2017 Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Project …snakeriverboard.org/wpi/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/...2017 Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Project Application Complete Application

Pre-Application Due Date: March 15, 2018

Draft Application Due Date: April 5, 2018

Final Application Due Date: July 10, 2018

1

2017 Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Project Application

Complete Application Checklist Summary:

Through the application process each of the following elements, depending on the project type, will need to be created and submitted at some point before the final application due date.

Local Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Application – this does not need to be submitted in PRISM, but is required and will assist in finalizing a complete application – may elements including the project title, description, property details, etc., can be copied and pasted throughout. The SRSRB Application includes this entire form, the pre-application, draft application, and final application sections.

The relevant Salmon Project Proposal (Appendix C, found in RCO Manual 18), which includes the response to the SRFB Review Panel comments if required.

Three maps: 1. a general vicinity map, 2. a detailed worksite map for planning and restoration projects or a parcel map for acquisitions, and 3. a map showing the project’s Area of Potential Effect with the section, township, and range identified.

A minimum of two site photographs in JPEG file format.

The proposed project design including plans, specifications, and a design report if available (for restoration projects only).

Detailed Cost Estimate.

Landowner Acknowledgement Form (Appendix F, found in RCO Manual 18).

Barrier Evaluation Form (fish passage construction and design projects only).

Correction Analysis Form (fish passage construction projects only).

Intensively Monitored Watershed Certification (when relevant).

Waiver of Retroactivity (for acquisition projects only).

Deliverables from prior phases of the project (when relevant).

Project partnership contribution form (when relevant, Appendix G, found in RCO Manual 18).

Salmon Recovery Funding Board Application Authorization Form

RCO Fiscal Data Sheet

Complete required elements of PRISM Online Application: (https://secure.rco.wa.gov/Prism/Sponsor/Account/LogOn).

Please contact the Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Lead Entity office for questions or assistance with the application and application process at 509-382-4115 or [email protected].

https://secure.rco.wa.gov/Prism/Sponsor/Account/LogOn




2

Pre-Application Section

(This section must also must be included as part of the Draft and Final Applications if you don’t submit a pre-application).

Project Title (less than 50 characters including spaces, please create a title that accurately reflects the project):

Touchet River Water Diversion/Adult Fish Ladder

Submitting Organization:

Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)

Project Contact Information (Complete for each project contact)

Mrs. Ms. Mr. First Name: Ace Last Name: Trump

Address: 13780 Highway 261, PO Box 278 City/Town: Starbuck State:WA Zip: 99359

Telephone # (509) 646-3454 Cell # ( ) -

E-mail address: [email protected]

Project Location: In the mainstem Touchet River, approximately 100-200 meters upstream of the

Dayton Dam where the water diversion/intake is for the WDFW Dayton Acclimation Pond and Irrigation

District, and where the adult fish trap/ladder is located. The project is located within the Touchet River

MSA for ESA listed summer steelhead, and in the designated Priority Restoration Reach of the

Touchet River (2011 SRSRP).

Maps: See Attached Google Earth Map for the conceptual idea of structures. Full designs will be

needed, but it is unknown when and whom will complete those.




3

Project Description

The WDFW will use this grant to implement habitat structures in the Priority Restoration Reach and MSA of the

Touchet River. The primary purpose of proposed structures are to maintain the directional flow of the Touchet

River towards the Dayton Dam water intake (adult salmon fish ladder, collection of water for the WDFW

acclimation pond and the city irrigation system). The property is located in Columbia County, adjacent to the

eastside of the Touchet River in Dayton, just upstream of the Dayton Dam. The project will add habitat

structures to the river for both adult and juvenile rearing of salmonids and native fishes, but the main purpose is

for fish passage. The project is expected to be no more than 300m in length with 3-5 habitat structures (see

attached map/photo). The primary ESA listed species supported by this project are summer steelhead and bull

trout, and re-introduced spring Chinook salmon (non-listed)

The WDFW has identified this project as a high priority for fish passage, with secondary benefits since it may

provide protection and/or enhancement of functioning habitat as identified in the Salmon Recovery Plan. The

WDFW will work closely with the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan to secure the majority of funding

(~75%) for this project. In addition, this project will build upon recent habitat restoration activities occurring in

the Touchet River Basin for the betterment of summer steelhead and bull trout.

Pre-Application Cost Estimate: Note: Please only use this section for the Pre-Application – the Cost Estimate for the Draft and Final Applications must be more detailed and in a separate document or spreadsheet – please contact LE Staff for examples. List SRFB request, match, and total project costs.

Budget Items

Cost/Unit Unit Matching Funds

SRFB Request

Total Project Cost

Materials and Labor for building structures

??? ??? 80,000 51,512 131,512

Design ??? ??? 50,000 50,000

Total Matching $130,000

Total SRFB Request $51,512

Total Project Cost $181,512




4

Restoration Project Preliminary Design Requirements Starting in 2013, the SRFB changed the requirement for design review of restoration projects which exceed $250,000 in SRFB requested funds. If your grant request from the SRFB will exceed $250,000 you will be required to submit a preliminary design or equivalent with the final application. Check the SRFB Manual18 (Appendix D) for information of the Design Requirements or contact LE Staff. Please check the appropriate box below as to whether the design requirement can be met.

I have preliminary designs completed and have cross walked them w/ SRFB requirements

I am currently working on preliminary design and may be able to complete by final application deadline

I do not have preliminary designs and will not have them by the final application

Evidence that this project is part of the Snake River Salmon Recovery Plan: List the HWS project number and the title of the project as stated in the Snake river Salmon Recovery Region Provisional Work Plan 2013-2018. If project is not directly stated in the Work Plan, list the general project category your project pertains to and describe the correlation.

Work Plan Number(s): No assigned work plan number. However, this project would align with the General Project Category of

“Restore/Increase Habitat Complexity” which involves increasing habitat complexity. These types of

projects will focus on improving habitat complexity through conducting in-stream habitat enhancement.

The placement of large wood, rock, or other structural material for the purpose of developing pools,

winter habitat (slack water & interstitial spaces), side channels, and spawning habitat. Combinations of

materials will be used as suited to stream reaches while developing the highest benefit to salmon,

steelhead and bull trout.

Assessment and Monitoring Projects: The SRSRB has requested that a project sponsor first seek Columbia River Salmon and Steelhead Endorsement (CRSSE) funding (if eligible) before making a request for SRFB funds. Details on the CRSSE can be found here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/crss_endorsement/. WDFW develops project proposals for the Columbia River Salmon and Steelhead Recreational Anglers Board (CRSSRAB) to evaluate and rank. To determine project eligibility, please work with regional WDFW staff. If your project is eligible for CRSSE funding, please be advised that your project may not be funded or it may be funded only after receiving CRSSE funds.

Is this project eligible for CRSSE funding (please provide relevant communications):

Yes

No

This is the end of the PRE-APPLICATION

When submitting your draft application, make sure to update the pre-application information where required as well as completing the following draft application. The pre-application will become part of the draft application to reduce redundant forms.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/crss_endorsement/




5

Rock/Wood barb structures to maintain river flow to the left bank.

Dayton Dam, Water Intakes and Fish Ladder Compound




6

Draft Application Section

(This section is in addition to the pre-application, please update sections above in the Pre-Application section where necessary).

Salmon Recovery Funding Board

Draft Application Information

Draft

Date Submitted to SRSRB

April 5th, 2018

Vicinity / Site Maps & Photos

Please submit photos as JPEG or other non PDF picture format. Maps and designs maybe submitted in photo or PDF format. If maps and photos were submitted with the pre-application, re-submit only if they have been updated.

Attached Vicinity Map

Detailed Worksite Map (planning and restoration projects) or parcel map (acquisition projects)

Map showing the project’s Area of Potential Effect (APE) with Section/Township/Range A minimum of two (2) Aerial or Site Specific Photos Attached Designs (conceptual, preliminary, or final) or Field Sketches (Attached in Pre-Application)

Salmon Project Proposal To complete this section download the Salmon Project Proposal template that fits your proposed project and attach as a separate document. Check appropriate box below. NOTE: This project proposal will be used primarily to evaluate your project and is the meat of the application. Please include appropriate metrics within the body of the text. The Salmon Project Proposal template documents listed below can be found at: http://snakeriverboard.org/wpi/salmon-recovery/lead-entity-committee/grant-applications/ or in Appendix C of SRFB Manual 18.

Attached 1) Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination (Restoration & Acquisition) Project

2) Planning Projects (Assessment, Design, and Study) and Combination (Planning & Acquisition) Projects

3) Regional Monitoring Projects

4) Barrier Inventory Projects

http://snakeriverboard.org/wpi/salmon-recovery/lead-entity-committee/grant-applications/




7

Regional Monitoring Proposal Requirements (Regional Monitoring projects only)

The Snake River Salmon Recovery Board, at its discretion*, may make up to 10 percent of its annual Salmon Recovery Funding Board (SRFB) project allocation available for monitoring activities subject to the following conditions:

Address a high priority information need or data gap identified within our recovery plan and/or associated regional research, monitoring, and evaluation (RME) plan or lead entity strategy.

Not duplicate or interfere with ongoing monitoring efforts.

Be consistent or compatible with data collection, analysis, and management methods and protocols being used within the region and shall to the maximum extent practicable be consistent or compatible with methods and protocols in common use throughout the state.

Make data available to the RCO, the public, and the SRFB Monitoring Panel.

Not exceed 3 years.

Total 10 percent or less than our regional allocation*.

NOT NEEDED FOR THIS APPLICATION Attached Regional Organization Monitoring Project Certification

Projects that address Imminent Threats – Population Effect Determination When the Lead Entity Committee reviews and evaluates project proposals, addressing an Imminent Threat to salmon and/or steelhead is taken into consideration Following the submission of the draft application, if your project addresses an Imminent Threat as identified in the Funding Habitat Restoration Projects for Salmon Recovery in the Snake River Region Application Booklet, the Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Regional Technical Team (RTT) will be consulted on the severity of Imminent Threats being proposed for restoration funding. The RTT will consider population level effects the project may have if the project is implement and provide a technical recommendation to the LE Committee either (I) large improvement on a population scale or (i) minimum impact on a population scale for project scoring and evaluation. Early communication with the RTT during project development to discuss screen impact is critical Determination of project significance will be based on the perceived benefits to salmonids and be determined during the review process. For screening projects, if multiple screens are grouped into one proposal, screens must be in the same drainage for evaluation purposes, along with screen size and type when possible. Specific screen locations must be identified in a project proposal rather than just a general action and each specific screen identified to be included in the project must have a signed landowner acknowledgement form.

RTT Technical Opinion (Filled in by LE Staff)

Population Scale (I) OR Local Scale (i)




8

Landowner Acknowledgment Forms To complete this section, download the landowner acknowledgment form (different from the landowner agreement form), have the landowner complete and sign the form, and submit a copy with the draft application. Draft applications without signed agreement forms may not be considered by the SRSRB for final scoring and ranking. Remember to complete a Landowner Acknowledgement form for each separate Landowner.

These forms can be found on the SRSRB web site at: http://snakeriverboard.org/wpi/salmon-recovery/lead-entity-committee/grant-applications/ or in SRFB Manual 18.

Number of Landowners and Attached Landowner Forms :1 Number:

Project Proposal Cost Estimate Please provide a detailed cost estimate to supplement the general cost information required by PRISM (it is easiest to align the cost estimate you create with the cost fields from PRISM). Applicants must use the existing template, and in general, restoration and design project cost estimates should separate costs for individual construction, design, and project administration elements and tasks (e.g., survey, design, permits, cultural resources, materials, labor, and equipment). Acquisition projects should include costs for land, incidentals (including, as appropriate, appraisals, review appraisals, hazardous substance assessment, title reports and insurance, baseline documentation for conservation easements, closing, recording fees, wetland delineation, fencing, signing, taxes), boundary survey, cultural resources review, demolition, noxious weed control, relocation, stewardship plan, and project administration. Contingency costs should NOT be included as a separate line item in the attached cost estimate. For more information and eligible costs, see RCO Manual 18. For this section, you must use an existing template cost estimate which can be found on the SRSRB website at: http://snakeriverboard.org/wpi/salmon-recovery/lead-entity-committee/grant-applications/

Attached

Detailed Cost Estimate

Barrier Evaluation Form (Fish Passage construction and design projects only)

This form is used to document fish passage barrier conditions. This form can be found on the SRSRB web site at: http://snakeriverboard.org/wpi/salmon-recovery/lead-entity-committee/grant-applications/ or in SRFB Manual 18.

NOT NEEDED FOR THIS APPLICATION Attached

Barrier Evaluation From








9

This is the END of the DRAFT APPLICATION.

Don’t forget to update the pre-project information to reflect changes, if didn’t submit in the pre-application round fill out the

pre-application information on your draft submittal.

Figure 1. General project area map of the Touchet River Basin. Map provided by

WDFW GIS Dept.




10

Figure 2. Proposed project site shown by shaded polygon. Township, section and range markers

indicated.




11

Photo 1. Proposed area of work, just upstream of the Dayton Water Intake/Fish Ladder Facility.

The large gravel bar shown mid-photo was formed during high flows in the early 2018. An excavator

dug the side-channel to the intake (required twice since the first high flow event) on the right side of

this phot to maintain water flow to the Intake and Fish Ladder entrance (seen in the right panel of

the photo). Proposed habitat structures would be put upstream on the east bank of the river (left

side of photo upstream). Structures would be angled to force the river towards the Intake Facility,

with enough flow to prevent a gravel bar from forming in the future.




12

Photo 2. Same area as previous photo without intake. Habitat work would occur along the left side

of the photo.




13




14

Appendix C-3: Restoration, Acquisition, and Combination Project Proposal

List all related projects previously funded or reviewed by RCO: Not Applicable for this Project

Project # or Name Status

Status of Prior Phase Deliverables and Relationship

to Current Proposal?

Choose a status

Choose a status

Choose a status

Submit this proposal as a PRISM attachment titled “Project Proposal.”

1. Project brief. The primary purpose of proposed structures are to maintain the

directional flow of the Touchet River towards the Dayton Dam Water Intake/Fish

Ladder Facility (Adult/Juvenile Fish Ladder, Collection of water for the WDFW

steelhead acclimation pond, and the Hearn and West End City Irrigation

systems).

2. Project location. In the mainstem Touchet River, approximately 100-200 meters

upstream of the Dayton Dam where the water diversion/intake is for the WDFW

Dayton Acclimation Pond and Irrigation District, and where the adult fish

trap/ladder is located. The project is located within the Touchet River MSA for

ESA listed summer steelhead, and in the designated Priority Restoration Reach

of the Touchet River (2011 SRSRP), and with the migration and rearing corridor

for ESA listed bull trout.

3. Problem statement. The primary purpose of proposed structures are to maintain

the directional flow of the Touchet River towards the Dayton Dam water intake

facility. High stream flows in the winter of 2018 deposited large amounts of

gravel along the west bank of the river in the project area, essentially cutting off

the water supply to the Dayton Water Intake/Fish Ladder Facility. The facility

provides fish passage around the Dayton Dam (a low height diversion dam

originally constructed to supply water to the Dayton Acclimation Pond).

Concerns were expressed in the mid-2000’s to improve this structure, and in

2007 a new facility was constructed with two significant improvements: 1) a fish

ladder to improve passage of both adult and juvenile fishes with the basin, and 2)

consolidation of the Hearn and West End Irrigation districts water intakes.

Previously, the irrigation districts annually constructed push-up berms in the

Touchet River to pump water from to supply the irrigation canal.

Project Number ????????????????

Project Name Touchet River Water Diversion/Adult Fish Ladder

Sponsor Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife




15

To make the Intake Facility operational, WDFW has already had the site partially

excavated in 2018, and this will continue on an annual basis unless the gravel

bar can be removed and the stream flow re-directed to the west side of the river.

Structures upstream of the facility that redirect the flow, along with the slope of

the dam towards the west bank, will maintain flows on the west bank in the

future.

Fish ladder usage by ESA listed salmonids has been impacted by the current

conditions. Under higher conditions, fish are still able to jump the low diversion

dam, but low flow conditions during the summer could be problematic if no, or a

very limited water is available for the fish ladder. Lack of sufficient or no water

will lead to migration delays, and could possibly lead to mortality, which was one

of the main reasons a fish ladder was added to the facility back in 2007.

4. List the fish resources present at the site and targeted by this project.

Species

Life History Present (egg,

juvenile, adult)

Current Population Trend (decline,

stable, rising)

Endangered

Species Act

Coverage (Y/N)

Steelhead Adult, Egg, Juvenile Stable (but depressed) Yes

Bull Trout Adult, Juvenile Stable Yes

5. Describe the limiting factors, and limiting life stages (by fish species) that

your project expects to address. The project would add structures to the river

which will provide or may enhance holding, rearing, and potentially spawning

conditions for ESA listed summer steelhead in the area, and holding and rearing

areas (at certain times of the year) for ESA listed bull trout. Other native species

(not listed) may also benefit. This section of the Touchet River lies within the

flood control channel (natural) though the city of Dayton, and is relatively devoid

of habitat complexity because one bank of the river is a high levee which protects

the city of Dayton, WA. Structures added to help re-direct flow would add some

needed complexity.

6. Project goals and objectives. When answering the questions below please refer

to Chapter 4 of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Stream Habitat

Restoration Guidelines for more information on goals and objectives.

A. What are the project’s goals?

Project Goal: Restore and maintain consistent river flow towards the

Touchet River Intake/Fish Ladder Facility. Benefits to this action will

supply water for the fish ladder around the Dayton Dam, water for city

irrigation districts, and water for the juvenile steelhead acclimation pond.

Instream structures may provide resting and rearing habitat for ESA listed

species, and may sort gravel to provide additional spawning areas.

http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01374/

http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01374/




16

B. What are the project’s objectives?

Construct historic-scale, in-stream combination rock barbs/logjams

sufficient in size and number to redirect the majority of the Touchet River

flow towards the Intake Facility on a consistent basis. This action will aid

in fish passage at the facility. By doing so, these barbs/logjams will

create pools and cover at each of the structure locations along the

mainstem Touchet River for holding, rearing and potentially spawning

habitat by 2020.

C. What are the assumptions and constraints that could impact whether

you achieve your objectives?

Most likely constraints to completing this project will come in the form of

not getting approval to implement in-river structures in this section of the

Touchet River since it’s within the flood control section of the river, and

the Corps of Engineers might not permit structures that could potentially

interfere with that function. Other constraints could come in the form of

funding delays, especially since we are relying on a heavy cost share with

Lower Snake River Compensation Plan funding.

Funding delays can be dealt with by re-applying for SRFB funds in the

future if the main funding source is delayed in implementation. Not

getting permission from the Corps of Engineers because of interfering

with flood control function will likely not be resolved, and other options to

fix the current situation will have to be explored that don’t involve adding

structures to the stream channel.

7. Project details. Please answer the questions below and all pertinent supplemental

questions at the end of the application form.

A. Provide a narrative description of the proposed project. As depicted in

the aerial photo in the Pre-Application, WDFW is proposing the addition of

the large wood/rock barb instream structures to assist in the redirection and

long-term maintenance of stream flow to the west bank of the Touchet River,

towards the Touchet River Intake/Fish Ladder Facility. Materials used will

be large enough and anchored sufficiently to not move during higher flow

events, yet will be designed to provide additional holding, rearing and

potentially spawning habitat for ESA listed steelhead and bull trout in the

basin.

Actual designs have not been completed, and proposed structures are very

preliminary at this time. WDFW has planned with the USFWS-LSRCP office

for a site visit with engineers to further evaluate the site and begin the

process for designs and cost estimation.




17

B. Provide a scope of work and detailed list of project deliverables.

Currently, WDFW is proposing the following timeline to complete this

project. Uncertainties for project design timelines drive most of the project,

but it’s WDFW’s intent to have this project completed by the summer of

2019.

Task Responsibility Project Deliverable Timeline

Site Visit w/Engineers WDFW, LSRCP, Engineering Firm

Site Visit Spring 2018

Project Design Engineering Firm Conceptual Design July 2018

Begin Permitting Process WDFW, LSRCP July, 2018

Project Design Engineering Firm Preliminary Design September 2018

Project Design Engineering Firm Final Design December 2018

Finalize Needed Permits Permits in Hand March, 2019

Bid Process for Contractors

LSRCP March, 2019

Acquire Materials LSRCP, WDFW May, 2019

Select Contractors LSRCP May, 2019

Project Implementation Contractors, LSRCP, WDFW

Completed Work August, 2019

C. Explain how the sponsor determined cost estimates. To date, the

sponsor has determined costs of this project by talking with WDFW local

habitat biologists and a WDFW habitat engineer. They have seen the site

and provided some very rough estimates on what total costs

(implementation and engineering designs) would likely be based on their

experience with other habitat projects of similar size.

D. Describe the design or acquisition alternatives considered to achieve

the project’s objectives. At this time, the only other alternative to fixing this

problem would be dredge the Touchet River where the gravel bar has

formed and physically re-direct the main flow of the river back towards the

west bank. However, high stream flows could re-deposit gravel again in the

future which and re-dredging would have to occur in the future. Large scale

dredging projects such as that are seldom permitted anymore, and provide

little, if any, restoration value. WDFW feels the proposed project would

naturally redirect the stream flow and maintain that stream flow in the future,

and at the same time provide some habitat complexity in this area of the

Touchet River for ESA listed and other native fish species.

E. How have lessons learned from completed projects or monitoring

studies informed this project? WDFW, in conjunction with the LSRCP

(main funding source) will use experienced in-stream engineers in the

design and implementation of the project. The overall function will be to re-

direct and maintain the stream flow to the west bank of the Touchet River.

Multiple types of structures have been engineered over the recent years to

accomplish such tasks and those will be used for this project.




18

F. Describe the long-term stewardship and maintenance obligations for

the project or acquired land. At this time, no long term stewardship or

maintenance is planned for this project. WDFW is assuming as this time

that proposed structures will be keyed into the existing rock levee along the

east bank of the Touchet River. Structures implemented will be designed to

be stable and long-term and not require maintenance.

8. Explain why it is important to do this project now instead of later. There are

multiple considerations (not in priority order) as to why this project should be

done now.

1) The channel to maintain water flow into the Water Intake/Fish Ladder has

been dug out twice in the last 2 months by an excavator, and will continue in

the future under the current conditions. Depending on stream flows and

gravel movement associated with each high flow event could result in the

channel needing re-excavation multiple (3-8) times a year. Each time the

channel needs excavation poses a risk to ESA listed fish in the area at that

time (steelhead and bull trout).

2) The dug out side channel that leads to the Water Intake/Fish Ladder may not

maintain adequate stream flow during low summer flow conditions. If that

occurs, the fish ladder will be inoperable, and any ESA listed, or other

sensitive native species (not listed) would have to jump the dam to travel

upstream. For some species and based on size of fish, jumping the dam is

not an option.

3) The Water Intake/Fish Ladder also supplies water to the Hearn and West End

Irrigation Districts in the city of Dayton. If flow is not maintained, neither

irrigation ditch would receive water. It’s unknown if this would lead to

temporary pumping of water directly from the Touchet River to fulfill irrigation

needs, which could pose risk to ESA listed species.

9. If the project is a part of a larger overall project or strategy, describe the

goal of the overall strategy, explain individual sequencing steps, and which

of these steps is included in this application for funding. For this area of the

Touchet River (while within the protection and restoration reach) is complicated

by the levee that protects the city of Dayton and provides flood control. It’s

currently unknown if the proposed project will interfere with this strategy along

this river reach. Nearly all other project planning proposed for the Touchet River

has occurred outside this area because of potential complications associated

with the levee.

10. Describe the sponsors experience managing this type of project. WDFW has

implemented habitat projects in SE Washington. Project leads on those have




19

been different, but their experience can be easily accessed to make sure this

proposed project is successful.

11. List all landowner names.

City of Dayton. Landowner Acknowledgment form is attached.

12. List project partners and their role and contribution to the project. The

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation have been contacted to

be a project partner and to provide support if needed. Currently, WDFW is not

asking CTUIR to be a funding contributor to this project.

13. Stakeholder outreach. Public outreach has not occurred at this time, but none is

anticipated. In fact, we believe local public support will be positive (especially

from those landowners that rely on water from the Hearn or West End irrigations

ditches). There have been no public safety concerns identified for this project at

this time.

Supplemental Questions

Restoration Project Supplemental Questions

Will the sponsor complete, or already completed, a preliminary design, final

design, and design report (per Appendix D) before construction? Yes. Due

to the primary funding source (USFWS – LSRCP program), final designs and a

design report will be completed before construction occurs.

Will a licensed professional engineer design the project? Yes. To date, a

licensed professional engineering firm has been contacted by the primary funding

source (LSRCP). However, a site visit with local staff has yet to occur, but

should within the next month or so.

If this project includes measures to stabilize an eroding stream bank, explain

why bank stabilization there is necessary to accomplish habitat recovery. No.

The proposed project is not addressing an eroding stream bank.

A. Describe the steps the sponsor will take to minimize the introduction and

spread of invasive species during construction and restoration. Contractors

that will be hired to implement the project will follow standard procedures when

working within the area to minimize the spread of invasive species. Equipment

used will inspected prior to usage, and will be clean on-site after

completion to minimize the spread of invasive species to other areas.

Comments Use this section to respond to the comments received after the initial site visits, and then again after

submitting the final application.




20

Response to Site Visit Comments Please describe how the sponsor responded to the review panel’s initial site visit comments. RCO

recommends that the sponsor list each review panel comment and question and identify the response. The

sponsor may use this space to respond directly to the comments.

Response to Post-Application Comments Please describe how the sponsor responded to the review panel’s post-application comments. RCO

recommends that the sponsor list each of the review panel’s comments and questions and identify the

response. The sponsor may use this space to respond directly to the comments.

RESTORATION

OVERALL PROJECT GRANT REQUEST

Budget must account

for all costs to

complete the project

Enter only the

amount of the grant

request

Amount Amount Match in PRISM

Funding not reported

in PRISM

Source (Grant, Cash,

Materials, Labor,

Volunteers, etc)

Match Type (federal, state,

local)

Category (choose one) Task Description Qty Rate

Construction 1.00 16,000.00$ 16,000$ -$ 16,000$ -$ Cash Federal

Construction labor staff during construction 1.00 25,000.00$ 25,000$ -$ 25,000$ -$ Labor Federal

Construction supervision Oversite of work 1.00 7,000.00$ 7,000$ -$ 7,000$ -$ Labor Federal

Equipment and equipment use Excavators, etc.. 1.00 10,000.00$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$ Equipment Federal

Materials Rock and Large Wood 1.00 50,000.00$ 50,000$ 40,000$ 10,000$ -$ Material Federal

Mobilization Transportation of equipment

and staff

1.00 10,000.00$ 10,000$ -$ 10,000$ -$

Permits Permit Costs 1.00 2,000.00$ 2,000$ -$ 2,000$ -$ Cash Federal

Other Coordination Among Federal

Partners

1.00 5,000.00$ 5,000$ -$ -$ 5,000$ labor Federal

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STotal 125,000$ 40,000$ 80,000$ 5,000$

Category Task Description Qty Rate

Conceptual design 1.00 9,000.00$ 9,000.00$ -$ 9,000$ -$ Federal

Preliminary design 1.00 14,000.00$ 14,000.00$ -$ 14,000$ -$ Federal

Final design 1.00 22,000.00$ 22,000.00$ -$ 22,000$ -$ Federal

Administrative 1.00 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ -$ 5,000$ -$ Federal

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

-$ -$ -$ -$ -$

STotal 50,000$ -$ 50,000$ -$

Description Approved Rate Total Project Base

Indirect 28.780% 40,000.00$ 11,512$ 11,512$

Indirect 0.000% 130,000.00$ -$ -$ -$ $ -

STotal 11,512$ 11,512$ -$ $ -

GTOTAL 186,512$ 51,512$ 130,000$ 5,000$

A&E maximum allowed in PRISM $ 36,000.00 PRISM Project Total $ 181,512

A&E validation (14,000) RCO Percentage Match Percentage

28.38% 71.62%

AA&E Budget Check

MATCH

Construction

Administrative, Architechtural & Engineering

Indirect Costs

The Grant Request and Match should equal the total project cost and Budget Check cell should be 0.

Sponsors must account for all sources and types of match need to complete the project.

See SRFB Manual 5 for additional information regarding allowable costs.

Lower Columbia Habitat Project Application Detailed Cost Estimate 2/1/2013

https://www.rco.wa.gov/documents/manuals&forms/Manual_5.pdf

Documents

2017 Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Project …snakeriverboard.org/wpi/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/...2017 Snake River Salmon Recovery Board Project Application Complete Application