Source: http://cfw.nwcouncil.org/fwprogram/ReviewCycle/fy1998/projects/8506200.htm
Timestamp: 2018-10-20 06:16:30
Document Index: 619767346

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 3', 'art 10', 'art 7', 'art 4', 'art 2', 'art 12', 'art 10', 'art 9', 'art 7', 'art 6', 'art 4', 'art 3', 'art 2']

Implement needed fish passage improvements at irrigation dams in theYakima River Basin. Provide hydrological evaluations of fisheries screening facilities.
Name Duane A. Neitzel, Staff Scientist
Mailing address K6-85, PO Box 999
Email da_netizel@pnl.gov
N/A There are no sub-contracts planned for the proposed work.
Spring chinook Juvenile
Fall chinook Juvenile
Coho Juvenile
Steelhea Juvenile
Stream miles affected 1900
Hydro project The Yakima Basin is an off-site mitigation subbasin.
Neitzel, D.A., T.C. Carlson, R.L. Mueller, and W.V. Mavros. In press. Evaluation of Infrasound for Enhancing the Capacity of Fish Screening Facilities to Protect Outmigrating Salmonids. Prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington
Neitzel, D.A., C.S. Abernethy, S.L. Blanton, and R.P. Mueller. 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 for the Bonneville Power Administration by the Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington
Project 8506200 has provided the region with the evaluations of installed screening facilities to ensure that the facilities are accomplishing the objectives for which they were designed and built. Monitoring of the screening facilities’ compliance with the design and maintenance criteria is key to measure 7.11B of meeting its objective of protecting juvenile salmon and steelhead during their migration to the ocean.
Initiate technical assistance task by contacting approved agencies to identify their current needs - Initiate during January 1996
Evaluation of infrasound system in modular screen system - February through June 1996
Evaluation of forebay configurations for 6-foot screen - February through June 1996
Field Survey #1 of up to 20 Phase II sites - during June and July 1996
Update evaluation of previously evaluated sites - during June, July and August 1996
Field Survey #2 of up to 20 Phase II sites - August 1996
Field Survey #3 of up to 20 Phase II sites - September and October 1996
Presentation of field survey results and pertinent assistance tasks at screen fabrication workshop - March 1996
Phase Planning Start 3/97 End 6/97 Subcontractor
Placement of all pre-1997 screen evaluation reports on website
Phase Planning Start 10/97 End 11/97 Subcontractor
Engineering analysis for applying sound to irrigation facilities
Phase Planning Start 7/97 End 9/97 Subcontractor
Determine standards for achieving the performance required to meet biological, operational, and cost effectiveness with infrasound behavioral barrier at irrigation screens
Phase Planning Start 4/97 End 6/97 Subcontractor
Design infrasound test to be conducted at an irrigation facility
Phase Planning Start 2/97 End 7/97 Subcontractor
Conduct Laboratory Tests with 35mm length fish; Examine habituation of startle response for zero-age salmonids; Examine other sound sources than tested during 1996; Identify sound source and metrics that could be used at an irrigation.
Phase Planning Start 12/97 End Subcontractor
Complete Placement of 1997 reports on electronic network
Phase Planning Start 10/97 End Subcontractor
Draft Report of field survey evaluations
Phase Planning Start 9/97 End Subcontractor
Field Survey #2 of up to 20 Phase III sites
Phase Planning Start 7/97 End Subcontractor
Field Survey #2 of up to 20 Phase II sites
Phase Planning Start 6/97 End 8/97 Subcontractor
Re-visit Phase I sites
Phase Planning Start Monthly End Subcontractor
Letter report of technical assistance tasks
Phase Planning Start As needed, begin 4/97 End Subcontractor
Begin evaluation of identified design or operational concerns using modular fish screen at the PNNL laboratory.
Phase Planning Start 4/97 End Subcontractor
Field survey #1 of up to 20 Phase II sites; Purchase sound source and metrics that could be used at an irrigation; Conduct consultations with BPA and Fish Screening Oversight Committee; Linking of PNNL and BPA sites for screen information
Phase Planning Start 3/97 or as scheduled End Subcontractor
Preparation of field survey results and pertinent technical assistance tasks at screen fabrication workshop; Demonstration of website at 1997 screen workshop
Phase Planning Start 2/97 End Subcontractor
Initiate technical assistance task by contacting approved agencies to identify their needs.
An evaluation of the screening facilities in the Yakima Basin.
The data will be provided to state and federal agencies that are designing and constructing fish screening facilities.
Various (See text in Opportunities for Cooperation section below)
Project 8506200 is related to screen improvement projects throughout the basin. These include: 7.10A.3 (Fisheries Managers maintenance of a prioritized list of tributary screening and passage facilities), 7.10A.4 (National Marine Fisheries Service, Working Oversight Committee, Appropriate Technical Work Groups and Bonneville identification of resources needed to accomplish screening and passage and monitoring and evaluation plans), 7.10A.5 (Bureau of Land Management, Idaho and Oregon/Washington Offices; U.S. Forest Service Regions 1,4,6; and Bureau of Reclamation, Pacific Northwest Region requirements that existing and new water use authorizations have functional fish screens and other passage facilities), 7.10A.6 (Corps of Engineers inspection of underwater diversions), 7.10A.7 (Idaho, Oregon, Washington requirements that installation, operation, and maintenance of fish screens are in compliance with state laws), 7.10.D (Bonneville’s evaluation of Dryden Dam screens), and 7.11 (Improvement of irrigation diversions in the Yakima River basin).
1997 Planned $120,000
1998 300,000 0% 100%
1999 300,000 0% 100%
2000 300,000 0% 100%
1992 733,000
1993 976,650
1994 883,000
1995 390,600
Total 4,973,250
This applies to the Direct Labor plus Indirect Labor costs and the General and Administrative Costs.
Contractor FTE 5 (none of these staff are employed full time on this work.)
Subcontractor FTE N/A No subcontracting is planned.