,904 5/1/2009 - 4/30/2010
47385 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II/HUNTSVILL SCR O&M Closed $171,345 5/1/2010 - 4/30/2011
53084 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II/HUNTSVILL SCR O&M Closed $388,853 5/1/2011 - 6/30/2013
61460 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II SCR O&M (WDFW) Closed $217,213 7/1/2013 - 6/30/2014
64584 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II - USBR Closed $111,178 4/1/2014 - 3/31/2015
65288 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $161,436 4/1/2014 - 6/30/2015
65672 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II SCREEN O&M-WDFW Closed $183,903 7/1/2014 - 6/30/2015
65925 SOW City of Yakima 1992-009-00 EXP GLEED - CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY REVIEW Closed $56,701 8/1/2014 - 12/31/2015
69367 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II - USBR Closed $111,178 4/1/2015 - 3/31/2016
69705 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II - WDFW Closed $191,357 7/1/2015 - 6/30/2016
69630 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $140,599 7/1/2015 - 6/30/2016
72100 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M- BOR Closed $111,178 4/1/2016 - 3/31/2017
72776 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M- WDFW Closed $180,213 7/1/2016 - 6/30/2017
72953 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $137,626 7/1/2016 - 6/30/2017
75601 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M- BOR Closed $110,887 4/1/2017 - 3/31/2018
74314 REL 10 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $140,000 7/1/2017 - 6/30/2018
74314 REL 1 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M- WDFW Closed $277,991 7/1/2017 - 6/30/2018
78528 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M- BOR Closed $105,923 4/1/2018 - 3/31/2019
74314 REL 39 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M - WDFW Closed $447,644 7/1/2018 - 6/30/2019
74314 REL 40 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $123,597 7/1/2018 - 6/30/2019
81780 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M - BOR Closed $299,826 4/1/2019 - 9/30/2021
74314 REL 76 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Closed $397,615 7/1/2019 - 6/30/2020
74314 REL 71 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $137,759 7/1/2019 - 6/30/2020
74314 REL 99 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP DELAYED SCREEN O&M - WDFW Closed $1,311,948 4/1/2020 - 9/30/2021
74314 REL 102 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $136,158 7/1/2020 - 6/30/2021
74314 REL 103 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Closed $329,219 7/1/2020 - 6/30/2021
74314 REL 136 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Closed $340,000 7/1/2021 - 6/30/2022
74314 REL 137 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Closed $180,213 7/1/2021 - 6/30/2022
88796 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M/ROZA - BOR Issued $122,178 10/1/2021 - 9/30/2022
84042 REL 6 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Issued $216,014 7/1/2022 - 6/30/2023
84042 REL 7 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Issued $140,000 7/1/2022 - 6/30/2023
91143 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M/ROZA - BOR Issued $122,178 10/1/2022 - 9/30/2023
84042 REL 46 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Issued $367,463 7/1/2023 - 6/30/2024
84042 REL 47 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Issued $140,000 7/1/2023 - 6/30/2024
93370 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M/ROZA - BOR Issued $127,554 10/1/2023 - 9/30/2024
CR-366226 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Pending $188,142 7/1/2024 - 6/30/2025
CR-366227 SOW Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Pending $146,160 7/1/2024 - 6/30/2025
CR-371472 SOW US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M Pending $127,544 10/1/2024 - 9/30/2025



Annual Progress Reports
Expected (since FY2004):41
Completed:35
On time:35
Status Reports
Completed:177
On time:47
Avg Days Late:14

                Count of Contract Deliverables
Earliest Contract Subsequent Contracts Title Contractor Earliest Start Latest End Latest Status Accepted Reports Complete Green Yellow Red Total % Green and Complete Canceled
4111 17780, 22595, 27152, 32674, 37644, 42336, 47385, 53084, 61460, 65288, 65672, 69705, 69630, 72776, 72953, 74314 REL 10, 74314 REL 1, 74314 REL 39, 74314 REL 40, 74314 REL 76, 74314 REL 71, 74314 REL 99, 74314 REL 102, 74314 REL 103, 74314 REL 136, 74314 REL 137, 84042 REL 6, 84042 REL 7, 84042 REL 46, 84042 REL 47, CR-366226, CR-366227 1992-009-00 EXP WDFW SCR O&M, YAK, UCR, LCR Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) 03/23/2001 06/30/2025 Pending 131 185 14 0 16 215 92.56% 0
64584 69367, 72100, 75601, 78528, 81780, 88796, 91143, 93370, CR-371472 1992-009-00 EXP YAKIMA PH II O&M US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) 04/01/2014 09/30/2025 Pending 40 62 13 0 2 77 97.40% 0
65925 1992-009-00 EXP GLEED - CONSOLIDATION FEASIBILITY REVIEW City of Yakima 08/01/2014 12/31/2015 Closed 6 5 0 0 0 5 100.00% 0
Project Totals 177 252 27 0 18 297 93.94% 0


The table content is updated frequently and thus contains more recent information than what was in the original proposal reviewed by ISRP and Council.

Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-NPCC-20230310
Project: 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Approved Date: 4/15/2022
Recommendation: Implement
Comments: Bonneville and Sponsor to take the review remarks into consideration in project documentation. This project supports past Program investments for operation and maintenance of fish screens. See Policy Issue II.a, II.b., and III.a.

[Background: See https://www.nwcouncil.org/2021-2022-anadromous-habitat-and-hatchery-review/]

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-ISRP-20230316
Project: 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Review: 2022 Anadromous Fish Habitat & Hatchery Review
Completed Date: 3/16/2023
Final Round ISRP Date: 2/10/2022
Final Round ISRP Rating: Not Applicable
Final Round ISRP Comment:

The significance of O&M for fish screens is undeniable, and this project appears to continue to be effective at keeping the screens under its purview operational. However, the proposal fell short in multiple aspects related to a) making a compelling case that the project creates important benefits for fish, b) demonstrating that it has vision and strategy for maintaining the project goal going forward, and c) creating a clear plan for what will be conducted under the next project phase.

The ISRP recommends the following steps to enhance the clarity and function of the project. These issues should be addressed in the next annual report and future work plans, and progress tracked by Council and BPA staff. SMART objectives. The proposal identifies its overarching goal of operating and maintaining fishways and screens that are owned (or funded) by BPA. The proposal also identifies some project “objectives,” but they are not measurable objectives and really are just a list of tasks that the project undertakes. The proponents should provide a set of specific

  1. SMART objectives (see proposal instructions)that include targets (e.g., number of inspections per year) and standards for assessment of success. Some activities, such as site visits and inspections, could reasonably be combined into a single objective with multiple actions.
  2. Project evaluation. Expectations for monitoring and evaluation with an O&M project are not as high as for other types of projects (e.g., habitat restoration or supplementation), but some description of how project managers evaluate the project should be provided. The ISRP recognizes that the project does not conduct monitoring, but the proposal did not provide any indication of a strategy for evaluating the effectiveness of the project. The only examples provided in the proposal were the transition away from woven mesh screens to perforated plates when the science and practice shifted in that direction, and the participation in the Fish Screening Oversight Committee’s quarterly calls and biennial workshops. While both are strengths of the project, a documented strategy for evaluating the project’s successes and needs could help the project adapt. For example, the inspection logs seem to be a missed opportunity for documenting details about the project. Which sites and infrastructure types require the most attention? Which ones are likely to have the greatest need for modification as streamflows change? Etc.
  3. Climate change and prioritization. Along these lines, the proposal identifies the need for some sites to be modified in response to climate change. How will those changes be identified, prioritized, planned, and funded? What types of modifications would be necessary? Are the proponents relying upon another one-time injection of funds from BPA, similar to the one they received in 2020 for deferred maintenance? More broadly, given the confounding factors identified by the proponents, the project is likely to be decreasingly effective at meeting its goal without some strategy in place for looking to the future and adapting to changes as they come. How are the proponents strategically planning for and adjusting the project going forward?
  4. List of annual work accomplishments. In a past ISRP review, a request was made for a list of work that has been accomplished for screens and fishways by year. The proponents did not deliver this, leaving the ISRP with questions regarding what work remains, how things get prioritized, and what benefit the screening project is providing to which species. In addition, the ISRP notes that the proposal contained many typos that made it difficult to read and left the ISRP wondering if important details were accidentally omitted.
Documentation Links:
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-NPCC-20131125
Project: 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal: GEOREV-1992-009-00
Proposal State: Pending BPA Response
Approved Date: 11/5/2013
Recommendation: Implement with Conditions
Comments: Recommendation in three parts: 1) Ongoing screen operations and maintenance: implement through 2018; 2) Gleed Screen: Implement through completion per Council decisions on August 18, 2010 and November 9, 2011; 3) Proposed Nelson Dam Facilities Consolidation work will depend on biological justification (ISRP qualification) and review by the ISRP and Council when submitted by the sponsor.
Conditions:
Council Condition #1 ISRP Qualification: Need to show information about the number of fish that are impacted by screens needing work.—Recommendation in three parts: 1) Ongoing screen operations and maintenance: implement through 2018; 2) Gleed Screen: Implement through completion per Council decisions on August 18, 2010 and November 9, 2011; 3) Proposed Nelson Dam Facilities Consolidation work will depend on biological justification (ISRP qualification) and review by the ISRP and Council when submitted by the sponsor. See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation C for long term maintenance.
Council Condition #2 Programmatic Issue: C. Provide Long-term Maintenance of Fish Screens—See Programmatic Issue and Recommendation C for long term maintenance.

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-ISRP-20130610
Project: 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Review: 2013 Geographic Category Review
Proposal Number: GEOREV-1992-009-00
Completed Date: 9/26/2013
Final Round ISRP Date: 8/15/2013
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria - In Part (Qualified)
Final Round ISRP Comment:

See qualifications.

Qualification #1 - Need to show information about the number of fish that are impacted by screens needing work.
The portion of the proposal to update Gleed and Nelson screens is not justified biologically, based on the information provided. That is not to say the screen improvements are not biologically justified, but more information would be needed. The sponsors need to show information about the number of fish that are impacted by screens needing work. For instance, if the sponsors are targeting a screen for re-constructing or re-furbishing, they should monitor the existing screen to demonstrate biological data (primarily fish) associated with problems at the screen location.
First Round ISRP Date: 6/10/2013
First Round ISRP Rating: Response Requested
First Round ISRP Comment:

Responses to the following issues are requested:

1) A more critical appraisal of the need for screen location and function from a fish perspective is needed.

2) Provide some basic quantitative biological information to justify the effectiveness of the screens.

3) Provide an approximate estimate of how many smolts might encounter the Gleed screen given that the primary flow and velocity are in the main channel.

4) How many screens must be replaced with appropriate 3/32” mesh screens?

5) Is funding for screen changes necessary if Nelson Dam modifications are not made?

There seems to be a history of not refurbishing several of these fish screens, and the sponsors indicated that maintenance is reaching the critical stage. Replacement costs exceed costs of regular refurbishment, and there is expertise available to get the refurbishment work done. A more critical appraisal of the need for screen location and function from a fish perspective, not an engineering perspective, is needed and requested. The appraisal should include a justification of the need for a screen in a particular location and a discussion of the biological benefits potentially associated with the refurbishment, as elaborated in the comments below.

1. Purpose: Significance to Regional Programs, Technical Background, and Objectives

This proposal provides preventive routine, emergency, and long term/overhaul maintenance and operational adjustments on Phase II fish screening facilities owned by BPA. The objectives of this project are to assure optimal facility performance thereby ensuring protection for all fish species. Regional significance and technical background are adequately described. The proposal provides an adequate description of the significance of the project O&M for fish screens to regional programs, including the BiOp and subbasin plans.

It appears that two, and possibly three, issues are brought up in the introductory material: 1) funding for Gleed Phase II facility to deal with debris, 2) the Nelson dam facilities consolidation, and 3) additional facilities identified as needing screens in 1990 but never installed and not mentioned again in the proposal. Gleed and Nelson are listed below as deliverables.

2. History: Accomplishments, Results, and Adaptive Management (Evaluation of Results)

This project does not have a monitoring and evaluation component, although Objective 3 does mention the contribution of this effort to overall biological criteria and evaluation of fish screens as part of the fish screen oversight committee. The ISRP previously requested information showing that the screens were effective. However, the proposal provides no quantitative information on screen effectiveness or salvage rates, which the proposal states are documented for example by the numbers of fish recovered as the channels are dewatered. The proposal refers to PNNL studies of fish screens showing their effectiveness but provided no results. The sponsors should provide some basic biological effectiveness information from recent investigations as a means to further justify their proposal.

Adaptive management was mentioned only to the extent that the “sponsors address issues when identified.” No examples of significant changes in O&M procedures were described in the proposal. It was not clear why the sponsor has not already responded to new fish screen mesh size criteria (3/32”). It is not clear if funding for this change is needed. Is there a need to screen additional water diversions in the basin?

3. Project Relationships, Emerging Limiting Factors, and Tailored Questions

The proposal did not identify emerging limiting factors such as climate change, and how this might affect some deliverables. For instance a discussion of changes in river channel in response to flood events and how this impacts screen operations would be a useful approach to the climate change.

4. Deliverables, Work Elements, Metrics, and Methods

The ISRP has questions about several deliverables identified below.

Deliverable 2: How many smolts might encounter the Gleed screen given that the primary flow and velocity, and presumably nearly all smolts, are in the main channel about 30 meters away from the screen.

Deliverable 3 is to refurbish screens. How many screens must be replaced with appropriate mesh screens?

Deliverable 4: The proposal mentions that screen changes at Nelson Dam cannot be made until the proposed dam modifications are made. Is funding needed if changes to the dam are not made within this project period? To what extent might changes at Nelson Dam involving consolidation benefit salmonids?

Deliverable 5 includes an element of screen evaluation as part of the oversight committee. The sponsor should provide some information showing that the screens are effective. For instance, how many fish are salvaged?

Modified by Dal Marsters on 9/26/2013 2:37:32 PM.
Documentation Links:
  • Proponent Response (7/9/2013)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review

Council Recommendation

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-NPCC-20090924
Project: 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Approved Date: 10/23/2006
Recommendation: Fund
Comments:

Independent Scientific Review Panel Assessment

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-ISRP-20060831
Project: 1992-009-00 - Yakima Phase II Fish Screens Operations and Maintenance (O&M) with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 8/31/2006
Final Round ISRP Date: None
Final Round ISRP Rating: Meets Scientific Review Criteria
Final Round ISRP Comment:
This ongoing project is necessary to protect the investment already made in screens to benefit fish. There is clearly an identified need to operate fish screens to avoid mortality from diversions. The review of the problem and references gives adequate technical background but could be improved by giving reviewers some details on many fish and what species are being saved from entrainment by the screening program. The information collected by the program, as it is currently set up, is not biological. This information is clearly essential to monitor the success/failure of the program.

It is not clear that the level of activity proposed in this project is optimal or if more or less activity would provide enhanced protection to all species and life stages of fish. The proposal would be strengthened if justification were provided for the level of effort identified.

In a previous review the ISRP requested a table of work to date by location. This is not included in this year's proposal or narrative. The proposal lists new screens by year but the proponents should provide such a table in the future, as it would be a valuable check on effort expended and required.
Documentation Links:

Legal Assessment (In-Lieu)

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-INLIEU-20090521
Project Number: 1992-009-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 10/6/2006
In Lieu Rating: Problems Exist
Cost Share Rating: None
Comment: O&M on BPA-funded fish screens in Yakima basin; need confirmation that BPA has committed to O&M for these (eg BiOp purposes?), otherwise irrigators authorized/required to O&M screens and cost share or other remedy required.

Capital Assessment

Assessment Number: 1992-009-00-CAPITAL-20090618
Project Number: 1992-009-00
Review: FY07-09 Solicitation Review
Completed Date: 2/27/2007
Capital Rating: Does Not Qualify for Capital Funding
Capital Asset Category: None
Comment: None

Project Relationships: None

Name Role Organization
Edward Gresh Env. Compliance Lead Bonneville Power Administration
Ray Gilmour Supervisor Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Daniel Didricksen Project Lead Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Enedina Galvez Administrative Contact US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)
Patrick Monk Project Lead US Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)
Eric Leitzinger Project SME Bonneville Power Administration
Thomas Jameson Supervisor Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Eric Leitzinger Project Manager Bonneville Power Administration
Verl Miller Interested Party Bonneville Power Administration
David Kaplowe Supervisor Bonneville Power Administration