HomeMy WebLinkAboutSuWa200sec8-6aAlaska Resources Library & Information Services
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document
ARLIS Uniform Cover Page
Title:
Technical memorandum: Riparian instream flow, groundwater, and riparian
vegetation studies FERC determination response SuWa 200
Author(s) – Personal:
Author(s) – Corporate:
R2 Resource Consultants, Inc.
GW Scientific
ABR, Inc.
AEA-identified category, if specified:
Final study plan
AEA-identified series, if specified:
Series (ARLIS-assigned report number):
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project document number 200
Existing numbers on document:
Published by:
[Anchorage : Alaska Energy Authority, 2013]
Date published:
June 2013
Published for:
Alaska Energy Authority
Date or date range of report:
Volume and/or Part numbers:
Study plan Section 8.6A
Final or Draft status, as indicated:
Document type:
Pagination:
55 p. in various pagings
Related work(s):
Pages added/changed by ARLIS:
Notes:
Consists of a cover letter, Attachment A, and four appendices.
All reports in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Document series include an ARLIS-
produced cover page and an ARLIS-assigned number for uniformity and citability. All reports
are posted online at http://www.arlis.org/resources/susitna-watana/
July 1 , 2013
Ms. Kimberly D. Bose
Secretary
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
888 First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20426
Re: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241-000;
Riparian Instream Flow, Groundwater, and Riparian Vegetation
Studies FERC Determination Response Technical Memorandum
Dear Secretary Bose:
On April 1, 2013, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC)
issued its Study Plan Determination (April 1 SPD) for 14 of the 58 proposed individual
studies in the Alaska Energy Authority’s (AEA) Revised Study Plan (RSP) for the
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241 (Project).
When approving the Groundwater Study (RSP Section 7.5), the Riparian Instream Flow
Study (RSP Section 8.6), and Riparian Vegetation Study (RSP Section 11.6), the
Commission recommended that AEA file a technical memorandum that provides
additional information on the methods for addressing several aspects of the study plan.
The recommendations were:
Groundwater Study (RSP Section 7.5)
We recommend that AEA consult with the [Technical Workgroup (TWG)] on the
construction of the necessary data sets for the MODFLOW RIP-ET package, and
file no later than June 30, 2013, the following:
1. A detailed description of the specific methods to be used to relate the data of
Study 11.6 (riparian vegetation) to plant functional groups.
2. A detailed description of the specific methods to be used to relate the rooting
depth data from Study 8.6 (riparian instream flow) and the water level data from
Study 7.5 (groundwater) to extinction and saturated extinction depths.
3. A detailed description of the specific methods to be used to estimate the shape
of the transpiration flux curves.
2
4. Documentation of consultation with the TWG, including how its
comments were addressed.
Riparian Instream Flow Study (RSP Section 8.6)
[W]e recommend that AEA consult with the TWG on the sampling design for
collecting plant xylem water; and file no later than June 30, 2013, the
following:
1. A detailed description of the sampling sites, frequency, and schedule.
2. Documentation of consultation with the TWG, including how its
comments were addressed.
Riparian Vegetation Study (RSP Section 11.6)
[W]e recommend that AEA consult with TWG on the sampling design for
vegetation sampling within and outside the focus areas, and file no later than
June 30, 2013, the following information:
1. A detailed sampling design, including a schematic of the sampling scheme for
each focus area, the stratification factors, and basis for the number of plots within
and outside the focus areas.
2. Documentation of consultation with the TWG, including how its
comments were addressed.
Consistent with the Commission’s recommendations within the April 1 SPD, AEA is
filing the attached Riparian IFS, Groundwater and Riparian Vegetation Studies FERC
Determination Response Technical Memorandum (attached as Attachment A).
The information supporting this technical memorandum was presented at a Technical
Workgroup Meeting on June 25, 2013. A comment response table is included within the
memorandum as Appendix 1.
As always, AEA appreciates the participation and commitment to this licensing process
demonstrated by Commission Staff, federal and state resource agencies, and other
licensing participants. AEA looks forward to working with licensing participants and
Commission Staff in implementing the approved studies, which AEA believes will
comprehensively investigate and evaluate the full range of resource issues associated
with the proposed Project and support AEA’s license application, scheduled to be filed
with the Commission in 2015.
3
If you have questions concerning this submission please contact me at wdyok@aidea.org
or (907) 771-3955.
Sincerely,
Wayne Dyok
Project Manager
Alaska Energy Authority
Attachment
cc: Distribution List (w/o Attachments)
Attachment A
Riparian Instream Flow, Groundwater, and Riparian Vegetation Studies
FERC Determination Response Technical Memorandum (June 2013)
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project
(FERC No. 14241)
Technical Memorandum:
Riparian Instream Flow, Groundwater, and Riparian
Vegetation Studies FERC Determination Response
Prepared for
Alaska Energy Authority
Prepared by
R2 Resource Consultants, Inc., GW Scientific and ABR, Inc.
June 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page i June 2013
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................1
1.1. Groundwater Study (Study 7.5) ...............................................................................1
1.2. Riparian Instream Flow Study (Study 8.6) ..............................................................1
1.3. Riparian Vegetation Study (Study 11.6) ..................................................................1
2. Study Plan Details ..............................................................................................................2
2.1. Groundwater Study (Study 7.5) ...............................................................................2
2.1.1. FERC request: “A detailed description of the specific methods to be used
to relate the data of Study 11.6 (riparian vegetation) to plant functional
groups.” ....................................................................................................... 2
2.1.2. FERC request: “A detailed description of the specific methods to be used
to relate the rooting depth data from Study 8.6 (riparian instream flow)
and the water level data from Study 7.5 (groundwater) to extinction and
saturated extinction depths.” ....................................................................... 3
2.1.3. FERC request: “A detailed description of the specific methods to be used
to estimate the shape of the transpiration flux curves.” .............................. 3
2.2. Riparian Instream Flow Study (Study 8.6) ..............................................................4
2.2.1. FERC request: “A detailed description of plant xylem isotope sampling
sites, frequency, and schedule.” .................................................................. 4
2.3. Riparian Vegetation Study (Study 11.6) ..................................................................5
2.3.1. FERC request: “A detailed vegetation sampling design, including a
schematic of the sampling scheme for each focus area, the stratification
factors, and basis for the number of plots within and outside the focus
areas.”.......................................................................................................... 5
3. References ...........................................................................................................................7
4. Figures .................................................................................................................................9
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Provisional Plant Functional Groups (PFGs) (yellow ovals), proposed method to
estimate ET (blue rectangles), and dominant plant species observed in the Susitna River
floodplain (black squares). .................................................................................................... 10
Figure 2. Generic transpiration flux curve (modified from Baird and Maddock 2005). ............. 11
Figure 3. Proposed Focus Area riparian vegetation plot sampling strategy for FA-104 (Whiskers
Slough). ................................................................................................................................. 12
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page ii June 2013
APPENDICES
Appendix 1. TWG Comment, AEA Response Table
Appendix 2. RIFSTT Meeting Notes, April 23, 2013
Appendix 3. RIFSTT Meeting Notes, June 6, 2013
Appendix 4. Groundwater Study Metadata Standards for Cluster Well Stations including Sap
Flow Sensors
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page iii June 2013
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation Definition
AEA Alaska Energy Authority
ET Evapotranspiration
FA Focus Area
FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
ISR Initial Study Report
RIFSTT Riparian Instream Flow Study Technical Team
MODFLOW U.S. Geological Survey’s groundwater-flow model,
MR Middle River
PFG Plant Functional Group
Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project, FERC Project No. 14241
RIP-ET Riparian Evapotranspiration Package for MODFLOW
RSP Revised Study Plan
SPD Study Plan Determination
TWG Technical Workgroup
USGS United States Geological Survey
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 1 June 2013
1. INTRODUCTION
On April 1, 2013, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued its Study Plan
Determination (April 1 SPD) for 14 of the 58 proposed individual studies in the Alaska Energy
Authority’s (AEA) Revised Study Plan (RSP) for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project,
FERC Project No. 14241 (Project). When approving the Groundwater Study (Study 7.5),
Riparian Instream Flow Study (Study 8.6), and Riparian Vegetation Study (Study 11.6), FERC’s
April 1 SPD made the following recommendations on the three interrelated study plans:
1.1. Groundwater Study (Study 7.5)
We recommend that AEA consult with the [Technical Workgroup (TWG)] on the
construction of the necessary data sets for the MODFLOW RIP-ET package, and file no
later than June 30, 2013, the following:
1. A detailed description of the specific methods to be used to relate the data of Study
11.6 (riparian vegetation) to plant functional groups.
2. A detailed description of the specific methods to be used to relate the rooting depth
data from Study 8.6 (riparian instream flow) and the water level data from Study 7.5
(groundwater) to extinction and saturated extinction depths.
3. A detailed description of the specific methods to be used to estimate the shape of the
transpiration flux curves.
4. Documentation of consultation with the TWG, including how its comments were
addressed.
1.2. Riparian Instream Flow Study (Study 8.6)
[W]e recommend that AEA consult with the TWG on the sampling design for collecting
plant xylem water; and file no later than June 30, 2013, the following:
1. A detailed description of the sampling sites, frequency, and schedule.
2. Documentation of consultation with the TWG, including how its comments were
addressed.
1.3. Riparian Vegetation Study (Study 11.6)
[W]e recommend that AEA consult with TWG on the sampling design for vegetation
sampling within and outside the focus areas, and file no later than June 30, 2013, the
following information:
1. A detailed sampling design, including a schematic of the sampling scheme for each
focus area, the stratification factors, and basis for the number of plots within and
outside the focus areas.
2. Documentation of consultation with the TWG, including how its comments were
addressed.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 2 June 2013
AEA has completed these recommended tasks. Consultation on the interrelated riparian
vegetation, riparian instream flow and riparian groundwater/surface water (GW/SW) study plans
was accomplished with TWG representatives in two Riparian Instream Flow Study Technical
Team (RIFSTT) meetings. Meetings were held April 23, 2013 and June 6, 2013 to allow agency
and AEA scientists to confer on technical details and to address agency comments and concerns
regarding the study’s technical approaches and methods (TWG meeting comments and AEA
responses may be found in Appendix 1; April 23 and June 6 meeting notes are provided in
Appendices 2 and 3).
This technical memorandum summarizes details concerning sampling design, proposed field
protocols and analytical methodologies related to FERC Determination requests. The document
is organized to address details for each of the three RSPs: Groundwater Study 7.5, Riparian
Instream Flow Study 8.6, and Riparian Vegetation Study 11.6. For each study, we first present
the FERC request followed by AEA’s response. Additionally, riparian groundwater study
MetaData Standards for Cluster Well Stations including Sap Flow Sensors are provided in
Appendix 4.
2. STUDY PLAN DETAILS
2.1. Groundwater Study (Study 7.5)
The FERC April 1 SPD recommended consultation with the TWG on detailed methods for
developing datasets for MODFLOW RIP-ET model. MODFLOW’s function is to understand
the larger scale GW/SW interactions to use in conjunction with field measurements and other
analyses. Elements of these questions apply to both the Groundwater (7.5) and Riparian
Instream Flow (8.6) studies. In the Riparian TWG Technical Team meetings (April 23 and June
6, 2013), AEA presented additional details and descriptions for the following:
1. Methods to determine plant functional groups.
2. Methods to determine extinction and saturated extinction depths for defining transpiration
flux curves for plant functional groups using rooting depth and water level data.
3. Methods to estimate shape of transpiration flux curves.
2.1.1. FERC request: “A detailed description of the specific methods to be
used to relate the data of Study 11.6 (riparian vegetation) to plant
functional groups.”
2.1.1.1. Determination of plant functional groups
Plant functional groups (PFGs) have been defined as non-phylogenic groups of plant species
with similar functions or response to environmental conditions (Lavorel et al. 1997, Ajami et al.
2012). For purposes of this study, PFGs are defined as groups of plant species that access
floodplain water compartments in a similar manner as defined by plant species root depth. Plant
access to different floodplain water compartments (e.g., groundwater, surface water,
precipitation, saturated soil) will be modeled for each PFG. Five provisional draft PFGs have
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 3 June 2013
been identified including Transitional, Wetland, Deep-rooted Trees, Shallow-rooted Trees,
Shallow Rooted and Transition Groups following the RIP-ET modeling process proposed by
Maddock et al. 2012 (Figure 1).
These PFGs have been defined based on expected rooting depths, water tolerance ranges
gathered from literature reviews, and preliminary field studies using methods similar to Baird
and Maddock (2005). PFGs will be used to model plant community responses to changes in
water levels across floodplain surfaces. These PFGs are provisional and will be revised to reflect
data gathered in 2013 on plant community composition and species distributions and rooting
depth measurements made during the 2013 field studies. Final PFGs will be presented to the
TWG for consideration in Q4 2013 and Q1 2014 meetings.
2.1.2. FERC request: “A detailed description of the specific methods to be
used to relate the rooting depth data from Study 8.6 (riparian instream
flow) and the water level data from Study 7.5 (groundwater) to extinction
and saturated extinction depths.”
2.1.2.1. Defining extinction and saturated extinction depths
Input data for MODFLOW requires estimation of the extinction and saturated extinction depth
(Figure 2) to assign transpiration flux curves. Extinction depth, or the depth at which the water
table is far enough below the rooting zone that plants can no longer obtain water, will be
approximated based on the maximum rooting depths observed in the field (Baird and Maddock
2005, Maddock et al. 2012). Root sampling will be done through the combination of random
soil core sampling within each plant function group and deep soil trenches. Cores will be
collected using a 7.62 cm diameter split-spoon soil core. Cores samples will be collected down
to 150 cm. Observations of presence or absence of roots will be recorded at specific depths. Soil
pits will be dug as part of the soil stratigraphic sampling for the Integrated Terrain Unit mapping
(Riparian Vegetation Study 11.6) and sediment deposition sampling (Riparian Instream Flow
Study 8 .6). Within these trenches, horizontal soil cores will be taken at systematic depths in the
soil profile using a 5 x 30 cm PVC corer. Root biomass will be measured by volume of the soil
core.
Saturated extinction depths, or the water table elevation at which plants dies from O2 deficiency
through flooding of the root zone by groundwater, will be approximated through correlations
between plant species occurrence and water-table elevations to describe upper and lower limits
of species water tolerances (Baird and Maddock 2005).
2.1.3. FERC request: “A detailed description of the specific methods to be
used to estimate the shape of the transpiration flux curves.”
2.1.3.1. Transpiration flux curves
In many riparian plant communities, the rate in which water is transpired greatly varies with
groundwater depth (Baird and Maddock 2005). In order to understand the interaction between
groundwater and surface water to riparian vegetation, AEA will develop plant functional group
specific transpiration curves. The shape of the curve is a function of transpiration flux (or the
rate of transpiration per area) relative to the depth to groundwater. To develop the transpiration
flux curve for the MODFLOW model, the average maximum evapotranspiration (ET) flux needs
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 4 June 2013
to be determined. Predicting the amount of water transpired by plants will be done using the
Penmen-Monteith (PM) equation. The PM predicts the total ET, estimating the rate of total
evaporation and transpiration from an ecosystem using the commonly measured meteorological
measurements of solar radiation, air temperature, vapor content, and wind speed (Allen et al.
2005). The PM will be used to measure hourly estimates of ET across FAs 104, 115 and128.
Direct measurements of woody plant species transpiration will be measured using Grainer’s
Thermal Dissipation Probe (TDP) methods using Dynamax Inc. TDP sap flow probes (Houston,
TX). Sap flow techniques use a series of probes which are inserted into the xylem of a plant that
measures the rate at which water flows through the xylem. The series is made up of two probes,
one heater probe and the other a temperature sensor (thermocouple). A pulse of heat is released
from the heater probe into the transpiration stream and the time it takes for that heat pulse to
reach the temperature sensor is the flow rate of sap flow. Inference into herbaceous transpiration
will be done by measuring leaf-level stomata conductance using hand-held porometers (SC-1,
Decagon Device, Pullman, WA).
Depth to ground water will be measured using transects of wells through the Focus Areas. Wells
will be located along important hydrological boundaries and within specific plant functional
groups. Differential pressure transducers will be used in each well and adjacent surface-water
body to record water levels throughout the year to develop an understanding of the annual
hydrologic cycle. The depth to groundwater will be measured with both self-logging pressure
transducers and pressure transducers logging in to data loggers in 15-minute intervals.
2.2. Riparian Instream Flow Study (Study 8.6)
2.2.1. FERC request: “A detailed description of plant xylem isotope sampling
sites, frequency, and schedule.”
2.2.1.1. Plant Xylem Isotopic Sampling
Details of the plant xylem water study including sampling sites, frequency and schedule were
discussed in two Riparian TWG technical team meetings (April 23 and June 6, 2013). The
discussion is summarized below. As described in RSP Section 8.6.3.6.3., a stable isotope
experiment has been designed to determine the source from which dominant woody plant species
obtain water. AEA proposes to collect isotope samples three times over the growing season in
each sampling year to gain an understanding of how water sources may vary by species during
the growing season and across meteorological conditions.
Due to inherent properties of isotopes (Lajtha and Marshall 1994), many biogeochemical
processes have a specific isotopic signature measured as the ratio of heavy to light isotopes
(Dawson 1993; Lajtha and Marshall 1994). Since plants do not discriminate against heavy
isotopes during water uptake, xylem water in non transpiring plant tissues retain the isotopic
signature of the water source from which it was derived (Flanagan and Ehleringer 1991).
Isotopic abundance in xylem sap corresponds to the range of isotopic composition of all water
taken up by the plant roots, and can be used to infer the source of a plant’s water uptake (Dawson
1993; Dawson et al. 2002). By comparing the natural isotopic signature of O18 and H2, it is
possible to differentiate plant water use between surface water, ground water, and precipitation
(Dawson et al. 2002).
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 5 June 2013
Plant xylem samples will be collected through a combination of branch clipping and increment
bore samples. Only non-transpiring tissues (Ehleringer and Dawson 1992) from target plants
will be sampled and placed in a sealed 12 mm glass sample tube and kept frozen until sample
extraction is completed. Large trees will be sampled with increment bore samples collected at
breast height excluding bark tissue. Small shrubs and herbaceous species will be sampled by
branch clipping. Sampling will be concentrated around midday (~1100 to 1400) to ensure the
collection of data from actively transpiring plants. It will be assumed that transpiration of woody
plants is at isotopic steady-state, such that the deuterium value of non-evaporated twig xylem
water would be representative of that of transpiration vapor during the sample collection periods
(Yakir and Sternberg 2000).
Plant xylem samples will be collected at two focus areas in 2013 (FA-104 and FA-128) with
sampling periods in early June, mid-July and late August/early September. At least five samples
will be processed for each dominant woody species selected for analysis including dominant
trees: poplar (Populus balsamifera ssp. trichocarpa), white spruce (Picea glauca), and paper
birch (Betula papyrifera), willows (Salix sp.) and dominant herbaceous species.
2.3. Riparian Vegetation Study (Study 11.6)
2.3.1. FERC request: “A detailed vegetation sampling design, including a
schematic of the sampling scheme for each focus area, the stratification
factors, and basis for the number of plots within and outside the focus
areas.”
2.3.1.1. Riparian Vegetation Sampling Design
Three sampling methods will be used for the riparian vegetation study, including Focus Area
sampling, Non-Focus Area sampling, and Integrated Terrain Unit (ITU) mapping transect
sampling. Focus Area sampling plots will be defined with stratified random sampling with the
stratification unit being Ecotype. Ecotypes are local scale ecosystems and are represented in the
ITU mapping as the mapping component which combines vegetation and environmental
attributes including vegetation cover types, geomorphology including flood frequency, poplar
successional status (size class), and soils.
A stratified random sample design was developed for each riparian Focus Area using ecotype as
the stratification unit. The ITU mapping completed in Fall/Winter 2012 for the middle Susitna
River was clipped using the boundary of each Focus Area. The total area of each Focus Area,
the number of ecotypes within each Focus Area, and the total area (acres) of each ecotype within
a Focus Area were calculated. The total number of random plots per Focus Area was determined
using the following formula as a guide:
# Focus Area plots = 1 plot/ 20 acres + 1.5* the total # of ecotypes in a Focus Area
The above formula accounts for both total area of a Focus Area and the total number of ecotypes
such that a smaller Focus Area with a large number of ecotypes would be assigned a larger
number of plots than it would based on area alone. The total area of each ecotype was then
divided by the total area of the respective Focus Area to determine the percent area of each
ecotype relative to the Focus Area. Ecotypes encompassing ≥ 2% of the total area within a
Focus Area were assigned a number of random plots using the following formula as a guide:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 6 June 2013
# Random Plots per Ecotype = % total ecotype area*# of Focus Area plots
The GENERATE RANDOM POINTS TOOL from Hawth’s Analysis Tools for ArcGIS
(http://www.spatialecology.com/htools/rndpnts.php) was used to generate the random plots by
ecotype. For 2013 field studies, stratified random plots will be distributed across three (3) Focus
Areas (FA-104, FA-115, FA-128) for a total of 118 plots.
The Non-Focus Area sampling design (satellite areas) will use a targeted/directed sampling
scheme to select areas that will document underrepresented vegetation types such as some of the
herbaceous communities which are not represented in the existing Focus Areas. A total of 94
Non-Focus Area plots will be targeted for sampling in 2013.
ITU transects will be focused in the Lower River study area to understand GIS aerial imagery
signatures and resolve ITU mapping polygons. Approximately 60 transects which corresponds
to about 300 plots are planned for the Lower River in 2013.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 7 June 2013
3. REFERENCES
AEA (Alaska Energy Authority). 2012. Revised study plan. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric
Project, FERC No. 14241. Submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
December 2012. Prepared by Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage, Alaska.
Ajami, H., and T. Maddock. 2009. RIPGIS-NET: An ArcGIS custom application for the RIP-
ET package in MODFLOW- 2000 and MODFLOW-2005. HWR Report no. 10-010, 247
pp., Department of Hydrology and Water Resources, University of Arizona, Tucson,
Arizona
Allen, R.G., A.J. Clemmens, C.M. Burt, K. Solomon, T. O’Halloran. 2005. Prediction accuracy
for project wide evapotranspiration using crop coefficients and reference
evapotranspiration. J. Irrig. Drain. Eng. 131(1): 24–36.
Baird, K. J., & T. Maddock III. 2005. Simulating riparian evapotranspiration: a new
methodology and application for groundwater models. Journal of Hydrology. 312(1):
176-190.
Cooper, D. J., D. R. D’Amico, M.L. and Scott. 2003. Physiological and morphological response
patterns of Populus deltoides to alluvial groundwater pumping. Environmental
Management 31(2): 0215-0226.
Dawson, T.E. 1993. Water sources of plants as determined from xylem-water isotopic
composition: Perspectives on plant competition, distribution, and water relations. In
Stable isotopes and plant carbon-water relations. Eds. J R Ehleringer, A. E. Hall and G.
D. Farquhar. Academic Press, Inc., San Diego, California.
Dawson T E, S. Mambelli, A.H. Plamboeck., P.H. Templer, and K.P. Tu. 2002. Stable isotopes
in plant ecology. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 33: 507-559.
Ehleringer J R and T.E. Dawson. 1992. Water-uptake by plants- perspective from stable isotope
composition. Plant Cell and Environment 15: 1073-1082.
FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). 2013. Study plan determination on 14
remaining studies for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Letter to Alaska Energy
Authority, April 1, 2013.
Flanagan, L. B. and J.R. Ehleringer. 1991. Stable isotope composition of stem and leaf water -
applications to the study of plant water-use. Functional Ecology 5(2): 270-277.
Ingraham, N. and R. Criss. 1993. Effects on surface area and volume on the rate of isotopic
exchange between water and water vapor. Journal of Geophysical Research 98:20547-
20553.
Ingraham, N.L., and B.E. Taylor. 1989. The effect of snowmelt on the hydrogen isotope ratios
of creek discharge in Surprise Valley, California: Journal of Hydrology 106(3-4): 233-
244.
Lajtha K and J. Marshall. 1994. Sources of variation in the stable isotopic composition of
plants. In Stable isotopes in ecology and environmental science. Eds. K Lajtha and R H
Michener. p. 316. Wiley-Blackwell.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 8 June 2013
Lavorel, S., S. McIntyre, J. Landsberg, and T.D.A. Forbes. 1997. Plant functional
classifications: From general groups to specific groups based on response to disturbance.
Tree 12: 474–478.
Maddock, Thomas, III, K.J. Baird, R.T. Hanson., Wolfgang Schmid, and H. Ajami. 2012, RIP-
ET: A riparian evapotranspiration package for MODFLOW-2005: U.S. Geological
Survey Techniques and Methods 6-A39, 76 p.
Scholl, Martha. 2006. Precipitation isotope collector designs. USGS. U.S. Geological Survey,
Web. http://water.usgs.gov/nrp/proj.bib/hawaii/precip_methods.htm Accessed 5 March
2013.
Yakir, D., and L Sternberg. 2000. The use of stable isotopes to study ecosystem gas exchange.
Oecologia 123, 297–311.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 9 June 2013
4. FIGURES
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 10 June 2013
Figure 1. Provisional Plant Functional Groups (PFGs) (yellow ovals), proposed method to estimate ET (blue rectangles), and dominant plant species observed in the
Susitna River floodplain (black squares).
ET
Wetland Deep Rooted
Trees Transition
Penman Sap velocity
(TDP)
Purple
Marshloc
k
Blue
Joint Silvery
Sedge
Balsam
Poplar Cow
Parsnip
Devils
Club Ostrich
Fern Willow Alder Balsam
Poplar
Shallow
Rooted Trees
Shallow
Rooted
Penman Penman
(DTP)
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 11 June 2013
Figure 2. Generic transpiration flux curve (modified from Baird and Maddock 2005).
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Page 12 June 2013
Figure 3. Proposed Focus Area riparian vegetation plot sampling strategy for FA-104 (Whiskers Slough).
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 June 2013
APPENDIX 1. TWG COMMENT, AEA RESPONSE TABLE
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 1 - Page 1 June 2013
Licensing Participant Comment Response
Bob Henszey, USFWS There may be additional herbaceous
plant communities that warrant
additional PFGs.
The 2012 study mapped only wet sedge meadow and
wet forb herbaceous communities. Additional 2013
field work will cover a broader range of floodplain
habitat. Additional functional groups, particularly
herbaceous species, may be added to the study in
2014, as necessary. This topic will be revisited
following summer 2013 field work and presented in Q4
2013 and Q1 2014 meetings TWG meetings.
Bob Henszey, USFWS Requested information on the
diameter soil core samples will be
taken, and whether the team would
do biomass estimates, volume, or
presence/absence for the soil cores.
Three (3) inch soil cores will be obtained using a
standard soil sampler. Soil cores for isotope studies
will be done at systematic depths and
presence/absence of roots will be noted. Root biomass
will be sampled in soil stratigraphic pits with horizontal
grab samples at taken systematic depths.
Bob Henszey, USFWS How will it be determined whether
each of the three sampling periods is
occurring on a rising or falling limb?
All groundwater heights, sap flow, and meteorological
data will be collected daily throughout the growing
season, enabling the RIFS team to look at trends in
regards to ET and groundwater elevations on a daily
scale (e.g., rising and falling limb for groundwater).
Porometer sampling periods were selected to coincide
with seasonal leaf area and plant water use trends.
Besides the seasonal rise and fall of the hydrograph,
additional measurements will be made to capture any
observed hydrograph flux.
Bob Henszey, USFWS How will the presence of a perched
water table be determined?
Perched water tables are not likely in the floodplain
environment. The conductivities typical of high-energy
fluvial sedimentary deposits (sands and gravels)
typically result in well-connected aquifer conditions.
Saturated soil conditions may exist at the top of a
melting active layer (seasonally frozen soils), but these
conditions typically referred to as a perched water table.
If field conditions due indicate any perched water table
conditions, then observational field hydrology methods,
in combination with surveyed surface water features and
terrain surface maps will be used to describe these
conditions, if they are found.
Colin Kikuchi, USGS Recommended that use of additional
tracers (beyond 2H and 18O) may be
necessary. Major ions such as
chloride as a natural tracer in addition
to the 2 tracers. He believes n-1
independent tracers are needed for a
robust analysis of water source.
AEA will investigate feasibility of using additional natural
occurring tracers based upon findings of 2013 field
season. AEA will report back to TWG in Q4 2013, Q1
2014.
Jan Konigsberg, AK
Hydro Reform
Requested clarification that only a
single year of sampling will be
conducted for this study
Riparian vegetation study is designed to describe
vegetation succession (plant community change over
time) by sampling the existing range of plant community
stages. These stages will then be used to construct a
model of plant community change over time. This study
approach is a standard protocol in the field of forest
ecology.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 1 - Page 2 June 2013
Colin Kikuchi, USGS Requested detailed, integrated maps
with proposed study plots. Maps showing proposed transect and plot locations
were provided at the June TWG meetings.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 June 2013
APPENDIX 2. RIFSTT MEETING NOTES, APRIL 23, 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 2 - Page 1 June 2013
Susitna Watana Hydro Project
Meeting Notes
Riparian Instream Flow and Groundwater
Technical Team Meeting
April 23, 2013
LOCATION: Webinar
TIME: 9:00 AM - 1:00 PM AKST / 10:00 AM - 2:00 PM PST
SUBJECT: Review and discuss FERC Determination Riparian TWG Consultation
Recommendations
Goal: 1) Review and discuss Riparian IFS and Groundwater Study Plan
2) Finalize Riparian Groundwater Study Implementation Plan
ON PHONE
ATTENDEES: Aaron Wells ABR, Kevin Fetherston R2, Michael Lilly GWS, Kate Knox
R2, Michael Mazzacavallo R2, Bob Henszey USFWS, Chiska Derr NMFS,
Colin Kikuchi USGS, Greg Auble USGS, Joe Klein ADF&G, Eric
Rothwell NMFS
This meeting serves as the first of two meetings to discuss details of the Groundwater/Surface Water
interaction study as required in the April 1, 2013 FERC Study Plan Determination. A detailed agenda for
this meeting is provided at the end of these notes. Goals for this meeting were to:
1) Review and discuss Riparian IFS and Groundwater Study Plan
2) Finalize Riparian Groundwater Studies Implementation Plan
Kevin Fetherston, R2, introduced the study plan design, described the concept of plant functional groups,
and gave an overview of the ET study design. Michael Lilly, GW Scientific, provided photographs of
current end of winter observations of seepage areas.
The proposed strategy to define plant functional groups (PFG’s) was described. PFG’s will be defined
with rooting depths which characterize the relationship of the plant community to groundwater. To define
this relationship, a literature review of rooting depth studies is underway and rooting depths will be
measured in the field. Kevin responded that field work efforts will include gathering additional data on
rooting depths which will be used to help to clarify PFGs. Preliminary assessment of plant community
rooting depths assumes 4 PFGs (Transitional, Wetland, Deep-rooted Riparian, Shallow-rooted Riparian)
following the RIP-ET modeling process proposed by Maddock et al 2012. Agency members generally
agreed with this approach and expressed interest in a process for continued refinement of how Viereck
plant communities will be aggregated into PFGs.
Aaron Wells, ABR, presented the ITU mapping process and provided a live web presentation of draft GIS
maps for Lane Creek. This presentation showed how the ITU mapping process can be used to create
preliminary PFG maps from original field mapping of Viereck vegetation classes. This mapping process
will be further utilized to determine spatial distribution of ET study results. The relationship between
groundwater and the plant functional groups will be determined through empirical field studies measuring
water depths within PFG units.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 2 - Page 2 June 2013
Kevin Fetherston and Kate Knox presented data on plant community distribution within the five (5)
Riparian Focus Areas presented in the RSP and subsequent Technical Memorandum, and developed
rationale for selecting four (4) Focus Areas instead of five (5) Focus Areas for the groundwater/surface
water interaction study. All agency members were generally in agreement that this may make sense
based on a first look at the data. Bob Henszey asked to have additional time to review this information
and respond.
Bob Henszey then gave a presentation about his work in developing plant response curves on floodplains
along the Platte River. He summarized some of the difficulties encountered when defining plan response
to hydrologic conditions. Bob used the 7-day moving average to correlate plant responses (frequency of
distribution) to groundwater depth.
The difference between transpiration flux curves (groundwater system) and abundance curves (plant
communities) was discussed. Abundance curves look at a longer time scale than transpiration response
curves. Bob and Colin raised the point that measuring ET only 3 times during the season for the
herbaceous species because the groundwater/soil moisture conditions may not result in a complete
growing season model. All acknowledged that it may be possible that the magnitude of transpiration
difference from trees/shrubs is higher than the possible error of measuring herbaceous transpiration.
The team discussed that the current proposal is to have four (4) Riparian Focus Areas with full
groundwater instrumentation with supplemental wells. These additional wells would be used to
characterize additional plant communities not found within the four (4) riparian focus areas.
Michael Lilly described his proposal for drilling shallow wells to map the water table. Details of the well
layout and strategy to define boundary conditions were discussed. He presented an outline for using data
in RIPET and MODFLOW.
Michael Mazzacavallo presented details of the vegetation physiological measurements for measuring ET
(evapotranspiration). He described the proposed strategy for using Penman-Monteith equation to
approximate ET and identify plant water source using stable isotopes was presented.
Michael Lilly asked agencies to identify important action items and take home messages from this
meeting. No concerns were raised by any agency attendee. The meeting closed with a discussion of when
the 2nd meeting could be held and what other important topics should be discussed. Tentative schedules
indicated a meeting in the first week of June would be possible.
Action Items:
1. Further refinement of the purpose of the ET-flux curves and the plant suitability curves is
needed. Bob Henszey was interested in knowing how the RIFS team will define whether
the 3 sampling periods are occurring on a rising or falling limb. Defining the margin of
error in assumptions will be necessary.
2. Bob Henszey will review and provide his response to the question of using four (4) Focus
Areas instead of five (5) Focus Areas for the groundwater/surface water interaction field
effort.
3. A second meeting may be scheduled in the first week of June.
4. A formal response to FERC to document results of this meeting and the 2nd meeting will
be prepared for June 30 due date.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 2 - Page 3 June 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 2 - Page 4 June 2013
Riparian Instream Flow and Groundwater Study
Technical Meeting Agenda
Tuesday April 23, 2013
LOCATION: WEBINAR
TIME: 9:00 AM - 1:00 PM AKST / 10:00 AM - 2:00 PM PST
OBJECTIVES: 1) Review and discuss Riparian IFS and Groundwater Study Plan
2) Finalize Riparian Groundwater Studies Implementation Plan
GoTo Meeting: https://www4.gotomeeting.com/register/407369839
1-800-315-6338 Code 3957#
9:00 – 9:10 Introductions
• Kevin Fetherston
9:10 – 9:30 Overview of Riparian Groundwater Study Plan
• Kevin Fetherston
• Combined studies – R-IFS, GW-R, Rip-Veg
9:30 – 10:45 Plant Functional Groups, Viereck Level IV Classes, Mapping and Analysis
• Fetherston: Plant functional groups: overview of functional groups and modeling
approach
• Aaron Wells: plant functional group mapping and relationship to Integrated
Terrain Unit mapping, field sampling, Viereck Level vegetation classes, ArcMap
live presentation
• Kate Knox - Focus Areas analysis: Change from 5 to 4 Focus Areas
• Short break
10:45 – 11:30 Robert Henszey, USFW, presentation of Platte River Floodplain
Groundwater Study and plant response curve analyses
• Fetherston intro to Bob’s presentation and how it relates to the R-GW Study
• Bob Henszey presentation
11:30 – 1:00pm Riparian Groundwater Study Approach and operational details
(working lunch)
• Fetherston Overview Groundwater operational study approach
• Michael Lilly – Hydrologic Cycle, GW/SW Study Approach
• Michael Mazzacavallo – Evapotranspiration: theory and field operational
measurement, Stable isotope analyses for water source identification of
fluxes/source of plant water
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 2 - Page 5 June 2013
• General Group Discussion
• Follow-Up Key Points,
• Action Items Review
• Next Meeting
1:00 pm Adjourn
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 June 2013
APPENDIX 3. RIFSTT MEETING NOTES, JUNE 6, 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 3 - Page 1 June 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 3 - Page 2 June 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 3 - Page 3 June 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 3 - Page 4 June 2013
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 June 2013
APPENDIX 4. GROUNDWATER STUDY METADATA STANDARDS FOR
CLUSTER WELL STATIONS INCLUDING SAP FLOW SENSORS
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 1 June 2013
Susitna Hydrology Project
ESMFA104-2 Focus Area Clearing Met Station
Data Measurement and Recording Standards
Last Update: 06/21/2013
Last Update By: R Paetzold
Focus Area Station
Data-Collection Objectives: Meteorological data to evaluate the potential for hydro-electric
power generation in the Susitna River region.
Time Recording Standard: Always Alaska Standard Time (UTC – 9).
Datalogger Scan Interval Standard: 60 seconds.
Time Measurement Standards:
- Hourly readings are recorded at the end of the hour; therefore, the hourly average water
temperature, for example, with a 60-second scan interval and a time stamp of 14:00 is
measured from 13:01 to 14:00:00. For a 60-second scan interval, the hourly average
would be the average of 60 min = 60 values.
- Quarter-hourly readings are recorded every fifteen minutes starting at the top of the hour.
- Instantaneous readings are taken at the time specified by the time stamp.
- A day begins at midnight (00:00:00) and ends at midnight (23:59:55). All daily data are
from the day prior to the date of the time stamp. For example, if the time stamp reads
09/09/2007 00:00 or 09/09/2007 12:00:00 AM, the data are from 09/08/2007.
Data Retrieval Interval: Data will be retrieved hourly.
Data Reporting Interval: Hourly
Images
Camera: Moultrie Game camera; not connected to data logger.
Memory Card: 16GB SD Flash Memory Card
Flash Card Capacity: ~20,000 Images or over 1 year
Images Taken: On camera’s internal time interval.
Images Saved on Camera Memory Card: Half-hourly Lo-Resolution
Images Saved on Datalogger: Not connected to data logger.
Image Trigger Interval: 30-minutes
Data Retrieval: Manually, during station visits.
Air Temperature
Sensor: HC2S3 AT/RH sensor (PT100 RTD, IEC 751 1/3 Class B, with calibrated signal
conditioning).
Measurement Range: -40°C to +60°C.
Accuracy: ±0.1°C @23°C (~±0.3°C at -40°C).
Installation: In 10-plate radiation shield, non-aspirated.
Height: 2 meters.
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Table:
o Hourly Sample Air Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 2 June 2013
o Hourly Average Air Temperature: 60 readings from the beginning of the hour to the
end of the hour, averaged and recorded at the end of the hour.
o Hourly Maximum Air Temperature: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Air Temperature: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Minimum Air Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Air Temperature: Fifteen-minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Air Temperature: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Air Temperature: The highest reading from the previous
fifteen minutes.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Air Temperature: The lowest reading from the previous
fifteen minutes.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Air Temperature: Average of all temperature readings for the previous
day ending at midnight AST.
o Daily Maximum Air Temperature: The highest reading taken during the previous day.
o Daily Minimum Air Temperature: The lowest reading taken during the previous day.
Relative Humidity
Sensor: HC2S3 AT/RH sensor (ROTRONIC Hygromer® IN1.
Operating Range: 0 to 100% RH.
Accuracy: ±0.8% @23°C (~±0.3% at -40°C).
Installation: In 12-gill radiation shield, non-aspirated.
Height: 2 meters
Output Units: % Relative Humidity
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Atmospheric Table:
o Hourly Sample Relative Humidity: Recorded at the top of each hour.
o Hourly Average Relative Humidity: 60 readings from the beginning of the hour to the
end of the hour, averaged and recorded at the end of the hour.
o Hourly Maximum Relative Humidity: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Relative Humidity: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Relative Humidity: Fifteen-minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Relative Humidity: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Relative Humidity: The highest reading from the previous
fifteen minutes.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Relative Humidity: The lowest reading from the previous
fifteen minutes.
• Hourly Climate Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 3 June 2013
o Hourly Sample Relative Humidity: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Maximum Relative Humidity: the highest reading taken during the previous
day.
o Daily Minimum Relative Humidity: the lowest reading taken during the previous day.
Dew Point Temperature
Sensor: Calculated value from AT/RH
Scan Interval: N/A, calculated
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Table:
o Hourly Sample Dew Point: Calculated from the Sample Air Temperature and
Relative Humidity values at the top of each hour.
o Hourly Average Dew Point: Average of the 60 values calculated from the 60-second
Air Temperature and Relative Humidity values.
o Hourly Maximum Dew Point: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Dew Point: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Dew Point: Fifteen-minute sample (point) calculation
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Dew Point: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 calculations
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Dew Point: The highest reading from the previous fifteen
minutes.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Dew Point: The lowest reading from the previous fifteen
minutes.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Dew Point: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Maximum Dew Point: The highest calculated value during the previous day.
o Daily Minimum Dew Point: The lowest calculated value during the previous day.
Wind Speed
Sensor: RM Young 05103-45 Wind Monitor (Alpine).
Operating Range: 0 to 100 m/s (0 to 224 mph).
Accuracy: ± 0.3 m/s (±0.6 mph) or 1% of reading.
Starting Threshold: 1 m/s (2.2 mph).
Installation: 30 m from nearest obstruction.
Height: 3 m.
Output Units: meters per second.
Scan Interval: 3s.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Met Table:
o Instantaneous Wind Speed: The 3-second wind speed sampled at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Wind Speed: Hourly average of 1200 three-second wind speed
readings for the previous hour.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 4 June 2013
o Hourly Peak Wind Speed: the highest recorded 3-second wind observation from the
reporting interval of the past hour (max wind).
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Instantaneous Wind Speed: The 3-second wind speed sampled at the top of the hour,
15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Wind Speed: Fifteen-minute average of all three hundred 3-
second readings recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Peak Wind Speed: the highest recorded 3-second wind observation
from the reporting interval of the past fifteen minutes (max wind).
• Two-Minute Wind Table:
o Two-Minute Average Wind Speed: 2-minute average of 3-second wind speeds.
o Two-Minute Peak Wind Speed: the highest recorded 3-second wind observation from
the reporting interval of the past 2 minutes (max wind).
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Wind Speed: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Wind Speed: The daily average of all 5-second wind speeds for the
previous day.
o Daily Peak Wind Speed: The highest recorded 5-sec wind speed for the previous day.
Wind Direction
Sensor: RM Young 05103-45 Wind Monitor (Alpine).
Operating Range: 0 to 360 deg (mechanical) True North (0 to 355 electrical, 5 deg open).
Accuracy: ±5°.
Starting Threshold: 1.1 m/s (2.4 mph) 10 deg displacement.
Installation: Align true north.
Height: 3 meters.
Output Units: degrees true north.
Scan Interval: 3s.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Atmospheric Table:
o Instantaneous Wind Direction: Wind direction sample at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Wind Direction: Hourly average of 3-second wind direction vector
for the previous hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Instantaneous Wind Direction: The 3-second wind direction vector sampled at the top
of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Wind Direction: Fifteen-minute average of all three hundred
3-second readings recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the
hour.
• Two-Minute Wind Table:
o Two-Minute Average Wind Direction: 2-minute average of 3-second wind direction
vector.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Wind Direction: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 5 June 2013
o Daily Wind Direction: Vector mean of all wind direction readings for the previous
day.
Wind Direction Standard Deviation
Sensor: Calculated.
Scan Interval: 3s.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Atmospheric Table:
o Hourly Wind Direction Standard Deviation: The standard deviation (computed by the
datalogger) of the wind direction over the one hour recording period.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Wind Direction Standard Deviation: The standard deviation
(computed by the datalogger) of the wind direction over the fifteen-minute recording
period.
• Two-Minute Wind Table:
o Two-Minute Wind Direction Standard Deviation: The standard deviation (computed
by the datalogger) of the wind direction over the 2-minute recording period)
• Daily Table:
o Daily Wind Direction Standard Deviation: The standard deviation (computed by the
datalogger) of the wind direction for the previous 24 hours.
Wind Chill Temperature
Sensor: Calculated from Air Temperature & Wind Speed. Wind Sensor
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: N/A, calculated.
Algorithms: WC = 35.74 + 0.6215 T - 35.75(V0.16) + 0.4275T(V0.16)
where:
WC = Wind Chill (°F)
T = Air Temperature (°F)
V = Wind Speed (mph)
Source: Alaska Safety Handbook. 2006. p180.
WC (°C) = (WC - 32) * 5/9
where:
WC (°C) = Wind Chill (°C)
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Atmospheric Table:
o Instantaneous Wind Chill: Calculated from the Instantaneous Air Temperature and
Wind Speed values sampled at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Wind Chill: Average of the 60 values calculated from the 60-second
sample Air Temperature and the average of the 60 corresponding 3-second sample
wind speed values.
o Hourly Maximum Wind Chill: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Wind Chill: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 6 June 2013
o Instantaneous Wind Chill: Calculated from the Instantaneous Air Temperature and
Wind Speed values sampled at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the
hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Wind Chill: Average of the 15 values calculated from the 60-
second sample Air Temperature and the average of the 15 corresponding 3-second
sample wind speed values.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Wind Chill: The highest reading from the previous fifteen
minutes.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Wind Chill: The lowest reading from the previous fifteen
minutes.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Wind Chill: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Maximum Wind Chill: The highest calculated value during the previous day.
o Daily Minimum Wind Chill: The lowest calculated value during the previous day.
Solar Radiation
Sensor: Campbell Scientific LI200X, LiCor LI200 pyranometer.
Height: 2 meters.
Output Units: mV, converted by datalogger to W/m2.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Met Table:
o Hourly Average Solar Radiation: 60 readings from the beginning of the hour to the
end of the hour, averaged and recorded at the end of the hour.
o Hourly Average Solar Radiation: 60 readings from the beginning of the hour to the
end of the hour, averaged and recorded at the end of the hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Average Solar Radiation: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Solar Radiation: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Solar Radiation: The daily average of all solar radiation
measurements for the previous day.
Barometric Pressure
Sensor: Campbell Scientific CS100, Setra 278
Height: 2 meters.
Range: 600 to 1100mBar
Output Units: mBar, Not Corrected to sea level
Scan Interval: 60 seconds.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Atmospheric Table:
o Hourly Sample Barometric Pressure: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 7 June 2013
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Barometric Pressure: Fifteen-minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Barometric Pressure: Recorded at the top of each hour.
Net Radiation
Sensor: Kipp and Zonen NR Lite2 Net Radiometer
Height: 2 meters.
Output Units: mV converted by datalogger to W/m2, Wind Corrected W/m2
Scan Interval: 60 seconds.
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Met Table:
o Hourly Sample Net Radiation, Net Radiation w/ Wind Correction: Recorded at the
top of each hour.
o Hourly Average Net Radiation, Net Radiation w/ Wind Correction: 60 readings from
the beginning of the hour to the end of the hour, averaged and recorded at the end of
the hour.
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Net Radiation, Net Radiation w/ Wind Correction: Recorded
at the top of each hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Net Radiation, Net Radiation w/ Wind Correction: Fifteen-
minute average of all 15 readings recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45
minutes past the hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Net Radiation, Net Radiation w/ Wind Correction: Recorded at the
top of each hour.
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor mV: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in mV.
o Hourly Average Sensor mV: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the previous
hour. "Raw" data in mV.
Air Temperature - Back Up
Sensor: Triplicate YSI Series 44033 thermistors
Operating Range: -80°C to +75°C
Installation: In 6-gill radiation shield, non-aspirated.
Height: 2 meters
Output Units: kΩ, °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Atmospheric Table:
o Hourly Sample Air Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour. (three values, one
for each thermistor).
o Hourly Average Air Temperature: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour. (three values, one for each thermistor).
• Hourly Climate Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 8 June 2013
o Hourly Sample Air Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour. (three values, one
for each thermistor).
• Fifteen-Minute Met Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Air Temperature: Fifteen-minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Air Temperature: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor Resistance: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in
kΩ. (three values, one for each thermistor)
o Hourly Average Sensor Resistance: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour. "Raw" data in kΩ. (three values, one for each thermistor).
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Air Temperature: Average of all temperature readings for the previous
day ending at midnight AST. (three values, one for each thermistor).
o Daily Maximum Air Temperature: The highest reading from the previous day. (three
values, one for each thermistor).
o Daily Minimum Air Temperature: The lowest reading from the previous day. (three
values, one for each thermistor).
Water Height
Sensor: One CS451 (Campbell Scientific, inc) pressure transducer, SDI-12 type sensor or one
INW PT12 (Instruments North West) pressure transducer, SDI-12 type sensor.
Pressure Measurement Range: 0-7.25 psig
Output Units: cm, ft (water height above sensor), psig
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Fifteen-Minute Water Height Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Water Height: Fifteen minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Water Height: Fifteen minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Water Height: Fifteen minute maximum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Water Height: Fifteen minute minimum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Water Height: Sample at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Water Height: Average of all readings for the previous day.
o Daily Maximum Water Height: Maximum water height for the previous day.
o Daily Minimum Water Height: Minimum water height for the previous day.
Water Temperature
Sensor: One CS451 (Campbell Scientific, inc) SDI-12 sensor or one INW PT12 (Instruments
North West) SDI-12 type sensor.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 9 June 2013
Operating Range: -10°C to 80°C
Output Units: °C
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Fifteen-Minute Water Level Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Water Temperature: Fifteen minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Water Temperature: Fifteen minute average of all 15
readings recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Water Temperature: The highest reading taken during the
previous fifteen minutes.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Water Temperature: The lowest reading taken during the
previous fifteen minutes.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Water Temperature: Sample at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Water Temperature: Average of all readings for the previous day.
o Daily Maximum Water Temperature: the highest reading taken during the previous
day.
o Daily Minimum Water Temperature: the lowest reading taken during the previous
day.
Soil Temperature Profile
Sensor: Twelve YSI Series 44033 thermistors
Operating Range: -80°C to +75°C
Installation: In back-filled bored hole.
Depths: 0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 150 cm, 1-12 thermistors (based on actual
depth of bored drill hole)
Output Units: kΩ, °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Subsurface Table:
o Hourly Sample Soil Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour. (twelve values,
one for each thermistor).
o Hourly Average Soil Temperature: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour. (twelve values, one for each thermistor).
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor Resistance: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in
kΩ. (twelve values, one for each thermistor)
o Hourly Average Sensor Resistance: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour. "Raw" data in kΩ. (twelve values, one for each thermistor).
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Soil Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour. (twelve values,
one for each thermistor).
• Daily Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 10 June 2013
o Daily Average Soil Temperature: Average of all temperature readings for the
previous day ending at midnight AST. (twelve values, one for each thermistor).
Soil Moisture Profile
Sensor: Four sensors: CSI 650 Unfrozen Soil-Moisture/Soil Temperature Probes
Installation: Horizontal orientation in back-filled hole
Depths: 10, 20, 30, 40 cm
Output Units: µs, volumetric soil water content (v/v). Electrical Conductivity
Scan Interval: Hourly
Output to Tables:
• Hourly subsurface Table:
o Hourly Instantaneous Soil Moisture: Hourly volumetric soil water content taken at the
top of the hour (four values). Unitless volume ratio (water volume/soil volume).
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Instantaneous Soil Moisture: Hourly "raw" volumetric soil water content
taken at the top of the hour (four values). Units are µs.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Soil Moisture: Recorded at the top of each hour(four values).
Unitless volume ratio (water volume/soil volume).
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Soil Moisture: Average of all readings for the previous day ending at
midnight AST (four values).
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor Period: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in μSec
Soil Temperature Profile 2
Sensor: Four sensors: CSI 650 Unfrozen Soil-Moisture/Soil Temperature Probes
Installation: Horizontal orientation in back-filled hole
Depths: 10, 20, 30, 40 cm
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: Hourly
Output to Tables:
• Hourly subsurface Table:
o Hourly Instantaneous Soil Temperature: Hourly volumetric soil water content taken at
the top of the hour (four values). Unitless volume ratio (water volume/soil volume).
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Soil Temperature: Recorded at the top of each hour. (four values).
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Soil Temperature: Average of all temperature readings for the
previous day ending at midnight AST (four values).
Soil Moisture Electrical Conductivity
Sensor: Four sensors: CSI 650 Unfrozen Soil-Moisture/Soil Temperature Probes
Installation: Horizontal orientation in back-filled hole
Depths: 10, 20, 30, 40 cm
Output Units: dS/m
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 11 June 2013
Scan Interval: Hourly
Output to Tables:
• Hourly subsurface Table:
o Hourly Instantaneous Soil Moisture Electrical Conductivity: Hourly soil water
electrical conductivity taken at the top of the hour (four values).
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Soil Moisture Electrical Conductivity: Recorded at the top of each
hour(four values). Unitless volume ratio (water volume/soil volume).
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Soil Moisture Electrical Conductivity: Average of all readings for the
previous day ending at midnight AST (four values).
Soil Heat Flux
Sensor: HFP01-L Hukseflux Soil heat Flux Plate
Operating Range: -2000 W/m2 to +2000 W/m2
Installation: Horizontally in back-filled bored hole.
Depth: 8 cm
Output Units: W/m2, mV
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Subsurface Table:
o Hourly Average Soil Heat Flux: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Sample Soil Heat Flux: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Soil Heat Flux: Recorded at the top of each hour.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Soil Heat Flux: Average of all readings for the previous day ending at
midnight AST.
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor mV: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in mV.
o Hourly Average Sensor mV: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the previous
hour. "Raw" data in mV.
Battery Voltage
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: V.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample CR1000 Battery Voltage: Measured at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average CR1000 Battery Voltage: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for
the previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum CR1000 Battery Voltage: The highest reading from the previous
hour.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 12 June 2013
o Hourly Minimum CR1000 Battery Voltage: The lowest reading from the previous
hour.
Battery Current
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: A.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample CR1000 Battery Current: Measured at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average CR1000 Battery Current: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for
the previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum CR1000 Battery Current: The highest reading from the previous
hour.
o Hourly Minimum CR1000 Battery Current: The lowest reading from the previous
hour.
Load Current
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: A.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample Load Current: Measured at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Load Current: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum Load Current: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum CR1000 Battery Current: The lowest reading from the previous
hour.
Solar Panel Voltage
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: V.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample Solar Panel Voltage: Hourly reading at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Solar Panel Voltage: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum Solar Panel Voltage: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Solar Panel Voltage: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
Solar Panel Current
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: A.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 13 June 2013
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample Solar Panel Current: Hourly reading at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Solar Panel Current: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum Solar Panel Current: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Solar Panel Current: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
Datalogger (CR1000) Panel Temperature
Sensor: CR1000 Internal thermistor
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Average CR1000 Panel Temperature: Average of the 60 one-minute readings
for the previous hour.
Voltage Regulator (CH200) Temperature
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Average CR1000 Panel Temperature: Average of the 60 one-minute readings
for the previous hour.
Resulting Final Storage Data Tables:
See Datalogger Output Files Excel Document
Notes
Definitions:
Scan interval = sampling duration = scan rate
Time of maximum or minimum values is not recorded
Sample reading = instantaneous reading
Beginning of the hour = top of the hour
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 14 June 2013
Susitna Hydrology Project
ESGFA104-6 Focus Area Well Head with Sap Flow Station
Data Measurement and Recording Standards
Last Update: 06/21/2013
Last Update By: R Paetzold
Focus Area Station
Data-Collection Objectives: Meteorological data to evaluate the potential for hydro-electric
power generation in the Susitna River region.
Time Recording Standard: Always Alaska Standard Time (UTC – 9).
Datalogger Scan Interval Standard: 60 seconds.
Time Measurement Standards:
- Hourly readings are recorded at the end of the hour; therefore, the hourly average water
temperature, for example, with a 60-second scan interval and a time stamp of 14:00 is
measured from 13:01 to 14:00:00. For a 60-second scan interval, the hourly average
would be the average of 60 min = 60 values.
- Quarter-hourly readings are recorded every fifteen minutes starting at the top of the hour.
- Instantaneous readings are taken at the time specified by the time stamp.
- A day begins at midnight (00:00:00) and ends at midnight (23:59:55). All daily data are
from the day prior to the date of the time stamp. For example, if the time stamp reads
09/09/2007 00:00 or 09/09/2007 12:00:00 AM, the data are from 09/08/2007.
Data Retrieval Interval: Data will be retrieved hourly.
Data Reporting Interval: Hourly
Sap Flow 1
Sensor: TDP30 Thermal Dissipation Probe Sensors
Installation: Two thermocouples and heater inserted in tree.
Height: TBD meters
Output Units: mV, cm3/cm2/hr.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Table:
o Hourly Sample Sap Flow: Recorded at the top of each hour. (one value for each
sensor).
o Hourly Average Sap Flow: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the previous
hour. (one value for each sensor).
o Hourly Maximum Sap Flow: Hourly maximum of all 60 readings recorded at the top
of the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Hourly Minimum Sap Flow: Hourly minimum of all 60 readings recorded at the top
of the hour. (one value for each sensor)
• QuarterHrlyMet Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute sample (point) reading recorded at
the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Fifteen-Minute Average Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for
each sensor)
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 15 June 2013
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute maximum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for
each sensor)
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute minimum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for
each sensor)
• HalfHrSap Table:
o Thirty-Minute Sample Sap Flow: Thirty-minute sample (point) reading recorded at
the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Thirty -Minute Average Sap Flow: Thirty-minute average of all 30 readings recorded
at the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Thirty -Minute Maximum Sap Flow: Thirty-minute maximum of all 30 readings
recorded at the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each
sensor)
o Thirty -Minute Minimum Sap Flow: Thirty-minute minimum of all 30 readings
recorded at the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each
sensor)
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Sap Flow: Recorded at the top of each hour. (one value for each
sensor). This table is for the Current Conditions page on the Diag Site only.
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor Voltage: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in mV.
(one value for each sensor)
o Hourly Average Sensor Voltage: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour. "Raw" data in mV. (one value for each sensor).
o Hourly Maximum Sensor Voltage: Hourly maximum of all 60 readings recorded at
the top of the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Hourly Minimum Sensor Voltage: Hourly minimum of all 60 readings recorded at
the top of the hour. (one value for each sensor).
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Sap Flow: Average of all temperature readings for the previous day
ending at midnight AST. (one value for each sensor).
o Daily Maximum Sap Flow: The highest reading from the previous day. (one value for
each sensor).
o Daily Minimum Sap Flow: The lowest reading from the previous day. (one value for
each sensor r).
Sap Flow 2
Sensor: TDP50 Thermal Dissipation Probe Sensors
Installation: Two thermocouples and heater inserted in tree.
Height: TBD meters
Output Units: mV, cm3/cm2/hr.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Table:
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 16 June 2013
o Hourly Sample Sap Flow: Recorded at the top of each hour. (one value for each
sensor).
o Hourly Average Sap Flow: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the previous
hour. (one value for each sensor).
o Hourly Maximum Sap Flow: Hourly maximum of all 60 readings recorded at the top
of the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Hourly Minimum Sap Flow: Hourly minimum of all 60 readings recorded at the top
of the hour. (one value for each sensor)
• QuarterHrlyMet Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute sample (point) reading recorded at
the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Fifteen-Minute Average Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for
each sensor)
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute maximum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for
each sensor)
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Sap Flow: Fifteen-minute minimum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour. (one value for
each sensor)
• HalfHrSap Table:
o Thirty-Minute Sample Sap Flow: Thirty-minute sample (point) reading recorded at
the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Thirty -Minute Average Sap Flow: Thirty-minute average of all 30 readings recorded
at the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Thirty -Minute Maximum Sap Flow: Thirty-minute maximum of all 30 readings
recorded at the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each
sensor)
o Thirty -Minute Minimum Sap Flow: Thirty-minute minimum of all 30 readings
recorded at the top of the hour and 30 minutes past the hour. (one value for each
sensor)
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Sap Flow: Recorded at the top of each hour. (one value for each
sensor). This table is for the Current Conditions page on the Diag Site only.
• Hourly Raw Table:
o Hourly Sample Sensor Voltage: Recorded at the top of each hour. "Raw" data in mV.
(one value for each sensor)
o Hourly Average Sensor Voltage: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour. "Raw" data in mV. (one value for each sensor).
o Hourly Maximum Sensor Voltage: Hourly maximum of all 60 readings recorded at
the top of the hour. (one value for each sensor)
o Hourly Minimum Sensor Voltage: Hourly minimum of all 60 readings recorded at
the top of the hour. (one value for each sensor
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Sap Flow: Average of all temperature readings for the previous day
ending at midnight AST. (one value for each sensor).
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 17 June 2013
o Daily Maximum Sap Flow: The highest reading from the previous day. (one value for
each sensor).
o Daily Minimum Sap Flow: The lowest reading from the previous day. (one value for
each sensor).
Water Height
Sensor: One CS451 (Campbell Scientific, inc) pressure transducer, SDI-12 type sensors
Pressure Measurement Range: 0-7.25 psig
Output Units: cm, ft (water height above sensor), psig
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Fifteen-Minute Water Height Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Water Height: Fifteen minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Water Height: Fifteen minute average of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Water Height: Fifteen minute maximum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Water Height: Fifteen minute minimum of all 15 readings
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Water Height: Sample at the top of each hour. This table is for the
Current Conditions page on the Diag Site only.
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Water Height: Average of all readings for the previous day.
o Daily Maximum Water Height: Maximum water height for the previous day.
o Daily Minimum Water Height: Minimum water height for the previous day.
Water Temperature
Sensor: One CS451 (Campbell Scientific, inc) SDI-12 Sensors
Operating Range: -10°C to 80°C
Output Units: °C
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Fifteen-Minute Water Level Table:
o Fifteen-Minute Sample Water Temperature: Fifteen minute sample (point) reading
recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Average Water Temperature: Fifteen minute average of all 15
readings recorded at the top of the hour, 15, 30, and 45 minutes past the hour.
o Fifteen-Minute Maximum Water Temperature: The highest reading taken during the
previous fifteen minutes.
o Fifteen-Minute Minimum Water Temperature: The lowest reading taken during the
previous fifteen minutes.
• Hourly Climate Table:
o Hourly Sample Water Temperature: Sample at the top of each hour. This table is for
the Current Conditions page on the Diag Site only.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 18 June 2013
• Daily Table:
o Daily Average Water Temperature: Average of all readings for the previous day.
o Daily Maximum Water Temperature: the highest reading taken during the previous
day.
o Daily Minimum Water Temperature: the lowest reading taken during the previous
day.
Battery Voltage
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: V.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample CR1000 Battery Voltage: Measured at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average CR1000 Battery Voltage: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for
the previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum CR1000 Battery Voltage: The highest reading from the previous
hour.
o Hourly Minimum CR1000 Battery Voltage: The lowest reading from the previous
hour.
• Battery Current
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: A.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample CR1000 Battery Current: Measured at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average CR1000 Battery Current: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for
the previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum CR1000 Battery Current: The highest reading from the previous
hour.
o Hourly Minimum CR1000 Battery Current: The lowest reading from the previous
hour.
Load Current
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: A.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample Load Current: Measured at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Load Current: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum Load Current: The highest reading from the previous hour.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 19 June 2013
o Hourly Minimum CR1000 Battery Current: The lowest reading from the previous
hour.
Solar Panel Voltage
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: V.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample Solar Panel Voltage: Hourly reading at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Solar Panel Voltage: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum Solar Panel Voltage: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Solar Panel Voltage: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
Solar Panel Current
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: A.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Sample Solar Panel Current: Hourly reading at the top of the hour.
o Hourly Average Solar Panel Current: Average of the 60 one-minute readings for the
previous hour.
o Hourly Maximum Solar Panel Current: The highest reading from the previous hour.
o Hourly Minimum Solar Panel Current: The lowest reading from the previous hour.
Datalogger (CR1000) Panel Temperature
Sensor: CR1000 Internal thermistor
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Average CR1000 Panel Temperature: Average of the 60 one-minute readings
for the previous hour.
Voltage Regulator (CH200) Temperature
Sensor: CH200
Output Units: °C.
Scan Interval: 60 seconds
Output to Tables:
• Hourly Diagnostics Table:
o Hourly Average CR1000 Panel Temperature: Average of the 60 one-minute readings
for the previous hour.
FINAL REPORT RIF, GW, RIPARIAN VEGETATION STUDIES FERC DETERMINATION RESPONSE
Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority
FERC Project No. 14241 Appendix 4 - Page 20 June 2013
Resulting Final Storage Data Tables:
See Datalogger Output Files Excel Document
Notes
Definitions:
Scan interval = sampling duration = scan rate
Time of maximum or minimum values is not recorded
Sample reading = instantaneous reading
Beginning of the hour = top of the hour