Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydro vol 1 of 3 Dec 2012
Aedtis onl E==A=A Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC No.14241 Volume1 of3 |(Secnons 1-9.L)f@ ALASKAGaENERGYAUTHORITY December 2012 This publication has been released by the Alaska Energy Authority /Susitna-Watana Project at a cost of $415.66 per set.It was printed in Anchorage Alaska by Service Business Printing. Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC No.14241 noereneornoa Zs "eeeeae7 eae eespeperalieseeeine?weeheyoe AB ae Geez ENERGY AUTHORITY December 2012 = @=--_ENERGY AUTHORITY December 14,2012 The Honorable Kimberly D.Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street,N.E. Washington,D.C.20426 Re: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project,Project No.14241-000 Submission of Revised Study Plan Dear Secretary Bose: Pursuant to the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission),18 C.F.R.§5.13(a),the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)submits for filing the Revised Study Plan (RSP)for the original license application for the Susitna- Watana Project No.14241 (Project). AEA has worked diligently with participants in the licensing process to develop a comprehensive study plan for the proposed Project.Beyond the standard requirements of the Commission's Integrated Licensing Process (ILP)regulations,AEA's collaborative efforts have included: e Implementing an early consultation outreach program and initiating baseline environmental information gathering prior to developing a preliminary list of studies for the Pre-Application Document. e Organizing resource-based Technical Workgroups (TWGs)and holding numerous meetings with licensing participants beginning in early 2012. e Publishing draft study requests in May 2012 to assist the participants in preparing formal study requests conforming to the requirements of 18 C.F.R.§5.9. e Providing funding to assist federal resource agencies'participation in the study plan development process. e Consulting extensively with participants following submittal of AEA's Proposed Study Plan (PSP),including several series of TWG meetings in August, September,and October. e Publishing an interim draft RSP to aid participants in their comments on the PSP and requesting the Commission to extend the comment deadline 30 days to November 14,2012. ait.akenergyauthority:orgi 813 West Northem Lights Boulevard Anchorage,Alaska 99503 1 907.771.3000 Toll Free (Alaska Only)888.300.8534 F 907.771.3044 AEA greatly appreciates the significant commitment of time and resources of Commission Staff,federal and state resource agencies,Alaska Native entities,and other licensing participants in contributing to the development of the enclosed RSP.As a result of these efforts,AEA is pleased to report that the RSP resolves the majority of study- related issues in the ILP.The RSP is a comprehensive document which includes 58 individual study plans,organized into resource sections and by topic within each section. In the minority of instances where AEA has determined not to adopt a proposed study plan or study plan component,the RSP explains the basis for AEA's decision,in accordance with the Commission's ILP regulations and Commission Staff's direction. As requested by Commission Staff,the RSP also includes a detailed master schedule that includes the estimated start and completion dates for all field studies,the plan for quarterly progress reporting in 2013 and 2014,and the timetable for filing the Initial Study Report and Updated Study Report.Under separate cover,AEA is providing a "crosswalk”table between the RSP and the original study requests submitted by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service,which has been prepared at the request of Commission Staff and these agencies. Following AEA's filing of the RSP,licensing participants have until January 18, 2013 to file comments with the Commission on the RSP.AEA will carefully review those comments and reach out to the appropriate participants,if it appears that any outstanding differences can be resolved efficiently and reasonably before the Commission issues its Study Plan Determination scheduled for February 1,2013. AEA is filing the RSP with the Commission electronically.Participants may access the RSP on the Commission's website (http://www.ferc.gov)by going to the "eLibrary”link and entering the docket number,P-14241.AEA is also making the RSP available for download on the Project website (www.susitna-watanahydro.org). In addition to this electronic filing with the Commission,a paper copy of the RSP is available to the public for inspection and reproduction during regular business hours at AEA's Anchorage office. If you have any questions related to this matter or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at wdyok@aidea.org or (907)771-3955. Ly A DytVe Project Manager Alaska Energy Authority Enclosure cc:Attached Distribution List (w/o Enclosure) Revised Study Plan Kathryn Martin Ahtna,Inc. P.O.Box 649 Glennallen,AK 99588 Scott Anaya Executive Director Alaska Center for the Environment 807 G Street,Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Susan K.Bell Commissioner Alaska Department of Commerce Community and Economic Development P.O.Box 11080 Juneau,AK 99811-0800 Bill Griffith ADEC,Division of Water 555 Cordova Street Anchorage,AK 99501-2617 Kate Kanouse Habitat Biologist ADF&G,Division of Habitat P.O.Box 240020 Douglas,AK 99824-0020 Daniel S.Sullivan Commissioner,ADNR P.O.Box 111000 400 Willoughby Avenue,Suite 500 Juneau,AK 99811-1000 Wyn Menefee Director,ADNR Division of Mining,Land &Water 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1070 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Candice Snow Permits,ADNR Division of Mining,Land &Water 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 900C Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Richard VanderHoek ADNR,Office of History and Archaeology 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1310 Anchorage,AK 99501-3565 Ethan Birkholz Chief of Planning xa Dept.of Transportation &Public racilities,Northern Region Planning 2301 Peger Road,MS-2550 Fairbanks,AK 99709 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Ken Johns President /CEO Ahtna,Inc. P.O.Box 649 Glennallen,AK 99588 David Theriault Alaska Conservation Alliance P.O.Box 100660 Anchorage,AK 99510 Dan Easton Director,Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation P.O.Box 111800 410 Willoughby Avenue,Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-0800 Brenda Krauss ADEC,Division of Water P.O.Box 111800 410 Willoughby Avenue,Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-1800 Monte Miller Hydroelectric Project Coordinator ADF&G,Division of Habitat 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Joseph R.Balash Deputy Commissioner,ADNR 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1400 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Kristina "Krissy”Plett Natural Resource Manager,ADNR Division of Mining,Land &Water 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1020 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Ben Ellis Director,ADNR Division of Park &Outdoor Recreation 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1380 Anchorage,AK 99501-3561 Rod Combellick ADNR,Division of Geological &Geophysical Surveys 3354 College Road Fairbanks,AK 99709 Ben White Alaska Dept.of Transportation &Public Facilities,Statewide Environmental Management Office P.O.Box 112500 Juneau,AK 99811-2500 Distribution List Page 1 Andy Moderow Executive Director Alaska Conservation Alliance P.O.Box 100660 Anchorage,AK 99510 Julie Jessen Alaska Conservation Alliance 441 W Sth Street,Suite 402 Anchorage,AK 99510-2340 Larry Hartig ADEC,Office of the Commissioner P.O.Box 111800 410 Willoughby Avenue,Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-0800 William Ashton Storm Water &Wetlands Manager ADEC,Division of Water P.O.Box 111800 Juneau,AK 99811-1800 Anne Johnson Natural Resources Manager Alaska Department of Natural Resources 550 W 7th Ave,Suite 650 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Tom Crafford Director,ADNR Office of Project Management &Permitting 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1400 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Gary Prokosch Natural Resource Manager,ADNR Division of Mining,Land &Water 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1020 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Judith Bittner State Historic Preservation Officer,ADNR Office of History and Archaeology 550 W 7th Avenue,Suite 1310 Anchorage,AK 99501-3565 Marie Steele Project Coordinator,ADNR Office of Project Management &Permitting 550 W 7th Avenue Suite 1430 Anchorage,AK 99501-3577 Emily Ford Public Outreach Liaison Alaska Energy Authority 813 W.Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage,AK 99503 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Mark Huber Alaska Fly Fishers 200 W 34th Avenue,No.1233 Anchorage,AK 99503 Alaska Ratepayers P O box 670287 Chugiak,AK 99567 Brett Swift American Rivers 320 SW Stark Street,Suite 412 Portland,OR 97204 Peg Foster Chase Community Council P.O.Box 205 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Becky Long Coalition of Susitna Dam Alternatives P.O.Box 320 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Margaret Brown President and CEO,Cook Inlet Region Corporation (CIRI) P.O.Box 933330 Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 Rachel Day P.O.Box 921 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Eklutna,Inc. 16515 Centerfield Dr.,Suite 201 Eagle River,AK 99577 Fairbanks Northstar Borough P.O.Box 71267-1267 Fairbanks,AK 99701 David Turner FERC 888 First Street NE Washington,DC 20426 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Marilyn Leland Executive Director Alaska Power Association 703 W Tudor Rd.,Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99503-6650 Judy Price Alaska Survival,Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives P.O.Box 602 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Thomas O'Keefe PNW Director,American Whitewater 3537 NE 87th Street Seattle,WA 98115 Doug Wade Chickaloon Native Village P.O.Box 1105 Chickaloon,AK 99674 Richard Leo Coalition of Susitna Dam Alternatives P.O.Box 320 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Jim Jager Director-ClRI P.O.Box 933330 Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 Denali Borough P.O.Box 480 Healy,AK 99743 Eklutna Native Village 26339 Eklutna Village Road Chugiak,AK 99567 Edward Perez Regional Engineer,FERC Portland Regional Office 805 SW Broadway,Suite 550 Portland,OR 97205 Kim Nguyen FERC 888 First Street NE Washington,DC 20426 Distribution List Page 2 Joseph R.Henri Alaska Ratepayers P.O.Box 210556 Anchorage,AK 99521 John Seebach American Rivers 1101 14th Street,SW,Suite 1400 Washington,DC 20005 Harold Shephard The Center for Water Advocacy P.O.Box 15332 Anchorage,AK 99603 Chitina Native Corporation P.O.Box 3 Chitina,AK 99566 Bob Shavelson Cook Inlet Keeper P.O.Box 3269 Homer,AK 99603 Ethan Schutt,Sr. Vice President,CIRI Land and Energy Development P.O.Box 933330 Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 James Mery,Sr. Vice President,Land &Natural Resources Doyon,Ltd. 1 Doyon Place,Suite 300 Fairbanks,AK 99701-2941 Federal Emergency Management Agency 130 228th St.SW. Bothell,WA 98021-8627 Kimberly Bose Secretary,FERC 888 First Street NE Washington,DC 20426 Kim Ognisty FERC,Office of General Counsel 888 First Street NE Washington,DC 20426 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan James Ferguson P.O.Box 15391 Fritz Creek,AK 99603 Debra Call Knik Tribal Council P.O.Box 871565 Wasilla,AK 99567 Shannon Post Director,Matanuska-Susitna Borough 350 E.Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Larry DeVilbiss Mayor,Matanuska Susitna Borough 350 E Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Susan Walker NOAA-NMIS,Alaska Regional Office P.O.Box 21668 709 W 9th Street Juneau,AK 99802 Kate Savage Energy Coordinator,NOAA-NMFS P.O.Box 21668 709 W 9th Street Juneau,AK 99802 Native Village of Kluti-Kaah P.O.Box 68 Cooper Center,AK 99573 Native Village of Gakona P.O.Box 102 Gakona,AK 99585 Native Village of Tazlina P.O.Box 87 Glennallen,AK 99588 Brian Bjorkquist Attorney General's Office 1031 W 4th Avenue,Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99501 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 William FitzGerald PO Box 93 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Tom Harris Knikatnu,Inc. P.O.Box 872130 Wasilla,AK 99687 Joe Griffith General Manager,Matanuska Electric Association P.O.Box 2929 Palmer,AK 99645 Mendas Cha-ag Native Corporation 457 Cindy Drive Fairbanks,AK 99701 Mandy Migura NOAA-NMSFS,Alaska Regional Office 222 West 7th Avenue,Box 43 Anchorage,AK 99513 Native Village of Kluti Kaah P.O.Box 68 Cooper Center,AK 99573 Pat Lavin National Wildlife Federation 750 W 2nd Avenue,Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99501 Katherine Poole Natural Resource Defense Council 111 Sutter Street,20th Floor San Francisco,CA 94104 Native Village of Tyonek P.O.Box 82009 Tyonek,AK 99682 The Honorable Sean Parnell Governor of Alaska P.O.Box 110001 Juneau,AK 99811-0001 Distribution List Page 3 Joseph Klauder P.O.Box 396 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Raymond Theodore President,Knikatnu Native Corporation P.O.Box 872130 Wasilla,AK 99687-7476 Larry Engel Matanuska-Susitna Borough 350 E Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Thomas Meyer,Attorney Advisor NOAA,Office of the Alaska Regional Counsel P,O.Box 21109 709 W 9th St.,Room 909A Juneau,AK 99802-7414 Kathryn Kempton NOAA,Office of General Counsel 501 W Ocean Bivd.,Suite 4470 Long Beach,CA 90802 Jan Konigsberg National Heritage Institute 7511 Labrador Circle Anchorage,AK 99502 Native Village of Tetlin P.O.Box TTI Tok,AK 99779 Noah Garrison Natural Resource Defense Council 1314 2nd Street Santa Monica,CA 90401 The Honorable,Michael C.Geraghty Attorney General of Alaska P.O.Box 110300 Juneau,AK 99811-0300 The Honorable Charlie Huggins Alaska State Legislature,State Senate 600 E Railroad Avenue,Suite 1 Wasilla,AK -99654 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan The Honorable Mark Neuman Alaska State Legislature House of Representatives 600 E Railroad Avenue,Suite 1 Wasilla,AK 99654 Tetlin Native Corporation P.O.Box 652 Tok,AK 99780 Tim Bristol Director,Trout Unlimited-Alaska Office 419 6th Street,Suite 200 Juneau,AK 99801 Steve Taylor CFO,Tyonek Native Corporation 1689 C Street,Suite 219 Anchorage,AK 99501 William A.Keller USACOE P.O.Box 6898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Michiel Holly USACOE-Alaska District P.O.Box 6898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Ken Lord US Department of Interior 4230 University Drive,Suite 300 Anchorage,AK 99508 Elijah Waters USDOI -BLM,P.O.Box 147 Mile Post 186.5 Glenn Hwy Glennallen,AK 99588 Lisa Holzapfet USDOI-National Park Service 240 W 5th Avenue Anchorage,AK 99501 David Meyer USDOI -USGS 4210 University Drive Anchorage,AK 99508 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Tanacross Village Council P.O.Box 76009 Tanacross,AK 99776 Randall Hagestein Alaska State Director The Nature Conservancy 715 L Street,Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99801 Kathryn Miller Trout Unlimited 227 SW Pine Street,Suite 200 Portland,OR 97201 Heidi Firstencel Field Office Manager,USACOE Alaska District P.O.Box 6898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Robert N.Jones USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Srvce 800 W Evergreen Ave.,Suite 100 Palmer,AK 99645-6539 Eric Marchegiani USDA-Rural Development 800 W Evergreen,Suite 201 Palmer,AK 99645 Gary Reimer USDOI --BLM 4700 BLM Road Anchorage,AK 99507 John Jangala USDO!I --BLM P.O.Box 147 Mile Post 186.5 Glenn Hwy Glennallen,AK 99588 Paul Anderson USDOI-National Park Service Denali National Park and Service P.O.Box 9 Denali Park,AK 99755 Douglas Mutter USDOI-Environmental Policy and Compliance 1689 C Street,Room 119 Anchorage,AK 99501-5126 Distribution List Page 4 Cathy Teich P.O.Box 155 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Shawn Stankowitz Trapper Creek Community Council P.O.Box 13021 Trapper Creek,AK 99683 Constance Twigg P.O.Box 266 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Shannon Morgan USACOE-Alaska District P.O.Box 6898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Michael Baffrey US Department of Interior 1689 C Street,Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Ricky Hoff USDOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs P.O.Xox 21647 709 W 9th Street Juneau,AK 99802 Renee Fenci USDO!-BLM 222 W 7th Avenue,No.13 Anchorage,AK 99507 Ann Rappoport USDOI-Fish and Wildlife Service 605 W 4th Street,Room G-61 Anchorage,AK 99501 Willie Taylor USDOI-Environmental Policy and Compliance 1849 C Street NW-MS 2462 Washington,DC 20240 Pamela Bergmann USDOI-Environmental Policy and Compliance 1689 C Street,Room 119 Anchorage,AK 99501-5126 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 709 Hart Senate Office Building Washington,DC 20515-0201 The Honorable Mark Begich 111 Russell Senate Office Building Washington,DC 20510-0201 John Strasenburgh 15406 E Barge Drive P.O.Box 766 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Denis Ransy P.O.Box 344 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Robert Coleman President,Susitna Community Co HC 89,Box 8575 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Ruth D.Wood PO Box 766 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Charlie Loeb President,Denali Citizens Council P.O.Box 78 Denali Park,AK 99755 Jeremy Millen Executive Director,Fiends of Mat-Su 308 E Dahlia St. Palmer,AK 99645 Karen Kelly Executive Director Northern Alaska Environmental Center 830 College Road Fairbanks,AK 99701 Ellen Wolf Talkeetna Defense Fund P.O.Box 371 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 The Honorable Don Young 2314 Rayburn House Office Building Washington,DC 20515-0201 Frank Yadon PO Box 1022 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Kevin Foster Mile 230.7 -Alaska Railroad Talkeetna,AK 99676 Paul Roderick President,Talkeetna Air Taxi PO Box 73 Talkeetna,AK 99676 William Post P.O.Box 271 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Louisa Yanes Alaska Center for the Environment 807 G Street Anchorage,AK 99501 Cliff Eames Cooper County Alliance HC 60,Box 306T Copper Center,AK 99573 Eric Rothwell Hydrologist,NOAA Fisheries Service Alaska Region 222 W 7th St.,5th Floor Anchorage,AK 99513 Joshua Sonkiss 1024 21st Ave Fairbanks,AK 99701 Corinne Smith Mat-Su Basin Program Director The Nature Conservancy of Alaska 715 L Street,Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Distribution List Page 5 Village of Dot Lake P.O.Box 2279 Dot Lake,AK 99737 Robert Gerlach 1366 E 2nd Street P.O.Box 23 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Beth Pike P.O.Box 968 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Michael Wood P.O.Box 773 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Sharon Corsaro Corsaro Creative Coaching P.O.Box 255 Hermosa Beach,CA 90254 Sheryl Salasky P.O.Box 196 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Cassie Thomas Program Analyst,National Park Service 11081 Glazanof Drive,Room 108 Anchorage,AK 99507 Lisa Hughes Northern Alaska Environmental Center 803 College Road Fairbanks,AK 99701 Sharon Montagnino Chairperson Talkeetna Community Council,Inc. P.O.Box 608 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Michael Buntier Fish and Wildlife Biologist USFW Service-AFWFO 605 W 4th Avenue Anchorage,AK 99501 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.Introduction to RSP 1-1 1.1.Background of RSP Development ........cece cesseseseeeeeceeceeeeseceeseeseceeseesneeensees 1-1 1.1.2.FERC NEPA Scoping........ccescesessssssessresescecesceeeeesscesecesesesseesneeenees 1-3 1.1.3.Development Of PSP oo...eseessesnssseessessesssreescetetseeecseersesesseesees 1-4 1.1.4.Development of RSP and Efforts to Resolve Differences over Study ReqQuests.........cssccssscsssscssssccsseceesesseesnesseseceesseeceeseeasseeseeeees 1-5 1.1.5.Summary of Study Plan Development Process ............ccsscceseees 1-6 1.2.Process and Schedule Overview ...........:cssscseccesseeeccesseceeeeeceseeseneceseeeseeseseeees 1-7 1.3.Project Facilities and Operations ..........ce eeesscescceseeeesesceesesecsareeseeasesseeeeeseeees 1-8 1.4.2012 Early Study Efforts 2.0.0.0...cescscsssssscescceeceeceseesesescessesscesseeseeseeseeseeeenes 1-15 lee Tables 0...cesscccsscsrccssseessccssscssesesecseseseccsesssrsecsecssaeseseesnesesceseseenaeseeceeneesseens 1-17 1.e°FIQUIeS.........ccsseccescssssseencessecssneesccsencesseesscessceceseessseseeessneesressseeesesesneessesasenseeess 1-22 10°Attachment 0.0...ceecsescssssssesseseeseesecsssscsesssseseseessecessesssnscneesseseseesseeeteeneesees 1-25 2.Proposed 2013 and 2014 ILP Studies 2-1 2.1.0 1b)(nec 2-4 2.2.FIQS™UIeS........ecssseesecsscesesessessceesceeeesseeesseeseeeescecseeeseceeeecasacesseenseseuceseeenessnsesseees 2-9 2.3.Attachments «00.00...ee eeecsseccseeceeseecesceeeeseeescensseeeesseesecaceesseeeeseeesseseesseeenseesees 2-11 3.Studies Not Proposed 3-1 3.1.Requested Study Not Adopted in the RSP...ee eessseceseseeeessesesssssessseeseees 3-1 3.1.1.Information Regarding Study Request............cccsscesesrsesseeseeees 3-1 3.1.2.Requester's Description of Study Goals and Objectives.............3-1 3.1.3.Relevant Resource Agency Management Goals............:.ccesseee 3-1 3.1.4.Sponsor's Description of Existing Information and Need for Additional Information ............ecsssssecesessseeseeseesesssessseesesseessessens 3-2 3.1.5.AEA's Rationale for Not Adopting the Proposed Study in the PSP sevesseseessessesessesessecsescseseseeesnsesasceseessesessenseeesseesceeeseseanecsesenssnessneeenaness 3-2 4.Geology and Soils 4-1 4.1.Introduction...sceesescsscseceseeesessceessececseceeeseeesenscsesesseeeseessessesssessecseensessenssens 4-1 4.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied...eee eesessscsecseseecenesseneseseceeseesscesesesesseseetseseneeeneees 4-1 4.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives.....cceccccscseessssesesseeseeeeeees 4-2 4.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants ............sssssesssessesecsesensesecseeeececesseecaceasesseeseseeteeeeneeeaeees 4-3 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page i December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 4.5.Geology and Soils Characterization Study ............sceesccsesceceeeeseesesneeeeeesseeaes 4-3 4.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........cesessscsssessseeees 4-3 4.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information........4-4 4.5.3.Study Area 0...ceccesssssccssceessceeseceensseesseeseceeecenseeeesseeenseeeenesereeates 4-5 4.5.4.Study Methods ........ce ccesscsesessecceseessecseessessscessesscesscesseeseeesessesenees 4-5 4.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice...........4-8 4.5.6.Schedule....cccsssssceeceececesssscceeceeecseceeacceesensessseeseseeeeaseneseesenses 4-8 4.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies .00.........ccssecssseesseesseeesseseseeesesenes 4-9 4.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost oc.cesecesecssesssessseescseesesssessesceseenessees 4-9 4.5.9.Literature Cited 0...cececceteececscceceesesseseseesscessesesssesssesessonseees 4-9 4.5.10.FIQUIOS..0.....ceeeeeeesseessseesesesssessscsscesesecesseessseseseeeesssesesssesessesonees 4-11 5.Water Quality 5-12 5.1.ImtrOductiOn..........:ccscccssceseceseccesecesssccsscersccsssssevsssseneecsscecsseossesosseessesoassessecsers 5-12 5.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied ......ee eusssscsscessessesesesssesesseesseesssesssssssseesseseeeeeeese 5-12 5.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives........cscscssessesseesesseeseereeeees 5-12 5.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants ...........csscsssssessecssessseersssescnsecsssccnseccsssonsessessssneees 5-13 5.5.Baseline Water Quality Study...cecsssesscesseescecseeceseceesseeeseeesseesseeseeeeees 5-14 5.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............eeseseseseeeeeens 5-14 5.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......5-14 5.5.3.Study Area .......ceceescssssssesseseceecsseeseeseceeessseseneeseesseesseeeesessesseenees 5-16 5.5.4.Study Methods ........scesesesseecscesseesccsecsseeensesecsesessesessssessorsoes 5-17 5.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........5-32 5.5.6.Schedule...eeeeesscsseeseeseecsesesssesessoeccsscesseesseeseensosesenaesanenss 5-32 5.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies .0.......ce ceeesesessessseseeeeseeeeeeeeees 5-32 5.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost ...........eeeseseeceecceseetseeessesecsseneeeeneveneees 5-33 5.5.9.Literature Cited oe eeeessccescecessccecceeseceeeesseeeessecerecsenseeeessenens 5-33 5.5.10.0 |0)(ne 5-34 5.5.11.FIQUIES........ceeseeesceeseseestecensscceceeseecseseseseecsseseeeseecsessscessesssoesesenss 5-41 5.6.Water Quality Modeling Study...eseeesseesesesceetseeeeeseseseeseseeessasenseas 5-44 5.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.............::essceeseeseees 5-44 5.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......5-44 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page ii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.6.3.Study Area oo...eesessesceesssensesecseeeesesenscecseeeeeessesatenseessenseeaes 5-45 5.6.4.Study Methods .........cessssssesscesseseeseeseeseessecssceesesstesesesseesseseeeaes 5-45 5.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........5-54 5.6.6.Schedule...cesscesccesesecsscsseessecescesseeesecsscesesseessecessscsceseeseeeaes 5-54 5.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies ............ccccsssccessecsesteesseeessnenes 5-54 5.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost 0...eeccssccescessccessessseessecesseeesseesseess 5-55 5.6.9.Literature Cited oe eeeesscecseceseeeoecesecseseesscesscesseeecseeessseseeeaes 5-55 5.6.10.|»)(ee 5-56 5.6.11.FIQUIOS.........cccssccesscessccessseescceeccsescessecsseceseecssessnescesessneseasecssessasens 5-60 5.7.Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study...............0 5-62 5.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........eeeeceeteeeeees 5-62 5.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......5-63 5.7.3.Study Area...ecseseeesecseeseeseecsseseesaeeeeeseeeceaseeeceeesssesseeeeesees 5-66 5.7.4.Study Methods 0.0...eeseecsssseccessceesecsecssnseeseeesssssneeeeeeaseesseessees 5-66 5.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........5-82 5.7.6.Schedule...ces eesscssescsseeseeseeeesscsssecessesteesesseeseeseccseressecseeeeesenss 5-83 5.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies ............ceesesscseeeseeestseeeeeseeeeeens 5-83 5.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost ........cccssssssccseccesecsesessnsessseeeseeseessseesees 5-83 5.7.9.Literature Cited 00...eeeeceeeseeesccescessccescccescesssessseeessesseeseeesaees 5-83 5.7.10.Tables 0...eeecsscessceesceseceseeeesetecescessscescececesssessceeseecssessnesseess 5-90 5.7.11.FIQSUICS..0.....ceesssecsessceeenceessseeesesessnecceaeecsseeesseesesaeeesaeecenseceestsensaes 5-93 5.8.Attachment ........csscesscsecsssescessescsesseesseccsscesecesseeseeseseessesenseeeseseseserssessens 5-96 6.Geomorphology 6-1 6.1.Introduction...eesecessceesccesescsscesescsscesceseseesseceseeeeseseeesseseneesesecsneessesesseeess 6-1 6.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied ......eee esescssceseceeseeseceeeeeeceseeceseeesnseseneceneesseesseeseess 6-4 6.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives...........cecccssssssseseseesssecsseesseesnees 6-4 6.3.1.National Marine Fisheries Service............:cscccssceestsesseessseseesesseees 6-5 6.3.2.US.Fish and Wildlife Service 0.0...eeeesecceseesescessescessneesseeses 6-6 6.3.3.Alaska Department of Fish and Game................0vsssseeessseesseven 6-6 6.3.4.Alaska Native Entities...........:csccsscsesseesseseseeesenseeseesetccsneeeneeerees 6-7 6.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants ..........cccssssscesceseeseseocesecseeeseeseesseeseeeseesseesseeaesneeeeesenens 6-7 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page iii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.Geomorphology Study ...........sccsssssseesseceseccesceeseeeseeeseesseeseeeaeesssesssacesseeeeseees 6-9 6.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...ces ccsessseesseeeees 6-9 6.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......6-10 6.5.3.Study Area .......csceeecsesssesscesecesnesseesssesssesecsesccssessecnsesocsseasceaseeese 6-11 6.5.4.Study Methods 2.0.0...ceesscssecteseeseeeeseeecesssceseseceeecceseseeesaesneseassess 6-11 6.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........6-60 6.5.6.Schedule ...........ccccsssscsssecesscescessecseceesesescsesseeseseesaseseesesnesnsoesoease 6-60 6.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies .............sssssssessssseeseesenesssenees 6-62 6.5.8.2012 Study Efforts ..........ceeescseesseeececsscesscssecsscssessssossensensessseees 6-64 6.5.9.Level of Effort and Cost...ceecssscssessscessessseeesresssceseseesenes 6-64 6.5.10.Literature Cited .......eee ecececsecetcsssecessenessesesneceseeeesessesnsesssonaes 6-64 6.5.11.Tables .......cccsssccsscescesseecssscscesssesecesceesecssesessessessesseesasseessessesseanens 6-72 6.5.12.FIQUIES..........cccsscceseeesctsecceessessseseeesecessasessesceesesseessasesscsesesasensonees 6-81 6.6.Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study ........0..00....6-90 6.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...ce eeeseeeeeeee 6-90 6.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......6-90 6.6.3.Study Area ......cccsecsssesssscsrsscceseescecsesecessceesessoesenseneeseceaseseenasenees 6-92 6.6.4.Study Methods .......ee eseessecssesecsrecsesserssecseesesesssosseessesseeaseesenoes 6-96 6.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......6-127 6.6.6.Schedule ........cc ceeessseceeseesessscceessessececcssseseeesscseesseseseassessenseeeees 6-129 6.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0...eee eeeseessesecesseessesseenees 6-129 6.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost ........cc eeccsscessesceseceeesseeeseeseseeseseesetees 6-131 6.6.9.Literature Cited 0.0.0...eeseeeseeecreecseseseseseesesssesseeesseessensseseeees 6-131 6.6.10.0-10)(ETE 6-135 6.6.11.FIQSUreS.........ccccccessecceessecessccescesencersseserssceeseseeseacesseeesssessseseesesens 6-148 6.7.Attachments ..........:ccsecceeecceeseceeessscceseerseeeeeesosseeecssesessseseeseeesseesessesesssenesons 6-152 7.Hydrology-Related Resources 7-1 7.1.TntrOductiOn...........cccsccssssscceceeececcsesceseceecsscseseaeeeaecanecsesseseacecseesaeseseaseesssesesessons 7-1 7.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied...cee ee eeeseessecesneeecseesesseeesseeseseesessesssesoseesoneeeees 7-1 7.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives............eecsescseeseeseesssseeeseeseees 7-2 7.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants ..........ccessssssessssessessesessessessessaseassasssessesesensessreseeesneses 7-2 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page iv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.Groundwater Study .........ceeesscescsscsseseceseesscssessssesceeeseescecssesseestesseseecensesseenes 7-3 7.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............cesessteeeseeeees 7-3 7.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information........7-4 7.5.3.Study Area...esscsescessceseecesscesceesecessecenscesscceeesssecsseeseseesenseesees 7-5 7.5.4.Study Methods o......eescsccscecececerseeseeseessscecesesesssecseeseseseeeeneeees 7-6 7.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........7-17 7.5.6.Schedule...ceecssceseesssessecescssssesseeseesseserssesessssssseeseeesseesseesees 7-18 7.5.7.Relationship to Other Studies .............cccsccsssssccssteeessseeesseecsseeenes 7-18 7.5.8.Level of Effort and Cot .0......eee eseeesecsesesceseceseeceeseeeseceeeeerseeees 7-20 7.5.9,Literature Cited oo...ee eseecsesseeeseecseeeseescccesesensnesenserseeseeeeses 7-22 7.5.10.Tables...eeescessssceceeseceseeessecesceseccesseseeeeseeesceceececseessasesseeeeneeses 7-24 7.5.11.FIQureS..........c:ccessscessccessesesseseessccesceecssteessacseseneeeseeeesssseessseeeeseeeess 7-26 7.6.Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study .........cccecsssccssseecssteessesseceneeeeseeees 7-37 7.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.............ccsssecesteceees 7-37 7.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......7-38 7.6.3.Study Area .......ccesscssccesssessecsecesesssscsececeseesenesaeeareesseseeseeseeesees 7-41 7.6.4.Study Methods ..0.......ceesscsscceesceceseesesseetseaseesseeessceeesesessreeseseees 7-41 7.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........7-48 7.6.6.Schedule...eeeceeesecsesesssecesececcenceencesnecesecescessaceessesseeeeeseessens 7-48 7.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies ...0...ee eeeeseecseeeeeeeneeereeeeees 7-49 7.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost 20.0...cesescssccesscesecesessessccetecessaseeseenes 7-50 7.6.9.Literature Cited ......eee eseceseceescccecessccennecesccseceesccesseesencesseeesnes 7-51 7.6.10.Tables oo...eeeeesesseecsceseceeseesseessccecscesecessceeseessacessesssacensesenseneneesnees 7-53 7.6.11.FIQures.........cccseccssecceeecesseceesseceeseteessseeserssssaceessasecenececsnsesecseecenees 7-54 7.7.Glacier and Runoff Changes Stud y.............:ccssscssessscsssessecesssecseesesesseeeseeeees 7-56 7.71,General Description of the Proposed Stud y.........ccesscssssseeeneee 7-56 7.7.2,Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......7-57 7.7.3.Study Area 0...ce cessecssesscesecessecseesceseesesseeeseseeeeeessssensceseeesesseens 7-58 7.7.4.Study Methods .......ce ccccssssssssesceseesesseeseeseeceesceeeeseeneseseesesseeen 7-58 7.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........7-63 7.7.6.Schedule...eescsscccsesecesessseessesecsscssscnecssevsssssessseosssesacsereseres 7-63 7.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies .......cceeesssscseseeeseeeseeseeseeeenees 7-63 7.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost ........cccssesssssccscseceseeceeeseesceeeseesensneeentes 7-63 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page v December 2012 REviseD STuDY PLAN 7.7.9,Literature Cited ......i cceecessseeseseesessessesesssecsesssnsessescssesseseeneeaes 7-63 7.7.10.010)(oh 7-68 7.7.11.FIQUreS.........:cceeccssscesssssesecossessesesescsseccsesssecossesssessssaccesensenessesesenes 7-69 7.8.Attachments .........c::csscssecscesccseceecseeseeescesceescnseescensessscssssesscssacsasssassesessesaoneeegs 7-73 8.Instream Flow Study:Fish,Aquatics,and Riparian 8-1 8.1.IntrOductiONn...........sccsccssceeceseescesessseceesessessseesesesesseseseesesesscesessssenseesseseseaeesseaees 8-1 8.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied 0.0...eeeseceessssssssssssccesseecsssasssssccensessesseesssesenseseerees 8-2 8.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives...escecesssesceeseseeteseeseeeeeees 8-2 8.3.1.National Marine Fisheries Service...escesesecseeesseseeserseeeees 8-2 8.3.2.USS.Fish and Wildlife Service .....cece eescssessesesreeeseesesenesseenees 8-3 8.3.3.Alaska Department of Fish and Game...cece cecsscseseesessseoeenes 8-4 8.3.4.Alaska Native Entities..............:csssscsssccecsseeeseeeesseeeeseeeeseceeseeeeneees 8-4 8.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants ...........:.sseessssescescsscrsssssnsenssesscecsessesssessserscsssesesseesseeeees 8-4 8.5.Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study «0.0...ceccsessssceeceresesssesssessonenseeee 8-6 8.5.1.General Description of the Study...ee eeceseeeeteeeecneneeeee 8-6 8.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information........8-7 8.5.3.Study Area ........seeesssesceseesecesseseesesceessseoescesesasseessesssesseseessseseates 8-22 8.5.4.Study Methods .0......sc cesssscesscsssessesessesseecssessussssescseessessseseenerees 8-24 8.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........8-95 8.5.6.Schedule .........cccesccssssesecseceseeeeeccecceescecseseseeesnesssensseeseesenseesseeae 8-95 8.5.7.Level of Effort and Cost ......cs scscsssssssessseessssescsseeseesseessecssesons 8-95 8.5.8.Literature Cited oes eeeeeesececseeesecesseeosssesssseeessseeseensseeeones 8-96 8.5.9.0 Oe)0)(EE 8-105 8.5.10.FIQS™UIeS............ssessseessstsesessscessesscsececsscesserssscsesessaserensesseersnseeeeeaes 8-135 8.6.Riparian Instream Flow Study .00........eessssssccscsssetecsssesessesesessesseesseeeneeees 8-170 8.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.........ceeeeseeseeseees 8-170 8.6.2.Study Area ......cceecssssseeeescssceceseesesesesceseseeseteeeesssoseeseesessuseseseees 8-172 8.6.3.Study Methods .00....ee eecsesseseesseseseseeseeesecssessseeseeseeseesensssesess 8-174 8.6.4.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......8-192 8.6.5.Schedule .........seescsssseccesccsceesccseecseeessesseeesceseneeseseeseseeeseeseeeenees 8-193 8.6.6.Level of Effort and Cost 20.0...ceesecessceseceeeeseeseneseseeseeseaeesasees 8-193 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page vi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.7.Literature Cited oe seesssccsscesccseeseceseeseceeeecscesessnsesssesseeees 8-194 8.6.8.0 Oe)(Cee 8-198 8.6.9.FIQUICS.......eee eeceeeceeeeeeeeeeeeccesceescesscessecssenecesesesceeeesteessessanees 8-207 8.7.Attachment 20.0...eeescsccsecsceecsseseeeseseceseeseseaseaesaceaceeseaseaseasenevseseesorensesnes 8-227 9.Fish and Aquatic Resources 9-1 9.1.Introduction...eeseesesescsseessetecsecessecescesneccessceesnecaceseessseeseeseseeceesensenseeeeesees 9-1 9.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied oe eessscsscesesesceesesenecsesessetaccseeceseeesnsesessneeseseees 9-2 9.3.Agency and Alaska Native Entities Resource Management Goals and ODJOCtIVES oe eeeeeecseneescesetessessscseeeneesescseeesecssceseesecenesecesseseseeeseeeessesessenesseees 9-3 9.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants ............:csecsssscsseeceseeessecesscesscccnsceescescescneesseesncecsseesssees 9-4 9.5.Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River........9-6 9.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...........ccescssseesseeeees 9-6 9.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information........9-7 9.5.3.Study Area 0...cece cececcsscesscceceeeeseceseeeseeseneeeseseesecseeessseesneesseesneees 9-9 9.5.4.Study Methods .00...eee eessessseeessceseeeeseceeceesesececsseeessseesneesseesneees 9-9 9.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices.......9-24 9.5.6.Schedule...sce esessssscsseeesececssecsseesescsesesseeseseseeesecessecsnecereeeees 9-24 9.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies ............cssccsssecsssscessseessseeessneees 9-25 9.5.8.Level of Effort and Cot .0.....eccsesccseceseeenseteeeeeeaeeeeeseeeereceeeneees 9-26 9.5.9.Literature Cited .0....eee eescssseseteeeseseeseeesssceteeseesseeeseetecsreseeeeneees 9-26 9.5.10.Tables oo...eeecesscseccsessecescessecesecesseeesseeseceeseeseesssesseessesesesesceeees 9-29 9.5.11.FIQUreS.......eceeeeeesccesecceeeceeeeeeseceesecessceeseessceesceessecsssesseesssssseesanseses 9-34 9.6.Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna RIVED...ee eeseeeceeeeescceeseeceseceeseceesceeesseeessceeeeenaceeesnsesseaeesnesecscessseseeasecesauecsneeees 9-38 9.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............ccscssseeeseeees 9-38 9.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......9-39 9.6.3 Study Area oo...esescssessesseceseeeeeseesseeeeseneeseeeesesseeeeseeesseeneeeees 9-41 9.6.4 Study Methods ...........ccsssesssccssecsenceeseeseeceseceseeesecesseesesesseesssesseees 9-41 9.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .......9-62 9.6.6.Schedule .......ececescsssssccscecsecceeseeceescsserseceseeseesseeeesseeseeseseseteesesees 9-62 9.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies 20.0.0...ceseeeseeeseeeeseceneseneneeeens 9-63 9.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost 20.0.0...ee eescescscesesseeeseesesececeeseeesenenaeeens 9-64 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page vii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 9.6.9.Literature Cited oo...le eee eescesceseeseereessessensseesecsecseesssseeseeneeees 9-64 9.6.10.Tables ........cccccsesecsscceeseeeccecsreessscesseeessceescsssersscesosseeesoseesesesesseeeeses 9-68 9.6.11.FIQUIES........se eeeeeeeececsesceseeeeeeneseensesseesseessussessnesseesnesseesesssseesuseeeoes 9-74 9.7.Salmon Escapement Study.......i cccecsssccscsscessssssssesssssecsssesscssesssssessseasesees 9-83 9.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...ce eeeeeeeseeeeeeee 9-83 9.7.2 Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......9-84 9.7.3 Study Area ......cccscsseeeececenceccsscsecssssasssssessassssssecseseseesssseseesseeses 9-85 9.7.4 Study Methods .0.......ee sessssscsssssssessessessesssssecsssseessssssssecsssussssoeeses 9-85 9.7.5 Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........9-99 9.7.6 Schedule ........cecseseccscssceseecescesesessecsseessescsasessesssccesseesseensnseeasones 9-100 9.7.7 Relationship with Other Studies .........cc ceceeseessesseeseeeeeeeeenees 9-100 9.7.8 Level of Effort and Cost 00...eee eeeeesseeeesseseenseeessseesesessssseees 9-101 9.7.9 Literature Cited ........ce cceesesecscseeseceesseeeceseecseeseseseeeeeeseseseseeeeeees 9-101 9.7.10 0)0)(<p 9-103 9.7.11 FIQUIES.........ccscceecceessseeseceeseseneesseseesesscessesecesesssossesssesensscnnseseeees 9-104 9.8.River Productivity Study...eeeseseessssersseeseessessssssensssrscsesseessesseeseeoes 9-107 9.8.1.General Description of the Proposed Study....eeeeseeseeeees 9-107 9.8.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-108 9.8.3.Study Area oo...eeeessescesessceecsessssnssessessssssessesssesseesssssessseeees 9-109 9.8.4.Study Methods .........ccsessescsssssecsserssesssscosessessserscssesenesssenssesoes 9-110 9.8.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .....9-122 9.8.6.Schedule .......cceeccssssseccsecessseccercecessecseseneesaseseescerseseseserssasesteneas 9-122 9.8.7.Relationship with Other Studies ........ce eeessesseteesesssteseseees 9-123 9.8.8.Level of Effort and Cot ......tees csssessessseessesesseseessssesesseees 9-123 9.8.9.Literature Cited .....ee eeeseeeceseeeeeceressceseeseressesssenesseesseneesesesees 9-123 9.8.10.010)(ee 9-132 9.8.11.FUQUIES........ccessseececestsneccesscescetcesseseteaseeeseseesesessosersssonessseseneesaees 9-133 9.9.Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats...ccc eeeeecesteeeeneee 9-136 9.9.1.General Description of the Proposed Study........cee eeeseeeneee 9-136 9.9.2.Study Goals and Objectives...eee esesseseeesesseessessscneesseees 9-136 9.9.3.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information...9-137 9.9.4.Study Area ......cecsesssscssesssescssersseeseeeesersenseseerseensesesosssnesseeseeees 9-139 9.9.5.Study Methods .0.......esessscscssesesceceseesecescesseeseesceeesenseeesnseees 9-140 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page viii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 9.9.6.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .....9-150 9.9.7.Schedule oo...ecessesssesseeeeessetccssceeesseeseeeeseeseecseessesseceseeaseanes 9-150 9.9.8.Relationship with Other Studies ..............ccssessscesssseeeesscessneeeeees 9-150 9.9.9.Level of Effort and Cost .....ec ceeeeescsseeessseseececeseteeeecessssceeeneens 9-151 9.9.10.Literature Cited occ eccsseseesceseceseeseceeecsseersessessesereneeseeees 9-151 9.9.11.Tables...eeeeeessceeeeccsncesceeseceseseesseeeseessecesseeecesesesenseseseeoeeenees 9-153 9.9.12.FIQS"ure.....eee esssssscescecteceseescccecseeeseeseceseseesseceesceseceseceesecnseenees 9-160 9.10.The Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study9-171 9.10.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.............cceseeseeeees 9-171 9.10.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-172 9.10.3.Study Area...cesscssccsssesneessccesceessecesecsesseseeseeesesesseesseessesenes 9-172 9.10.4.Study Methods .00.....cee esesssscssccescecessessecssecseseescesensesseeesseeseesees 9-173 9.10.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......9-178 9.10.6.Schedule...eseseessesesceeeseesteeseessessesenseeseeeseeseeeeeeseeseeneees 9-178 9.10.7.Relationship with Other Studies ...........ccsscccesccssstesesseecsteeeeneees 9-179 9.10.8.Level of Effort and Cost oe.ce eesccsesssesccsecseseeeeecensesseeeeessees 9-179 9.10.9.Literature Cited oe eeeeesceeecesseeeceesseeeseeessecseeeeseeseeesnseees 9-180 9.10.10.Tables...eeeeeecesesscssccsceseeeceeeenecscetecsceseeesesnsesesseeeeeeaeseeeeseeeeees 9-181 9.10.11.FIQSUIES..........cscccessscesscesessecessscsssecsessceceetecssssecssesesseseseeesaceseeeees 9-182 9.11.Study of Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam.............ccccsscecesseesnseeeees 9-184 9.11.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..............csssseseeeees 9-184 9.11.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-184 9.11.3.Study Area oo...eeesessscsseeesecesccesseeesnceecesereesecsecesscerseesssesseeesnes 9-186 9.11.4.Study Methods ......ccc eeesscssesseesececesecsesestecsecsecensesseseeseeseneees 9-186 9.11.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .....9-190 9.11.6.Schedule...cecescssscssesssescseceseeectsesseseseecseeensenseeseesesseseneeaners 9-190 9.11.7.Relationship with Other Studies .0..........ccsccsssesseesesseeessesseeenes 9-190 9.11.8.Level of Effort and Cost .........cccescesccsercessecsssessecssseseceseeeneceees 9-19] 9.11.9.Literature Cited oc.cesesscesceseeeseceesessetecsesecesacessesesseesneeees 9-191 9.11.10.Tables 0...eeeeccsesesceeccseccsscsecesccsecsesseccassessessesessessaeseceseesaceneseees 9-193 9.11.11.FIQUICS........ccsccssccssesssecsssesscessecensessccesecesceesceeeseescesssecsueetsesseesees 9-194 9.12.Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries .0........ccscsscsscessessceseeseceteeseeseeseesesceseeseeseeseeeeeesesseeeaseaes 9-196 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page ix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 9.12.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.............scccsseseseeees 9-196 9.12.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Historic Information saseuceeaceaseaeesceececsecssosccsensesqsensesscaceesesessescecseeasesssenssesseseseeseseeaess 9-197 9.12.3.Study Area .......ceesseececssccccessessesescssesessesseeseseseesssecsseerersesetenss 9-198 9.12.4.Study Methods ......eee cesssssscseceseccssesseseseesesesseesecssescssseeseneees 9-198 9.12.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......9-207 9.12.6.Schedule...eecessessesseeessesecseecseccssesesssesssesseseserscsescescseseseens 9-207 9.12.7.Relationship with Other Studies ..0..........ce sesssssseceeeseseeeneeeeees 9-208 9.12.8.Level of Effort and Cost 0...eessssscessccsscesseesseeesseecesesesensene 9-209 9.12.9.Literature Cited...eee eeeeeesceseeceececececeeesseeeesseeeesseeeeseeeseeeers 9-209 9.12.10.0)0)(<1 ee 9-211 9.12.11.FIQSUreS.......sccssccsscessecssesssccsscsscesssonscesseensssoeseseseeeseeesseeseenenseeesees 9-216 9.13.Aquatic Resources Study within the Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Construction Area oo....ccccsssssscsscssscnescsssssessesosessseseeses 9-224 9.13.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eee eeeeeeeees 9-224 9.13.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-224 9.13.3.Study Area ooo...eeccesssceesescssecsscceescesesssceseessescsesessseeseecseseneeeees 9-228 9.13.4.Study Methods .........eceeesssscssseseessesesesessceseesesseseseceseeeseesseeneees 9-228 9.13.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......9-233 9.13.6.Schedule...ceccesesesscesesssneeeeesesesssceseescneeeetecceseeeseseesescenseaes 9-233 9.13.7.Relationship with Other Studies 2.0...ee essesseeesesseeeeeeeneeeenes 9-234 9.13.8.Level of Effort and Cost ooo...cies eesecssecssessssssseesssesesescrsssanees 9-234 9.13.9.Literature Cited ........cecssssccssesecsesescecsseeceeceeseseuseaeesasenscsecsaess 9-235 9.13.10.Tables .......eseccsesserseessseesesscsseceeseesnccneseneesceseesaeseesensseaesssessesneess 9-238 9.13.11.FIQUIeS.........ccsecccssscccssessceeseceseceacoescceesceeeeeeeseecerssseesseeeseesssaess 9-239 9.14.Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species...ett seeesesesesseeneees 9-241 9.14.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeeeeeeeees 9-241 9.14.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-242 9.14.3.Study Area .....ec cecesecesssessescsseessseccseesseesssesssesssesessesssscsseesessess 9-244 9.14.4.Study Methods.........cee eesssssssceeccseeecsceesseesesscsssesaeeesessseseasees 9-244 9.14.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......9-248 9.14.6.Schedule...esc cescssssesscsseeseeseeeceseeeseceeestecseesseeeeesaesssssacseeees 9-248 9.14.7.Relationship with Other Studies ..............cssessscssscesseeeeeeeeeeeeees 9-249 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page x December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 9.14.8.Level of Effort and Cost 00...es eeecsescsseeeeesetsetsseeteesecesueeseeees 9-249 9.14.9.Literature Cited .....ee eeecesesseesscesscessoeesseeesescsscecsersereeceeeeeees 9-249 9.14.10.Tables...ceecesccsccsscccscceeeeceseeessecsnceesscesceeeseseseessscesseeensessneeseees 9-251 9.14.11.FIQUICS.........ccscccssccsssccsscecesnccesssceesscetscsecesceesesseesseeesscseseeereesaees 9-254 9.15.Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area ..........sccsccsssscsscsseccsccesceseccessceeseceseceesessaeesaeeees 9-255 9.15.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............cceeseeeeeees 9-255 9.15.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-255 9.15.3.Study Area oo...ce eeeessccseeeceeseeseessceeseesseneeseeeseessneesacecseesseeeeneens 9-258 9.15.4.Study Methods .0......ee esesseessecessecesecessesecseseseesecessceseeeceseeeetees 9-258 9.15.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .....9-262 9.15.6.Schedule...ee sesesscecseecsccesececseeseecesssseaceeseeeeeseesceeaseceeeseeenes 9-262 9.15.7.Relationship with Other Studies .0...........cscsssccsseeeesreeseeeeseeeees 9-262 9.15.8.Level of Effort and Cot wo...eeecssesseecsssesscsseescretteceoseenseees 9-263 9.15.9.Literature Cited oe esesscesseseeesseescseecssetseerecesecsceseesessesensees 9-263 9.15.10.6 |0)(eee 9-265 9.15.11.FUQUreS......:ceessceeesscesceecersceesssesceseccsesscesscesensceeeesceesseaeeensneeenees 9-266 9.16.Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River .9-269 9.16.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............cccccesseeeeee 9-269 9.16.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-269 9.16.3.Study Area oo...ee eesseessceessceeeseeeceseecesseeeeseceseeessneceeseeeeseneesaees 9-271 9.16.4.Study Methods .0......ce eeeeessecsecssseeseeesseescesseeeseceseceseceneeesecenees 9-271 9.16.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......9-279 9.16.6.Schedule .......ceescessscscsessccseseecseccsecessesseeceeeesesseneceeseseceseseeees 9-279 9.16.7.Relationship with Other Studies .............cscesccssessseseeesseesseeeens 9-279 9.16.8.Level of Effort and Cost...ccccccscssssssnccsseesssesseessecesssennessces 9-280 9.16.9.Literature Cited 00.0...eesceecesecesesceccesncessecseeceestsnssesseeenseseeesues 9-280 9.16.10.6))(heer 9-282 9.16.11.FIQUICS.........ccsescesecesccestceseecnscscscescessenersceeseeessessaeseceeensecseesaeenaes 9-283 9.17.Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study .0....eee ceseccsesseseeseceesenssssssesersersereseees 9-286 9.17.1 General Description of the Proposed Study............esessseeeees 9-286 9.17.2 Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....9-286 9.17.3 Study Area and Timing............eeeeesesessceseecenececeeeseesecceseesenees 9-288 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 9.17.4 Study Methods .0......ceeesesesecsescssesessseessseccsseseseseesssssesseseeesenees 9-289 9.17.5 Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .....9-294 9.17.6 Schedule .........csceseccecseessreeseceeesesesessseeessesesesessessseesessssseeseseees 9-295 9.17.7 Relationship with Other Studies ..........ceccscsesessecseessrerseeenees 9-296 9.17.8 Level of Effort and Cost ..........ceessscesscesecseseeseseseseessssseeeeosee 9-296 9.17.9 Literature Cited .........cc ceesesescessserereceeeesscessecseesseessseessesesaenees 9-296 9.17.10 Tables ......ccccccsscccscccsssececesseseesesenseceeseesseseseeesesesseeseeseseneeseeaeens 9-299 9.17.11 FU QUICS.......ccecceeeeeceeceseceeesecsesssseesccsessesssesessesssesansesesersueaseneeseees 9-300 9.18.Attachments ..........cccccccsccsesesccesseeceeeesceeecseesecesesessosaeessosesssenssusseseseseessesseusnes 9-302 10.Wildlife resources 10-1 10.1.IntrOduction..........sccsscccsceessesscceesceseceecesecsceseecesseeseeessasesescnssseeesseesesesceseeseesense 10-1 10.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied ...........cc ceesseccceececeercseeessseesseessssseesseeesesesesnsecseseaees 10-1 10.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives.........cecscsessseeeseessetsereseeenees 10-2 10.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants ...........:csssssscsseeessssssssessessssenssesessssessseeeseeeessesseeasenes 10-3 10.5.Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival.10-5 10.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...10-5 10.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information.......10-6 10.5.3.Study Area ee ceecessesessecseescesssssccssasssesssessssssseesesssesssseresseesees 10-7 10.5.4.Study Methods .......ec esscsscesesseesseessescseccsesessesseecsseessesseesseeseaes 10-7 10.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........10-9 10.5.6.Schedule ...........ccssesssssssseecteceseeeseescessescsesessecssesesusosseessssssasenseees 10-9 10.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies ......0.esscsssssseeseeseeseeeenees 10-10 10.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost .......ccesecceseseeececeeeeseeseceeeeneeesssseneanees 10-11 10.5.9.Literature Cited 0.0...ecccessesseseeceseeeeeseeeeseeeesreesesseessseasenseerseees 10-11 10.5.10.Tables ....c.ccccccsscsssecsssseseecceeeesesscesseseseseeseceeesaeseaesseseaseesesseaseenes 10-13 10.5.11.FIQUIeS........:cssccsscessscsecesssceneeseeesseseasesesessasssecsseneessensuseeseesenseees 10-14 10.6.Caribou Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival10-16 10.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........eeeeseessceseeee 10-16 10.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-16 10.6.3.Study Area oo...cecssececscseseseecsesseseeeseeeeaseseseesssaveaseaseneseeensenes 10-17 10.6.4.Study Methods ..0......eeeeeseecesseseeesesesesseseeeeeeceaceeeescessossssseessees 10-18 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 10.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices .....10-19 10.6.6.Schedule...eessssessccssecssecesceesccesececsecesaceeeesneceeeeseseeseeeeseees 10-19 10.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0.0...cesseseeseseseeeeeeneeneeees 10-20 10.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost 0...eseeesceeseessceeeceseesessesseceseeeenes 10-21 10.6.9.Literature Cited .....ct ceececssessceessesececessceeeeeseccsecesnsesecernsesaes 10-21 10.6.10.Tables .......eeescscscsseccsscceecessncesccessccecsesscesscesseseaceesseessseseesnsees 10-22 10.6.11.FIQS™UIES..........:ccseccsscseeecoscesccenscesccessesessccsceseneessesscessnsesassesseesees 10-23 10.7.Dall's Sheep Distribution and Abundance...........cceccesceseceseceecesesecesneesees 10-25 10.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...........csssseeeeeeees 10-25 10.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-25 10.7.3.Study Area ......ee eeeeseeseeecsecessceseesesceseceseeesecessceseeesseseneeseeeeees 10-26 10.7.4.Study Methods ...........:cccsscecesssesssrcesescecsseeesseecsereesesesesseeeeseeenes 10-26 10.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-27 10.7.6.Schedule...eeesesescsessssceeseeseesscereeseessesesseeseeseceeeseesneceeeneees 10-27 10.7.7.Relationships with Other Studies...............csscsscsssssstessssesseeseees 10-27 10.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost ......eee eesesesseesceeceeseeeesceeneeeeseteenees 10-28 10.7.9.Literature Cited .0.....cc escssscscesecetccsececsececeseesceseeensseeseneseneseees 10-28 10.7.10.Tables...seeseesessecesessesencensccsesscescesserseeecssessesseeeseseseessecseeerees 10-29 10.7.11.FIQUIOS............ceeceesseceessseeesenseceescscceeeseeseessesosseeseteesesseneeceeseeeess 10-30 10.8.Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large Carnivores..............10-32 10.8.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........ccesesccseeeees 10-32 10.8.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-32 10.8.3.Study Area oo...ce cseseceeesseeeseseeccetecseseeeseesaeseeseesesceseneesseeeeeseas 10-35 10.8.4.Study Methods 2.0.0...csecccsseceseseccssceesscesesseesseneeeeseecsseessensesanees 10-35 10.8.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-37 10.8.6.Schedule...ees essscsssseeseteseseeceseesesssensceseeeesesseesesaceereseseeenees 10-37 10.8.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0.0...eessseesseseeeeeeeeeteeeeeens 10-38 10.8.8.Level of Effort and Cost 20.0...scesessssessesenseseceseencessseneeseeeesens 10-39 10.8.9.Literature Cited ........ce eeecscsssescesenesseseeeeeessenseeseesessseeeesseeenenes 10-39 10.8.10.01)(he 10-42 10.8.11.FIQSUICS..0.....eeccsssscceessscccessenceeesseeesecseeeecessceeeceeccessseseeeeteeeseneaes 10-43 10.9.Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occupancy..............0006 10-45 10.9.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeseeeeeeees 10-45 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xiii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 10.9.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-45 10.9.3.Study Area ......ecesescsscescseceecseesscsesseesecsseseesscessscsecssesessceseeeeeesees 10-46 10.9.4.Study Methods 00...eesscsssssssessesenssessssesssessessssssesescessssseeeseees 10-46 10.9.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-47 10.9.6.Schedule ...........ccecssccsseeceseceseecseseteeesecesenssesssresesessseesesssseseeeees 10-47 10.9.7.Relationship with Other Studies ......0...ccesssessesesseecssseseeseeees 10-48 10.9.8.Level of Effort and Cost wo...ecesceseessecesssscseescesssssssssesneees 10-49 10.9.9.Literature Cited 0.0...eccesseessscseeceeceeeesecsecssecessesscessseeesessoneeses 10-49 10.9.10.0A)0)(<1 10-51 10.9.11.FIQUIeS........sccsscsecesccssseeceresceseeserencrscenscossseseeseessneseesseesssansssesees 10-52 10.10.Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use .000.....eee eeseeeeeeeeees 10-54 10.10.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.........e cesses 10-54 10.10.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-55 10.10.3.Study Area oo...cccecccssseseeceeerecsseseesscsssseesseseesesseesssessseseesseeeaeeses 10-56 10.10.4.Study Methods.......cc eeeeesescecscesessssesesssecsseeseessesssssssssssssssseeoees 10-56 10.10.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-60 10.10.6.Schedule ........csceccssesseccscesseseceeesseeseeseesscesessaeeseeeeeessessaseesenseees 10-60 10.10.7.Relationship with Other Studies ........cesses ssesseesesseeeeeneeees 10-60 10.10.8.Level of Effort and Cost .0......e ee eeseecceeecseeeeseceesesssnessnseeesees 10-61 10.10.9.Literature Cited .......cecsesessssecetscesscsscseeeseeececaseserseeseseeseaeeaes 10-62 10.10.10.01)(a re 10-65 10.10.11.FIQUIES.........:cseceseceesseeccccensensensecsescnesessesesescesessseesseessaseeeeeensees 10-66 10.11.|Aquatic Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use ...........csessesseseesseseeneeteeeee 10-68 10.11.1.General Description of the Proposed Study........eesessssseeees 10-68 10.11.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-68 10.11.3.Study Area wo...ceeessesscseseeseecsenseeeseesseesereceeseeesesesesssesesseeseaneeae 10-70 10.11.4.Study Methods ..0....ee eesesseccseesesceecssecsecsseeeecsssssasessssessesseeeeees 10-70 10.11.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-72 10.11.6.Schedule ..........cescsessseeseessescesssecesesssceseesaeeseeeseeesesssssesorsneeneanes 10-72 10.11.7.Relationship with Other Studies 00.0.0...ceeeeesseseesessesseseeesesees 10-73 10.11.8.Level of Effort and Cost wo...cicscssseseeeseeceeeeseeseeesessessssessnees 10-74 10.11.9.Literature Cited 00...eesecsesceseesceeseeeesseetscetseeerseeseesssseesonsens 10-75 10.11.10.Tables ........ee eesesscessseecessscseeesseeesseesssecesseesesseeescneessesscesessnseeeees 10-77 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xiv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 10.11.11.FIQUIeS.........esccescceescececceeecoeceesnceesccssucessceeeeeessseesseeesseesseecsteneeeees 10-78 10.12.|Small Mammal Species Composition and Habitat Use ...........cccceseeeeees 10-80 10.12.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...........:csseeseeseees 10-80 10.12.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-80 10.12.3.Study Area oo...ecsccscsscesscseecsssseesseesseesesssceeseesesensseseeensssceneesees 10-81 10.12.4.Study Methods..0......ee eesssceeseeeescesecsseceseececceseeesseeessseseseeneees 10-81 10.12.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-82 10.12.6.Schedule...eeeesseessesecesecceeceeessesseceessccseeesseessseesseessrsesseeseees 10-82 10.12.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0...eee eseceeeeereeeeeeeeeteeeneees 10-82 10.12.8.Level of Effort and Cost 0.0...cesessccssccssesscessesseeseeseesseseneesnsens 10-83 10.12.9.Literature Cited oo...eescsecsseceeseecesecseeesecesceseeeseesereeneenseens 10-83 10.12.10.0)(eee 10-85 10.12.11.FIQure........csccescsssescsscescectseecseceecesscesscesaceacsnscenessaetsnseseeeuseaseass 10-86 10.13.Bat Distribution and Habitat Use...eecsessccsnesseeeseseeceseessesesessesseeaees 10-88 10.13.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.............ccsseesseeeees 10-88 10.13.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-88 10.13.3.Study Area .....ce eceesccsscsscessseseesceceeessesscseceseesecseeessesnsseaeesseenees 10-88 10.13.4.Study Methods .0.....cesessseseessesseeeeseseceeecsecesseseeesecssessesenessees 10-89 10.13.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......10-90 10.13.6.Schedule...eeessccsecessccsececnsecseceseessececssessesessseesaeesseesacesseeeees 10-90 10.13.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0...eecsceeseseceseceteceasenneees 10-91 10.13.8.Level of Effort and Cost 00...cescecssscssessececeesssessseesseeensesnees 10-92 10.13.9.Literature Cited oe.cceseeesceseceseeseeseeseccesessnsessneeseessseennens 10-92 10.13.10.Tables 00...eseescssccsccerceecssrecesssceseesereseeeseecesescessseesesseesseseeseneenees 10-94 10.13.11.FIQUICS........eseseesccsccesseecescsenescensesacesececcceesesssneeaseasessseaesseenees 10-95 10.14.Surveys of Eagles and Other Raptors .............::ccsscsssessscesecesseesnceeneesseesenees 10-97 10.14.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...ceeeeseeeeeees 10-97 10.14.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....10-98 10.14.3.Study Area ........ccccssscsssessscsssessessssceneceseesssceescessscesseessssesesesseenees 10-99 10.14.4.Study Methods ...........scssscssesececssceseeessssoseesceeesseeeeeeseseeseeeaeens 10-100 10.14.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.....10-104 10.14.6.Schedule .........cecsscsssesescesssseceeeseesesecsessecssesseesseeeeeseesneeeseesens 10-104 10.14.7.Relationship with Other Studies ........cc eeeeescesseeeeesseseeeseeees 10-105 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 10.14.8.Level of Effort and Cost .........tee eeeesseecsseceseceeseseeeesseeenrerees 10-107 10.14.9.Literature Cited oo...eee esesscsseneseesesetceseseeneseneseessesenecessaeeees 10-107 10.14.10.00)(<1 10-109 10.14.11.FUQUIES........:cseccsccenceecscsteeeecseeesseeseesscesssseesosscoseseseosessseessessonees 10-111 10.15.Waterbird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study...eee 10-113 10.15.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeeeeeeees 10-113 10.15.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information ..10-114 10.15.3.Study Area ......cscceccsessssssseccscsseseceesscesessserscasecsssasessessseseoessaeaees 10-114 10.15.4.Study Methods .0.....ce eeeseeessseceeseseseeseesssecsesesssseessensesseeseasees 10-115 10.15.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.....10-120 10.15.6.Schedule....eeeseeesscesssesecessessssessescseesessssssesesesesssesssesneeeees 10-121 10.15.7.Relationship with Other Studies 20.0...ccc ceessseccessssteneeeeeeee 10-121 10.15.8.Level of Effort and Cost ..........eeeeessccessscereeseeeessecesseasseeeeseees 10-123 10.15.9.Literature Cited 0.00...eee eeeeesceecsseeesssecessseesoessessescseeseeeens 10-123 10.15.10.Tables.........ccccsscssscsssssssecesecesccesceececesecessccotacesseeesesoeseeseeesesoseee 10-126 10.15.11.FIQUIES.......ccccssseesescccscscctessccscesesecescerseessseessasenserscoasessesenaetees 10-127 10.16.|Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study....10-129 10.16.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeeeeeeee 10-129 10.16.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information..10-130 10.16.3.Study Area oo.eeesseecescescceseeessssssssessceessessesssssssesscssesseessesesees 10-131 10.16.4.Study Methods .......ceeesessssessscsserssesessessssssssscssessreseeseenees 10-132 10.16.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.....10-137 10.16.6.Schedule ........ceseseeseseceseceeeeeesscesssseeesecessesscasessssseaseseesssoneoenes 10-137 10.16.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0.00...ee eeecsessssreseseseeseee 10-138 10.16.8.Level of Effort and Cost ......ec cecsesscssseseseeresscnssoseesseesensoneens 10-139 10.16.9.Literature Cited ooo...ce cecscsscereessesesesecesceseessecesessnesseeseenees 10-139 10.16.10.Tables .......cscssscsccscecseesssestescescenceteccseeseseaceeseenaeeceeeeeaeessoesoeete 10-142 10.16.11.FIQUreS.......ssccssscssssessecccscenseceseasssseessesssasesesessessusonsesesseeeseneones 10-143 10.17.|Population Ecology of Willow Ptarmigan in Game Management Unit 1310-145 10.17.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...........csseeseeseees 10-145 10.17.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information..10-145 10.17.3.Study Area .0....es eeeesessesececesccesseresstssscsscesseeeecsecereeesessaseseasons 10-146 10.17.4.Study Methods ..00....ee eesssseseesecsesssceeecesesseesceneesseeseeseeensens 10-146 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xvi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 10.17.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.....10-149 10.17.6.Schedule...ee eeeeessceeceseceeseessecesecesseessseesseeseeeesseseeeesecsenes 10-149 10.17.7.Relationship with Other Studies ..............:ccsscscsseeesesssecesseserees 10-149 10.17.8.Level of Effort and Cost oc...ceeessceseeeseecesseseneeescceseeeesenees 10-151 10.17.9.Literature Cited 0...eeeescceeseecececessceceeeeeseensecessessasesseeenes 10-151 10.17.10.Tables oo...eesesceseccessceseccesceesccesecesacecseecsesesecsoeeesssesseseatseeeseass 10-153 10.17.11.FIQUreS.........ccccccssccessssccsscsesesteesseesescssssacecessessceeceseceensesseneesees 10-154 10.18.|Wood Frog Occupancy and Habitat Use ..0.......ce ceccecessessseceseessseesnceeeeenes 10-157 10.18.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............cccesseeeseee 10-157 10.18.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information...10-157 10.18.3.Study Area .......ccesesecsscssescseescesssessscceseeeseeeseeesseseeseeseeteneeseees 10-158 10.18.4.Study Methods «0.00.2...ceesscssscccsseccssreccsseeessseeesseeeeseeeesseeeseaeees 10-158 10.18.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.....10-161 10.18.6.Schedule...eee cesecesscessceesececceeeeecscesencesecesseesesessesesseeeensessees 10-161 10.18.7.Relationship with Other Studies .............cssscssscssscesseesssesseeeees 10-161 10.18.8.Level of Effort and Cost ......cs cessecssscseesesseeeseeessseesneeeeseneees 10-163 10.18.9,Literature Cited 2.0...eee cesesecceecsesscesscecececsncesnccetscssaceeerenees 10-163 10.18.10.6 |5)(cc 10-165 10.18.11.FIQUIES........seesceeeeeeeesceeeeecesceceeeeescceseesaceeseesceecsceeeeeseeeseneesees 10-166 10.19.Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use...ee cesccseeceescesseeeteceeseesnessseees 10-168 10.19.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............ccesceeseeee 10-168 10.19.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information...10-168 10.19.3.Study Area .......ceeccsccseessccesseseecscceceseeeseeceeeeeesanesseesssnseeseasees 10-169 10.19.4.Study Methods «0.0.2...es ecssesceseccessccessseesseceeseecesseeessreessrsessnes 10-169 10.19.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.....10-171 10.19.6.Schedule...eee ecesseeseceseceesseeecsscecsceececsseseesneesssseeessresseesees 10-171 10.19.7.Relationship with Other Studies ............ccsscccsssecssteessreesereeees 10-171 10.19.8.Level of Effort and Cost ........cceseessssessesscceecceseessseessessesenneess 10-172 10.19.9.Literature Cited ..0....cee ccsscceseeeeeeecesceesecsesecesecesseseneesesseeeeses 10-173 10.19.10.0 01)(eee 10-175 10.19.11.FIQUIeS........cccssccesccessessccesscseecsecetecesocesoeseceseneeesceesseseneeeceeeserees 10-180 10.20.Wildlife Harvest Analysis...eesesceecssosscsesesenseessessseesscrsscsessesenetens 10-182 10.20.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........eeeeesseeeees 10-182 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xvii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 10.20.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information..10-183 10.20.3.Study Area oo...ce eeseeesseessssccssesesserseesssesessesseessssessseesseeeseeees 10-183 10.20.4.Study Methods .......cee seeeesssssssssscseeserssssassessssesssssssesasseseseree 10-184 10.20.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practices ...10-184 10.20.6.Schedule...cesesccsssseeccssecssceessecesceeseseseeseessessssesesesansessssoeeees 10-185 10.20.7.Relationship with Other Studies ........cc secssssssessscssstseeeneens 10-185 10.20.8.Level of Effort and Cost .......cccesessssssssseeseesecsesseceeeeseteeeenees 10-186 10.20.9.Literature Cited .........cccseesseeeeeecceeeceseeessccessseeseesnsoreeeensoes 10-186 10.20.10.Tables ......ccesccsccscsssscssscesccsecscceecsscccssessscnsenscesaerscesseeeseeeoesensoes 10-187 10.20.11.FIQSUIES..........:cssecesecssssseeseressescecerseseeseasecssecssensessosssossensassseescues 10-188 11.Botanical 11-1 11.1.IMtrOductiOn...........cccsccsssccsssestsceeccsessesesceeceseeeseeesseseeseessesacessesscasonsaseaeesseeesers 11-1 11.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied 00.0...eescseeseesecseesseseseessesessecesssssessseessnaseansoeese 11-1 11.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives...se eseseeeeseeseeeeeeeeeeeseee 11-2 11.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants ............ssccccssscssessesseeseeseseseseeessasesesessessceseessssesseeseeees 11-3 11.5.Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin...cessccsseseeecescceecesecesesstecesseesseeseesetseseaseneesssesasesseacoeeesesees 11-4 11.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........eee eeeeseeeeee 11-4 11.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......11-5 11.5.3.Study Area ........ccecccecsssssseccseesseceesseeseessesenseasesesesesssessseesseeseseseees 11-6 11.5.4.Study Methods .0....ee eeeessesesesssscseesccssscssnsesseessesseessesseseesseeee 11-6 11.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........11-9 11.5.6.Schedule .......ccecceccssscseescesssescseeensessesseeseeeseeseeeecesessereseeseeserseees 11-10 11.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies ...........et eeeseeeeesseessessteoneeees 11-10 11.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost ......cee eessesseteseseresesscssesceessceseseeeeeees 11-11 11.5.9.Literature Cited oe csesesceseeseesseecesseeeeeeecssessesessssseesessaess 11-11 11.5.10.0)(a 11-14 11.5.11.FIQUreS........sccssesesscesssscessssesseeseressecssscseeseseesenssaesoreusseaessesesensenee 11-15 11.6.Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Susitna-Watana Dam11-17 11.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...........eeseseeeeess 11-17 11.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....11-18 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xviii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 11.6.3.Study Area oo...eescecsccessesesscseesesscseeesesecsseesseeseeseseeseaeesseseeeens 11-19 11.6.4.Study Methods 2.000...ceeeeseeecceeeceeeseecesseeeeceeecssesessesecscesesseeees 11-20 11.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......11-28 11.6.6.Schedule...essscsecssccesseesceseeseccccsecscesessceseessesssessesenssensees 11-28 11.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies .....0.eee eesseeeesensesesereneees 11-29 11.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost .....cece cesscsecseeseesssesesesessescseessaeesees 11-31 11.6.9.Literature Cited 0...let eeccstecsscseesecessscecsenessesessassseesseeceeensees 11-31 11.6.10.Tables...eeeesscccsscesescessceesesessessesesseesceecneccseesseeseaseosseesseesseensees 11-33 11.6.11.FI QUIS...seeeeceeeseeeeesceeeeseseesecessseececeeesssessesecessseeesssessseueseneens 11-34 11.7.Wetland Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin.............11-40 11.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...ee eeeeeeeeeeeee 11-40 11.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....11-40 11.7.3.Study Area 0...eeeccssscsseesseecssceesecseesecesseceseeeesesseeessareseesseeses 11-41 11.7.4.Study Methods ............cesscsssseceeseesssereseceessceeessceseseeeessnseesereses 11-42 11.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......11-47 11.7.6.Schedule .......cccceeccsssesseesecesececccsecseesecseseseceneeseeseeeseesessesseseeetes 11-48 11.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0...ee eesceseeeeeeeeeseseeeeneees 11-48 11.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost wc eesecescscesesesescsesessetsresesonenees 11-49 11.7.9.Literature Cited 0.0...cescsesescesesssessecseessecsaneseesesesssatssesoasense 11-49 11.7.10.0 Oo)(cle 11-52 11.7.11.FIQS™ureS........cescssscessccssecscesesesessseseseessesessessscessesessessacoessesenoseees 11-53 11.8.Rare Plant Study ........cescssccssscescesseceseeceeceseeescceseeeseeeeceersseesacenseseseesseeenees 11-56 11.8.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeeeeeeeeeeeee 11-56 11.8.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....11-56 11.8.3.Study Area ........escesesssessscesecessssssssnessssssnsccssessssssnsccsssssesooaseees 11-57 11.8.4.Study Methods ........cecesscssssscsscsscssesscrescssesseesesssssssssesssoseoees 11-58 11.8.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......11-59 11.8.6.Schedule...ceesesecesseesseesesevsneesesseseescesseeesseeesescesseseecseeeseees 11-59 11.8.7.Relationship with Other Studies .............eseeeseeseseceeeeneessreeesees 11-60 11.8.8.Level of Effort and Cost 00...ccecsescsssesscessescssenseeseeessaseeseneees 11-60 11.8.9.Literature Cited 0.0....cccssscsesseseceeceeeseecceecsessececerereesseseesseeasenes 11-61 11.8.10.Tables ........ccesccesscsssecssrcesscesecesseessecescosscessesssesessenssesseesseeessneasees 11-62 11.8.11.FIQUICS.......cc eeeeeceeecessceesececneesecenssoessesesessesesesessenseseseenseesessaseens 11-64 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 11.9.Invasive Plant Study ...........eeeeecssesceeccetceesseteoseceececseecseeesseseseseneeennessees 11-66 11.9.1.General Description of the Proposed Study................:csseeseees 11-66 11.9.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....11-66 11.9.3.Study Area 0...cscecccseecseesstsessetscenseceseceeeseseseesaceseeseesenseeeerens 11-67 11.9.4.Study Methods .......cc eesessesssssescsecensesececeesseseseseseesneeseeeeeeseeees 11-68 11.9.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......11-69 11.9.6.Schedule...sseccsscesssseseeessceecesscsscesssessesseeessessseseecsseeeeseessens 11-69 11.9.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0.0.0...esseecssseesesessecsseeeseeeee 11-70 11.9.8.Level of Effort and Cost...eseeesecseesceseseseeeaseenseseeeceeneneee 11-70 11.9.9.Literature Cited oe eessscseccecesessecceseecssesenseesceeseeeeceeesees 11-70 11.9.10.Tables ......cesececssceesseesseseeecsecessecessceesseeesesceerssceseeaseeseeesseseneeeses 11-72 11.9.11.FIQUIES...........cscccsssseeseceeceencesceeesscetsceeseseceecceeescecesseeseseeeasensetes 11-74 12.Recreation and Aesthetic Resources 12-1 12.1.IntroductiOn...........cccsscsecsseccsceeecceessccesrcescesetsceeecesseenceseeseeeasesensceeaceacereeseeaneas 12-1 12.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied oe eeeseeeessceeseeeececeseseecesseceesseatesseeeenseeseeeeseeees 12-1 12.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives...esecseeeeeseeseeseeserenees 12-2 12.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants 0.0...ess eescsesscsssescsecssecsesereeesersesesesseeeneseneceseseecesseees 12-2 12.5.Recreation Resources Study ........sccscsscsssececceesccesseescessccseceesssesecesseesseceseees 12-4 12.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeseseseeeeeees 12-4 12.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information.......12-4 12.5.3.Study Area ......ceesccssecsccsecssccssseessnecesseessscceescessnacevseecececeseesenses 12-5 12.5.4.Study Methods 0...eesssssseecseesescsecsacesessessseesesesesssessoesseaseas 12-6 12.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......12-22 12.5.6.Schedule .......ccscesccssssescsesceseseseseessesecsecsscesaceeeseessetesseeeeseneeees 12-22 12.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies .0..........eccssseesceseeceeceeeeeeeeeees 12-23 12.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost ......ce eeeeesessessceseceseesseeeeseesseerseseases 12-24 12.5.9.Literature Cited oe eeseceecseeeseeeeescescessesesssesasseceseeseassoesees 12-25 12.5.10.FIQUIES......ccscesccesescesteecnecncsteeseeaceatcesscsacsseeseseceeesensceeacessoaseneeees 12-27 12.6.Aesthetic Resources Study.......cc cccsesssssesssessscesseesssseseecsscesseeseeseeeeeeseneeees 12-30 12.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............scseseeeeees 12-30 12.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....12-30 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xx December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 12.6.3.Study Area .......eeessccscccseccssccssecsescsssssecccessecsesesseescsseseeessnerenees 12-31 12.6.4.Study Methods.......eee ecesseessccesccesecesceeseceescsecseseesesesesesneeeeees 12-32 12.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......12-37 12.6.6.Schedule...ecesccsccssecesesseesscesesseseseecessessessesseeeeeeeeeeseesesees 12-37 12.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies 00.0...eee eseseeeseeeeeeseeeeeeeee 12-38 12.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost .csscccsssssessssecsssssssesscesssssssesecessesseseceeen 12-39 12.6.9.Literature Cited 0.2...eeeessceseceseceseceecceeseceseeeeseceseseenseeseeeeeees 12-39 12.6.10.Ol)(ene 12-40 12.6.11.FIQUreS.........ssssesscsseceesseseseeceenecsrsesctssessssanscesetsesesesseaseeseeessoes 12-46 12.7.River Recreation Flow and Access Stud y.........cccesscccssscersstcesseeecssseeesseneees 12-48 12.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.............eeeeceseseeees 12-48 12.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....12-48 12.7.3.Study Area oo...esc sescsssesesceecseceeesesesscsessesaseacesssseceeseesesessensees 12-49 12.7.4.Study Methods 20.0...ees eeeesesscessceceseeseceseessceseeseessseesanseseeaees 12-50 12.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice...12-53 12.7.6.Schedule...csessesssseecseeesersscesenssesseeseseneseeseaeeesseseeeesesseeseeeasons 12-53 12.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies 20.00...eee eee eeeeseeeseceeeeeeeeees 12-54 12.7.8.Level of Effort and Cot .0......eeeeeeessescceseseeeceseeeeseteeaceesnenenees 12-54 12.7.9.Literature Cited 0...eee eceececccecseneesececeessesecsseeseeesseesnceeseeees 12-55 12.7.10.U1»)(pee 12-55 12.7.11.FIQUICS........cccsssssecscessceesseeseecsseesescsssessscsssesseseasseaaeesessseeseasens 12-56 12.8.Attachment .0......ccecessesscnsesseesecsncesssenscessensevecenseneseeescsescesenecesseeesseneeenees 12-58 13.Cultural and Paleontological Resources 13-1 13.1.INtrOduction .......ceeseecssscsscnsccsssesseeessesescsesseesesesseoecnseeeeseessetseeeteseesesseseesees 13-1 13.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied oo...eessceesesseccseecsccseseseceecsscseessessseeseseeeeseeeeeess 13-2 13.2.1.Cultural RESOUICES .........cc csecssceseeceeecescessseensenseesseseseeceeesereeeees 13-2 13.2.2.Paleontological RESOUPCES ..........ccsssscssceeesssccesesestecsssesseceserecenees 13-3 13.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives..........ccescescessteesssesssesseceseeees 13-4 13.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants ...........eeesescceseessessesessceessssssesscsscrecsscesessessssseseesasenae 13-5 13.5.Cultural Resources Study...esesssssescsssssseessessssseeseseeseesessssensssessesseneeonses 13-6 13.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...eeesseeeeeeees 13-6 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 13.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......13-8 13.5.3.Study Area 0...cesesecsssscssseseeessenecesetscesscseseessecseceseeeesetsesesanseess 13-10 13.5.4.Study Methods ..0.....ee csessscsscseeeseceseseeseeecseeseseeeeeseseseneeseeseees 13-12 13.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......13-23 13.5.6.Schedule...esecesessceseceseesssessseceseesesessessesssessessesssessecseneeeees 13-24 13.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies 20.0...eee seesesseeseceseeeseeeesees 13-25 13.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost 0.0.0...ceesessecccesecssseseeeseeeceeeeseeeeeeeneees 13-25 13.5.9.Literature Cited ........i eeescesecseeesesseeeeseseesasecesseseesseesenesseesneaees 13-25 13.5.10.0 1)(nn 13-29 13.5.11.FIQSUIS..........secesscssersseseseesecessessesesseesssessseesseecseecnseeseeseaeeeneseeees 13-32 13.6.Paleontological Resources Study...eseessesccsreseceseeseeseseseeseseneeeeeanes 13-39 13.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............ccesseseeseees 13-39 13.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....13-40 13.6.3.Study Area 0...cece cccsseeresereeeseceeseeensseceessceseneeeecsceeeseaeeeeeeseeeesees 13-40 13.6.4.Study Methods .......ss cseessccsscsrecsssesserssescsseessesensecseesseeeeesnaees 13-40 13.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......13-42 13.6.6.Schedule ......ccceccsscssssssscseccsceescceecseeesseeeeeseseseeeseesseseessesecesseeneeans 13-42 13.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies .............ceeecesseeeseseeteeeeessneenes 13-43 13.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost wo...eecescsceeceeessectceseessreeeeeeeseeeees 13-43 13.6.9.Literature Cited 0.0...eee eeeeeeseeeeesceesseeessceeseseeessaeeeseeeeeneenscees 13-43 13.6.10.|0)(ne 13-44 13.6.11.FIQSUTES........:csssescsceseeceeseceneeescesaecesasctaceseeseseonseseseseseceeseasensesenee 13-45 13.7.Attachments 0.0...cc cecscsesesscessecseessesssessccsssessesessscesesseesseeseescsesssesssaseasessese 13-47 14.Subsistence Resources 14-1 14.1.TmtroductiOn..........eeeesccescessessccessscessesesecessensassseessasesssesssonseseseeesessseseseesssoonee 14-1 14.2.Nexus Between Project Construction/Existence/Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied...esscssecsrcessscesesesescseceseeceacceseceeseeeeseneenetoeses 14-1 14.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives...........cssessesserceseeseseesesceeeeees 14-2 14.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants ............ccsescssscssesccceeesesescceeceesaesesesesaneetseasesessssesees 14-3 14.5.Subsistence Resources Stud y........ccccsccssscssscccsssscsssscesssccssessseecsseeeseeesseeesse 14-5 14.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........ccccssseseeeees 14-5 14.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......14-5 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 14.5.3.Study Area oo...eeeeeeecseccssececceeesecessesseseeseceeecessceseesseneesasesserens 14-7 14.5.4.Study Methods ..........ccsssccsseceseecessccssessesesceceenecssscesenseseseseeeeseeees 14-8 14.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......14-13 14.5.6.Schedule...ee eeeessscesscesseessceeseesesceseeseneeeeesenseessseceeeveeseeasens 14-14 14.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies 20.0...es eeesseeeeeneteeeseeeeeees 14-14 14.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost 00...ce escesssssseseseeseceseceseesecsscceseeeaeees 14-15 14.5.9.Literature Cited oc esccsccscccrsccsseseeteceseessceeceseeseesseesaceaeesees 14-15 14.5.10.Tables...eecsessccseesescsscessccsseetsecscssscsaeeceeecsescseesseeseeenseeeneeesses 14-16 14.5.11.FIQ"UreS........ceceesesecscecseeceeescceccscsesssceeseeeessneeeseasecssesessaeeseeseeeeats 14-21 14.6.Attachments «00.0...eecsesccsscecseessctescceceesececeeecesaceneeeeseeesceecaeeseesesseessesensenensens 14-25 15.Socioeconomic and Transportation Resources 15-1 15.1.Introduction...eeeecesesessceseceeseeeseeessceescessasecseeeneeesseeeseeesaceeeseseeeesseessnsesenss 15-1 15.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied oo...cee escesseecereessecesecesecesceessecesceesaeeeseceseeesneeennes 15-1 15.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives..............sscsssscsseceeceeseesseeesees 15-2 15.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants ...........ccsscccsssccsssesesetceessecessceeseeeeessnsesseesecssessensesseeees 15-3 15.5.Regional Economic Evaluation Study .............cccssssssseccssscesseeessseceesresseees 15-4 15.5.1.General!Description of the Proposed Study............ceescessecesseeees 15-4 15.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......15-4 15.5.3.Study Area oo...sescsssssssecsseessseescessssessesessscescessesseeseeceseeseeeseeees 15-4 15.5.4.Study Methods ........ee eeeesscessceesccesecesecesscesesceeeeseeessesseceneeesenens 15-5 15.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........15-6 15.5.6.Schedule...ececessesscessecesseesecceseeesscesecessetessessseeessessncesseesnsees 15-7 15.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies ............cessccesteessseeessneeseseeeeses 15-7 15.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost ......cece eecseseeeeseeeseeseceeseeeeteeesneeseasennes 15-7 15.5.9.Literature Cited oo...eceseecscesesctsssesseetsccecsceseeesseseneeeseeeeeees 15-7 15.5.10.60-9)(pee 15-8 15.5.11.FIQSure.........scessccssccessncessccesseceecsceceseseneeesssseessceesenecsesecessaeeessnees 15-9 15.6.Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study...........csccesessees 15-10 15.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........eeeeeeeeeee 15-10 15.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....15-10 15.6.3.Study Area .......ccccccscscccssecsesecesscesssccsssecssseesssssecenseesseeeesseeeeseeens 15-11 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxiii December 2012 REviISED STUDY PLAN 15.6.4.Study Methods ........ee eeesseeecseesecssecseceseeeneseassesseesssseeeesenesnees 15-12 15.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......15-17 15.6.6.Schedule...eeescssscessscesseseesessseesecssscsssssssoseceseesseseesesseseteesenees 15-17 15.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies ..........cc eeseccsteseeeeseceeeeeeeeeeees 15-18 15.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost ..........cesessessscseeseeeseeseseesesseneeseeeesseaes 15-18 15.6.9.Literature Cited ......ce ccscssseeceeececsceecsceesessseesssescnseeseeeeeerees 15-18 15.6.10.Tables ......ccsscseccsssssesssceseeseessesecsssessscsssosecosescsssnssossssssoseseesosesees 15-20 15.6.11.FIQUIES........cceeceseeeceecececteetecescesseceseeseceesescecsesesseseessesseneaseasonseceas 15-21 15.7.Transportation Resources Study ou...sessessesesessesessessesssessseseessseseeseseees 15-24 15.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study.........ceeeeseseeeeees 15-24 15.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....15-24 15.7.3.Study Area .....ccccsccsscssescseessseseeseeseseseesseeseeesnesseeseessseseseaseaeseeees 15-25 15.7.4.Study Methods ........eeeceseesececsscssecssessesessesssssscessssesssessseeeees 15-26 15.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......15-28 15.7.6.Schedule ..........ccccscssssssesesceeesssseeeeeeseseeseeeceseeeeesaseecesenseesesesseees 15-28 15.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies .......ccc cscscseseseesescterseneeoes 15-28 15.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost oo...ee eesesesecsseseesnecesessseseeseeseeessens 15-29 15.7.9.Literature Cited oo...cc secseesceseeceeesseseseessesessesseesenseseeesesoees 15-29 15.7.10.Table .......ccccsccsscssscssssesseseesccsscneceserenscasenaseasonsecasonseseseaseessnsenes 15-30 15.7.11.FIQUIeS........:ccsccsseseessssesersceseeeectecesesececseeeeossscsaeeesssascsensesessseees 15-33 15.8.Health Impact Assessment Study...ce essecsssssssssssssscsensssssensessenssesseeees 15-34 15.8.1.General Description of the Proposed Study............eesseseeeeee 15-34 15.8.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....15-35 15.8.3.Study Area 0...scescccsesccsscesecsseeeecesececsccsceeeseeseseceseesensensserseseesees 15-36 15.8.4.Study Methods ........cccssceseseseseeeceecseeceseteeeesseeseseeeeaeseeseeesesesees 15-36 15.8.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......15-39 15.8.6.Schedule...ce eesssesecesescseecesseccseecseessseseseeessesssesessonenssseeneees 15-40 15.8.7.Relationship with Other Studies .........cece seseesseesseesnesreuseeees 15-40 15.8.8.Level of Effort and Cost .0...ccc ceseeseceeeseeeesessssecsarsssseseneeeese 15-40 15.8.9.Literature Cited oe eeeseceseresssrecssesesseneeseseessoeersseeesssesesesens 15-41 15.8.10.Tables ........sccsscsscecsesssscesecesscsssessessscesnesessessseeseesenecseeseseesseseess 15-41 15.8.11.FIQUreS........ccssccsssessssssessssccseseesseesessseeseeteeesessasseeseseeesessesssseennens 15-42 15.9.Air Quality Study...ecsesscssssscccsssssecssssessccccsesseneeseneseescssessceseessesssaeeesees 15-47 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxiv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 15.9.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...seeeeseseeeeee 15-47 15.9.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....15-47 15.9.3.Study Area ......ccccccccssccssseecseeesreseessescnseneeseceseeseeceeeeesesseseteneees 15-48 15.9.4.Study Methods .0....cee essccsssesssecssesssesssessssssssecssenssesseessnssoeenees 15-48 15.9.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......15-50 15.9.6.Schedule.......cccesssscsscsssssseecesesecsseseesssseeaceoeseeseneseneceseseseeeeseeeeeees 15-50 15.9.7.Relationship with Other Studies 0.0...cccssesssessesesessneeeseneneee 15-50 15.9.8.Level of Effort and Cot woo...ccecessscsscesesccnsessesensecseessseeseeees 15-51 15.9.9.Literature Cited ......eee eeeceeeeseeeeessesssseessseeessesecseeseseeneeeeees 15-51 15.9.10.01)15-51 15.9.11.FIQUICS......eeeeseeseeceeeeeeseeeeesceseeeasoseeseesssoseessensessesesausesseenenseass 15-52 15.10.----Attachments .0.......cc ceceesccsecceeeceeceeeseeeseeesceeececeeseeseescaeeeseeecseesseseseanseevneosaes 15-53 16.Project Safety 16-1 16.1.ImtrOductiOn...........esscssscescessecescesceeceeeecccceseeesesecstenseseseessersassesaseaesesseceesoseeaes 16-1 16.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied ........cee eeseeeeessecessccesseeesseeeccersescesseaesssseesseseseaeees 16-1 16.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives...........sscsscssessseersessecnseveneees 16-1 16.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities and Other Licensing Participants ..............sseessssescsscesseeseseeteessessecessaseseessasennessesessesees 16-1 16.5.Probable Maximum Flood (PME)Study ............esessssscessceeeeeseeeseneeseeeneeeees 16-2 16.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study..........ei eseeeeseeees 16-2 16.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information......16-2 16.5.3.Study Area ........eesecsssessseessseseessseessesesrsceesesrsessscssesssevssassuassaeeoes 16-3 16.5.4.Study Methods ou...eeesesecsescssecssccsesesscsseesssccssanssessessssoeeeees 16-3 16.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.........16-8 16.5.6.Schedule 00.0...ceeceesecceseeeesceeeesseesesscessseessaseessescsesesseessssessnsaesenes 16-8 16.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies .......cee esssesecsseereeseseeeeeneeee 16-8 16.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost .....ccc ceecessssscsessssessseescensseseeecsesesenens 16-9 16.5.9.Literature Cited ......eee eeseeeeeseesssesessessseeescssesessesesseserseesenseens 16-9 16.5.10.0)(ee 16-10 16.5.11.FIQUICS........sccsscessccssseesecesccesccecnsceseeesneessscssecssssssescsessaesesesesusesees 16-10 16.6.Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Study ..........scssssscsesssssscsssssssssssessssseseeseees 16-11 16.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study...cece 16-11 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 16.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information....16-11 16.6.3.Study Area ........cesesssssssseseseoseceessceseessceeeceessenseseeseeenseeseeeeeneees 16-12 16.6.4.Study Methods .........eeeesesecsseccsecseccecseeesceceesceseeseeseceeeecenseess 16-13 16.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice.......16-16 16.6.6.Schedule....eeecssssessssessesseesesseseseneecesecesesesceeesessesenseeseneseeeseees 16-16 16.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies 20...eescseescssesesscteseereees 16-17 16.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost 0.0...ce scsccssssseseonscsecseeseesesessseeeeeees 16-17 16.6.9.Literature Cited oo...ccs esccseeeccecensesseressesesescssseseessesseeesenenes 16-17 16.6.10.Tables ......ccssscsccesseescseceestscceeseseecescessesscssesctscescessenessaesacsceesenseees 16-18 16.6.11.FiQUreS........csccsssccsseessssceccnscenecsceseeecessnesscenseeeeensesesenesessnaeeeeensees 16-19 LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1.Technical Workgroup and Agency Consultation Meetings since development of the PSP...cesesscscessessscsseessssecstsccessccsnseeccssscensessesecesesesessnsenseeseseeseeeseesssensessseaeseasenseseeatensensenseess 1-17 Table 1.1-1.Project Process Plan and Schedule (dispute process highlighted in yellow)........1-20 Table 2-1.Summary of formal study requests filed with FERC..........csssssssessessesessssetenseceeseans 2-4 Table 4.5-1.Schedule for implementation of the Geology and Soils Study...eeeseeeeees 4-9 Table 5.5-1.Proposed Susitna River Basin Temperature and Water Quality Monitoring Sites..5- 34 Table 5.5-2.Proposed Susitna-Watana Meteorological Stations...........cscscssssseessesseenseoseeeee 5-35 Table 5.5-3.Parameters for water quality monitoring and laboratory analysis (Baseline Water Quality Monitoring and Focus Area MOnitoring).00...cecsescesesesesesseenseesessesseeeseenenseeeeeee 5-35 Table 5.5-4.List of water quality parameters and frequency of collection.00.0...ceceesseseeeeee 5-37 Table 5.5-5.Schedule for Implementation of the Baseline Water Quality Study................5-40 Table 5.6-1.Proposed Susitna River Basin Water Quality and Temperature Monitoring Sites..5- 56 Table 5.6-2.Evaluation of models based on technical,regulatory,and management criteria.5-57 Table 5.6-3.Schedule for Implementation of the Modeling Study.0.0...ee csceteessceseeeeeee 5-59 Table 5.7-1.Sediment Results from the Susitna River Drainage ..............cesccesecseeeeecetersereeeeees 5-90 Table 5.7-2.Whole Body Slimy Sculpin Results from the Susitna River Drainage .................5-90 Table 5.7-3.Speciated Mercury Results from Susitna River Drainage (ug/g dry weight)........5-90 Table 5.7-4.Summary of ADEC Data for Mercury in Fish Tissue,Susitna River Drainage...5-91 Table 5.7-5.Proposed Susitna River Basin Mercury Monitoring Sites....cssessseessssseeesees 5-91 Table 5.7-6.List of parameters and frequency of Collection......i eesseeessteeseteteeeessceeeasenees 5-92 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxvi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 5.7-7.Schedule for Implementation of the Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study.......csccsccsssssscecsscccsssscecsscesseescesecsnccsesesesesesssseesseeseesseseeesnesseesssesaees 5-92 Table 6.5-1.Initial geomorphic reach classifications............cc:scssccsssesesseeseesseesseeesseesseessessneenes 6-72 Table 6.5-2.Estimated Water Year 1985 annual sediment loads for the Susitna River and major tributaries (based On USGS 1987).ou...eescessceseccessessecsecesnseesecssssseessssesseeseesssssesseeesseses 6-73 Table 6.5-3.Summary of 2012 aerial photo acquisition for the Upper,Middle,and Lower Susitna River SCQMEMS.........cesssescscseesecsceseeeeecscesstesesssceseeesceseesaeeseteseeseseseensenseaeosseesseess 6-74 Table 6.5-4.Middle Susitna River Segment aquatic habitat sites from 1980s to be digitized..6-75 Table 6.5-5.Schedule for implementation of the Geomorphology Study.............cssescceseeeeees 6-76 Table 6.5-6.Information and products required by the Geomorphology Study from other studies. Table 6.5-7.Information and products the Geomorphology Study will provide to other studies.6- 78 Table 6.5-8.Summary of 2012 Geomorphology Study efforts to support preparation and refinement of the Study Plan...eee eeseeessccesssccessecceseescsnecseesecenceesseesesereesenseesneceeaats 6-79 Table 6.5-9.Geomorphology Study COSts...........csessscsesssesesessescssesenesssesesesseasonseesseeesessseseeeees 6-80 Table 6.6-1.Schedule for the downstream study limit determination process for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study......cc cceeccesseesscesescsseesseesssecsseeseceseceseeeseeeseeseeeseneenees 6-135 Table 6.6-2.Evaluation of potential 1-D bed evolution models...............c:cccssseeceseeescesseeeeeees 6-136 Table 6.6-3.Evaluation of potential 2-D bed evolution models..0.........ee ceesscesereeseeeseteeeneees 6-137 Table 6.6-4.Summary of model parameter precedencies for water resources models to be applied in the Susitna-Watana licensing effort.00.0.0...et eseseseseeseeeseeseeseeeeceseessteeseeseesees 6-138 Table 6.6-5.Potential Focus Areas in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments..........6-139 Table 6.6-6.Primary output variables for which values are taken directly from the 1-D and 2-D mobile-boundary models and relevance to other Studies............ccsscssccsssseeseesseesssesseeeseees 6-140 Table 6.6-7.Key variables needed for the impact assessments for which results are obtained through additional analysis of predictions taken directly from the 1-D and 2-D mobile- boundary models..0.......eee escsseesssescesessesesccsecneesseseeecssesseesceaceeseseetssessenesesscsssesacensetaneees 6-141 Table 6.6-8.Schedule for implementation of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study.6-143 Table 6.6-9.Information and products required by the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study from Other Studies.00.0...eesscsssescecsseescesesecseecoeecessseeseesesecsseseesaeesesetsessenesesececseaesensenseeeees 6-144 Table 6.6-10.Information and products the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will provide to Other StudieS.......ee eesescsssseesssseesssesesseeesecsescersneceeseeesseeessceessseeesceesseeseeassecsssonseseesaeeees 6-146 Table 6.6-11.Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study costs...........ccscssssssessesessessessseesesnees 6-147 Table 7.5-1.Data collection parameters and associated sensors that will be used for the Groundwater Studyat selected Focus Areas..........cscescssesssesseseeeseeseteeesceeesesceneeeseesneeneeenens 7-24 Table 7.5-2.Schedule for implementation of the Groundwater Study............cescssssseseesseeees 7-7-25 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxvii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 7.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study.....7-53 Table 7.7-1.Glacier and Runoff Changes Study schedule........cece esseeseeeeeeeeeeeeesesseeseeeenes 7-68 Table 8.5-1.Summary of HSC curves developed during 1980s Susitna Studies............8-105 Table 8.5-2.Periodicity of Pacific salmon habitat utilization in the Middle Segment (RM 184-98.5)of the Susitna River by species and life history stage.Shaded areas indicate timing of utilization and dark gray areas represent peak USE..........ccscssseesesstecseeeeonees 8-106 Table 8.5-3.Instream flow sites and habitat modeling methods used during the 1980s in the Middle and Lower Susitna River (Marshall et al.1984;Sandone et al.1984;Vincent-Lang et al.1984;Hilliard et al.1985;Suchanek et al.1985)...eee sessessseseseseseseeesnseeeeeaes 8-108 Table 8.5-4.Geomorphic reach designations for the Upper River (UR)Segment,Middle River (MR)Segment,and Lower River (LR)Segment of the Susitna River as described in Section G.S.4.1.2.2..cccssccscsssessscecceressnecesenecseeesassnesscesesseeesesessesessoscesseessesssossessosseessnersesesesssnssseseees 8-110 Table 8.5-5.Nested and tiered habitat mapping units,categories,and definitions.................8-111 Table 8.5-6.Locations,descriptions and selection rationale of proposed Focus Areas for detailed study in the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River.Focus Area identification numbers (e.g.,Focus Area 184)represent the truncated Project River Mile (PRM)at the downstream end Of each FOCUS...........cccccssecccssecessccsnceseseceessesceseseseencescsuseesssesessasoeseeceseesseeenseeensesecsaees 8-113 Table 8.5-7.Partial list of river cross-sections,and flow and water surface elevations measured in 2012 on the Susitna River between River Miles 75 and 184.The list does not include additional measurements in late September/October.Those measurements had not been processed at the time this study plan was prepared...........cc csecsssessssseseeseeesesesseesenssesseees 8-114 Table 8.5-8.Summary of gaging stations established on Susitna River in 2012...eee 8-117 Table 8.5-9.Susitna Real-Time Reporting Network Stations.0.0.0.0...eeseesscceseeteeeeseeeeeeenees 8-118 Table 8.5-10.Period of record of flows measured by the USGS on the Susitna River...........8-119 Table 8.5-11.Period of record of flows measured by the USGS on tributaries of the Susitna RIVED......ceseccesecessceessccessccccsncesssecscccesncsesscesceeeeseeacesseeeseasecscesesaeeesscersssensdeeesseeeesseeesaesseees 8-120 Table 8.5-12.List of 33 Index of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA)parameters (The Nature Conservancy 2009).......cscsssesssssesesscescsserssccsssseccsecsrsecssessnssseseeesonsscsssoressessasesssesesesseasenes 8-121 Table 8.5-13.List of 34 Environmental Flow Component (EFC)parameters (The Nature Conservancy 2009).......eesesscssssssesscessesscsesesesscseessccssseesceesseseasssessssesosssssesesesesesenesseeoneoes 8-122 Table 8.5-14.Schedule for implementation of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study..8-123 Table 8.5-15.Common names,scientific names,life history strategies,and habitat use of fish species within the Lower,Middle,and Upper Susitna River,based on sampling during the 1980s (from HDR 2011)......ceeeeeecssesscsscseesseescsesseesesensecessnecsseaseeeevecenseseseasesssecsesseeseseeees 8-127 Table 8.5-16.Site-specific habitat suitability measurements recorded during 2012 at Middle and Lower Susitna River sampling sites,by fish life stage.ee eesceseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeseeeeeeees 8-128 Table 8.5-17.Proposed substrate classification system for use in development of HSC/HSI curves for the Susitna-Watana Project (adapted from Wentworth 1922)...........ccceseees 8-130 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxviii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-18.Example of table that will be developed as part of the stranding and trapping analyses to illustrate the frequency of potential stranding and trapping events by month for a given Project operational SCENATIO.0.0...eeeescesescesseseeessesssecesescseeseessscsesseassesessecsesoneees 8-131 Table 8.5-19.Assessment of physical and biological processes and potential habitat modeling 1 C<Z0)01 0)(6 [0 (ot a 8-132 Table 8.5-20.Seasonal daylight and night downramping guidelines (Hunter 1992).............8-132 Table 8.5-21.Conceptual Comparison of Multiple Resource Indicators of the Effects of Alternative Operational Scenarios for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project.Indicators to be coordinated with resource-specific Working QTOUPS............seesseseeeeeetesetenteeseseenene 8-133 Table 8.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Riparian Instream Flow Study..................8-198 Table 8.6-2.8.6.3.1 Floodplain Vegetation and Physical Process Regimes Critical Review, Synthesis and Lessons Learned,00...cecesccssescseeceessesseesseesesssenssssscssesssssansecssessessensaes 8-199 Table 8.6-3.8.6.3.2 Focus Area Selection-Riparian Process Domain Delineation...............8-200 Table 8.6-4.8.6.3.3.1 Synchrony of Seed Dispersal,Hydrology,and Local Susitna River Valley Climate .........csccccsscesssecsssccseccecessceeeensesesseeseceneseeesscesenseeessecensccesesseesecscenseseeessensseesesseeseeeeeees 8-201 Table 8.6-5.8.6.3.3.2 Seedling Establishment and Recruitment Study...ee eeseeeeeeeeeee 8-202 Table 8.6-6.8.6.3.4 Characterize the role of river ice in the establishment and recruitment of dominant floodplain vegetation,.........cecsescsseeseenseeseessesesesssesessesssesseeeseseeescseesesonseseees 8-203 Table 8.6-7.8.6.3.5 Characterize the role of erosion and sediment deposition in the formation of floodplain surfaces,soils,and Vegetation...........escesecssssesescseeessceseessesessecesessssreesnsesoues 8-204 Table 8.6-8.8.6.3.6 Characterize natural floodplain vegetation groundwater and surface water maintenance hydroregQiMe...........ccs sesesssseeesseseessceessessssesecescssecsescessssesecssesesossesseeesenseees 8-205 Table 8.6-9.8.6.3.7 Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Model Scaling and Project Operations Effects Modeling..............essssseseeeeeeeee 8-206 Table 9.5-1.Summary of life history,known Susitna River usage of fish species within the Upper Susitna River Segment (compiled from Delaney et al.1981)...eeeeeeneees 9-29 Table 9.5-2.Proposed methods by objective,task,species,and life stage...eseeeeeseeeeeee 30 Table 9.5-3.Length and weight of fish species to be radio-tagged and respective target radio-tag WEIGHS.2.00...seesecessesescevscsecssscecsesssesssssseesscesssssessacssonscerssuceescsesnsessssessnsesssnssassnesesaseseesesonee 9-32 Table 9.54.Schedule for implementation of the Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna RIVEL........cccccsscccesesssseceesescseeceseeeceecsssesesscesssessssesseseeeceeseseneesseseecaseseeeaseseeeeeaeeesenses 9-33 Table 9.6-1.Summary of life history,known Susitna River usage,and known extent of distribution of fish species within the Lower,Middle,and Upper Susitna River Segments (from ADF&G 1981 a,b,C,CfC.).cc eeeeeseeessessssssessenscesseseussssecsesesesesesssesesensesenseones 9-68 Table 9.6-2.Proposed methods by objective,task,species,and life stage...eesessceeeeee 9-69 Table 9.6-3.Length and weight of fish species to be radio-tagged and respective target radio-tag WEIGHS.....ssssccsscsssessessesseeseseenenecesscnsssscssscsssseuscsscessesseesneessesessescessesseeasssansgesssenseessesesassenaeenss 9-72 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 9.64.Schedule for implementation of the Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Study............cesscsssssssssecseeseesscesceccesessneeesceseeseesecesteceneseseaeesseenss 9-73 Table 9.7-1.Schedule for implementation of the Salmon Escapement Study.........cess 9-103 Table 9.8-1.Preliminary macroinvertebrate and algae sampling sites,stratified by reach and habitats.Refer to Figures 9.8-1 -9.8-2 for locations of the preliminary sampling reaches ANA StAtiONS.........ccecsscceecsceeececcesceeccescensceseseceeseerceeeaseseseeseccesesececaeseseseeeseeeseesseeseseeteneesese 9-132 Table 9.8-2.Preliminary schedule for River Productivity Study...cescsesesscesessceeeeseeees 9-132 Table 9.9-1.Primary sources of existing information supporting the aquatic habitat study..9-153 Table 9.9-2.Tributaries in the Upper River conducive to aerial video mapping and mapped in QOL 2...eecescesceecesceseessecesceecesseesceescoscessseacesesseecsestessessesessseosessessssesesssevseseesecasesersesraveesonans 9-153 Table 9.9-3.Upper River tributary mesohabitat types and descriptions...ce ceseeeseeeeeeeee 9-154 Table 9.9-4.Nested and tiered habitat mapping units and cateQories.2.0.0...eeeesseeeeeceeeetees 9-156 Table 9.9-5.Example of raw data from mapping displayed in Figure 9.9-16........ee eeeeeseeee 9-158 Table 9.9-6.Example data summarizing percent composition of unique habitat types..........9-158 Table 9.9-7.Example data summarizing length and percent composition of general habitat units by main channel and off-channel habitat.00.0...ccc ccscssssseeesseesseeseeesesssesssceseeseesseeeesseens 9-158 Table 9.9-8.Schedule for implementation of the Habitat Characterization and Mapping Study.9- 159 Table 9.10-1.Schedule for implementation of the Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study....ceceeeessesssssecseccseessessesssesssneescersseessaseseesssesensonsensaese 9-181 Table 9.11-1.Schedule for implementation of the Study of Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam.......ceccccscesessccescecesscceecsceeeneseccerssacesseesssesnacsseeesesesoscasceusescuescseesessdsesseeseseseesssesessseeseeens 9-193 Table 9.12-1.Co-location of 1984 aquatic studies pertinent to fish passage at sloughs and side Channel s..........ceeeeseescesseeeseceescesecesseesecescessseessescsesnseseessescesssasesescsssesesessscsseseessessesseesseeseseees 9-211 Table 9.12-2.Location of proposed 2012-13 flow routing transect relative to locations of 1984 slough and side channel study Sites.00.0...ce eseesesecsscceessecesscscsseseseeceeesessessnsesesssseeeeeees 9-212 Table 9.12-3.Fish and potential fish species within the lower,middle,and upper Susitna River, based on sampling during the 1980S...scssceseecsecsesseeeceeeteeescssseresessersccetssesseesenees 9-213 Table 9.12-4.Pacific salmon leaping height capabilities from three sources..............eeeeeeeee 9-214 Table 9.12-5.Schedule for implementation of the Fish Passage Barrier Study................+9-215 Table 9.13-1.Preliminary schedule for the Aquatic Resources Study within the access alignment,transmission alignment,and COnStructiOn ATea..........eeeeeeeseeeeteceeeeeeeceeeeseeees 9-238 Table 9.14-1.Area,location,and sublocation of desired baseline samples of adult Chinook salmon spawning aggregates for genetic analysis.Samples (Total)and sample years for collections in the Gene Conservation Laboratory archives,desired remaining nmber (Need), and number slated for genetic analysis (To analyze)and indicated.Some systems listed may not have spawning stocks in them,including some of those noted from above Devils CAmyOD.......:cescccseeceeseccesceceecnerensesesscessescnsssesecessseesssossasesssesaconseceeseeesnaeeseceeseseeeerecessessesaees 9-251 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxx December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 9.14-2.Potential Susitna River fish species for targeted for genetic analysis sampling.....9- 252 Table 9.14-3.Preliminary schedule for the Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species....9- 253 Table 9.15-1.Schedule for implementation of the Analysis of Fish Harvest Study..............9-265 Table 9.16-1.Schedule for implementation of the eulachon Study..........ce seeeesseeeseeseneesees 9-282 Table 9.17-1.Schedule for implementation of the beluga study..........ce eeseesseeteceseeetereeeees 9-299 Table 10.5-1.Schedule for implementation of the Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements, Productivity,and Survival Stud y.............csssessscseessssssenssessecsessseessensecessesssesenesssesonseesenens 10-13 Table 10.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the caribou Study...eeeeesseceeesreneeeseeeees 10-22 Table 10.7-1.Schedule for implementation of the Dall's sheep study...eeeeeeseeeeeeeeee 10-29 Table 10.8-1.Schedule for implementation of the Large Carnivore Study............eeeeeeeeeeeees 10-42 Table 10.9-1.Schedule for implementation of the Wolverine Study...........ee eeeeeeseeeeeeeeees 10-51 Table 10.10-1.Schedule for implementation of the Terrestrial Furbearer Study....................10-65 Table 10.11-1.Schedule for implementation of the Aquatic Furbearer Study..........ccc eeee 10-77 Table 10.12-1.Schedule for implementation of the Small Mammal Study...eee 10-85 Table 10.13-1.Schedule for implementation of the Bat Study...ee eseeesseeseeesteeeeeeeeees 10-94 Table 10.14-1.|Raptors in the vicinity of the middle basin of the Susitna River (from Tables 4.6-2 and 4.8-2 in AEA 2011).wo.eeeeececeecseceeneeseceeeeeseesseesseessssssosecsesssescnssessenseeeess 10-109 Table 10.14-2.Schedule for implementation of Surveys of Eagles and Other Raptors........10-110 Table 10.15-1.Schedule for implementation of the Waterbird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study.0.0...ceeeescessesssssecsseescssessscsssesessecsescsseesssossesssssssssssesesssessssessesssscsesesesonsasseaones 10-126 Table 10.16-1.Schedule for implementation of the landbird and shorebird study................10-142 Table 10.17-1.Schedule for implementation of the Willow Ptarmigan Study...10-153 Table 10.18-1.Schedule for implementation of the Wood Frog Study...ee eesseseeeteee 10-165 Table 10.19-1.Bird species of conservation/management concern that are known or likely to occur in the Susitna River basin,Alaska,..........ccccccsscsssssssscsssesccssccseccesssecsassesesesesseseesce 10-175 Table 10.19-2.Schedule for implementation of the wildlife habitat-use evaluation............10-179 Table 10.20-1.Schedule for implementation of the Wildlife Harvest Analysis....................10-187 Table 11.5-1.Schedule for implementation of the Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin.............ccsceesseeeeeeseeseseneeseessesesssessesessees 11-14 Table 11.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the riparian vegetation study...eee 11-33 Table 11.7-1.Schedule for implementation of the Wetland Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin.«0.0...eeeesesssessscsececsceesessessessssssersesseesesesessessessesseseesessessasseseseaes 11-52 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 11.8-1.Rare vascular plant taxa that have been collected in a broad region surrounding the Susitna River drainage (see AEA 2011).1 ou...ceeeeeeecseeeeececeetceeseeeeeeeseesseesacessesseesenes 11-62 Table 11.8-2.Schedule for implementation of the Rare Plant Study.........cts teeeeeesseteeseseeses 11-63 Table 11.9-1.Invasive vascular plant species recorded on road-system surveys in and near the Susitna basin and in other plant surveys in the region of the proposed Project...............11-72 Table 11.9-2.Schedule for implementation of the Invasive Plant Study.0.0.0.0...eeeeeeeees 11-73 Table 12.5-1.Schedule for implementation of the Recreation Study...ceceeescesssseeteeees 12-23 Table 12.6-1.Preliminary Recommendations for Analysis Locations...........:ssssssssesessseeeeees 12-40 Table 12.6-2.Aesthetic Resources Study Schedule...eesceesscesscessesscesseseeseeeseserseseneees 12-45 Table 12.7-1.Recreational Boating /River Access Study Schedule...cet esseeseeteseeeeee 12-55 Table 13.5-1.Datasets used in Project Model 1 0...cece eesssseseeseenssesssssesesessssecsssecsessensneess 13-29 Table 13.5-2.Classified variables examined in Project locational modeling...eee 13-30 Table 13.5-3.Schedule for implementation of the cultural resource Study...........csccscsseeeseeee 13-31 Table 13.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Paleontological Resources Study.............13-44 Table 14.5-1.Study Communities.0000.0...ce eesessseeessessssesseecssessssesesenenesessssessseeeseessseasessesasons 14-16 Table 14.5-2.Susitna Watershed Household Harvest Survey Added Study Communities.....14-17 Table 14.5-3.Traditional Knowledge Criteria and Selected Study Communities...........0.....14-18 Table 14.5-4.Schedule for implementation of the Subsistence Resources Study...............6 14-19 Table 14.5-5.Study Communities Selected for Traditional Knowledge,Subsistence Mapping, and Household Harvest SurveyS...........:.:scsssscsssscsssecessesssseseessssssseessessseesessseseassssesasenss 14-20 Table 15.5-1.Schedule for implementation of the Regional Economic Evaluation Study......15-8 Table 15.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Stud y........ccsssecsscseesseseesesecssscssesececscaesssssessseessesseseceseesesoseseeseesssssesesseseaseneseese 15-20 Table 15.7-1.General Resources for Transportation Resources Study............sscesseeseeseeeeeees 15-30 Table 15.7-2.Road Resources for Transportation Resources Study..........ccsccessssseeesesseeneeees 15-30 Table 15.7-3.Rail Resources for Transportation Resources Study...........:..sceseseeseeseeeeaesoneee 15-31 Table 15.7-4.Aviation Resources for Transportation Resources Study............esseesesseseeeeees 15-31 Table 15.7-5.Port Resources for Transportation Resources Study...........csscesssesseesseseseeeseees 15-31 Table 15.7-6.Schedule for implementation of the Transportation Resources Study.............15-32 Table 15.8-1.Schedule for implementation of the HIA.0...ee eeccesessesecteeseeneseeseessseenenees 15-41 Table 15.9-1.Schedule for implementation of Air Quality Study...ete eeeeeeseeneeseeeenees 15-51 Table 16.5-1.Schedule for Implementation of the PMF Study.ou...ee eeeesessesstesesesseeeeeees 16-10 Table 16.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Study.......16-18 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.2-1.Susitna-Watana Project Area woo...eecsscsssessessseesseecsscscnscosensessseesssssesserseessneeeees 1-22 Figure 1.2-2.Susitna River Stage near Watana Tailwater...........cccscsscsssssscssssessecseesecnsesseneseess 1-23 Figure 1.2-3.Susitna River Stage near Gold Creek...ecsssceesseseessessesseseseeseeeeseeeaeeaeeneenees 1-23 Figure 1.2-4.Susitna River Stage near Sunshine...........ssessccecsscssseseessesesesseeseseesseeseassesseseeseees 1-24 Figure 2-1.Interrelationships amongst Riverine-based Studies.........cccssssessesessesseteseeeseseeeeees 2-9 Figure 2-2.Interrelationships amongst Upland-based Studies..............csssscsseesssessesesseeseeeees 2-10 Figure 4.5-1.Interdependencies for Geology and Soils Study...........cccsssesecessessssensenseeeseenees 4-11 Figure 5.5-1.Proposed 2012 Stream Water Quality and Temperature Data Collection Sites for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project.0.0...eecssessseesscesesessecsscesesessessesonssssssssussonees 5-41 Figure 5.5-2.Example of a 10-foot (3-meter)tripod MET station installed above the proposed Watana Dam Site...ee eessssceseessessesseseeesssescecneeorssonsesesescesuscessonseessescerssesessesssesesesssesseenans 5-42 Figure 5.5-3.Interdependencies for water resources StUCIES..........:.::ccessesssesessesseseeeeneeneeseeseens 5-43 Figure 5.6-1.Proposed 2012 Stream Water Quality and Temperature Data Collection Sites for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project.000...eeeesscssessesesssesssessesssscssevsssesseessssoeessseens 5-60 Figure 5.6-2.Interdependencies for water resources StUCIES..........:.sccsssssseseeceseeseseeseseesenseseenees 5-61 Figure 5.7-1.Transfer of Methylmercury to Fish Shortly after Impoundment from Hydro- Quebec (2003)......cccesseesseccectscecesereeseeseeescescessesersssassanseseasssesacsscssessssscsscsesacsaseesseseessesseenuse 5-93 Figure 5.7-2 Example of Predicted and Actual Mercury Concentrations in Fish (from Hydro- Quebec 2003)......eescesccessesesecccecseseessscserseeessoesssssesessaussessesseesscessesscessessacessesesesenseseesessenusees 5-94 Figure 5.7-3.Interdependencies for water resOUrCes StUGIES..........cccceseesseeseseesseesseeesseesseneeeses 5-95 Figure 6.1-1.Conceptual framework for the Susitna-Watana Instream Flow Study depicting integration of habitat specific models and riverine processes to support integrated resource analyses;and integration of riverine processes to develop fish and aquatic habitat specific MOGEIS.......ccccccessecssseesccesesseeseccccssccesserseseeecseseeseeerseeeeeeessceeecseeceseeecesdscssessesesessesesesecsseesnaes 6-81 Figure 6.5-1.Susitna River Geomorphology study area and large-scale river segments..........6-82 Figure 6.5-2.Upper Susitna River Segment geomorphic reaches..........cscsssccssseseeeseessssenseneees 6-83 Figure 6.5-3.Middle Susitna River Segment geomorphic reaches..........ssccssesesessseeteeeerenees 6-84 Figure 6.5-4.Lower Susitna River Segment geomorphic reaches...........cccscssesesesseresesesseneneeeees 6-85 Figure 6.5-5.USGS Susitna River basin gaging stations and 2012 measurement locations.....6-86 Figure 6.5-6.Susitna-Watana Geomorphology Study reservoir geomorphology study area....6-87 Figure 6.5-7.Susitna-Watana access COITIGOTS........csssssseseeseseesessessenesseseesesesseneeseseessesesesseeenses 6-88 Figure 6.5-8.Study interdependencies for the Geomorphology Study.........cccccsseseeeeeeeneneeees 6-89 Figure 6.6-1.Example of coarse mesh applied to the Whiskers Slough potential Focus Area, Middle Susitna River Segment,Geomorphic Reach MR-8 .......csccesssesesesesssceeseeseeens 6-148 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxiii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 6.6-2.Example of fine mesh applied to the Whiskers Slough proposed Focus Area, Middle Susitna River Segment,Geomorphic Reach MR-8..........ecesscssseeseeessseeesseseeeeaes 6-149 Figure 6.6-3.Locations of proposed Middle Susitna River Segment Focus Areas.................6-150 Figure 6.6-4.Study interdependencies for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study.......6-151 Figure 7.5-1.Sedimentary basins and geologic structure in the Susitna watershed (modified from Kirschner 1994)....ececesesssecscceseeesseecesesaceasesceesseesesesencseessseseseeesseseaeesesensssoesesoesee 7-26 Figure 7.5-2.Geologic units in the Susitna watershed (modified from Beikman 1994)..........7-27 Figure 7.5-3.Study interdependencies for the Groundwater Stud y...........:.sssscsssssesseseeeeesensees 7-28 Figure 7.5-3.Study interdependencies for the Groundwater Study (continued).........eee 7-29 Figure 7.5-3.Study interdependencies for the Groundwater Study (continued)............esee 7-30 Figure 7.5-4.Discharge hydrograph and analysis examples for the Susitna River at Gold Creek. eseceacenceasescenseateacesneuecucesaesacacsacesceasesceseeaeeaeesseseeseesescesesasseessessesssssessosesseoseeseesecsteseesessstacereoetes 7-31 Figure 7.5-5.Illustration of groundwater and surface-water interactions with changing stage Levels.........csccessesssceescessccessessecsscesseseseeeceeceeessaecsssaceessessecaseaasesesessseeeseseecsseessassaesossseseensnees 7-32 Figure 7.5-6.Groundwater responses to stage changes in the Chena River (Nakanishi and Lilly 1998)....cccsssscsscescesscssessccccsscessccsesseseecenseseessceesesesseneseaseasensescecsesseseaeesseessesaseasecaeeeasneeseenases 7-32 Figure 7.5-7.An example of applying surface water stage conditions and groundwater levels from a well as input to boundary conditions to a two-dimensional groundwater model (Nakanishi and Lilly 1998).0...esssscesecesecessecececsceeesseseeseseeeeecaeescessseseescessescateasanenseees 7-33 Figure 7.5-8.Example schematic of groundwater well and surface water station network in a hypothetical Focus Area targeting riparian analySis............cscsssscsesssesseseeeseeeeeerereeeeeeeseees 7-33 Figure 7.5-9.Example schematic of groundwater well and surface water station network in a hypothetical Focus Area targeting fish and aquatic habitat analysis...0........eseesseeeeeeeees 7-34 Figure 7.5-10.Example schematic of a 3D groundwater model grid in a hypothetical Focus Area targeting fish and aquatic analysis.2D cross-section models would be developed in this hypothetical case at sections XS1 and X82.oes eeseesesteesseceeeseeeseeesaeeeeneesesteasen 7-35 Figure 7.5-11.The upper graphic is an example schematic of a 2D cross-section across the floodplain,main channel,and a side channel or slough.Groundwater and surface water interactions and examples data collection stations are shown.The lower plots show the daily mean gage height for the Susitna River at Gold Creek...cee eccesseesseseeseeseeseresecseeeneees 7-36 Figure 7.6-1.Relationship of ice observations to other Studies...cesesssecsecsssensessenesseeees 7-54 Figure 7.6-2.Relationship of ice modeling to other studies..........ccceeseseseeeeseeeeeeseeeeteeceseeeeeees 7-55 Figure 7.7-1.September 1999 oblique aerial photograph of the terminus of an unnamed glacier that drains to the East Fork of the Susitna River,looking northeast.The western end of the lake corresponds to the 1955 position of the terminus.The large trimline suggests that the glacier has recently thinned significantly more than 50 meters (164 feet)and retreated more than 2 kilometers (1.2 miles).From Molnia 2008.00...eee cessscssessessessesseseesesseeeseeeeneeeeees 7-69 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxiv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 7.7-2.Schematic representation of the long-term effects of negative glacier mass balances on a)glacier volume and b)glacier runoff.Note that runoff is initially larger during prolonged mass wasting until the glacier is small enough to reduce excess runoff (Jansson et al.2003).........ccssssssccssescesnsccsssscessceecsseessseeesnsessenscesssnssessaesecsesecasecsessessceesseeesons 7-69 Figure 7.7-3.Susitna Glacier and other unnamed glaciers contributing to Upper Susitna River CraiMage..........cceessceseccescceeseeeecessceeescceeseceeessesessceecsseeassesecseeeesseeesssseceseceeassesesceeacaesesseeeeesneeees 7-70 Figure 7.7-4.Fairbanks Frost-Free Season,1904 to 2008.Over the past 100 years,the length of the frost-free season in Fairbanks,Alaska,has increased by 50 percent.U.S.Global Change Research Program (2009).0...esscsssscerssecssceeessecessseeesseecessaeesssnceesecencseescseesseneeeesseesseeeees 7-70 Figure 7.7-5.Mean annual temperature and total annual precipitation at Talkeetna,Alaska 1915-2010 showing the trend line.From Alaska Climate Research Center, http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/Climate/Location/TimeSeries/Talkeetna.html...eee 7-71 Figure 7.7-6.Interdependencies for Glacier and Runoff Changes Study...eeseeseseeeeeeeeee 7-72 Figure 8.5-1.Study interdependencies for Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study..............8-135 Figure 8.5-2.Relative amounts of habitat types in different areas of the Susitna River at seven mainstem discharges.Source:Klinger-Kingsley et al.(1985)..........eeesesscsseceeeeseeeeeeneees 8-136 Figure 8.5-3.Habitat types identified in the middle reach of the Susitna River during the 1980s studies (adapted from ADF&G 1983;Trihey 1982)...eee eseceseesesncescceeseesceeseseseesees 8-137 Figure 8.5-4.Example HSC curves for rearing juvenile Chinook salmon in the Middle Susitna River developed during the 1980s instream flow studies.............:ccsscessecscsesereeseceeseseeeees 8-137 Figure 8.5-5.Mean daily intergravel and surface water temperature data from a spawning site in Skull Creek.Source:Trihey (1982).0...eeceesseessceessceceenceeeseceenescesecseceeseceesesecsseseneeees 8-138 Figure 8.5-6.Locations of instream flow transects and model types applied during the 1980s Su- Hydro studies in lower and upper Side Channel 11 and in Slough 11,located near Gold Creek.Breaching flows based on those studies are also depicted for various side channel and side slough habitats.0.0.0...ee esseesecesseceeseeceeeesseeessnesecseeerescecesseeeenscecsseeceseeseseeseeaees 8-139 Figure 8.5-7.Locations of instream flow transects and model types applied during the 1980s Su- Hydro studies in the Whiskers Slough complex.Breaching flows based on those studies are also depicted for various side channel and side slough habitats.«00.0.0...eseseseseeeeeeee 8-140 Figure 8.5-8.Transects and shoreline and mid-channel sampling cells associated with RJHAB modeling (Marshall et al.1984).0.0...eesesscessetesceseeesecesscecsceceseeesccesseseoseesceeeceseseneeeatens 8-141 Figure 8.5-9.Map depicting the Upper,Middle and Lower Segments of the Susitna River potentially influenced by the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project........cececessseeeeseeee 8-142 Figure 8.5-10.Conceptual framework for the Susitna-Watana Instream Flow Study depicting integration of habitat specific models and riverine processes to support integrated resource analyses;and integration of riverine processes to develop fish and aquatic habitat specific MOEIS.........sceeseesscesscescesscsesssssescsssesecsessesseseeeeseseesssesasesssonsesesesesssessesssssssssessssssonssseseoseeeey 8-144 Figure 8.5-11.Map of the Middle Segment of the Susitna River depicting the eight Geomorphic Reaches and locations of proposed Focus Areas.No Focus Areas are proposed for in MR-3 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN and MR-4 due to safety issues related to sampling within or proximal to Devils Canyon....8- 145 Figure 8.5-12.Map of the Lower Segment of the Susitna River depicting the six Geomorphic Reaches.Focus Areas have not been identified in this segment but will be considered pending results of open-water flow routing MOdEeIING.........cscs secctsesseeeesescseeesseeteeesees 8-146 Figure 8.5-13.Map showing Focus Area 184 that begins at Project River Mile 184.7 and extends upstream to PRM 185.7.The Focus Area is located about 1.4 miles downstream of the proposed Watana Dam site near Tsusena Creek........cccsscsessesessesscnsssssseeenaseensscssessenees 8-147 Figure 8.5-14.Map showing Focus Area 173 beginning at Project River Mile 173.6 and extends upstream to PRM 175.4.This Focus Area is near Stephan Lake and consists of main channel and a side channel complex.............css scssscssesseeesseesesescesecsseecesesssaessesesseeseneesene 8-148 Figure 8.5-15.Map showing Focus Area 171 beginning at Project River Mile 171.6 and extends upstream to PRM 173.This Focus Area is near Stephan Lake and consists of main channel and a single side channel with vegetated island...essscscetscteccseserseseensesesssseeesensees 8-149 Figure 8.5-16.Map showing Focus Area 151 beginning at Project River Mile 151.8 and extends upstream to PRM 152.3.This single main channel Focus Area is at the Portage Creek CONFIUCNCE.20...eeeceeeecceeceereeseceeesecesetecesonacensenscesssesssesusscessscseseessssssescaseseesessesecessnsseeneseasees 8-150 Figure 8.5-17.Map showing Focus Area 144 beginning at Project River Mile 144.4 and extends upstream to PRM 145.7.This Focus Area is located about 2.3 miles upstream of Indian River and includes Side Channel 21 and Slough 21...eesesssessseceseeceesseecessseseeeeees 8-151 Figure 8.5-18.Map showing Focus Area 141 beginning at Project River Mile 141.8 and extends upstream to PRM 143.4.This Focus Area includes the Indian River confluence and a range of main channel and off-channel habitats.0.0.0.0...ee esecsceeseceeeececeeseeececesseeteseesseseeseaes 8-152 Figure 8.5-19.Map showing Focus Area 138 beginning at Project River Mile 138.7 and extends upstream to PRM 140.This Focus Area is near Gold Creek and consists of a complex of side channel,side slough and upland slough habitats including Upper Side Channel 11 and Slough 11...eeeseessseecescesceseesceccssescesseseeseesesssssssssessesssessecsessscsssssessssssasseeseaseassssesssasenees 8-153 Figure 8.5-20.Map showing Focus Area 128 beginning at Project River Mile 128.1 and extends upstream to PRM 129.7.This Focus Area consists of side channel,side slough and tributary confluence habitat features including Skull Creek........ccc cescscsccssscceceeesscesscessceeeceeseees 8-154 Figure 8.5-21.Map showing Focus Area 115 beginning at Project River Mile 115.3 and extends upstream to PRM 116.5.This Focus Area is located about 0.6 miles downstream of Lane Creek and consists of side channel and upland slough habitats including Slough 6A....8-155 Figure 8.5-22.Map showing Focus Area 104 beginning at Project River Mile 104.8 and extends upstream to PRM 106.This Focus Area covers the diverse range of habitats in the Whiskers NS)Colo ted sere)00)0)(<>,Capt ne en 8-156 Figure 8.5-23.Examples of cross-sections established on the Susitna River in 2012 at River Miles 170 and 76.........ccccsccsccsscsscesceeeessesesscesensssssssssessssscecssoeessensesseseasesseeaeenseessesesenseeeeesens 8-157 Figure 8.5-24.Output from ADCP from one pass across the Susitna River at River Mile 170 on Jue 21,2012.oo.ceccsscsescescceseseceesessssessesessesussssssessessceacesessessoesnesseesaseeeeenesecsecseneeeeeseeees 8-157 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxvi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 8.5-25.Susitna Network Stations Diagnostics Screen.Data fields are color coded to allow quick scans for evaluating station conditions.Email and text messaging are used to communicate warning conditions and non-reporting Stations...........:csccsssessceseeesseesseeenes 8-158 Figure 8.5-26.Typical AEA gaging station current conditions reporting page.............cs08 8-159 Figure 8.5-27.Geomorphic Reaches and winter habitat use sampling areas in the Middle Susitna River SegQMent.............sssscssccsssecssccseccesececsesessecsssesseecssecsnecsaesesseesaeesseeeesceseeseeesseeseeeeneesees 8-160 Figure 8.5-28.Location of proposed winter fish habitat use sampling sites at Whiskers Slough in the Middle Susitna River Segment..............cccssscssssssecessceeccessecsecesseessseeseesssessteesseesarenses 8-161 Figure 8.5-29.Location of proposed winter fish habitat use sampling sites at the Skull Creek Complex in the Middle Susitna River Segment..............cceescssccsscecsssteeseeeesenceeseeesteeeceeeeees 8-162 Figure 8.5-30.Cross-sectional conceptual diagram illustrating stranding and trapping areas.....8- 163 Figure 8.5-31.Conceptual layout of 2-D coarse and fine mesh modeling within the proposed Whiskers Slough Focus Area..........cessesscesscecsessessesecessceseceescsenecensesescseeseeeseseeseeseesesesnsens 8-164 Figure 8.5-32.Conceptual diagram depicting the Effective Spawning/Incubation Model....8-165 Figure 8.5-33.Conceptual framework of the varial zone model.0.0.0....eesesssceseeceereeeneeeneess 8-166 Figure 8.5-34.Illustration of 12-hour/12-hour,12-hour/7-day,and 12-hour/30-day varial zones modeling scenarios assuming single transect amalySes............ccscccssscceestecssseesscesteeesseeees 8-167 Figure 8.5-35.Example time series analySis............cccsccssccessecceescesssccssseesssscesnseesnacessseeeeneenes 8-168 Figure 8.5-36.Conceptual figures illustrating procedure used for deriving non-modeled specific area (sa)Habitat Availability Index curve using a modeled curve,as applied during the 1980s Su-Hydro Studies (see Steward et al.1985;Aaserude et al.1985).The procedure included lateral shifts (upper figure)due to adjustments from differences in breaching flows (Qms Qsa)as well as vertical shifts (middle figure)proportional to structural habitat indices (SHIsa/SHIms)to account for differences in structural habitat quality.The lower figure shows final hypothetical modeled and non-modeled specific area Curves...........2::00000 8-169 Figure 8.6-1.Study interdependencies for Riparian Instream Flow Study.........:...:csesseeseees 8-207 Figure 8.6-2.Helm and Collins (1997)Susitna River floodplain forest succession.Note:model depicts typical floodplain forests found in the Susitna River Middle River and Three Rivers Confluence Segment..........:ccccessscssneceseeseessceesssceeeneeessceessneeensecessaeessacecsaeecsasesesesenseesneees 8-208 Figure 8.6-3.Riparian Process Domain Delineation 8.6.3.2.oe..esescsscesceeeceseeteeeseseenseneees 8-209 Figure 8.6-4.Riparian Focus Area Selection 8.6.3.2......cscsscsssssseessseccetseseeeesersseceasetessesenees 8-210 Figure 8.6-5.Cottonwood (Populus)life history stages:seed dispersal and germination,sapling to tree establishment.Cottonwood typically germinates on newly created bare mineral soils associate with lateral active channel margins and gravel bars.Note proximity of summer baseflow and floodplain water table (Braatne et al.1996)...ceececesscssssscescessenseesenees 8-211 Figure 8.6-6.The riparian "Recruitment Box Model”describing seasonal flow pattern, associated river stage (elevation),and flow ramping necessary for successful cottonwood and willow seedling establishment (from Amlin and Rood 2002;Rood et al.,2005). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxvii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Cottonwood species (Populus deltoides),willow species (Salix exigua).Stage hydrograph and seed release timing will vary by region,watershed,and plant species..............:06 8-212 Figure 8.6-7.Seed Dispersal,Hydrology and Climate Synchrony Study8.6.3.3.1................8-213 Figure 8.6-8.Susitna Study Area meteorological station locationS.............eeeesecceseeteeteceneees 8-214 Figure 8.6-9.Seedling Establishment &Recruitment Study 8.6.3.3.2.0.0...eseesseseeceereeseeees 8-215 Figure 8.6-10.Cottonwood tree ice-scar.Floodplain located immediately above Three Rivers Confluence...........ceecccssceseseceeseceeeecesnseeesecsessceceasesseeeseeseseeesseceesceseseceeteccseessseseesesensneeenses 8-216 Figure 8.6-11.Cottonwood forest tree ice-scars.Floodplain located immediately above Three Rivers Confluence.........ceeeseseecesccseeeesseseeccsccssccsssnsscsecesesosacessensseasseesesdeecaeeenceseeseeeeesens 8-217 Figure 8.6-12.Floodplain ice deposited gravel piles.Floodplain in braided reach below Three Rivers Confluence...eescsesesssssseseseecsssesseescseseessscssessessssessaecseeesseeesaeectececsecenseneeseeeetaees 8-218 Figure 8.6-13.River Ice-Floodplain Vegetation Establishment and Recruitment 8.6.3.4......8-219 Figure 8.6-14.Floodplain Erosion,Sediment Deposition &Floodplain Vegetation Study 8.6.3.5. besescesctsneescenseeseeesscosceosecscsesseatsscossesesessessseseussscssensesssesosssesssssossosssnssesesesesossesasessdsesesseseessegs 8-220 Figure 8.6-15.Riverine hydrologic landscape (Winter 2001).........eeeeeseseseeeseeeeceeaseeseneeecees 8-221 Figure 8.6-16.Whiskers Slough typical Focus Area groundwater /surface water study design illustrating monitoring well and stage recorder transect locations.Typical floodplain plant community types found in the middle segment of the Susitna River are shown.............8-222 Figure 8.6-17.General schematic of a riparian Focus Area floodplain channel complex bounded by the Susitna River,side slough,and side channel.oc.eceeeeesssescesseeeseeeeeeeseeeeeeees 8-223 Figure 8.6-18.(A)Transect profile view of typical monitoring well and stage recorder locations looking downriver.(B)Gold Creek Gauge Station,Susitna River April through September 2005-2009,.o...eesesseesecesecesseeseccsaceseseseessceseaseesecssscsesaesseseneessecseeseeeeseeessseesseeeseeessenteteeeseaes 8-224 Figure 8.6-19.Floodplain Vegetation Groundwater &Surface Water Study 8.6.3.6............8-225 Figure 8.6-20.Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Scaling &Project Operations Effects Modeling 8.6.3.7..........ccsscescesereeeseceseeeetenseeeeesees 8-226 Figure 9.5-1.Fish distribution and abundance study area............seseeesecessecessccesceesceneeeseeeeeeees 9-34 Figure 9.5-2.Schematic showing strata by habitat type for relative abundance sampling for the Upper River.Note that level two stratification within geomorphic reach,is not depicted in this figure because not all habitat types will be present within each geomorphic reach in the Upper River.The selection of habitats to sample will be distributed across geomorphic reaches as described in the Upper Susitna River Fish Distribution and Abundance Implementation Plan and in Section 9.5.4.1.ccc teecsesscessecteceesecenecesseeescessseesseeeseeeeesnes 9-35 Figure 9.5-3.Existing or derived length-weight relationships for fish species to be radio-tagged. seseuseccesseseesecsseensesssensenseessesssssenscssecsesscesseesesececseseescesseaesesessesssssesaecsscaessuecaecasecaeeassaesuassaeenees 36 Figure 9.5-4.Flow chart showing study interdependencies for the Fish Distribution and Abundance Study in the Upper Rivet..........ccccccssssscecsesscsteceseceesseceseeseeseeesscesenseeeesesseeeeees 9-37 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxviii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 9.6-1.Map for Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Study Plan.Note that fish sampling in the Lower River is proposed in geomorphic reach LR1 from RM 61 to 98.oo.ceeeecsceesscceseceeseeeseceneesneseseeesscecseeesscceseesaceesececereeseenacsoneeeseees 9-74 Figure 9.6-2.Schematic showing strata by habitat type for relative abundance sampling for the Lower River.Note that level two stratification within geomorphic segment,is not depicted in this figure because not all habitat types will be present within each geomorphic segment in the Upper River.The selection of habitats to sample will be distributed across geomorphic segments as described in the Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Lower and Middle Susitna River Implementation Plan and in Section 9.6.4.1......ee eeeeeseseeeeeeeeteees 9-75 Figure 9.6-3.Schematic showing strata by habitat type for fish distribution sampling for the Middle River.Note that level two stratification within geomorphic segment,is not depicted in this figure because not all habitat types will be present within each geomorphic segment in the Upper River.The selection of habitats to sample will be distributed across geomorphic segments as described in the Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Lower and Middle Susitna River Implementation Plan and in Section 9.6.4.1.oe eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 9-76 Figure 9.6-4.Schematic showing strata by habitat type for relative abundance sampling for the Middle Rivet,...........:cesscccescceseeseeeessceecscecsecseescsecesceesseeesseeesseesesseeesesseaenssseessssersseesseeeeseeeesea 9-77 Figure 9.6-5.Schematic showing strata by habitat type for relative abundance sampling in Focus ATCAS......ceccscesssssccecsseesssoeessscesceeeessssceeccessssececsseeeeesseeesceaceecssnesesesssesessosuceesosecseseceseseeeceeeeeer®9-78 Figure 9.6-6.Existing or derived length-weight relationships for fish species to be radio-tagged. pasesaceesaeesneecsecesssecsccesuccsessaesccesesecesasecscecsnsessecescesscenseeenecessseseeesacecoesecesenaeesaceseeesaseaeseneseaeeeses 9-79 Figure 9.6.-7.Distribution of winter sampling sites in Slough 8A,Susitna River.............9-80 Figure 9.6-8.Distribution of winter sampling sites in Whiskers Slough,Susitna River...9-81 Figure 9.6-9.Flow chart of study interdependencies for Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Study Plan...ccc esssccssscessssecesseeseseeeeseeeeseaceecnereseees 9-82 Figure 9.7-1.Susitna watershed showing fish capture sites (fishwheels)and the locations of fixed-station telemetry receivers in the Susitna River,.0.........ccsscecssscsserscsecescceseeseeesenes 9-104 Figure 9.7-2.Fixed-station telemetry receivers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River,2012- QOL.eeeccsccsccscesececescssccssesesesesscaceccesseesesesessesetnesssescsesessensseseseasesseeseesssesseasseesenseneseues 9-105 Figure 9.7-3.Study interdependencies for Salmon Escapement Study.............eseseeeseeseeeeeeee 9-106 Figure 9.8-1.Upper Susitna River Segment,preliminary sampling reaches for the River Productivity Study.0...ceesssssssscseessessseccsesesesseessessessesesesesssessesesssssseseessasonascnneesnes 9-133 Figure 9.8-2.Middle Susitna River Segment,with the Instream Flow Focus Areas under consideration for the four sampling locations proposed within Geomorphic Reach MR-6 for the River Productivity Study....eecsssssscsssessececessceeeesesesceesesecsesesssessesssessssensasensesaes 9-134 Figure 9.8-3.Study interdependencies for River Productivity Study...cscs 9-135 Figure 9.9-1.Video frame capture of a tributary mid-channel scour pool in a confined channel with boulder and cobble substrate and no stream wood visible.(For a closer inspection the image can be Zoomed to 250 Percent)...ccccescssssecsersersereeseessescsscssccsccaseceecsscseceesceacsetsetaesens 9-160 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xxxix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 9.9-2.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Falls...eeeesseseeseeeees 9-161 Figure 9.9-3.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Cascade..........cescesscseees 9-161 Figure 9.9-4.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Chute...ee eeeeeeeees 9-162 Figure 9.9-5.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index-Rapid.«00.0...ee eeeeeseeneeeees 9-162 Figure 9.9-6.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -RUM.........cee eeeeseereeeeeeees 9-163 Figure 9.9-7.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Boulder Riffle.........0.00....9-163 Figure 9.9-8.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Cobble/Gravel Riffle -Split Channel..0........eeecceeecccssscseeeesecescseceessceensscensssecesersneeseasseseeeesaceesseecesnceeesnecesensesesseeeseseeeaeens 9-164 Figure 9.9-9.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Glide.0...ee eee eeeeeeseeee 9-164 Figure 9.9-10.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Mid Channel Scour Pool.....9- 165 Figure 9.9-11.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Lateral Scour Pool -Braided Channel..0.......ceseescssssesseesseessessseceseevesescssecsseescsssecsesessessesssasssasesasecseecessecssoesseeeessceeseseeesees 9-165 Figure 9.9-12.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Alcove -Special Habitat FOAtul eo...eeeeeccesseeceesececescseesersceeesnsscsscesenssassssesscecsssnsesesssaseesessansssaesseeseneseaseonsecsseneeeaes 9-166 Figure 9.9-13.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Beaver Complex -Special Habitat Feature.2...csecesssessseecsrescsnecssesceessscscesesesessseseseccsssesseeessesessesesesessseeseesoeasoass 9-166 Figure 9.9-14.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Unclassified -Boulder Riffle? saseaceeetestecseesecossesscosessssessenseeeeescessseseensssseesssnsescsessssensecsssnsssssessesssessseseecssesseosescasensereseaseesense®9-167 Figure 9.9-15.Aerial video tributary habitat mapping type-index -Unclassified -Braided Chane]?00.0.0...ceeceescesssccssccessceessccceeccecescecsscenecssoneeseeececsceeesscesecseenssceesessecesseseesceesssesseaes 9-167 Figure 9.9-16.Example of mapping using the tiered habitat classification system in GIS....9-168 Figure 9.9-17.Aerial video capture of the Lower River mainstem..............essesssesseteeereeneees 9-169 Figure 9.9.18.Interdependencies for Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats.....9-170 Figure 9.10-1.Map of study area for Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study..........ceccscscscsesscessceesecesscecsseeeeceessessesescesseeescecsaeessaessesecasesseeseessneeneeees 9-182 Figure 9.10-2.Flow chart showing relationships between components of the Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study (ovals),other study programs, and related Information.00.0...ceeceseesseseeeeeeeceseseteessseaceeteeseeasessecssesrscsecesesecseceseeeeeeeeees 9-183 Figure 9.11-1 Study area for Fish Passage Feasibility,from the confluence with Portage Creek (RM 148)upstream to the Oshetna River (RM 233.4).oo.eeescsssccsesseceeeseeeeeseessereeesenees 9-194 Figure 9.11-2.Fish passage feasibility interdependencies with other AEA studies................9-195 Figure 9.12-1.Study interdependencies for the Fish Passage Barriers Study.............:::c000 9-216 Figure 9.12-2.Depth/distance passage criteria for chum salmon in unobstructed uniform channels with smaller substrates.Source ADF&G 1984.0...eee cessessceeseesssesseseeeeseenes 9-217 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xl December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 9.12-3.Depth/distance passage criteria for chum salmon in obstructed non-uniform channels with larger substrates.(ADF&G 1984)D).........cccsscssseesseessesssesesensesseesesesessennens 9-218 Figure 9.12-4.Barrier analysis decision tree (URS and HDR 2010)...........ccesccsscesecereeseeseeeees 9-219 Figure 9.12-5.Example of barrier field drawing with measurement notation (URS and HDR 2010).oe eeecesesescesscseeseeesesecssscecsceesseessceessceesceeccescsceesteesecseceecsseeeusessceeseeeesesessessasecascneeenes 9-220 Figure 9.12-6.Draft physical barrier field form..........ce eseeceseceeseeeeceecceeteesseeneessessessesssessees 9-221 Figure 9.12-7.ADF&G (1984b)flow chart for slough and side channel assessment methods....9- 222 Figure 9.12-8.Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna Basin.........9-223 Figure 9.13-1.Study area for aquatic resources in the potential access and/or transmission alignment COITICOTS.0.00...eesesescesceseseseesscetecescecosenseeeecaesensesseceesseeeseseseseceesesessesscnsseeseense 9-239 Figure 9.13-2.Study interdependencies for Aquatic Resources Study within the access alignment,transmission alignment,and COnStruction ALea..........esccesesesseessceseceeeessesseaes 9-240 Figure 9.14-1.Study interdependencies for the Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species. heseneecasenecesceesesscesseesesscescesseseeosssessessesescesssesescasessssceneeesescecssesesecesseeeaeeeseesssessceasesesseesseatenes 9-254 Figure 9.15-1.Upper Cook Inlet Management Commercial Fishing Districts and Statistical Reporting Areas (Shields and Dupuis 2012).0...eecsesceecesceeteescenceesceteesscesseesensesnees 9-266 Figure 9.15-2.Northern Cook Inlet Management Area Sport Fishing Management Units (Oslund ANd Ivey 2010).oe esesssscsssessessensesscsscessccscesseveesensesseneescsensescsseeseeeaseeeeseeeeesseseesseesseatens 9-267 Figure 9.15-3.Study Interdependencies for Analysis of Fish Harvest Study..............:cseee 9-268 Figure 9.16-1.Eulachon study area...cesesscsscssccessesecseesesssscssscecessesseeessesessessscesnsensesseaees 9-283 Figure 9.16-2.Historic eulachon spawning locations (ADF&G 1984)...eeeesessesseeeeeeeee 9-284 Figure 9.16-3.Eulachon study interdependencies.............:cssescccsscseseessseesscesersscessasesseesaeeeeee 9-285 Figure 9.17-1.Study area for Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study..........ee eescessssesseeseeseesseeaes 9-300 Figure 9.17-2.Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study interdependencies...............cscsescsssesseceeeeeee 9-301 Figure 10.5-1.Moose study area...cc cescesscesescsseeseecseeeseecseeeseesesseesseeesseensessssessesensessnenaees 10-14 Figure 10.5-2.Interdependencies for moose StUdY.........essesseseceseseeeseceeseesecseeeseeesesseesneeseenees 10-15 Figure 10.6-1.Caribou study area...eeesessecsccssessceseesceeecsscecsseesseatesscesessesssesssenssesssasessees LO-23 Figure 10.6-2.Interdependencies for caribou Study..............ccesecsssceesceecceseessecesseesseesesesneeseees 10-24 Figure 10.7-1.Dall's sheep study area...ce ceesssseceeseneesceserteceeeesesseesseseesestesecesensenseeeeess 10-30 Figure 10.7-2.Study interdependencies for Dall's sheep study.«00.0...eeeceeeseseeseeeeeeecssesneeeeees 10-31 Figure 10.8-1.Study area for large Carnivore...........csssssssssssessessssssessscssesscsecssesersetesseseneeeees 10-43 Figure 10.8-2.Study interdependencies for the large carnivore StUCY............ecesesseesceeseeeeeeee 10-44 Figure 10.9-1.Wolverine study area...cesessesseccescseceerserscesassacsasesscsccscsscsessetseesseneeneensees 10-52 Figure 10.9-2.Study interdependencies for Wolverine Stud y...........cccccccsscssessesssessessecnseseeeees 10-53 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 10.10-1.Terrestrial furbearer study area..........scscsecscsesessonsecsecsssesssessssesseserenesassesseees 10-66 Figure 10.10-2.Study interdependencies for Terrestrial Furbearer Study............cccesssesseeees 10-67 Figure 10.11-1.Aquatic furbearer study areas.........cceescsscsscsecessceseeenseesesssesseessassersssseseseenes 10-78 Figure 10.11-2.Study interdependencies for the Aquatic Furbearer Study.........cc cssseesenees 10-79 Figure 10.12-1.Study area for the small mammals study.«0.0.0.0...sccsssssscsssesesessessesesssescnsseees 10-86 Figure 10.12-2.Study interdependencies for the small mammal study..............cccsesseseeeseeee 10-87 Figure 10.13-1.Bat study area...ee essssessssenssseecssessscsssssessssssscsesseeenseesesseesnesesssssneeassee 10-95 Figure 10.13-2.Study interdependencies for the Bat Study.oo...cece cessssseescsesseeessssessesssoe 10-96 Figure 10.14-1.Study area for Surveys of Eagles and Other Raptors.............:cscsccsssssseseesees 10-111 Figure 10.14-2.Study interdependencies for Surveys of Eagles and Other Raptors.............10-112 Figure 10.15-1.Waterbird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study area...............c00 10-127 Figure 10.15-2.Study interdependencies for the waterbird Study............scscssssesssceseersseesees 10-128 Figure 10.16-1.Landbird and shorebird study area...........ccsssscssssesesseseeeseeecseeseesecssessseneees 10-143 Figure 10.16-2.Study interdependencies for the landbird and shorebird study...............00 10-144 Figure 10.17-1.Willow Ptarmigan study area........cccecccssesssessssecseeeseeseesssssesseessesseessesseeeseee 10-154 Figure 10.17-2._A Sharp-tailed Grouse equipped with an ATS 3950 radio tag identical to the model that will be used for Willow Ptarmigan..........ccccesccssceseceessesseetsseessescateeeeoeees 10-155 Figure 10.17-3.Study interdependencies for the Willow Ptarmigan study............:ssseseeee 10-156 Figure 10.18-1.Wood frog study area.oo...ce cecsssssesececssssececsseessssenssessessesssesseessesseseeneseees 10-166 Figure 10.18-2.Interdependencies for Wood Frog Study.........csscsccscssesscsrececesssssseoeeeee 10-167 Figure 10.19-1.Study area for evaluation of wildlife habitat use.The study area is a combination of the wildlife habitat mapping areas from the Vegetation and Habitat Mapping Study (Section 11.5)and the Riparian Vegetation Study (Section 11.6)...ee eeeeeeeeeeee 10-180 Figure 10.19-2.Study interdependencies for the wildlife habitat-use evaluation.................10-181 Figure 10.20-1.Study area for the Wildlife Harvest Analysis..........c.csscessssseessssscesevenesseees 10-188 Figure 10.20-2.Study interdependencies for the Wildlife Harvest Analysis...........:csesesees 10-189 Figure 11.5-1.Study area for vegetation and wildlife habitat mapping for 2013 and 2014 in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project area.0...ee eesessercceeeserecesseceseceseseneeseeseteeeeseeneees 11-15 Figure 11.5-2.Study interdependencies for the Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin..........ccscccsscsesseeeeseeseeeeceseeeeesesesseseessneasssessees 11-16 Figure 11.6-1.Preliminary riparian vegetation study area for 2013 and 2014 in the Susitna basin. seeuseaesacsateacesseatesseseesessesseeaseneecessessesseseesususssceseesssessscsesesssaceasssenescaseeseeeseeseessescessessesseseneeseoe 11-34 Figure 11.6-2.Diagram of Ecological Land Survey (ELS)plot for use in the riparian vegetation study showing plot center (3-m radius),6.5-m radius plot (trees <5 cm DBH and tall Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xilii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN shrubs),11.5 m-radius plot (trees >5 cm),16.25-m radius plot (snags),vegetation sampling lines,and soil pit location.Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project,Alaska,2013-2014.11-35 Figure 11.6-3.Diagram of laser point sampler mounted on frost probe for use in the riparian vegetation study,Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project,Alaska,2013-2014................11-36 Figure 11.6-4.Study interdependencies for the riparian vegetation study.............cccccseeeees 11-37 Figure 11.7-1.Study area for wetlands mapping in 2013 and 2014 in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project area...eeessessescsscsensesceecescesessesecesssssseesssessenesaesseessesssateatesesesseees 11-53 Figure 11.7-2a.Study interdependencies for the Wetland Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin.0.0...seeseessseseeeeceseccsceseessessccesccsscenscesseseessseseesssesessesseessecseeses 11-54 Figure 11.7-2b.Study interdependencies for the Wetland Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin (Continued)............cccscccsssseessseesceccesecessecsesscssssssssssssecsssccssesesscoosnees 11-55 Figure 11.8-1.Study area for rare plant surveys in 2013 and 2014 in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project area...esecssesecsecesecsseesceseescecssssesesssseeesesseesesesessseeresseesseseaees 11-64 Figure 11.8-2.Study interdependencies for the Rare Plant Stud y..............ccsccsssessesseesseeseeees 11-65 Figure 11.9-1.Study interdependencies for the Invasive Plant Study..........c.cccsscssssceseeseeees 11-74 Figure 12.5-1 Recreation Resources Study Area.oo...cessessssssesccsscesscceseeesseesseeessessateseeenscesees 12-27 Figure 12.5-2 Survey Intercept Locations...........ceessssssssesssesseeseeseesscsseesseessesaessscssseaeeeesseeeess 12-28 Figure 12.5-3 Study interdependencies for recreation...........ccsscssessesssesesssesscessessesssesscseeesersees 12-29 Figure 12.6-1 Aesthetic resources Study area..........eeesecsescesceescessecesesscecseecsseessessnessesentensees 12-46 Figure 12.6-2 Study interdependencies for aesthetics...........ccessssccessessesseessesssessessesscesecsuceeees 12-47 Figure 12.7-1 River Recreation -Reaches Study Area....ccsscscsscscsesescessesseessessseseesecsneenees 12-56 Figure 12.7-2 Recreation River Flow Study Interdependenci€s...............ccccssseesecesseesseesevenrees 12-57 Figure 13.1-1.Property ownership in the vicinity of the study area...........cceeessccsseeeteeseceeeees 13-32 Figure 13.5-1.Direct and indirect APEs for the cultural resource study............esscsseseesereeees 13-33 Figure 13.5-2.Survey coverage accomplished in the late 1970s and early 1980s.................5 13-34 Figure 13.5-3.Traditional Native language areas in the vicinity of the study area.................13-35 Figure 13.5-4.Detail of testing accomplished in the late 1970s and early 1980s...............0.5 13-36 Figure 13.5-5.Proposed survey methods in the direct and indirect APES...........ccccccssesseseeeee 13-37 Figure 13.5-6.Study interdependencies for the cultural resources Study.........ccsssssesseseceeeees 13-38 Figure 13.6-1 Study Area for Paleontological Resources Study...........ccccsscsssesseesessseseeseesseeees 13-45 Figure 13.6-2.Study interdependencies for the Paleontological Resources Study..............5 13-46 Figure 14.5-1.Federally Designated Nonrural Areas...........c:ccscsscessscscessceseceseesecsnsesssaeeseneeees 14-21 Figure 14.5-2.State of Alaska Designated Nonsubsistence Areas............:sssssssssesessceeseeeseeeees 14-22 Figure 14.5-3.Overview of Subsistence Study Commumities...........cccccesseeeeceseeceseeeeeeseseseees 14-23 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xiii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 14.5-4.Study interdependencies for subsistence baseline documentation study.........14-24 Figure 15.5-1.Study Interdependencies for the Regional Economic Evaluation Study...........15-9 Figure 15.6-1.Fish and Wildlife Study Interdependencies for the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study 0.0...ceeesssessessessecsssscscesseeseeseecssessevecceseesseseseeeaeeseeesasseseneeeeens 15-21 Figure 15.6-2.Recreation Study Interdependencies for the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study.........cscscccssseesscsssecssseecesesssesesecseecessessseessesscecceesesseeeseeceseseeaseesensees 15-21 Figure 15.6-3.Fish and Wildlife Harvest Study Interdependencies for the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study..........esccscsssessssesssvscsesccesceseseesnseesessesseesoassonsonssensseneees 15-22 Figure 15.6-4.Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study Interdependencies with Transportation Study...eeesscscsessssesssecsensssssscsssssssscssseesessnsesssnesssseessssesessessesseceseeserses 15-23 Figure 15.7-1.Transportation Resources Study Interdependencies with Other Studies........15-33 Figure 15.8-1.HIA Interdependencies for Baseline Water Quality and Mercury Bioaccumulation Studies..........ccccesccsccssssscseccscceceescesscessceeessnseoacesseessesenseeseaceseseseeseeseseaeseeneesseseesneesssrseeseasees 15-42 Figure 15.8-2.HIA Interdependencies with Air Quality and associated Transportation Study COMPONEMMS.20...ceeccesesseessscsseeesecesssoesensssssesscssscsssssssscsessssssuesecerssenseesessesseeeesssessenesesesen 15-43 Figure 15.8-3.HIA Interdependencies with the Transportation Study...csssessesseessssseees 15-44 Figure 15.8-4.HIA Interdependencies with Social Conditions and Public Services Study....15-45 Figure 15.8-5.HIA Interdependencies with Subsistence Study.0.0...cccecescsessssessesseeseneens 15-46 Figure 15.9-1.Air Quality Study Interdependencies with Other Studies.........cc cecsceseeeseeeee 15-52 Figure 16.5-1.Interdependencies for Probable Maximum Flood Study.........ceeesesseeeeeeeeee 16-10 Figure 16.6-1.Regional Faults (Csejtey et al,1978;Plafker et al,1994;Williams and Galloway, 1986),..ccececccsccssccscesccessccescesceseeseneesecstecsescssssersssecsecaceasensescecetenseesesesseesecseeasonsenesenseaseasenes 16-19 Figure 16.6-2.Interdependencies for Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Stud y.......cceceseecseeeeees 16-20 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1-1.2012 Early Study Efforts Attachment 2-1.Comprehensive Schedule Attachment 5-1.Baseline Water Quality Monitoring -Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)/Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Attachment 5-2.Water Quality Modeling Study -Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)/Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Attachment 5-3.Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)/Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP). Attachment 5-4.Glossary of Terms and Acronyms -Water Quality. Attachment 6-1.Glossary of Terms and Acronyms -Geomorphology. Attachment 7-1.Glossary of Terms and Acronyms -Hydrology. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xliv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Attachment 8-1.Glossary of Terms and Acronyms -Instream Flow. Attachment 8-2.Three-Year Seedling Cohort Longitudinal Establishment and Survival Analysis. Attachment 9-1.Glossary of Terms and Acronyms -Fisheries. Attachment 12-1.Incidental Observation Form. Attachment 12-2.Recreation Intercept Survey Instrument (Draft). Attachment 12-3.Recreation Executive Interview Protocol (Draft). Attachment 12-4.River Recreation and Access Survey Instrument (Draft). Attachment 12-5.River Recreation and Access Executive Survey Interview Protocol (Draft). Attachment 13-1.Plan for Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources and Human Remains. Attachment 14-1.Review of Communities and Subsistence Use Areas in the Susitna River Watershed. Attachment 14-2.Household Harvest Survey Instrument (Draft). Attachment 14-3.Household Harvest Survey Key Informant Interview Protocol (Draft). Attachment 14-4.Active Harvester Subsistence Mapping Interview Protocol (Draft). Attachment 14-5.Traditional Knowledge Workshop Protocol (Draft). Attachment 15-1.Regional Economic Evaluation Interview Protocol. LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1 Comment Response Table of FERC-filed Comments. Appendix 2 FERC-filed Letters Coded with Comment Identifiers. Appendix 3 Comment Response Table of Informal Consultation,July -November 2012. Appendix 4 Consultation Documentation for Informal Consultation,July -November 2012. Appendix 5 Mapping References. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page xlv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN LIST OF ACRONYMS AND SCIENTIFIC LABELS Abbreviation Definition ug microgram yg/L micrograms per liter g/m microgram per cubic meter ul microliter(s) 4C Carbon 14 AAC Alaska Administrative Code ac-ft acre-feet ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation pve oda Jaaond an averrparcinaucumieas nee ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation ADF&G Alaska Department of Fish and Game Adfluvial Fish that spend a part of their life cycle in lakes and return to rivers and streams to spawn. ADNR Alaska Department of Natural Resources ADOT&PF Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities ADOTPFCR ADOT Central Region Planning ADOTPFNR ADOT Northern Region Planning AEA Alaska Energy Authority AEIDC Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center AFB air force base AFFI Alaska Freshwater Fish Inventory Age-0 juvenile The description of an organism that,in its natal year,has developed the anatomical and physical traits characteristically similar to the mature life stage,but without the capability to reproduce. AHMG Alaska Habitat Management Guides AHRS Alaska Heritage Resources Survey Ahtna Ahtna,Inc. AKNHP Alaska Natural Heritage Program Algae Single-celled organisms (as individual or cells grouped together in colonies)thatcontainchlorophyll-a and are capable of the photosynthesis. Alluvial Relating to,composed of,or found in alluvium. AMP Airport Master Plan Anadromous rule to ap migra ee venues from freshwater to saltwater and then return as Anchor ice Submerged ice attached or anchored to the bottom,irrespective of the nature of itsformation.Often accumulates as frazil slush in open reaches. ANCSA Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act ANILCA Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 ANOVA Analysis of variance,a collection of statistical models,and their associated Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page xlvi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition procedures,in which the observed variance in a particular variable is partitioned into components attributable to different sources of variation. APA Alaska Power Authority APA Project APA Susitna Hydroelectric Project APE area of potential effect APLICs Alaska Public Lands Information Centers A geologic formation,group of formations,or part of a formation that contains Aquifer sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to springs and wells. ARRC Alaska Railroad Corporation AS Alaska Statutes ASCP Alaska Shorebird Conservation Plan ASFDB Alaska Subsistence Fisheries Database ASG Alaska Shorebird Group Investigative (analytic)procedure in laboratory medicine,pharmacology, Assa environmental biology,and molecular biology for qualitatively assessing orssayquantitativelymeasuringthepresenceoramountorthefunctionalactivityof a target entity (the analyte). ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATV all-terrain vehicle AVC Alaska Vegetation Classification The Anadromous Waters Catalog,a catalog and atlas maintained by the Alaska AWC Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)of waters important for the spawning, rearing or migration of anadromous fishes. Off-channel habitat characterization feature found along channel margins and Backwater generally within the influence of the active main channel with no independent source of inflow.Water is not clear. The sloping land bordering a stream channel that forms the usual boundaries of a Bank channel.The bank has a steeper slope than the bottom of the channel and is usually steeper than the land surrounding the channel. Bankfull stage (flow)The discharge at which water completely fills a channel;the flow rate at which the water surface is level with the floodplain. Bankfull width The width of a river or stream channel between the highest banks on either side of a stream. The portion of stream flow that comes from the sum of deep subsurface flow andBaseflowdelayedshallowsubsurfaceflow.It should not be confused with groundwater flow. Baseline (or Environmental Baseline):the environmental conditions that are the Baseline starting point for analyzing the impacts of a proposed licensing action (such as approval of a license application)and any alternative. BCC birds of conservation concern BDPs Best development practices Beacon (tag)A beacon is an intentionally conspicuous device,in this case a telemetry tag, designed to attract attention to a specific location. Beaver complex Off-channel habitat characterization feature consisting of a ponded water body created by beaver dams. Benthos (benthic)Defining a habitat or organism found on the streambed or pertaining to the streambed (or bottom)of a water body. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page xlvii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition BIA DOI,Bureau of Indian Affairs Biotelemetry The remote detection and measurement of a human or animal function,activity,orcondition(as heart rate or body temperature) BLM DOI,Bureau of Land Management BLM-S BLM sensitive species BLM-W BLM watch list species BMC birds of management concern BMPs best management practices BOD biochemical oxygen demand BOF Alaska Board of Fisheries Bonferroni's method A statistical method used to counteract the problem of multiple comparisons. Border ice Ice sheet in the form of along border attached to the bank or shore;shore ice. Boulder Substrate particles greater than 12 inches in diameter.Larger than cobble. BP before present BPIFWG Boreal Partners in Flight Working Group Braided streams Stream consisting of multiple small,shallow channels that divide and recombine numerous times.Associated with glaciers,the braiding is caused by excess sediment load. Brash ice Accumulations of floating ice made up of fragments not more than about 2 meters (6 feet)across;the wreckage of other forms of ice. Break-up Disintegration of ice cover. Break-up jam Ice jam that occurs as a result of the accumulation of broken ice pieces. Break-up period Period of disintegration of an ice cover. In the context of hydrologic modeling,calibration is the process of adjusting input Calibration variables to minimize the error between predicted and observed water surface elevations or other hydrologic parameters. Capillary fringe The subsurface layer in which groundwater seeps up from a water table by capillary action to fill soil pores. Carbon isotope ratio The identification of isotopic signature,the distribution of certain stable isotopes and chemical elements within chemical compounds. The steepest of riffle habitats.Unlike rapids,which have an even gradient, Cascade cascades consist of a series of small steps of alternating small waterfalls and shallow pools. CATC CIR!Alaska Tourism Catch per unit effort The quantity of fish caught (in number or in weight)with one standard unit of fishing effort. Catchability coefficient (fishwheel)The relationship between the catch rate (CPUE)and the true population size,aka effectiveness. CCCMA Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling and Analysis. CDP census-designated place CEll Critical Energy Infrastructure Information CFR Code of Federal Regulations cfs cubic feet per second Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page x\viii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Channel A natural or artificial watercourse that continuously or intermittently contains water,with definite bed and banks that confine all but overbank stream flows. CIBW Cook Inlet Beluga Whales CIRI Cook Inlet Region,Inc. Cirques A bowl-shaped depression on the side of a mountain at the head of a glacier. cm centimeter CNIPM Alaska Committee for Noxious and Invasive Plants Management Cobble Substrate particles between 3 and 12 inches in diameter.Larger than gravel and smaller than boulder. Commercial fishery Aterm related to the whole process of catching and marketing fish and shellfish for sale.It refers to and includes fisheries resources,fishermen,and related businesses. In terms of water conductivity,the ability of water to conduct electricity,normallyConductivitythroughthepresenceofdissolvedsolidsthatcarryelectricalcharges. Confluence The junction of two or more rivers or streams. Consecutive dry days Number of days in a row without precipitation. Consecutive wet days Number of days in a row with precipitation. COY cubs of the year CPOM course particulate organic matter,particle size larger than 1 mm in size Cross-section Aplane across a river or stream channel perpendicular to the direction of water flow. U.S.Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory,Hanover,NewCRRELHampshire. csIs ADF&G Community Subsistence Information System Datum A geometric plane of known or arbitrary elevation used as a point of reference todeterminetheelevation,or change of elevation,of another plane (see gage datum). DBSD Denali Borough Schoo!District DCCED Alaska Department of Commerce,Community,and Economic Development Decision tree barrier analysis A step-wise process for evaluating potential barriers in the field.Quantitative metrics are used at each step in the decision tree to identify the impassability of the potential barrier. Also termed freezing degree-day,a measure of the departure of the mean dailyDegree-day temperature below a given standard,usually 0°C (32°F). Delta Alow,nearly flat accumulation of sediment deposited at the mouth of a river or stream,commonly triangular or fan-shaped DEM Digital elevation model. Denaturation is a process in which proteins or nucleic acids lose the tertiary Denaturation structure and secondary structure which is present in their native state,by©application of some external stress or compound such as a strong acid or base,a concentrated inorganic salt,an organic solvent,or heat. Depth Water depth at the measuring point (station). Devils Canyon Located at approximately Susitna River Mile (RM)150-161,Devils Canyon contains four sets of turbulent rapids rated collectively as Class VI.This feature is a partial fish barrier because of high water velocity. DHSS Alaska Department of Health and Social Services DIDSON Dual Frequency Identification Sonar.Sonar imaging instrumentation developed by Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page xlix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Sound Metrics Corp.with applications for fish enumeration,behavior and habitat mapping. Direct solar radiation Sunlight not blocked by clouds. Discharae The rate of stream flow or the volume of water flowing at a location within agspecifiedtimeinterval. Discontinuous permafrost Permafrost that is laterally discontinuous,or isolated by thawed soils or bedrock. Distribution (species)The manner in which a biological taxon is spatially arranged. Diurnal Any pattern that reoccurs daily. DNA A nucleic acid containing the genetic instructions used in the development and functioning of all known living organisms. Do dissolved oxygen.The amount of gaseous oxygen (02)dissolved in the water column. DOl U.S.Department of the Interior Downwellin The downward movement of water from rivers,streams,sloughs and other surfacegwaterfeaturesintosoilsandbedrock. Doyon Doyon,Ltd. DPOR ADNR Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation .The total land area draining to any point in a stream.Also called catchment area,Drainage area watershed,and basin. DSM Demand Side Management Duration of ice cover The time from freeze-up to break-up of an ice cover. EARMP East Alaska Resource Management Plan ECHAM5 A global climate model developed by the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology. Edge habitat ne boundary between natural habitats,in this case between land and a stream.evel five tier of the habitat classification system. EE energy efficiency Effectiveness (fishwheel)the true populaton ite the relationship between the catch rate (CPUE)and EFH essential fish habitat EIM Environmental Information Management EIS environmental impact statement EI.elevation Electrofishing A biological collection method that uses electric current to facilitate capturing fishes. Emergence ye pen of becoming visible after being concealed,the escape of an organism EMS emergency medical services Entrainment The unintended diversion of fish into an unsafe passage route. EO Executive Order EPA U.S.Environmental Protection Agency EROS Earth Resources Observation System. ESA Endangered Species Act Escapement (spawning)The number or proportion of fish surviving (escaping from)a given fishery at the end of the fishing season and reaching the spawning grounds. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page |December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition et al."et alia',and the rest Evapotranspiration The sum of evaporation and plant transpiration to the atmosphere. FAA Federal Aviation Administration FBOM fine benthic organic matter FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FHA USDOT Federal Highway Administration Fim Granular,partially consolidated snow that has passed through one summer meltseasonbutisnotyetglacialice. Fish barrier Barriers to fish migration Fishers exact test Astatistical significance test used in the analysis of contingency tables.Although in practice it is employed when sample sizes are small,it is valid for all sample sizes. Fishery Generally,a fishery is an activity leading to harvesting of fish.It may involve capture of wild fish or raising of fish through aquaculture. Fishing Any activity,other than scientific research conducted by a scientific research vessel,that involves the catching,taking,or harvesting of fish;or any attempt to do $0;or any activity that can reasonably be expected to result in the catching,taking, or harvesting of fish,and any operations in support of it. Fishing gear The equipment used for fishing (e.g.gillnet,hand line,harpoon,haul seine,long line,bottom and midwater trawls,purse seine,rod-and-reel,pots and traps).Each of these gears can have multiple configurations. Fishwheel A device for catching fish which operates much as a water-powered mill wheel.A wheel complete with baskets and paddles is attached to a floating dock.The wheel rotates due to the current of the stream it is placed into.The baskets on the wheel capture fish traveling upstream.The fish caught in the baskets fall into a holding tank. FLIR Forward looking infrared,an imaging technology that senses infrared radiation. Can be used for watershed temperature monitoring. Flood Any flow that exceeds the bankfull capacity of a stream or channel and flows out on the floodplain. Floodplain 1.The area along waterways that is subject to periodic inundation by out-of-bank flows.2.The area adjoining a water body that becomes inundated during periods of over-bank flooding and that is given rigorous legal definition in regulatory programs. 3.Land beyond a stream channel that forms the perimeter for the maximum probability flood.4.A relatively flat strip of land bordering a stream that is formed by sediment deposition.5.A deposit of alluvium that covers a valley flat from lateral erosion of meandering streams and rivers. Floodplain vegetation -groundwater/ surface water regime functional groups Assemblages of plants that have established and developed under similar groundwater and surface water hydrologic regimes. Of or pertaining to the processes associated with rivers and streams and theFluvialdepositsandlandformscreatedbythem. FMP Fishery Management Plan F A Areas selected for intensive investigation by multiple disciplines as part of the AEAocusAreastudyprogram. Fork lenath A measurement used frequently for fish length when the tail has a fork shape.ork leng Projected straight distance between the tip of the snout and the fork of the tail. FPOM fine benthic organic matter fps feet per second Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page li December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition FR Federal Register Erazil Fine spicules,plates,or discoids of ice suspended in water.In rivers and lakes it isformedinsupercooled,turbulent waters. Frazil pan A circular agglomerate of loosely packed frazil that floats. Freeze-up jam Ice jam formed as frazil ice accumulates and thickens during the freeze-up period. Freeze-up period Period of initial formation of an ice cover. A recently hatched fish.Sometimes defined as a young juvenile salmonid withFryabsorbedeggsac,less than 60 mm in length. FS featured species ft feet ft MSL feet mean sea level FY fiscal year Fyke net Hoop nets are tubular shaped nets with a series of hoops or rings spaced along theylengthofthenettokeepitopen. g gram Gaaina station Aspecific site on a stream where systematic observations of stream flow or otherginghydrologicdataareobtained. A population genetics software package originally developed by Michel Raymond Genepop and Francois Rousset,at the Laboratiore de Genetique et Environment, Montpellier,France. Genetic markers Agene or DNA sequence with a known location on a chromosome that can be used to identify individuals or species. A diagram showing the lineage or genealogy of an individual and all the directGenetictreeancestors,usually to analyze or follow the inheritance of trait. The genetic makeup of a cell,an organism,or an individual (i.e.the specific allele Genotype makeup of the individual)usually with reference to a specific character under consideration.[ Geohydroloaic unit An aquifer,a confining unit,or a combination of aquifers and confining unitsyaro'og comprising a framework for a reasonably distinct geohydrologic system. Geohydrology The study of water in the Earth's surface,commonly called groundwater. Geomorphic mapping A map design technique that defines,delimits and locates landforms. Geomorphic reach Level two tier of the habitat classification system.Separates major hydraulic segments into unique reaches based on the channel's geomorphic characteristic. Geomorphology The scientific study of landforms and the processes that shape them. Gillnet With this type of gear,the fish are gilled,entangled or enmeshed in the netting. These nets may be used to fish on the surface,in midwater or on the bottom. Geographic Information System.An integrated collection of computer software and GIS data used to view and manage information about geographic places,analyze Spatial relationships,and model spatial processes. Glacial mass wasting When large amounts of glacial ice rapidly disintegrate and melt. Relatively rapid movement of a glacier down-gradient.Frequently accompanied by increased flow of meltwater and additional sediment production.These eventsGlacialsurgetypicallyhaveasuddenonset,extremely high (tens of meters/day)maximum flow rate,and a sudden termination,often with a discharge of stored water. Glacier geometry changes Changes in the size or shape of a glacier over time. Glacier mass balance The difference between accumulation and ablation of a glacier. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page lii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Glacier outburst Asudden release of water from a glacier. Glacier retreat The upslope migration of the terminus of a glacier. Glide An area with generally uniform depth and flow with no surface turbulence.Low gradient;0-1 %slope. GMP General Management Plan GMU Game Management Unit CPS global positioning system.A system of radio-emitting and -receiving satellites used for determining positions on the earth. Gradient The rate of change of any characteristic,expressed per unit of length (see Slope). May also apply to longitudinal succession of biological communities. Gravel Substrate particles between 0.1 and 3.0 inches in size,larger than sand and smaller than cobble. Grounded ice Ice that has run aground or is in contact with the ground underneath it. In the broadest sense,all subsurface water;more commonly that part of theGroundwater(GW)subsurface water in the saturated zone. Annual or seasonal.The increase in weight of a fish per year (or season),dividedGrowthratebytheinitialweight. .The amount of growth predicted for fish with known prey availability andGrowthRatePotentialenvironmentalconditions. GU globally unrankable GVEA Golden Valley Electric Association GW/SW interactions The physical interactions between groundwater and surface water. GWh gigawatt-hours The environment in which the fish live,including everything that surrounds and Habitat affects its life,e.g.water quality,bottom,vegetation,associated species (including food supplies).The locality,site and particular type of local environment occupied by an organism. Habitat Suitability Criteria Agraph/mathematical equation describing the suitability for use of areas within a stream channel related to water depth,velocity and substrate by various species/life stages of fish. Habitat Suitability Index A suitability index providing a probability that the habitat is suitable for the species, and hence a probability that the species will occur where that habitat occurs. Habitat Suitability Modeling A tool for predicting the quality or suitability of habitat for a given species based on known affinities with habitat characteristics,such as depth and substrate type. Amass of ice composed mainly of frazil or broken ice deposited under an ice coverHangingdaminaregionoflowflowvelocity. The total number or weight of fish caught and kept from an area over a period ofHarvesttime HEA Homer Electric Association Heat transfer model Amodel for migration of heat from a warm body to cold. Hierarchical log-likelihood ratio analysis A technique used in statistics to examine the relationship between more than two categorical variables. A graphical representation showing a visual impression of the distribution of data.ItHistogramisanestimateoftheprobabilitydistributionofacontinuousvariable. Homogeneity is the state of being homogeneous.Pertaining to the sciences,it is a Homogeneity substance where all the constituents are of the same nature;consisting of similar parts,or of elements of the like nature. Hook and line A type of fishing gear consisting of a hook tied to a line. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page liii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Hoop net Hoop nets are tubular shaped nets with a series of hoops or rings spaced along thePlengthofthenettokeepitopen. HRM Historic River Mile Hummocked ice Ice piled haphazardly,one piece over another,to form an uneven surface. Hydraulic head A measure of energy or pressure,expressed in terms of the vertical height of a column of water that has the same pressure difference. Hydraulic model A computer model of a segment of river used to evaluate stream flow characteristics over a range of flows. Agraph showing stage,flow,velocity,or other property of water with respect toHydrographtime The hyporheic zone is the subsurface volume of sediment and porous space Hyporheic beneath and lateral to a river or streambed,where there is mixing of shallow groundwater and surface water. Hyporheic flow Shallow subsurface (groundwater)flow through porous sediments adjacent to river channels. Ice bridge A continuous ice cover of limited size extending from shore to shore like a bridge. The ratio (in eighths or tenths)of the water surface actually covered by ice to the Ice concentration total area of surface,both ice-covered and ice-free,at a specific location or over a defined area. Ice cover A significant expanse of ice of any form on the surface of a body of water. Ice floe Free-floating piece of ice greater than about 1 meter (3 feet)in extent. Ice jam Astationary accumulation of fragmented ice or frazil that restricts or blocks aJstreamchannel. Ice run Flow of ice in a river.An ice run may be light or heavy,and may consist of frazil or broken sheet ice. Ice-free No floating ice present. IFRR Instream Flow Relationships Report ILP Integrated Licensing Process in Inch Inclined plane trap This trap consists of a revolving screen suspended between two pontoons. Downstream migrant fish reaching the back of the trap are dropped into a live box where they can later be enumerated. An index is a statistic that is assumed to be correlated to the true parameter ofIndexcountinterest(population)in some way Instream flow The rate of flow in a river or stream channel at any time of year. instream Flow Incremental Methodology integrates concepts of water-supply planning,analytical hydraulic engineering models,and empirically derived habitat- IFIM versus-flow functions to address water-use and instream-flow issues and questions conceming life-stage-specific effects on selected species and the general well- being of aquatic biological populations. Interannual stream flow variations Changes in stream flow on a year-to-year basis. The lateral movement of water in the upper part of the unsaturated zone,or vadoseInterflowzone,which directly enters a stream channel or other body of water. Intergravel Intergravel refers to the subsurface environment within the riverbed. Invertebrate All animals without a vertebral column;for example,aquatic insects. IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page liv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition ISER University of Alaska Anchorage Institute for Social and Economic Research ISR Initial Study Report Juvenile Ayoung fish or animal that has not reached sexual maturity. kemil circular mils kg kilogram km kilometer km2 kilometer(s)squared kV kilovolt L liter(s) Leaf area index.LA!is the one-sided green leaf area per unit ground area in LAI broadleaf canopies,or as the projected needle leaf area per unit ground area in needle canopies. Ib pound The upstream extent of a continuous ice cover that is progressing upstream via juxtaposition (accumulation)of frazil ice pans. Agencies,ANSCA corporations,Alaska Native entities and other licensing participants LIDAR Light Detection and Ranging.An optical remote sensing technology that canmeasurethedistancetoatarget;can be used to create a topographic map. An arbitrary age classification of an organism into categories relate to body Leading edge of ice cover licensing participants;Participants Life stage morphology and reproductive potential,such as spawning,egg incubation,larva or fry,juvenile,and adult. Loci The position of a gene (or other significant sequence)on a chromosome. LOEL Lowest Observable Effect Level A software package developed by Simon C.Heath,which analyses a quantitative LOKI trait observed on large pedigrees using Markov chain Monte Carlo multipoint linkage and segregation analysis. Lotic Refers to flowing water. Lower segment Susitna ay Sysina River from Cook Inlet (RM 0)to the confluence of the Chulitna River at LP DAAC Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center. LRTP Long Range Transportation Plan LWCF Land and Water Conservation Fund LWD large woody debris m meter(s) M million m2 square meter(s) Macroinvertebrate An invertebrate animal without a backbone that can be seen without magnification. For habitat classification system:a single dominant main channel.Also,the primary downstream segment of a river,as contrasted to its tributaries. Level four tier of the habitat classification system.Separates main channel habitat types including:tributary mouth,main channel,split main channel,multiple split main channel and side channel into mesohabitat types.Mesohabitat tyes include pool,glide,run,riffle,and rapid. Main channel Main channel habitat Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page lv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Mainstem Mainstem refers to the primary river corridor,as contrasted to its tributaries. Mainstem habitats include the main channel,split main channels,side channels, tributary mouths,and off-channel habitats. Mainstem habitat Level three tier of the habitat classification systems.Separates mainstem habitat into main channel,off-channel,and tributary habitat types.Main channel habitat types include:tributary mouth,main channel,split main channel,multiple split main channel and side channel.Off-channel habitat types include:side slough,upland slough,backwater,and beaver complex.Tributary habitat is not further categorized. Major hydraulic segment Level one tier of the habitat classification system.Separates the River into three segments:Lower River (RM 0-98},Middle River (RM 98-184),and Upper River (RM 184-233). Manning's equation V =1.486 R2/3S1/2/n in English units (V =R2/3S1/2/n in SI units)where V =mean flow velocity,R =hydraulic radius,and S =hydraulic slope;n is a coefficient of roughness. MAPS Monitoring Avian Productivity and Survivorship Mat-Su Matanuska Susitna MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act MEA Matanuska Electric Association Mesh size The size of holes in a fishing net. A discrete area of stream exhibiting relatively similar characteristics of depth, Mesohabitat velocity,slope,substrate,and cover,and variances thereof (e.g.,pools with maximum depth <5 ft,high gradient rimes,side channel backwaters). MET Meteorological!stations. mg milligram mg/L milligrams per liter mi mile(s) mi2;sq.mi.square mile(s) Middle segment Susitna The Susitna River from the confluence of the Chulitna River at RM 98 to the _proposed Watana Dam Site at RM 184. Migrant (life history type)Some species exhibit a migratory life history type and undergo a migration to from rivers/lakes/ocean. Systematic (as opposed to random)movement of individuals of a stock from oneMigrationplacetoanother,often related to season. Minnow tra Normally composed of small steel mesh with 2-piece torpedo shape design,thisPtrapisdisconnectedinthemiddleforeasybaitingandfishremoval. MIROC Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate. .A fishery whose stock consists of fish that are of a variety of ages,sizes,species,Mixed stock (fishery)geographic or genetic origins or any combination of these variables. Traditional mixed stock analyses use morphological,chemical,or genetic markers Mixed stock analyses measured in several source populations and in a single mixed population to estimate the proportional contribution of each source to the mixed population. ml milliliter(s) ML&P Anchorage Municipal Light and Power mm millimeter(s) MODFLOW The name of a common USGS finite difference 3-D groundwater flow model. MON Museum of the North Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page Ivi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Monte Carlo simulation is a statistical approach whereby the inputs that are used Monte Carlo fora calculation are resampled many times assuming that the inputs follow known statistical distributions. MP mile post mph miles per hour MRLC Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics. MSA Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act MSB Matanuska-Susitna Borough MSL mean sea level Multidimensional scaling Aset of related statistical techniques often used in information visualization for exploring similarities or dissimilarities in data. Multiple split main channel Main channel habitat characterization feature where more than three distributed dominant channels are present. MVA megavolt-Ampere MW megawatts (one million watts) MWh megawatt hour n.d.no date N/A not applicable or not available NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NARR North America Regional Reanalysis. NAWCP North American Waterfowl Conservation Plan NAWMP North American Waterfowl Management Plan NCI Northern Cook Inlet NCIMA Northern Cook Inlet Management Area (sport fish harvest) NCM Newton centimeter NEPA National Environmental Policy Act Nested design (sometimes referred to as a hierarchical design)is used for Nested design experiments in which there is an interest in a set of treatments and the experimental units are sub-sampled. NGO non-governmental organization NHPA National Historic Preservation Act Nitrogen isotope Stable isotopes are method for understanding aquatic ecosystems because they can help scientists in understanding source links and process information in marine food webs.Certain isotopes can signify distinct primary producers forming the bases of food webs and trophic level positioning.Nitrogen isotopes indicate the trophic level position of various marine organisms. NLCD National Land Cover Dataset NLUR Northern Land Use Research NMFS NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service No.number NO2;NO2 nitrogen dioxide NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page lvii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition Nodes geet ee)SEee ae heeeearenen 4 NOEL No Observed Effects Level NOI Notice of Intent Non-native Not indigenous to or naturally occurring in a given area. NPS DOI,National Park Service NRCS USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NTU nephelometric turbidity unit NWI National Wetlands Inventory NWR National Wildlife Refuge O&M operations and maintenance Os ozone °C degrees Celsius °F degrees Fahrenheit Off-channel Those bodies of water adjacent to the main channel that have surface water connections to the main river at some discharge levels. Off-channel habitat Habitat within those bodies of water adjacent to the main channel that have surface water connections to the main river at some discharge levels. OHV off-highway vehicle Elongated opening in the ice cover caused by water current (velocity lead)or warmOpenleadwater(thermal lead). OPMP Office of Project Management and Permitting ORV off-road vehicle Otolith The ear bone of a fish.Otoliths have rings on them like the rings on a tree stump, and are used to find the age of the fish and its growth rate. .Several types of trapping equipment that can be used to estimate the abundance ofOutmigranttrapdownstreammigratinganadromoussalmonidsmolts. Overbank flow Powthat exceeds the level of a river's banks and extends into the floodplain.Also Freshwater habitat used by salmonids during the winter for incubation of eggs and Overwintering alevin in the gravel and for rearing of juveniles overwintering in the stream system before migrating to saltwater the following spring. PAD Pre-Application Document Partial barrier Heature that is impassable to some fish species,during part or all life stages at all Pb lead PCE primary constituent elements PDD Preliminary Decision Document Period of record The length of time for which data for an environmental variable has been collected on a regular and continuous basis. Permafrost Earth materials that remains continuously at or below OoC for at least two consecutive years. Permanent barrier A feature that is impassable to all fish at all flows.Results in the exclusion of all Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Wviii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition species from portions of a watershed. Permeability The capacity of a rock for transmitting a fluid;a measure of the relative ease with which a porous medium can transmit a liquid. Personal use fishery In Alaska,"Personal use"is a legally defined regulatory category of fishery.It is defined as "the taking,fishing for,or possession of finfish,shellfish,or other fishery resources,by Alaska residents for personal use and not for sale or barter,with gill or dip net,seine,fishwheel,long line,or other means defined by the Board of Fisheries”. pH A measure of the acidity or basicity of a solution. Physical Habitat Simulation,aspecific model designed to calculate an index to the PHABSIM amount of microhabitat available for different life stages at different flow levels. PHABSIM has two major analytical components:stream hydraulics and life stage- specific habitat requirements. PhD Doctor of Philosophy Piezometer 'ype of groundwater well installed to specifically measure water levels or pressure PIT Passive Integrated Transponder tags used to individually identify animals and monitor their movements. PL Public Law PLC programmable logic controller PLP Preliminary Licensing Proposal PM particulate matter PM&E protection,mitigation and enhancement PMio;PM10 particulate matter up to 10 microns in diameter PM2s;PM2.5 particulate matter up to 2.5 microns in diameter PMF probable maximum flood Slow water habitat with minimal turbulence and deeper due to a strong hydraulicPoolcontrol. Porosity The ratio of the volume of voids in a rock or soil to the total volume. An imaginary surface representing the static head of ground water in tighty cased Potentiometric surface wells that tap a water-bearing rock unit (aquifer);or,in the case of unconfined aquifers,the water table. POW palustrine open water (ponds under 20 ac) ppb parts per billion PRECPTOT Total precipitation for a year. Parameter-elevation Regressions on independent Slopes Model.PRISM uses PRISM point measurements of precipitation,temperature,and other climatic factors to produce continuous,digital grid estimates of monthly,yearly,and event-based climatic parameters. Process domains Define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern habitat attributes and dynamics (Montgomery 1999). Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration PSP Proposed Study Plan Pump test A method of determining aquifer properties by pumping water from a well and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page lix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition measuring the water level drawdown or recovery in the well,and nearby piezometers or wells. Q Hydrological abbreviation for discharge,usually presented as cfs (cubic feet per second)or cms (cubic meters per second).Flow (discharge at a cross-section). R (program) R is an open source programming language and software environment for statistical computing and graphics.The R language is widely used among statisticians for developing statistical software and data analysis. Radiotelemetry Involves the capture and placement of radio-tags in adult fish that allow for the remote tracking of movements of individual fish. Ramping rates The rate at which (typically inches per hour)a flow is artificially altered to accommodate diversion requirements. Swift,turbulent flow including small chutes and some hydraulic jumps swirling around boulders.Exposed substrate composed of individual boulders,boulderRapidclusters,and partial bars.Lower gradient and less dense concentration of boulders and white water than Cascade.Moderate gradient;usually 2.0-4.0%slope. RASP Regional Aviation System Plan RCC roller compacted concrete Rd recreation-dispersed Rearing Rearing is the term used by fish biologists that considers the period of time in which juvenile fish feed and grow. Recreational Fishery Harvesting fish for personal use,sport,and challenge (e.g.as opposed to profit or research).Recreational fishing does not include sale,barter,or trade of all or part of the catch. Redd The spawning ground or nest of various fishes An area protected from disturbance and exposure to adverse environmental Refugia conditions where fish or other animals can find shelter from sudden flow surges, adverse water quality,or other short-duration disturbances. Regime The general pattern (magnitude and frequency)of flow or temperature events through time at a particular location (such as snowmelt regime,rainfall regime). Relative abundance Relative abundance is an estimate of actual or absolute abundance;usually stated as some kind of index. A body of water,either natural or artificial,that is used to manipulate flow or storeReservoirwaterforfutureuse. Resident Resident fish as opposed to anadromous remain in the freshwater environment year-round A fast water habitat with turbulent,shallow flow over submerged or partially Riffle submerged gravel and cobble substrates.Generally broad,uniform cross-section. Low gradient;usually 0.5-2.0%slope. Riparian Pertaining to anything connected with or adjacent to the bank of a stream or other body of water. Riparian process domain Define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern floodplain habitat attributes and dynamics. Riparian vegetation Vegetation that is dependent upon an excess of moisture during a portion of the growing season on a site that is perceptively more moist than the surrounding area. Riparian zone Astream and all the vegetation on its banks that is influenced by the presence of the stream,including surface flow,hyporheic flow and microclimate. RIRP Railbelt Integrated Resources Plan River A large stream that serves as the natural drainage channel for a relatively large catchment or drainage basin. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Ix December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition A perennial,intermittent,or ephemeral stream and adjacent vegetative fringe.The River corridor corridor is the area occupied during high water and the land immediately adjacent, including riparian vegetation that shades the stream,provides input of organic debris,and protects banks from excessive erosion. River mile The distance of a point on a river measured in miles from the river's mouth along the low-water channel. RM River Mile(s)(add clarification for origin of RM Project vs historic) ROS recreational opportunity spectrum Rosgen channel-type The Rosgen stream classification system which categorizes streams based on channel!morphology so that consistent,reproducible,and quantitative descriptions can be made. RS revised statute RSP Revised Study Plan RTE rare,threatened and endangered RTK Real time kinematic,in reference to a GPS survey method. A habitat area with minimal surface turbulence over or around protruding boulders with generally uniform depth that is generally greater than the maximum substrate Run (habitat)size.Velocities are on border of fast and slow water.Gradients are approximately 0.5 %to less than 2%.Generally deeper than riffles with few major flow obstructions and low habitat complexity. Run (migration) Seasonal migration undertaken by fish,usually as part of their life history;for example,spawning run of salmon,upstream migration of shad.Fishers may refer to increased catches as a "run”of fish,a usage often independent of their migratory behavior. s second Sand Substrate particles less than 0.1 inches in diameter,smaller than gravel. SANPCC Southcentral Alaska Northern Pike Control Committee SaSl Salmonid Stock Inventory SB Senate bill SCORP Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan Screw trap A floating trap that relies on an Archimedes screw built into a screen covered conethatissuspendedbetweentwopontoonsisused. SCRO ADNR South Central Regional Office SD1 Scoping Document 1 $D2 Scoping Document 2 SDVCSC South Denali Visitor Center Steering Committee Seasonal barrier A feature that is impassable to all fish at certain flow conditions (based on run timing and flow conditions).Can result in a delay in movement beyond the barrier for some period of time. Sediment Solid material,both mineral and organic,that is in suspension in the current or deposited on the streambed. Sediment load The portion of the sediment that is carried by a fluid flow which settle slowly enough such that it almost never touches the bed. Sediment transport The movement of solid particles (sediment),typically due to a combination of the force of gravity acting on the sediment,and/or the movement of the fluid in which the sediment is entrained. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Ixi December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition A fishing net that hangs vertically in the water with its bottom edge held down by Seine (beach)weights and its top edge buoyed by floats.Seine nets can be deployed from the shore as a beach seine,or from a boat. SES City of Seward Electric System sf,ft?Square foot (feet) SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer Lateral channel with an axis of flow roughly parallel to the mainstem,which is fed by water from the mainstem;a braid of a river with flow appreciably lower than the Side channel main channel.Side channel habitat may exist either in well-defined secondary (overflow)channels,or in poorly-defined watercourses flowing through partially submerged gravel bars and islands along the margins of the mainstem. Side slough Off-channel habitat characterization of an Overflow channel contained in the floodplain,but disconnected from the main channel.Has clear water, Side-scan sonar Side scan sonar uses transducers that emit fan-shaped acoustic pulses down toward the riverbed or seafloor. Simple daily intensity index Known also as SDII,it is the annual total precipitation divided by the number of wet days in the year. Slope The inclination or gradient from the horizontal of a line or surface. Awidely used term for wetland environment in a channel or series of shallow lakes Slough where water is stagnant or may flow slowly on a seasonal basis.Also known as a stream distributary or anabranch. Slush i An agglomerate of loosely packed frazil floating on the water surface or adhered tousnIcethebedorundersideoftheicecover. SMAP Susitna Matanuska Area Plan Smolt An adolescent salmon which has metamorphosed and which is found on its waymodownstreamtowardthesea. Smottfication The physiological changes anadromous salmonids and trout undergo in freshwatermomcaiowhilemigratingtowardsaltwaterthatallowthemtoliveintheocean. SMP Shoreline Management Plan SNAP Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning. Single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)is a change to a single nucleotide ina DNA SNP markers sequence.The relative mutation rate for an SNP is extremely low.This makes them ideal for marking the history of genetic trees. $02;SOQ2 Sulfur dioxide Soil heat transfer Heat flow between the soil surface and the deeper layers.Heat transfer varies with soil type,moisture,horizon,etc.The flow of heat is directed from warmer layers to cooler layers.Heat transfer in soil is substantially influenced by the snow cover, vegetation,and terrain. Soil water storage variations Seasonal changes in where and how water is stored in a hydraulic system. Solar geometry Angle of the sun's rays to the surface. Spaghetti tag A long,thin external tag type used to mark individual fish.Sometimes referred to as anchor or dart tags,they are usually made of vinyl tubing that can have study information printed upon. Spawning The depositing and fertilizing of eggs by fish and other aquatic life. Split main channel Main channel habitat characterization where three of fewer distributed dominant channels. Sport fishery Also known a recreational fishery,a sport fishery consists of fish taken for pleasure or competition.It can be contrasted with commercial fishing,which is fishing for Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Ixii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition profit,or subsistence fishing,which is fishing for survival. Spring Area where there is a concentrated discharge of groundwater that flows at the ground surface. SpUD Special use district SQL Standard query language SRMAs Special Recreation Management Areas Stable isotope analysis Stable isotopes have become a popular method for understanding aquatic ecosystems because they can help scientists in understanding source links and process information in marine food webs.Certain isotopes can signify distinct primary producers forming the bases of food webs and trophic level positioning. Stage The distance of the water surface in a river above a known datum. Stage-discharge relationship The relation between the water-surface elevation,termed stage (gage height),and the volume of water flowing in a channel per unit time. Increase in water levels upstream of the leading edge of ice cover caused by theStagingpartialblockageofthechannelbyice. U.S.General Soil Map Data,a digital general soil association map developed by STATSGO the National Cooperative Soil Survey and distributed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the U.S.Department of Agriculture. STB Surface Transportation Board .Fish stranding is any event in which fish are restricted to poor habitat as aStrandingconsequenceofphysicalseparationfromamainbodyofwater. Stratified sampling Amethod of sampling from a population.In statistical surveys,when subpopulations within an overall population vary,it is advantageous to sample each subpopulation (stratum)independently.Stratification is the process of dividing members of the population into homogeneous subgroups before sampling. Streambed The bottom of the stream channel;may be wet or dry. Subsistence fishery A fishery that is typically small-scale and low-technology aimed at supporting oneself at a minimum level. Supercooled water Water with a temperature slightly below the freezing point (0°C or 32°F). SVO Successor Village Organizations sw Surface water.Water that has not infiltrated below ground surface,including rivers, streams,sloughs,lakes,ponds,wetlands. SWHS Statewide Harvest Survey TCP traditional cultural property TCW Talkeetna Mountains and Chulitna-Watana Hills TDG total dissolved gas TDS total dissolved solids TEK Traditional Environmental Knowledge Temporary barrier A feature that that is impassable to all fish for a period of time and is not flow dependent.Temporary instream barriers are widely used for construction and maintenance purposes,as well as access and erosion control. Terminus The down-gradient end of a glacier. Thalweg A continuous line that defines the deepest channel of a watercourse. Thermal break-up Melting in place.Also called in situ break-up. Thermal cycling Consists of cycles of repeated heating and cooling of the reaction for DNA melting Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Ixiii December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition and enzymatic replication of the DNA. Thermal ice Solid ice formed in place in low-velocity areas. The confluence of the Susitna,Chulitna,and Talkeetna rivers at Susitna River Mile Three Rivers Confluence (RM)98.5 represents the downstream end of the Middle River and the upstream end of the Upper River. Thematic Mapper.One of the Earth observing sensors introduced in the Landsat™program. TOC total organic carbon In terms of groundwater applications,the use chemical or physical (usually Tracer study temperature)properties to determine groundwater pathways and mass exchange with surface water. A fish passage facility designed to trap fish for upstream or downstream transport toTrapandhaulcontinuetheirmigration. Tributa A stream feeding,joining,or flowing into a larger stream (at any point along itsrycourseorintoalake).Synonyms:feeder stream,side stream. Tributary mouth Main channel habitat characterization of clear water areas that exist whererytributariesflowintoSusitnaRivermainchannelorsidechannelhabitats. Trimline Soil stripped of vegetation by a glacier. A heavy fishing line with baited hooks attached at intervals by means of branch Trotline lines called snoods.A snood is a short length of line which is attached to the main line using a clip or swivel,with the hook at the other end. TSP total suspended particulate Turbidi The condition resulting from the presence of suspended particles in the watertycolumnwhichattenuateorreducelightpenetration. TWG Technical Workgroup U.S.,US United States U.S.C.;USC U.S.Code UAAES University of Alaska Agriculture Experiment Station UAFAFES University of Alaska Fairbanks Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station UCG underground coal gasification UCIMA Upper Cook Inlet Management Area (commercial fish harvest) Unconfined aquifer Aquifer whose upper surface is a water table free to fluctuate. Undercut bank A bank that rises vertically or overhangs the stream. Underwater video imaging which can record images in real-time over short time intervals and can provide information on fish species presence/absence in the Underwater video immediate vicinity.Although water clarity and lighting can limit the effectiveness of video sampling,a distinct advantage of video over DIDSON is the ability to clearly identify fish species. Unsaturated zone A subsurface zone above the water table where the pore spaces may contain a combination of air and water. Off-channel habitat characterization feature that is similar to a side slough,but Upland slough contains a vegetated bar at the head that is rarely overtopped by mainstem flow.Has clear water. Upper segment Susitna The Susitna River upstream of the proposed Watana Dam Site at RM 184. Upstream fish passage A fishway system designed to pass fish upstream of a passage impediment,either by volitional passage or non-volitional passage. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Ixiv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Abbreviation Definition The movement of groundwater into rivers,stream,sloughs and other surface water Upwelling features.This is also called groundwater discharge and may be associated with a gaining reach of a river or stream. USACE U.S.Army Corps of Engineers USCB U.S.Department of Commerce,Census Bureau USDA U.S.Department of Agriculture USDOT U.S.Department of Transportation USFS USDA,Forest Service USFWS DOI,Fish and Wildlife Service USGS DOI,Geological Survey USR Updated Study Report USSCP U.S.Shorebird Conservation Plan VFD Volunteer Fire Department VHF very high frequency VOC volatile organic compound Volitional passage Fish passage made continuously available without trap and transport. VRM Visual Resource Management system WasSiM Water Balance Simulation Model. The dam proposed by the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric project.The approximately 750-foot-high Watana Dam (as measured from sound bedrock)would be located at Watana Dam river mile (RM)184 on the Susitna River.The dam would block the upstream passage of Chinook salmon,possibly other salmon species,and resident fish that migrate through and otherwise use the proposed Watana Dam site and upstream habitat in the Susitna River and tributaries. Water slope Change in water surface elevation per unit distance. Water stage The water surface elevation above the bottom of the river channel or above some g arbitrary datum. Water table The top water surface of an unconfined aquifer at atmospheric pressure. Wetted channel width (wetted The length of the wetted contact between a stream of flowing water and the stream Perimeter)bottom in a plane at right angles to the direction of flow. Weather generator model that can be used to generate daily values for WCEN precipitation,maximum temperature,minimum temperature,and solar radiation. The model accounts for the persistence of each variable,the dependence among the variables,and the seasonal characteristics of each variable. WSR Wild and Scenic River yd Yard Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page Ixv December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Revised Study Plan (RSP) 1.INTRODUCTION TO RSP This document provides the Alaska Energy Authority's (AEA)Revised Study Plan (RSP)for original licensing of the proposed Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (Project),Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission)Project No.14241.This RSP is required under FERC's Integrated Licensing Process (ILP)regulations,18 CFR §5.13,and includes a suite of 58 individual study plans to support the licensing of the Project.This RSP builds upon the study plans in the Proposed Study Plan (PSP),and has been prepared through extensive consultation with Federal and State resource agencies,Alaska Native entities,Non- governmental Organizations (NGOs),members of the public,and other licensing participants (collectively,licensing participants). As described in detail below,although AEA is pursuing a license under FERC's default ILP regulations,AEA has gone beyond the ILP regulatory requirements in the study development process to take a more collaborative approach.AEA recognizes the importance of working closely with licensing participants in the development of licensing studies that will support AEA's License Application,inform protection,mitigation and enhancement (PM&E)measures, serve as a foundation to environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),and support all needed state and federal permits including FERC's licensing determination under the Federal Power Act (FPA).AEA appreciates the extraordinary effort of all licensing participants over the last several months to engage actively in this intensive process. As a result of these efforts,this RSP incorporates significant changes from the PSP released in July 2012.Based on recent comments filed with FERC by licensing participants,AEA believes that this RSP resolves the majority of study-related issues raised in the ILP.While some issues do remain for Commission resolution,AEA believes that this enhanced consultative effort- which included a complete additional iteration of the study plans as an interim draft RSP distributed for comment-was well worth the significant investment of time,resources and effort by all to participate in this process. 1.1.Background of RSP Development 1.1.1.NOI,PAD,and Communication Protocol On December 29,2011 AEA filed with FERC its NOI and PAD to start formal licensing for the proposed Project.As required by FERC's regulations,18 CFR §5.6,the PAD provided licensing participants with existing relevant and reasonably available information related to the Project,to enable licensing participants to identify information needs,develop study requests and study plans,and prepare documents analyzing issues related to any application filed by AEA. Section 5 of the PAD identified issues and preliminary study concepts that AEA developed during early consultation with licensing participants.Although FERC's ILP regulations do not require broad-based consultation prior to preparation and distribution of the PAD,AEA felt it was important to set the tone for an open and enhanced public process.Consequently,starting in early 2011,AEA implemented an outreach program and initiated baseline environmental Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN information gathering activities.During this period,AEA conducted meetings and posted extensive licensing information on its Project website,http://susitna-watanahydro.org.These early meetings,summarized in Appendix 6-1 of the PAD,were instrumental in helping AEA identify and scope issues,and develop initial study plans included in the PAD. In addition,as part of its goals of facilitating communication and cooperation among AEA and other licensing participants,AEA voluntarily developed a Communication Protocol that it included in the PAD.The Communication Protocol was intended to be "a structured framework for communications among all Participants and [to]provide AEA's plans regarding access to information regarding the consultation activities related to the licensing and planning of the Project.”PAD §2.3.At the same time,the Communication Protocol intentionally "provide[s]a flexible framework for dissemination of information and for document consultation among all participants involved in the Project licensing.”Jd.(emphasis added). For example,the Communication Protocol contemplates that "a variety of meetings”will be held during the licensing effort,including "meetings required by the ILP as well as additional general information/project update meetings and technical workgroup meetings.”PAD §2.3.3. Recognizing this,the Protocol does not mandate a/]meetings to be scheduled 30 days in advance,or all agendas and meeting materials to be posted on the website two weeks prior to themeeting.'Not only would such an approach be impossible under the Commission's ILPregulations,'it would stifle the very open,continual dialogue that the Communications Protocol intends to promote. Accordingly,the Communication Protocol provides that AEA "will strive to notify all Participants of meetings scheduled by AEA at least 30 days prior to the meeting date to the extent practicable.”Id.§2.3.3 (emphasis added).The Protocol recognizes that circumstances may not allow for advance notice,providing that "AEA may hold a meeting with less than 30 days notice.”Jd.The Protocol provides similar flexibility with regard to the production of meeting agendas,meeting summaries,technical documents,and posting documents on itswebsite.'Jd.§§2.3.3,2.3.4.1,2.3.4.2. 'See Communication Protocol §2.3.3 (providing that "AEA will strive to make available documents and other information necessary to prepare for a consultation meeting at least two weeks prior to the scheduled meeting”) (emphasis added).As discussed in Section 1.2 below,for example,for quarterly progress reporting during the 2013- 2014 study phase of the licensing effort,AEA does not anticipate that agendas and written materials will always be ready for public distribution at least two weeks prior to a scheduled quarterly TWG meeting,as the purpose of these meetings will be to provide a more contemporaneous and complete reporting of ongoing work.For this reason, written materials associated with these quarterly TWG meetings may not be available until closer to the schedule meeting or,in some instances,at the meeting itself. ?In some instances,for example,the Commission's ILP regulations establish a period of less than 30 days prior to a comment deadline,or a 15-day period for a meeting prior to or following a mandated filing deadline.See,e.g.,18 CFR §§5.13,5.14(d),5.15(c)(2),5.15(f).In those instances,it would not be possible to follow a rigid 30-day prior notice period to schedule an informal or Technical Wrivorkgroup meeting. 3 With regard to documents posted to AEA's website,AEA understands that there has been some misunderstanding about the amount of information AEA intends to maintain on its Project website.While Section 2.3.1 of the Communication Protocol provides generally that "[t]he consultation record will be updated regularly and available to the public on the website,”AEA never intended for its website to be a complete repository for all licensing materials,essentially duplicating FERC's eLibrary system.Rather,Section 2.3.2 of the Communication Protocol addresses the specific issue of website materials,which provides that AEA will maintain on the website "key documents developed during the course of the licensing consultation,such as the PAD and NOI,meeting notes, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN AEA endorses the ideals expressed in the Communication Protocol and will continually assessandimproveitsefforts,'as necessary,to promote timely dissemination of information and effective communication-as licensing parties continue to press forward together in this licensing process.By the same token,AEA does not intend to allow adherence to the Communication Protocol unintentionally to stifle the frequent dialogue,informal communications,and exchange of ideas that AEA believes are essential to resolving disputes andachievingconsensusonthemanycomplexissuesrelatedtothislicensingeffort. 1.1.2.FERC NEPA Scoping On February 24,2012,FERC issued a public notice acknowledging the filing of AEA's NOI and PAD,officially commencing the licensing proceeding,and soliciting public comment on the PAD and study requests from licensing participants.In addition,FERC issued Scoping Document 1 to outline the subject areas to be addressed in its environmental analysis of the Project pursuant to NEPA.FERC held six Scoping Meetings for the Project.The meetings were held the week of March 26,2012 in Anchorage,Wasilla,Glennallen,Sunshine,Cantwell,and Fairbanks and focused on obtaining comments and input on resource issues related to Project operations from resource agencies,Alaska Natives,local governments,NGOs,and members of the general public.The purpose of the meetings was for FERC to scope the issues,review and discuss existing Project information,identify information and study needs;and discuss the process plan and schedule for licensing activities required under the ILP regulations. Following these meetings,federal and state resource agencies and other licensing participants filed 169 scoping comment letters with FERC.Following its review of the meeting transcripts and written comments,FERC issued Scoping Document 2 on July 16,2012. meeting summaries,study plans and study reports,preliminary licensing proposal/draft license application and final license application.”Based on this language and FERC's ILP regulations,AEA intends for its website to contain: (1)all documents that AEA is required to make publicly available under FERC's ILP regulations,18 CFR 5.2, unless impractical or impossible due to copyright restrictions,public disclosure prohibitions,file size considerations, or other limitations;(2)all key issuances by FERC in the licensing effort,such NEPA documents,notices and orders;and (3)agendas and meeting summaries from more formal Technical Workgroup Meetings.For other filings and issuances,FERC's user-friendly eLibrary system is a more effective tool for accessing the numerous documents associated with the licensing process.For efficiency,AEA's website contains a link to FERC's eLibrary system. *For example,AEA acknowledges that during the intensive fall 2012 period-when it was holding multiple agency and stakeholder meetings,often on a weekly basis,in an effort to reach consensus on nearly 60 proposed studies,as noted in Table 1-1 below-it did not always have the opportunity to circulate agendas in advance of meetings, provide 30 days'notice prior to a meeting,or readily post meeting summaries on the website.See,e.g.,Letter from James W.Balsiger,National Marine Fisheries Service,to Kimberly D.Bose,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,at 2-3,Project No.14241-001 (filed Nov.1,2012). 5 For these reasons,AEA does not agree with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)and other licensing participants that Commission intervention is warranted to enforce the voluntary guidelines in the Communication Protocol.See,e.g.,Letter from James W.Balsiger,National Marine Fisheries Service,to Kimberly D.Bose,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,at 2-4,Project No.14241-001 (filed Nov.1,2012).In this time-limited period of the ILP study plan development,rigidly following the Protocol as advocated by NMFS would have significantly impeded,or even precluded altogether,AEA's ability to work closely with NMFS and other licensing participants in an effort to reach resolution on issues related to this RSP.This exemplifies why AEA intentionally provided flexibility when drafting the Communication Protocol. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 1.1.3.Development of PSP Following its filing of the PAD,AEA continued its approach of participant outreach to facilitate meaningful involvement by resource agencies,NGOs,Alaska Native entities,and other licensing participants in the licensing process.First,AEA organized resource-based Technical Workgroups (TWG)with licensing participants and held a series of monthly meetings to present and discuss AEA's proposed study plans and study planning process.A listing of the meetings and topics covered during these early TWG meetings is provided in Table 1-1 of the PSP,and documentation of these early TWG meetings appears in Attachment 1-1 of the PSP.In addition to 14 separate TWG meetings held by AEA between the PAD and PSP during this period,AEA and its consultant team held many individual and small group meetings and follow-up discussions with individual licensing participants to discuss study issues,existing information, and information needs. Second,in an effort to assist licensing participants in preparing what AEA expected to be a large number of study requests,AEA took the initiative to prepare and distribute to licensing participants a total of 46 preliminary model draft study requests,based on the early TWG meetings and other consultation with licensing participants.On May 18,2012,AEA filed these study requests with FERC.Although FERC's ILP regulations do not require prospective applicants to prepare model study requests,or otherwise to assist licensing participants in developing their requested studies,AEA voluntarily undertook this additional,significant effort for purposes of gathering and synthesizing information developed during the early TWG meetings and other consultation efforts,easing the burdens placed on licensing participants,and assisting licensing participants'preparation of their formal study requests. Third,through an innovative agreement between AEA,Alaska Department of Natural Resources Office of Project Management and Permitting,and federal agencies involved in the licensing process,AEA agreed to provide funding to help support federal resource agencies'participation in the Project licensing.Pursuant to this agreement,federal agencies will be able to retain theirownexpertconsultantstoenhanceandaugmenttheirtechnicalexpertiseinthislicensingeffort.® As a result of these efforts,AEA developed a comprehensive PSP.Together,licensing participants and FERC staff submitted a total of 52 individual formal study requests,many of which were similar in purpose and scope to the study issues and concepts outlined in Chapter 5 of the PAD,as modified and updated in collaboration with licensing participants during TWG and other meetings and set forth in AEA's draft model study requests. In response to the 52 formal study requests submitted,AEA's PSP proposed to undertake all but one of the requested resource studies,although the PSP did propose some alterations and adjustments to the studies requested by licensing participants.In total,the PSP contained 58 individual study plans,organized by corresponding natural resource topical areas and contained within each respective resource section of the PSP.As required by FERC's ILP regulations,18 CFR §5.11(b)(4),AEA's PSP included an explanation of all studies submitted by licensing ®In this regard,AEA acknowledges that many individuals submitting comments have requested that all studies be subject to peer review.See Appendix 1 (AEA responses to comments GEN-09 and GEN-10).While FERC's ILP regulations do not require formal peer review of licensing studies,all study reports developed in this process will be subjected to scrutiny and expert review-with the involvement of AEA,AEA's technical consultants,FERC, FERC's third-party contractor,federal and state resource agencies,and agencies'technical consultants. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN participants but not adopted in the PSP.In light of AEA's extensive outreach effort,moreover, the PSP included specific documentation of consultation relevant to the study plan development. AEA filed the PSP with FERC on July 16,2012. 1.1.4.Development of RSP and Efforts to Resolve Differences over Study Requests Following its filing and distribution of the PSP,AEA continued its enhanced collaborative process for developing a study plan for the proposed Project.Although FERC's ILP regulations establish a minimal requirement of a single consultation meeting following submittal of the PSP, 18 CFR §5.11(e),AEA consulted extensively with licensing participants following distribution of the PSP.Shortly after its release of the PSP,AEA held a series of TWG meetings in Anchorage to review each of the 58 proposed studies in the RSP.These meetings occurred over a five-day period on August 8,9,15,16,and 17,2012.Following these initial meetings,AEA held monthly TWG meetings with licensing participants to solicit comments on AEA's PSP and resolve concerns and differences of opinion related to study objectives,methodologies,scopes, and levels of effort.In addition,over the past several months since issuing the PSP,AEA has conducted numerous individual and focused outreach meetings and teleconferences with licensing participants-all in an attempt to reach agreement on licensing studies.In total,in the brief three-month period following its release of the PSP,AEA held 23 separate TWG meetings, in addition to other,less formal consultation meetings and contacts with licensing participants. TWG meetings held since the filing of the PSP are summarized in Table 1-1. With regard to AEA's responsibility under FERC's ILP regulations to describe its efforts to resolve differences related to study request,18 CFR §5.13(a),during this period AEA continued hold meetings and individual consultation with licensing participants.During TWG meetings and other consultations with AEA,licensing participants raised issues and concerns,which appear in the meeting summaries in Appendix 4 of this RSP.As set forth in Appendix 3,AEA either adopted changes to its proposed studies to accommodate participants'concerns and comments, or explained its basis for declining to make a recommended change.Throughout this highly collaborative period,licensing participants worked closely in efforts to resolve differences and craft a study plan intended to meet participants'resource and information needs for assessing effects of the construction and operation of the proposed Project. In light of the progress to date in resolving concerns related to the proposed studies,on September 14,2012 AEA and other licensing participants requested FERC to grant a 30-day extension to allow additional time for licensing participants to submit comments on the PSP,andtocontinuetoresolvedifferencesrelatedtotheproposedstudies.'The Commission granted thisrequestonSeptember17.3 AEA and the other licensing participants made good use of this additional time granted by the Commission.To memorialize the progress reached since the PSP was issued in July,AEA agreed to prepare-based on comments received during the post-PSP collaborative process-an 'Letter from Wayne Dyok,Alaska Energy Authority,to Kimberly D.Bose,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,Project No.14241-001 (filed Sept.14,2012). ®Notice of Extension of Time to File Comments on the Proposed Study and Revised Study Plan,Project No.14241- 000 (issued Sept.17,2012). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN interim draft RSP,which other licensing participants could use when preparing their written ILP comments submitted to FERC.Although this effort intensified the consultation effort,AEA successfully redrafted the study plans,releasing them for public comment by the end of October 2012.Just prior to completing these revisions,AEA held a series of TWG meetings over a five- day period in mid-October,to once again individually review each study plan,summarize and discuss the updates to AEA's study plans since the PSP filing,and provide written response to all comments received from licensing participants.AEA's written response to comments received through the completion of the interim draft RSP at the end of October appears in Appendix 3. Although the extension of time and interim draft RSP certainly were well beyond the scope of ILP regulatory requirements,AEA believes that these efforts were well worth the investment of time and resources.This RSP,like its PSP predecessor,continues to propose a total of 58 individual study plans;as a result of the intensive and frequent consultation between AEA and other licensing participants over the last three months,however,most of the proposed plans in the RSP have undergone significant modification.The study plans continue to be organized by corresponding natural resource topical areas and contained within each respective resource section of the RSP.For each proposed study within a resource area,the RSP provides all information specified under FERC's ILP regulations,18 CFR §5.11,along with additional information about the proposed study.As required by the ILP regulations,moreover,Appendices 1 and 2 of this RSP contain all written comments submitted by licensing participants following AEA's release of the interim draft RSP,together with AEA's detailed response to each proposed study and study component,18 CFR §5.13(a).In Section 3 of the RSP,AEA addresses a study that again was requested by certain licensing participants,and which AEA has not adopted in this RSP. While several licensing participants did not have time to thoroughly review the interim draft RSPwhenpreparingtheirwrittencommentstoFERC,”participants that were able to review the interim draft RSP generally commented that most of their concerns and differences were addressed.AEA's response to all written comments filed with the Commission following the interim draft RSP appear in Appendix 1. 1.1.5.Summary of Study Plan Development Process Based on the above summary,AEA believes that the extraordinary effort of all licensing participants have gone far to resolve most of the study concerns and differences raised in the licensing proceeding.Of the 52 study requests originally submitted by licensing participants,the 58 individual study plans in this RSP substantially adopt the objectives and methodologies of all but one of those requests.Most of the studies proposed by AEA in this RSP essentially consolidate the various study requests by specific resource areas.In this fashion,nearly all of licensing participants'study requests have been incorporated into this RSP.If approved by *In this regard,AEA notes FERC staff's request for the RSP to "clearly track all differences between [AEA's]study proposal and the requested studies.”Letter from Jennifer Hill,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,to Wayne Dyok,Alaska Energy Authority,at A-2,Project No.14241-000 (issued Nov.14,2012).As the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)and NMFS have requested a similar "cross-walk”document from AEA,and focused their submitted comments on AEA's original PSP,AEA has prepared a separate "cross-walk”document for the original study requests of NMFS and USFWS,which AEA is filing with FERC and distributing to licensing participants concurrently with this RSP. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN FERC as proposed,these studies will provide information needed to investigate potential effects to environmental resources resulting from Project construction and operation. 1.2.Process and Schedule Overview In accordance with FERC's September 17 notice extending the comment period for the RSP, licensing participants have until January 18,2013 to file any comments on this RSP.Following this deadline,FERC is scheduled to issue its study plan determination by February 1,2013,also in accordance with the September 17 notice. Within 20 days after FERC's study plan determination,any federal agency with authority to provide mandatory conditions under Sections 4(e)or 18 of the FPA,16 USC §§797(e),811,or any state agency or tribe with authority to issue water quality certification for the licensing of the Project under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA),33 USC §1341,may initiate the formal dispute resolution procedures under the ILP with respect to studies pertaining directly to the exercise of their authorities under FPA Sections 4(e)and 18,or under CWA Section 401.18 CFR §5.14.Following the completion of any study plan dispute process,FERC will issue its final determination,including any amendments to its study plan determination,no later than May 2,2013.18 CFR §5.14(). As provided in each of the study plans in this RSP,and as required under FERC's ILP regulations,18 CFR §5.11(b)(3),AEA will provide periodic progress reports to licensing participants.These reports will be provided through periodic TWG meetings scheduled quarterly through 2013 and 2014.The purpose of these meetings will be to update licensing participants with information on study progress and initial results,as available.While AEA will strive toschedulethesequarterlymeetingsatleast30daysinadvance,”the agendas and any other written materials for these meetings may not be available until closer to the meeting date,or at the meeting itself,to allow AEA to present a more complete and contemporaneous progressreportofongoingwork.''In accordance with the Communication Protocol,"[t]o the extentpossible,a meeting summary will be posted to the Project Website within 15 days.””?In addition,any comments on the meeting summary "should be submitted within 15 days ofposting.” By February 3,2014,AEA will issue its Initial Study Report (ISR),followed by a meeting to discuss study results and any proposed new studies or study modifications,and a public comment period.18 CFR §5.15(c).All first year studies other than the Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River are expected to be completed by the end of 2014,and AEA will present final results in its Updated Study Report (USR),which will be issued by February 2,2015,followed by another public meeting and comment period.18 CFR '©Communications Protocol §2.3.3. "'Cf id.(providing that AEA "will strive to post a written meeting agenda on the Project website at least two weeks prior to the scheduled meeting”and that AEA "will strive to make available documents and other information necessary to prepare for a consultation meeting at least two weeks prior to the scheduled meeting”)(emphasis added). 2 1d.§2.3.4.1. 3 Iq. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN §5.15(f).The information in the ISR and USR,together with the results of the fish distribution study,which is expected to be completed by the end of April 2015,will be updated as necessary and analyzed as part of AEA's License Application.The updated process,plan,and schedule for the Project is provided in Table 1.1-1,which includes additional detail regarding specific study dispute resolution steps and milestones.AEA has included timeframes for Formal Dispute Resolution,highlighted in yellow [18 CFR 5.14],which only apply if AEA and the licensing participants cannot resolve any study disputes informally. 1.3.Project Facilities and Operations This section provides a brief overview of the Project location,facilities and proposed operational characteristics.At this time there several updates from the descriptions in the PAD,including the proposed dam height and normal maximum reservoir level,the study area boundaries for the transmission and road corridors,along with updated information on project operations described below.The proposed Project is located in the Southcentral region of Alaska,approximately 120 miles (mi)north-northeast of Anchorage and 110 mi south-southwest of Fairbanks.As proposed, the Project would include construction of a dam,reservoir and power plant on the Susitna River starting at river mile (RM)184,approximately 32 mi upstream of Devils Canyon.Transmission lines connecting into the existing Railbelt transmission system and an access road would also be constructed.Because engineering and environmental studies are helping define the locations and configurations of the Project components,the current study area for the Project is larger than that which will be proposed within the Project Boundary and includes alternative transmission and road corridors that are expected to eventually be narrowed down to one or two proposed corridors (Figure 1.2-1). Dam and Reservoir As currently envisioned,the Project would include a large dam with a 23,546-acre reservoir at El 2050 ft mean sea level (msl).The height and type of dam construction are still being evaluated as part of ongoing engineering feasibility studies,but analysis to date indicates that a roller- compacted concrete structure is viable and economic.The dam has a nominal crest elevation (El.)2,075 ft (msl)corresponding with a maximum height of about 750 ft above the prepared rock foundation and a crest length of approximately 3,100 ft.The maximum height of the structure will depend both on the results of the ongoing geotechnical site investigations (which will indicate the extent of excavation required below the river bed)and the results of the PMP/PMF studies (which together with the spillway design analysis will determine the freeboard above normal TWL).The Watana Reservoir normal top water level (TWL)has been reassessed and is proposed as El.2,050 ft msl,which will impound a reservoir approximately 42.5 mi long (measured along the centerline of the reservoir at El.2050)with an average width of approximately 1 to 2 mi.The total water surface area at normal maximum operating level is approximately 23,546 acres.The minimum reservoir level will be about 1,850 ft msl during normal operation,resulting in a maximum drawdown of 200 ft.Based on recently updated GIS data,the reservoir will have a total capacity of 5.2 million ac-ft,of which 3.4 million ac-ft will be active storage. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The dam incorporates three facilities for discharge: 1.Penstocks which direct water through the power facilities; 2.Emergency Release facilities installed within the plugged diversion tunnels;and, 3.Outlet facilities discharging below the spillway. The outlet facilities which will facilitate the discharge of up to 24,000 cfs (together with the powerhouse flow representing up to a routed 50-year flood,or a flushing flow)will be located so that they may be used even when the reservoir level is at its minimum level. Construction materials for the dam and appurtenant structures will utilize,as far as possible,rock from the structure excavations to minimize the quarry development.Stable excavations and rock cuts will be designed with suitable rock reinforcement and berms. The bulk of the rock excavated to provide aggregate for concrete etc.is projected to be derived from a quarry to be located on the left abutment upstream of the dam.The planning of the quarry will attempt to ensure that the floor of the quarry is below the lowest projected water level in the reservoir,in order to minimize visual impact and leave the quarry always flooded during operation.In a similar manner,the area upstream of the dam is being investigated to try to define a spoil area upstream of the dam that will be permanently submerged. Clearing of shrubs and trees within the projected reservoir is not contemplated throughout the entire reservoir area.It is proposed that clearing of all substantive vegetation only be initiated for a distance of some two to three miles upstream of the dam,although consideration will be given during studies to clearing the area between the active storage top and bottom water level of trees throughout the length of the reservoir. The quarry will incorporate sloping roads to facilitate access from bench to bench,and during operation it is expected that any floating debris will be captured by boat and brought to the ramps in the flooded quarry for removal and disposal.The intakes themselves will incorporate trashracks and rakes for removal of any debris not collected by boat operations. Thick alluvial deposits will be removed from the river bed,and there will be excavation of weathered or loose rock in order to found the dam on sound bedrock. Hydroelectric Facilities The powerhouse will be located immediately downstream of the dam,and will house three generating units,each with a nominal capability of 200 MW unit output under average net head for a total plant capacity of 600 MW under average head.However,based on discussions with Railbelt utilities regarding electrical system reliability,AEA may propose up to four units with a nominal capacity of 150 MW and a total capacity of 600 MW.The capacity of the Project eventually proposed for licensing could extend up to 800 MW.The exact sizing and number of units may change as a result of further transmission system studies. The average annual energy of the Project will be about 2,800,000 megawatt hours.If only three units are proposed,the powerhouse will be designed and constructed with an extra empty generating unit bay for the potential installation of a fourth unit at a future time.There would be two outlet works facility structures and four power intake structures (one corresponding to the extra unused powerhouse bay if three units are proposed). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-9 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Ancillary Facilities Watana Dam site development will require various facilities to support the construction activities throughout the entire construction period.Following construction,the operation of the Project will require a small permanent staff and facilities to support the permanent operation and maintenance (O&M)program. The most significant item among the temporary site facilities will be a construction camp.The construction camp will be a largely self-sufficient community normally housing approximately 800 persons,but with a peak capacity of up to 1,000 people.After construction,AEA plans to remove most of the camp facility,leaving only those aspects that are to be used to support the smaller permanent residential and operation and maintenance facilities. Other site facilities include contractor work areas,site power,services,and communications.Site power and fiber optic cabling for construction will be brought either on the transmission line route,or along the side of the access road.Items such as power and communications will be required for construction operations,independent of camp operations. Permanent facilities will include community facilities for O&M staff members and any families. Other permanent facilities will include maintenance buildings for use during operation of the power plant. The airstrip and helicopter/airplane hard standing will be left in place after construction. Transportation Access There would be both temporary and permanent site access facilities to provide a transportation system to support construction activities,and to facilitate orderly development and maintenance of the Project.The current planning assumes restricted public access during construction for safety considerations.Another goal is to co-locate access roads and transmission facilities,to the extent possible,in the same corridor to minimize environmental impacts. Three possible alternatives for access roads and transmission lines have been identified for the Project (Figure 1.2-1).Two of the alternatives would accommodate east-west running transmission lines in combination with a new site access road connecting to the Alaska Intertie and the Alaska Railroad.One of these corridors,designated as the Chulitna Corridor,would contain a road approximately 42.7 miles-long running north of the Susitna River,and extending to the Chulitna siding area.The other alternative,designated as the Gold Creek Corridor,would contain a road approximately 49.2 miles-long running south of the Susitna River,and extend to the Gold Creek area.Neither of these two access roads would connect to public roads,ending at the railway tracks. A third corridor,designated as the Denali Corridor,would run due north,connecting the Project site to the Denali Highway by road over a distance of about 41.4 miles.If a transmission line is constructed within this corridor,it would be extended westward along the existing Denali Highway and connect to the Alaska Intertie near Cantwell. If the Denali Corridor is selected the affected sections of the Denali Highway will be upgraded in order to facilitate safe construction of the Project.The Denali Highway upgrades would not be a part of the Project. Regardless of which road is chosen,the majority of the new road will follow terrain and soil types that allow construction using side borrow techniques,resulting in a minimum of Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-10 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN disturbance to areas away from the alignment.A berm type cross-section will be formed,with the crown of the road being approximately 2 to 3 ft above the elevation of adjacent ground.To reduce the visual impact,the side slopes will be flattened and covered with excavated peat and other naturally occurring materials.A 200-foot right-of-way is anticipated to be sufficient for this type of construction. Permanent access to the Watana Dam site will connect with the existing Alaska Railroad either at Chulitna,Cantwell or Gold Creek,where-at the chosen location-a railhead and storage facility occupying up to 40 ac will be constructed alongside the existing passing bays.New sidings of a length up to 5,000 ft will be constructed so that off-loading and transfer of goods and materials can take place without interrupting the daily operations of the Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC).This facility will act as the transfer point from rail to road transport and as a backup or interim storage area for materials and equipment,and as an inspection and maintenance facility for trucks and their loads.Within the 40 acre site would be a small residential camp for early use before the main camp at site is complete.It is intended that elements of this camp will be removed to the main site camp,leaving sufficient facilities for drivers trucking equipment to the construction site,for laborers and staff operating the transfer, for emergency use,and for support staff such as cooks and maintenance workers. If the Denali Corridor is chosen for road access,the pavement on the first section of the Denali Highway in the community of Cantwell will be extended for a distance of approximately four miles to help minimize problems with vehicle dust and kicked-up stones.In addition,the following measures will be taken: e Speed restrictions will be imposed along appropriate segments; e Improvements will be made to the intersections including pavement markings and traffic signals. Electric Transmission Facilities The transmission lines will begin at a new substation at Watana Dam and consist of three 230- kV lines,in either single or double-circuit configuration.The same three corridors under consideration for the access road are also those under consideration to route the Project primary transmission lines to the Alaska Intertie.One or two transmission corridors may be chosen.The transmission system will include a switching station at the points of tie-in (at Chulitna,Gold Creek and/or Cantwell).Extending out from the Watana substation,the transmission corridors are essentially co-located with the access road corridors except for three specific areas: 1)For the northern westward route (Chulitna Corridor),the first five miles (westward from the power facilities)of the double circuit 230-kV transmission lines will not follow the coincident road corridor.The two lines will cross the river from the substation (together with any line destined for the northern route)in a northerly direction for two mi,after which the two lines will turn northwesterly to cross Tsusena Creek and three mi later will intersect the Chulitna road corridor.At the extreme westerly end of the corridor,it will widen to facilitate the divergence of the road and the transmission line which will continue to a switching station on the Alaska Intertie. 2)For the southern westward route (Gold Creek Corridor)the transmission lines would generally follow the planned road corridor.Some 5 miles northeast of Gold Creek will be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-11 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN a switching station on the existing Alaska Intertie,beyond which,to the west,the road will be the sole occupant of the corridor. 3)For the northern route,the only divergence between the road and transmission line corridor will occur at Deadman Lake,at which location the road will be aligned west of Deadman Hill,while the transmission will follow a lower elevation corridor on the east of the hill.Both corridors will rejoin some 9 mi later on the north side of the Deadman Hill. At the Denali Highway,the northern transmission corridor will turn west and continue along the Denali Highway to the Cantwell switching station. The right-of-way for the transmission lines within the corridors will consist of a linear strip of land.The width will depend on the number of lines.The transmission rights-of-way will be 200, 300,or 400 feet,depending on whether one,two,or three lines run in parallel and may run coincident with a road right-of-way in many locations. The switching stations and substation will occupy a total of approximately 16 acres. Rights-of-way for permanent access to switching stations and substation will be required linking back to the permanent site access road.These rights-of-way will be 100 ft wide. Access to the transmission line corridors will be: a)Via unpaved vehicle access track from the permanent access roads at intermittent points along the corridor.The exact location of these tracks will be established in the final design phase. b)By helicopter,where there is no access road projected. Within the transmission corridor itself an unpaved vehicle access track up to 25 ft wide will run along the entire length of the corridor,except at areas such as major river crossings and deep ravines where an access track would not be utilized for the movement of equipment and materials. Project Operations Project operating flexibility is important to Railbeit utilities.AEA is performing "production modeling”simulation,encompassing the entire Alaska Railbelt connected system in order to maximize the benefit of the Watana generating station,and may propose to operate the Project in a load-following mode such that firm energy is maximized during the critical winter months of November through April each year to meet Railbelt utility load requirements.To accomplish efficient dispatch,the reservoir would be drafted annually by an average of about 150 ft,but a maximum drawdown of 200 feet (to 1850 ft)will be possible and could infrequently occur. Instream flow releases would be made through the powerhouse or through low level outlet works during the rare occasions when the power plant is off line during emergency outages.Flow discharges through the powerhouse under this operating plan would range from the minimum required instream flow release (yet to be determined)to a high of about 15,000 cfs (based on the 600 MW nominal installed capacity)during times of maximum power generation.Based on preliminary studies,daily power generation during a peak winter month (January)would average about 9,200 MWh and powerhouse discharges would average approximately 9,600 cfs during that time. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-12 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN For efficient operation of the whole system,powerhouse discharges are expected to vary over a 24-hour period during the peak winter months.It is difficult to characterize typical powerhouse operations before production modeling simulation of the Railbelt is complete.To provide a preliminary indication of powerhouse discharge variability under the relatively conservative assumption of the Watana powerhouse providing the entire load variability of the Railbelt during a typical January,daily powerhouse discharges could range from about an average of 5,600 cfs to about 13,000 cfs.Powerhouse discharges could be as high as 15,000 cfs (at maximum plant output based on a 600 MW project)for short periods of time during the day to meet load spikes or emergency conditions.The daily flow variation may be constrained because of environmental needs.For a Base Case preliminary test case operating plan,initial model runs have been made using the Case E-VI minimum instream flow criteria developed during the 1980s project studies. Those criteria specified a minimum wintertime flow of 2,000 cfs at Gold Creek,and a minimum summertime flow release of varying amounts at or above about 9,000 cfs.At this time,for planning purposes,AEA is considering a minimum winter flow of not less than 3,000 cfs at Gold Creek.During the winter the average daily flow would be gradually increased to reflect colder conditions in January and February.The average daily flows would be gradually reduced during March and April. During 2013,a detailed analysis of downstream water level variations will become available. These results will be based on cross-sectional,water level,river flow,and other data gathered during field studies performed in 2012.The results of the production operation modeling-i.e., the projected operation of the Project derived therefrom-will be used,together with HEC-RAS modeling to project the variations in water levels at locations downstream of the Project. In the interim,before final 2013 studies of water level variations are available,it is useful to have an early preliminary indication of downstream water level variations.Cross-sectional data collected in the 1980s are available at about 100 cross-sections between the Watana Dam site (RM 184)and the vicinity of Sunshine (RM 84).Combined with other data and information available from 1980s reports,including rating curves developed at the cross-sections with the HEC-2 Water Surface Profiles program and roughness coefficients,it is possible to develop a downstream flow routing model using the USACE program HEC-ResSim.While results from this model eliminate the void of having no indication at all of downstream water level fluctuations,it must be clearly noted that final results in 2013 will differ from the results presented on the following figures for at least the following reasons:(1)input data will be changed from 1980s data to 2012 data;(2)the analysis model will change from HEC-ResSim to HEC-RAS,which is much more detailed and uses better hydraulic routing methods,and (3)the hourly flow releases at Watana Dam will be updated based on production modeling results. One calendar year of preliminary hourly flow routing results from HEC-ResSim are presented in Figures 1.2-2,1.2-3,and 1.2-4,respectively,for cross-sections in the tailwater area just below the Watana Dam site,near Gold Creek,and near Sunshine.The unregulated stage (red)line represents natural conditions without Watana Dam.The regulated stage (gold)line represents simulated conditions with the proposed Watana Dam.The results presented on these figures incorporate the following conditions and assumptions: e Ice free conditions must be included in the analysis throughout the year as flow simulation under an ice cover is beyond the capabilities of HEC-ResSim. e The Watana powerhouse provides the entire load variability of the Railbelt.Although this is not a realistic operation for an entire year,it was included for the entire year for Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN illustration purposes.AEA anticipates that existing hydropower in the Railbelt system (e.g.,Bradley Lake)would typically provide the load variability and that the Project would be used to provide remaining load variability subject to environmental constraints. This would significantly reduce the need for powerhouse flow fluctuations. e Minimum release requirements are Case E-VI from the 1980s,modified to include minimum flows of 3,000 cfs at Gold Creek. e All cross-sectional data and rating curves are from the 1980s. e Load data originates from the 2010 Railbelt Integrated Resources Plan. The following figures indicate two primary changes in water level when comparing the unregulated and regulated conditions.First,there is a seasonal shift of flow from the natural high flow months into the cold season months of November through April.This results from the primary function of the reservoir,which is to store water during the months of higher flow and lower electricity demand (May through October)and release more flow for generation during the period of lower flow and higher electricity demand (November through April). The second primary change in water level variations would be the addition of water level fluctuations on a diurnal basis as Watana generation responds to the hourly change in electricity demand in the Railbelt.Results on the three stage figures generally indicate a reduction in water level fluctuations as the flow moves downstream.It must be noted that water level fluctuations will vary from one location to another along the river,depending on the shape of the cross- section.Determining the unregulated flow record for long periods with an ice cover is an inherently difficult task that can be expected to have lower accuracy compared to ice free conditions.The unregulated recorded flows are frequently constant for an entire winter month, with a step change on the first day of the following month. Another notable aspect of the regulated flow operation with Watana Dam is exhibited on the figures during late August of the example year when reservoir outflows rapidly increase so that reservoir outflows are essentially the same as reservoir inflows.This is an indication that the reservoir has filled and passing the inflows to maintain the maximum normal pool level.This is also a preliminary operating mode that could be moderated by future detailed generation scheduling and inflow forecasting. Construction Schedule The current Project schedule allows 13 years for Project development including:FERC licensing,license implementation,design and contracting,construction,demobilization,and site restoration.Several assumptions have been made regarding the times required for the various activities. The following are the time periods for major components of Project Development: Total schedule -13 years,2012-2024 Pre-Application studies and related activities 3.5 years FERC and Cooperating agencies post-filing activities -approximately 1.5 years. Project Construction -7.5 years Reservoir filling -one to two years Site Restoration -throughout construction. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-14 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN Design work would be initiated prior to issuance of the license,so that construction critical to the schedule (such as access roads and construction support facilities)will be ready to commence shortly after issuance of the license and subsequent approvals. Study Area As show in Figure 1.2-1,the whole study area under evaluation for the siting of Project facilities consists of 97,244 acres.The proposed reservoir normal maximum water surface elevation includes all lands and waters up to elevation 2,050 feet that encompass approximately 23,546 acres.The area around the proposed dam site being evaluated for siting of construction and operation camps,airstrip and quarries encompasses 9,578 acres.The transmission and road corridor study areas encompass the following acreages (approximate): Gold Creek Road and Transmission Corridor -18,497 acres Chulitna Road and Transmission Corridor -19,687 acres Denali Road and Transmission Corridor -25,936 acres 1.4.2012 Early Study Efforts AEA is currently completing initial studies carried out during 2012.These early studies have in many cases helped inform the study planning process and provided updated information that supplements existing information.Much of the information that was gathered in 2012 has informed the study planning process particularly with respect to planning the logistical aspects of 2013 and 2014 studies.In some cases,updating information consists of taking information developed in the 1980s and converting it into modern digital datasets for use in comparative analysis with the new information being obtained in the FERC formal studies.The following list identifies the specific 2012 studies;please refer to Attachment 1-1 for a summary of each study effort. Water Resources Review of Existing Water Temperature Model Results and Data Collection e Aquatic Habitat and Geomorphic Mapping of the Middle River Using Aerial Photography e Reconnaissance-Level Geomorphic and Aquatic Habitat Assessment of Project Effects on Lower River Channel e Documentation of Susitna River Ice Break-up and Formation Instream Flow e Instream Flow Planning Study e River Flow Routing Model Data Collection Fish and Aquatic Resources Synthesis of Existing Fish Population Data Adult Salmon Distribution Habitat Utilization Study Upper Susitna River Fish Distribution and Habitat Study Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Anadromous Prey Analysis Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-15 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Botanical Resources e Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study e Wetland Mapping Study e Riparian Study Wildlife Resources e Eagle and Raptor Nest Study e Past and Current Big Game Harvest Study e Wildlife Habitat Use and Movement Study Recreation and Aesthetic Resources e Aesthetic and Recreation Resources Study Cultural Resources e Cultural Resources Study Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-16 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 1.5 Tables Table 1-1.Technical Workgroup and Agency Consultation Meetings since development of the PSP. Date Licensing participant Subject 08/08/2012 AEA,ADF&G,ADNR-OPMP, AHTNA,BLM,Chickaloon Village, DHSS,EPA,FERC,MSB,Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower Reform Coalition,NPS,OHA/SHPO, and other interested parties Regional Economic Evaluation Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study Transportation Air Quality Health Impact Assessment Project Safety (PMP and Seismic Hazards) Recreation,River Flow,and Aesthetics Cultural and Paleontological Resources Subsistence Study 08/09/2012 AEA,ADF&G Wildlife Conservation, ARR!,BLM,Office of Project Management and Permitting,Natural Heritage Institute,USFWS,FERC, and other interested parties 16 Wildlife Study Plans 5 Botanical Study Plans 08/15/2012 AEA,USFWS,ADNR,ADNR-OPMP, NMFS,EPA,ADF&G,FERC,Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower Reform Coalition,ARRI,Alaska Ratepayers,and other interested parties Characterization of Aquatic Habitats Fisheries Studies (in River,in Future Reservoir,Salmon Escapement,Passage Barriers,Genetic Baseline, Harvest,Passage at Dam,River Productivity) Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Aquatic Resources in Other Project Areas 08/16/2012 AEA,USFWS,ADNR,ADNR-OPMP, NMFS,ADF&G,USGS,Tribal Council,FERC,Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower Reform Coalition,ARRI,Alaska Ratepayers, and other interested parties Instream Flow Riparian Instream Flow Groundwater-Related Aquatic Habitat Glacial Runoff Geology/Soils 08/17/2012 AEA,USFWS,ADNR,ADNR-OPMP, NMFS,ADF&G,USGS,Tribal Council,FERC,Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower Reform Coalition,ARRI,Alaska Ratepayers, and other interested parties Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Ice Processes Baseline Water Quality Mercury and Bioaccumulation 09/06/2012 ADF&G,USFWS,FERC,AEA,and other interested parties Landbird and Shorebird Studies 09/07/2012 AEA,BLM,OHA,MatSu Borough, NOAA,Chickaloon,AHTNA,CIRI, FERC,and other interested parties Cultural Resources 09/13/2012 AEA,ADF&G Wildlife Conservation, FERC,and other interested parties Terrestrial Mammal Studies (Bear,Dall's Sheep, Furbearers,Wolverines,Bats) Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Wood Frogs Landbirds and Shorebirds Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-17 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Date Licensing participant Subject 09/13/2012 AEA,USFWS,FERC,Louis Berger e Fish Distribution and Abundance Studies (Sampling Group,ARRI strategies and techniques) 09/13/2012 AEA,USFWS,ADF&G e Fish Distribution and Abundance Studies (Sampling strategies and techniques) AEA,USFWS,ARRI,ADF&G,Village 09/14/2012 of Eklutna,,FERC,Coalition for e -Instream Flow Study Site Selection Susitna Alternatives,and other e Geomorphology and Ice Processes interested parties 91er2012 |Sere ocho intercaiod parte *Wetland Delineation,Mapping,and Functions 09/19/2012 AEA,NMFS,ADF&G e Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study AEA,ADF&G,ADNR,Alaska HIA,e Recreation Survey BLM,FERC,Natural Heritage *-Socioeconomic Study09/20/2012 Institute/Hydropower Reform River Flow StudCoalition,NOAA,NPS,and other ver Flow otudy interested parties °-Aesthetics Study 99/04/2042 AN oa Mesa e Cultural Resources Study Plan (APE map and other Borough,and other interested parties maps) 9/25/2012 AEA,ADF&G e Salmon Escapement Study Fish Genetic Baseline Study 9/27/2012 AEA,USFWS,NMFS,ADF&G,ARRI e -Fish Distribution and Abundance Studies (Sampling strategies and techniques) 9/27/2012 AEA,USFWS,NMFS,FERC,Louis e River Productivity Study Berger Group,ADF&G,UAF,ARRI AEA,USFWS,NMFS,Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower e -Instream Flow Riparian Study Plan (Focus Areas,Study 10/01/2012 Reform Coalition,ADNR,Coalition Site Design,Groundwater-Surface Water Interaction, for Susitna Dam Alternatives,FERC,Ice) BLM,and other interested parties AEA,BLM,NMFS,USFWS,ADF&G, 4002/0012 ,parrivinlenialnisan e -Instream Flow Study (Focus Areas,Fish and Aquatics,Coalition.ARR 'Na ska Ratepayers Models,Method Selection,Pilot Winter Studies) and other interested parties AEA,ADNR (State Parks),ADF&G e Aesthetic Resources (Key Observation Points,Analysis ,ale FarKs),Process)10/03/2012 BLM,FERC,NPS,and other . interested parties °River Flow Study e Survey Instruments AEA,NOAA,USFWS,ARRI, ADF&G,NMFS,FERC,Natural 10/04/2012 Heritage Institute/Hydropower e -Instream Flow Field Reconnaissance Debrief Reform Coalition,and other interested parties Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-18 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Date Licensing participant Subject AEA,USFWS,ADF&G,FERC,and10/04/2012 other interested parties Waterbirds Studies (Study Plan,Migration and Breeding, Productivity,Harlequin Duck) Bird Migration Surveys AEA,ADF&G,USFWS,FERC, ADNR OPMP,Natural Heritage 10/16/2012 Institute,Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives,and other interested parties PSP and ILP Study Plan Process Terrestrial Wildlife Studies (Birds,Wood Frog,Moose, Caribou,Dall's Sheep,Large Carnivores,Wolverine, Terrestrial and Aquatic Furbearers,Habitat Evaluation, Harvest,Little Brown Bat,Small Mammals) Botanical Mapping Studies (Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat,Riparian Vegetation,Wetland) AEA,ADF&G,ADNR,ADNR-DMLW, AHTNA,CIRI,Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives,FERC,Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower Reform Coalition,NPS,SHPO,and other interested parties 10/17/2012 Transportation,Air Quality,and Health Impact Assessment Regional Economics and Socioeconomics Subsistence Recreation,River Flow,and Aesthetic Cultural Resource AEA,ADNR,USGS,USFWS,DEC, Natural Heritage Institute/Hydropower Reform 10/23/2012 Coalition,USDA,FERC,ADF&G, NMFS,Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives,and other interested parties PSP and ILP Study Plan Process Geomorphology Study Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Baseline Water Quality Mercury Project Hydrology AEA,USGS,USFWS,ADNR,AGO, Hydropower Reform Coalition, USDA,ARRI,DGGS,ADF&G,DEC, Coalition for Susitna Alternatives, FERC,NMFS,and other interested parties 10/24/2012 PSP and ILP Study Plan Process Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Riparian Instream Flow Groundwater-Related Aquatic Habitat Glacial and Runoff Changes Project Hydrology AEA,ADF&G,ARRI,AGO,ADF&G, 10/25/2012 USFWS,USDA,BLM,ADNR,NMFS, FERC,and other interested parties PSP and ILP Study Plan Process Habitat Characterization Study Fish Distribution and Abundance River Productivity Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Hydrology 11/02/2012 AEA,NMFS and ADF&G Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Eulachon Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Page 1-19 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 1.1-1.Project Process Plan and Schedule (dispute process highlighted in yellow). : a:.FERCResponsiblePartyPre-Filing Milestone Date Regulation AEA Issue Public Notice for NOI/PAD 12/29/14 5,3(d)(2) AEA Fite NOV/PAD with FERC 12/29/11 5.5,5.6 FERC Alaska Native Entity Meetings 1/30/12 5.7 FERC Issue Notice of Commencement of Proceeding and 2re72 5.8 Scoping Document 1 FERC Scoping Meetings 3/26-29/12 5.8(b){viii) 5/31/12 5.9 All licensing participants PAD/SD1 Comments and Study Requests Due FERC Issue Scoping Document 2 T/A6/12 5.1 AEA File Proposed Study Plan (PSP)T/A6/12 5.11(a) Alllicensing participants Proposed Study Plan Meetings 8/15-16/12 5.11(e) All licensing participants Proposed Study Plan Meetings 10/16-25/12 N/A er _5.12;All licensing participants Proposed Study Plan Comments Due 11/14/12 FERC Notice ..5.13(a);AEA File Revised Study Plan 12/14/12 FERC Notice or wa .5.13(b);All licensing participants Revised Study Plan Comments Due 1/18/13 FERC Notice .ee 5.13(c);FERC Director's Study Plan Determination 2/1/13 FERC Notice Mandatory Conditioning . Agencies only Any Study Disputes Due 2/21/13 5.14(a) Dispute Panel Third Dispute Panel Member Selected 3/8/13 5.14(d) Dispute Panel Dispute Resolution Panel Convenes 3/13/13 5.14(d)(3) AEA Applicant Comments on Study Disputes Due 3/18/13 5.14(j) Dispute Panel Dispute Resolution Panel Technical Conference 3/2513 5.14(j) Dispute Panel Dispute Resolution Panel Findings Issued 4123 5.14(k) FERC Director's Study Dispute Determination 5/2/13 5.14(I) AEA First Study Season 2013 5.15(a) AEA Initial Study Report 2/3/14 5.15(c)(1) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-20 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN :..FERCResponsiblePartyPre-Filing Milestone Date Regulation All licensing participants Initial Study Report Meeting 2/18/14 5.15(c)(2) AEA Initial Study Report Meeting Summary 3/5/14 5.15(c)(3) Alllicensing participants Any Disputes/Requests to Amend Study Plan Due 4/4/14 5.15(c)(4) All licensing participants Responses to Disputes/Amendment Requests Due 5/4/14 5.15(c)(5) FERC Director's Determination on Disputes/Amendments 6/4/14 5.15(c}(6) AEA Second Study Season 2014 5.15(a) AEA Updated Study Report due 2/2/15 5.15(f) Alllicensing participants Updated Study Report Meeting 217/15 5.15(f) AEA Updated Study Report Meeting Summary 3/4/15 5.15(f) All licensing participants Any Disputes/Requests to Amend Study Plan Due 4/3/15 5.15(f) All licensing participants Responses to Disputes/Amendment Requests Due 5/4/15 5.15(f) FERC Director's Determination on Disputes/Amendments 6/3/15 5.15(f) File Preliminary Licensing Proposal or Draft LicenseAEAApplication 4114/15 5.16(a) i wo Preliminary Licensing Proposal/Draft License ApplicationAlllicensingparticipantsCommentsDue 73/15 5.16(e) AEA File Final License Application 9/11/15 5.17 AEA Issue Public Notice of License Application Filing 9/11/15 5.17(d)(2) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-21 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN ==ALASKA... 1.6.Figures : 7 OES 7 =TT ores 0168 mes ™aw ont ii 3} | so '|ma 017s 0178 \a"[ye be a 0178 O75 7 ifUC)ae foes Z an ¢ 0178 Le / :WA KNé_Cantwell -7 os "ff P7 \atin wat 0188 : 0188 ) mo ed _ran va "9 ey so |YO a BG of'7 f' 18S"ZL mes ;"17,--. 19S018sowDenaiif/.: -fa M Road &Transmission Corridor .WAY Pe 19s /o198ff.»SFT y 0183),/5 y 4 2 0198 /P .: a <} - oe'4 oa bios fo y ows -A o19S ]: ;ef .utte 4 wosvyenake'o208 'i aLp-=.-cos mS ayF>Ws ee a ae a20s ){ ')an wos Se f ;021 c As 4 o20s°7 -net we i -0s 0S »re.Ne Rene ars }0218 \-!NN e&ib ae 'o><hs 0218 Oo I ,x NS vis ;eeibek ,SN, ' \\i)er tS -I wis »)0218 <i\we wis Ne if :en wes 18 Ny :/Denali ?"LS mts \IS ;Road &Transmission Corridor td 1028 vo W228 on i a -- .ad 228 .;; . N -é .Existing Anchorage-Fairbanks f G >)jos od ; an a Intertie Transmission Line \e aot ;sig a a2 |0225 -Ss ss ake a : 4Ujee-po Le \$j \="\" :\":4 -4 SL,033N o33NnosI;oo 18 i 033N 033N <"0228 (}ob.<@ 033N tan k aSy)y Chulitna NN =\ix Cree ,Road &Transmission Corridor oan "|lay 6?Ms oe _pn PS A #|Dam and Camp / /y 3N ON Nae Facilities Area UT 032N a3N oe om,-3N ve ¢1 N 032inrnen/ss *aee en a e )-.032N -1 Proposed Watana |- @»b. }{howe -e »Reservoir el.2050 ft |"- }Se,an 032N _2N ,4 ; x %032N_4"eee tf *=NE/wo ek,2 " |y ee cs !- :=a fan MINPy). "i t Top os:Khe oY 032N 4 -ae {oop ("|Dam and Powerhouse \Ay a ,\ee ;-- : .Z,aT y;Pa . aN 031N--Oi eygor eR O31N (JatanaLypgceti031Nake j ee 031N /-0B4N a % . a'1N =o SIN 4 f'Gold Creek \y Claren ce.AQ30N q s 031N -Road &Transmission Corridor ete .ae S N 5 /030N s ake Y f pe 3)won \z an |?foe > :Ig os son 030N ars|on jASS0N PN wt \029N od "L,ee {029N'.°2 ,!a ain aan |\oo A :: ;i O29N h Q29N . =>ENERGY AUTHORITY wae Proposed Watana Dam rn?Chulitna Road and bn moval Transmission Corridors (25,936 Acres) c}Dam and Camp Facilities Area (9,578 Acres)(__]Reservoir 2,050 Max Poot (23,546 Acres) e-e--Existing Transmission Intertie Gold Creek Road and Transmission Corridors (18,497 Acres) fev meeond Transmission Corridors (19,687 Acres) "=I Denali Road and ====PLS Meridian ===Alaska Railroad Roads General Land Status "|Bureau of Land Management Native Patent or IC _Native Selected Private State Patented or TA State Selected Data Sources:See Map References LS| 025 5 10 oeees(Viles 0 5 10 20 ees Kilometers Projection:NAD 1983 Alaska Albers Date Created:11/28/2012 Map Author:MWH -Eric Zimmerman File:SuWa_Corridor_Study_Area_11x17_11_28_12.mxd Figure 1.2-1.Susitna-Watana Project Area, Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-22 REVISED STUDY PLAN 18 16 | 14 12 ="a any @10 4= a F8 ” 6 4 Preliminary -Subject to change. 2 --Susitna River at XS$107 (RM 184.2)-Regulated stage (feet) e -Susitna River at XS107 (RM 184.2)-Unregulated stage (feet) os 3 3 ps 3 3 pS 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 9 2 S i 2 2 4 2S <4 2 2 2 oO oOo o oOo Qo oa oO oOo Qo oO Oo oO oO &S S 3 S 3 3 3 3 &3 3 3 ====fo}S fon}rep oO S S ive}SG =2 cs)2 2 2 Q Q Q Q Q N N Figure 1.2-2.Susitna River Stage near Watana Tailwater. 18 16 14 12 So£ a D88 7) 6 4 Preliminary -Subject to change. 2 ---Susitna River at XS45 (RM 136.7)-Regulated stage (feet) --Susitna River at XS45 (RM 136.7)-Unregulated stage (feet) 5 3 ps ps So 3 2 S 2 ps ps 2c=)2 2 2 e 2 i=]b=2 eS i=)b=]2 o oO o oO o Qo Oo oO oO oO o Lo)oO 3S g g 3S RS g ES 3S S 3S 3 3 3gS25ray88&a &Ni Sy &&v =°3 ¢6 6 o Sd Ss =N Figure 1.2-3.Susitna River Stage near Gold Creek. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-23 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 24 16 oSry 2 2 aD cSBi} w 8 4 Preliminary -Subject to change. -Susitna River at XS0.001 (RM 83.9)-Regulated stage (feet) -Susitna River at XS0.001 (RM 83.9)-Unregulated stage (feet) 0 3 8 3 8 8 8 8 g g 3 g 8 8 o °oO oO o o co}Qo oO o oO °o oO 3 3S 3 3 &3 S &3 S &3 3 ====So Oo a a oO Led oO o =2 3 2 2 2 gy g g g g g Nx =a =Pe]Pr]i o 4 S =qa Figure 1.2-4.Susitna River Stage near Sunshine. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-24 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 1.7.Attachments ATTACHMENT 1-1.2012 EARLY STUDY EFFORTS Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1-25 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 1-1 2012 EARLY STUDY EFFORTS Revised Study Plan 2012 Early Study Efforts Water Resources Review of Existing Water Temperature Model Results and Data Collection The objective of the 2012 Review of Existing Water Temperature Model Results and Data Collection Study was to provide a baseline for water temperature modeling of the Susitna River and proposed reservoir to be conducted in 2013-2014.Specific objectives included:(1)evaluate 1980s water temperature modeling (i.e.SNTEMP and DYRESM)results;(2)determine applicability of past modeling results;and (3)initiate collection of stream temperature and meteorological data required for 2013-2014 modeling.The study area included the Susitna River from river mile (RM)10.1 to RM 233.4. SNTEMP and DYRESM assumptions and predictive capabilities were evaluated to determine applicability to current conditions.Model configurations,input parameters,and calibration/validation were assessed,and flows and a range of release schedules were compared with recent records to assess applicability to the currently proposed Project.If existing temperature models are applicable,results will be synthesized to evaluate potential effects of the proposed Project on water temperature and guide the design of 2013-2014 study plans. The 2012 monitoring locations were selected from water temperature data and monitoring locations from the 1980s.Locations were selected based on:(1)adequate representation throughout the Susitna River and tributaries;(2)preliminary consultation with AEA and licensing participants;and (3)understanding of other proposed studies and study sites (e.g., instream flow,ice processes).Water temperature data loggers were installed at 39 sites,and meteorological (MET)data were collected at eight locations between RM 25.6 and RM 224. Aquatic Habitat and Geomorphic Mapping of the Middle River Using Aerial Photography Aquatic habitat and geomorphic features were quantified using aerial photography from the 1980s and evaluated for applicability to current conditions.Quantification of geomorphic features and aquatic habitat types provided a basis for selecting study sites,understanding flow- habitat relationships,and assessing geomorphic conditions.Objectives of the 2012 Aquatic Habitat and Geomorphic Mapping of the Middle River Using Aerial Photography Study included:(1)identify the surface area of riverine habitat types over a range of stream flows;(2) compare current and 1980s geomorphic feature/units and associated aquatic habitat type data to characterize the relative stability of the channel under unregulated flow conditions;and (3) delineate large-scale geomorphic river segments to stratify the river into study segments for use in 2013-2014 study design and implementation.The study area included the Middle Susitna River from RM 98 to RM 184. Aerial photography from 2012 was combined with historic information and digitized to create a spatial representation (i.e.,GIS database)of geomorphic features/units and macro-and meso- scale riverine habitat types.The information was compared with aquatic habitat and geomorphology under 1980s and current conditions.The Middle River was then delineated into large-scale geomorphic river segments with relatively homogeneous characteristics including Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 1 December 2012 Revised Study Plan channel width,entrenchment ratio,sinuosity,slope,geology/bed material,single/multiple channel,braiding index,and inflow from major tributaries. Reconnaissance-Level Geomorphic and Aquatic Habitat Assessment of Project Effects on Lower River Channel The 2012 Reconnaissance-Level Geomorphic and Aquatic Habitat Assessment of Project Effects on Lower River Channel Study assessed the Project's potential to affect aquatic habitat and channel morphology in the Lower Susitna River.The study quantified the magnitude of change associated with stream flow,riverine habitat features,and sediment transport under existing pre- Project and anticipated post-Project conditions.Analyses performed included a stream flow assessment,riverine habitat-flow relationship assessment,sediment transport assessment, geomorphic assessment of channel change,and delineation of large-scale geomorphic river segments with relatively homogeneous characteristics (e.g.,channel width,lateral confinement by terraces,entrenchment ratio,sinuosity,slope,bed material,single/multiple channel,and hydrology).Specific objectives included:(1)evaluating the relative magnitude of changes to the flow regime;(2)assessing potential changes to channel morphology and aquatic habitat;(3) evaluating the relative magnitude of changes to the sediment regime,potential impacts on sediment/substrate gradations,and the vertical and lateral stability of the channel;(4)delineating large-scale geomorphic river segments with relatively homogeneous characteristics;(5) conducting a geomorphic assessment of historic channel change and whether changes have affected the frequency and distribution of mesohabitat units;and (6)providing information to assist AEA and licensing participants in developing 2013-2014 study plans.The study area included the Lower Susitna River from RM 0 to RM 98. Documentation of Susitna River Ice Break-up and Formation The overall objective of the 2012 Documentation of Susitna River Ice Break-up and Formation Study was to document baseline ice conditions and assess potential effects on ice processes downstream of the proposed Project.Specific objectives included:(1)document the timing and progression of break-up and ice cover formation on the Susitna River between RM 0 and RM 234;(2)document open leads between RM 0 and RM 234 throughout the winter;(3)document the interaction between river ice processes and channel morphology,vegetation,and aquatic habitats;and (4)provide baseline data to help identify the river reaches most likely to experience changes in river ice formation as a result of Project construction and operation. Susitna River ice studies conducted in the 1980s were reviewed and synthesized,as appropriate, for use in developing 2013-2014 study plans.Information was compiled into a geospatial format for comparison with current observations.Recent studies of the effects of hydroelectric projects on river ice in arctic and sub-arctic climates were also be reviewed. Open leads in the Middle River,mapped in 2012,were compared with locations of open leads documented in 1984-1985.Time-lapse cameras were installed in spring 2012 at 11 locations between RM 9 and RM 184 for observing ice break-up and ice-cover formation.Ice break-up progression was documented in spring 2012 between RM 0 and RM 234 via aerial observations. Documentation of freeze-up progression was conducted in fall/winter 2012 and included observations of the presence of frazil ice,ice bridges,ice cover,and snow cover.Meteorological and stream temperature data compilation occurred in fall/winter 2012,and river stage data from the National Weather Service observer at Sunshine Station and Gold Creek gage were obtained Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2 December 2012 Revised Study Plan daily.Telemetered stage and camera installations from the 2012 flow routing and transect study were observed daily for signs of ice formation. Physical ice processes models were considered to predict the effects of the proposed Project on river ice processes.The model and/or modeling approach will be selected,as part of the formal studies,in consultation with the Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research Engineering Laboratory (CRREL),AEA,other technical experts,and licensing participants during the 2012 study year so that the model can be approved for use in 2013-2014. Ice-scarred floodplain trees were mapped in support of delineating Riparian Ice Process Domains for selecting 2013 Riparian Instream Flow Focus Area Study sites.On-the-ground tree ice-scar reconnaissance was performed from approximately RM 168.5 to RM 172.5.Helicopter photo- reconnaissance was conducted along the middle Susitna River (RM 99 to RM 184).On-the- ground 1980's tree ice-scar reconnaissance was performed from approximately RM 124 to RM 126.When river ice conditions allow in the winter of 2012,additional tree scar surveys will be conducted by snow machine. On-the-ground conditions were observed for developing field protocols and costs for installing Groundwater and Surface Water wells and stage recorders at potential Instream Flow Riparian and Fish Focus Area study sites.On-the-ground groundwater/surface water reconnaissance was performed from approximately RM 168.5 to RM 172.5.On-the-ground 1980's groundwater well search-and-find survey and groundwater /surface water reconnaissance was performed from approximately RM 124 to RM 126. Instream Flow Instream Flow Planning Study The 2012 Instream Flow Planning Study outlined the objectives and methods for characterizing existing information to use as a foundation for future flow-habitat studies. A comprehensive instream flow study plan was developed in 2012 as part of the Project licensing process.The 2013-2014 instream flow study will assess aquatic habitat response to Project-induced changes in river flow,water temperature,turbidity,and other river channel/water quality parameters.The objective of the 2012 Instream Flow Planning Study was to obtain information to be used as the foundation for,and assist in development of,the 2013-2014 Instream Flow Study.Specific 2012 study objectives included:(1)synthesize 1980s instream flow.study information and evaluate applicability to the currently proposed Project;(2)identify appropriate fish species/life stages,study reaches,study sites,and instream flow modeling methods for the 2013-2014 Instream Flow Study;(3)conduct a site reconnaissance survey with agencies and stakeholders,and identify preliminary study sites,potential transect locations,and analytical methods;(4)collect habitat suitability criteria (HSC)data at selected locations on the Susitna River;(5)coordinate instream flow study data needs across resource disciplines and studies;and (6)assist in the development of the 2013-2014 Instream Flow Study Plan.The study area includes all aquatic habitats and riparian areas related to river flow in the Susitna River downstream of the proposed Watana Dam (RM 184 to RM 0). The 2012 study methods addressed the following tasks:(1)review 1980s instream flow study documents;(2)preliminary identification of fish target species,life stages,and/or guilds;(3) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3 December 2012 Revised Study Plan preliminary determination of species periodicity;(4)compilation and review of habitat utilization data by life stage/guild;(5)identification of physical habitat processes;(6)river stratification and study site selection;(7)review existing HSC data/initiate collection of new data;(8)review and selection of habitat modeling methods/components;(9)assist in assessment of temperature modeling;and (10)develop the 2013-2014 study plan. The following field efforts were completed in 2012: e Field teams conducted a reconnaissance-level,on-ground survey of lateral habitat features and mainstem channel to evaluate potential instream flow study sites (sites in the lower Middle Reach were toured in July 2012).A site visit with the agencies and AEA was held in late September to discuss study site selection and modeling procedures. e Field teams conducted aquatic habitat and HSC data collection during July,August,and September in the lower,middle,and upper Susitna River and its tributaries.Sampling methods consisted of seine capture and visual observation during snorkel and pedestrian surveys.Coordination/training with field staff was performed on Montana Creek,a tributary to the lower Susitna River,and near Curry in the Middle Susitna River Reach. e Field personnel conducted reconnaissance visits to selected sloughs and side channels to enable some ground truthing of the aerial videography. River Flow Routing Model Data Collection A hydraulic flow routing model of the Susitna River downstream of Watana Dam will be required to support a variety of other models used to assess the Project's impact on river hydraulics,temperature,ice processes,sediment transport,aquatic resources,and terrestrial resources.The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers'HEC-RAS model is being considered for this purpose.The 2012 River Flow Routing Model Data Collection Study initiated data collection required for developing a routing model. The purpose of the 2012 field effort was to provide input,calibration,and verification data for a river flow routing model that extends from the proposed dam site (RM 184)to RM 75.Specific objectives included:(1)surveying cross-sections to define channel topography and hydraulic controls between RM 75 and RM 184,excluding Devils Canyon;(2)measuring stage and discharge at each cross-section during high,low,and intermediate flows;(3)measuring water surface slope during discharge measurements and documenting substrate type,groundcover, habitat type,and woody debris in the floodplain to develop roughness estimates;and (4) installing and operating water-level recording stations in collaboration with other studies. The primary study area included the Susitna River mainstem channel between RM 75 and RM 184.Additional measurements were made at inactive U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)stations at RM 26 (Susitna Station)and RM 223 (Susitna River near Cantwell),as well as in the Susitna delta. Cross-sections were surveyed in 2012,with over 100 cross-sections surveyed overall,and more will be undertaken in 2013.Water level,surface slope,and discharge measurements were made concurrently with bathymetric surveys at each location.A survey team recorded main channel and overbank locations,substrate and vegetation descriptions,water temperature,estimated D84 substrate size,and field roughness following USGS guidance.Water-level monitoring was conducted at several stations. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Fish and Aquatic Resources Synthesis of Existing Fish Population Data Objectives of the 2012 Synthesis of Existing Fish Population Data Study included:(1) consolidate and synthesize contemporary and historical fisheries resource data from the study area into a comprehensive reference document;and (2)develop a geospatial database of existing fisheries resources for use in analyses and studies to be conducted in 2013-2014.The data synthesis was intended to improve understanding of baseline conditions,refine the list of potential fisheries data gaps,and assist in developing well-focused aquatic resource studies for 2013-2014. The following information was compiled:(1)river mile locations for geographic landmarks used in historical studies;(2)resident and anadromous fish species composition within the upper Susitna River (upstream of RM 184),middle Susitna River (RM 184 to RM 99),and lower Susitna River (RM 99 to RM 0);(3)distribution of resident and anadromous fish species among riverine habitat types;(4)relative abundance of fish species in river segments and riverine habitat types;(5)run timing,spawning,and incubation periods for resident and anadromous species;(6)representative indicators of fish growth,condition factor,age structure,and genetic information;(7)physical habitat attributes beneficial to or preferred by fish species and life stages;(8)physical habitat attributes that appear to limit fish populations;and (9)fish communities,benthic macroinvertebrate communities,and habitat conditions at stream crossings associated with proposed transmission line and access corridors. Adult Salmon Distribution Habitat Utilization Study The 2012 Adult Salmon Distribution and Habitat Utilization Study was the initial component of a multi-year data collection and interpretation effort.The goals of the 2012 study were to:(1) characterize the distribution,migration behavior,and proportional abundance of adult salmon and determine their use of mainstem,side channel,and slough habitats in the lower,middle,and upper Susitna River;(2)determine whether historical study results and conclusions are consistent with the current distribution and relative abundance of spawning adult salmon in the mainstem Susitna River;(3)provide spawning habitat data to support the selection of sites for the instream flow study,develop site-specific habitat suitability criteria,and develop habitat sampling protocol for 2013-2014;and (4)develop information to refine the scope,methods,and study sites for assessing habitat use by adult salmon during the 2013-2014 studies. Study objectives included:(1)capturing,radio-tagging,and tracking adults of the five species of Pacific salmon in the middle Susitna River in proportion to their abundance;(2)determining the migration behavior and spawning locations of radio-tagged fish in the lower,middle,and upper Susitna River;(3)assessing the feasibility of using sonar to determine spawning locations in turbid water;(4)characterizing salmon migration behavior and run timing above Devils Canyon; (5)comparing historical and current data on relative abundance,locations of spawning and holding salmon,and use of mainstem,side-channel,slough,and tributary habitat types by adult salmon;(6)locating individual holding and spawning salmon in clear and turbid water and collecting habitat data from holding and spawning salmon in the middle and lower river mainstem consistent with developing HSC for instream flow modeling;and (7)evaluating the effectiveness of methods used in 2012 to address study goals and objectives,and assessing their suitability for future studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5 December 2012 Revised Study Plan The study area included the Susitna River from Cook Inlet (RM 0)upstream to the Oshetna River (RM 234.4),with an emphasis on river reaches between its confluence with the Chulitna River (RM 98)and Devils Canyon (RM 154).This study was coordinated with basin-wide radio telemetry studies being conducted by the Alaska Department of Fish &Game (ADF&G).This study differs from the ADF&G studies in that spatial data will be collected from radio-tagged fish on a finer scale,with the objective being to obtain locations of spawning and holding salmon at the macro-and microhabitat levels. Upper Susitna River Fish Distribution and Habitat Study The 2012 Upper Susitna River Fish Distribution and Habitat Study constitutes the first year of a multi-year effort aimed at characterizing the existing distribution of Chinook salmon and other fish species in the Susitna River and its tributaries above Devils Canyon.Specific objectives included:(1)determining the distribution of adult and juvenile Chinook salmon and relative abundance of juvenile Chinook salmon in the Susitna River and its tributaries above Devils Canyon;(2)characterizing aquatic habitat in the Susitna River and its tributaries/lakes from Devils Canyon upstream to,and including,the Oshetna River and determining the suitability of that habitat for Chinook salmon;(3)determining fish species composition and relative abundance in the proposed reservoir inundation zone;(4)characterizing the type and amount of aquatic habitat within the proposed reservoir inundation zone;(5)identifying the locations of potential fish barriers in tributaries between Devils Canyon and the Oshetna River;(6)collecting genetic samples of Chinook salmon;and (7)providing information for the development of plans for studies to be conducted in 2013-2014.The study area included the mainstem Susitna River, tributaries,and several lake systems associated with the Susitna River between Devils Canyon (RM 154)and the Oshetna River RM (234.4)(including the Oshetna River). Habitat mapping was conducted in tributaries,the mainstem Susitna River,and in lakes.Adult Chinook salmon spawning surveys were conducted in tributaries and the mainstem;timing of the surveys was based on existing run-timing information and clear water habitat conditions. Juvenile Chinook salmon and other fish species were sampled in tributaries,the mainstem Susitna River,and in lakes;sampling was scheduled based on typical outmigration timing. When appropriate,a simple geomorphic and biologic model was developed to identify the distribution ofjuvenile Chinook habitat in the mainstem river and tributary streams. A two-day habitat training session was conducted for the field crews for the 2012 Fish Distribution,Radio Telemetry,and Fishwheel surveys.The habitat training was conducted in the upper Susitna River and its tributaries.The field data audits were conducted at Stephan Lake Lodge,at fish sampling sites on the unnamed tributary that enters the mainstem Susitna River at historic river mile 192,Curry Camp,and at Fishwheel 2 in the mainstem Susitna River.Training sites were selected to represent a variety of channel types. Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Anadromous Prey Analysis Project-induced changes to river stage and discharge may impact Cook Inlet beluga whale (CIBW)access to the lower Susitna River and/or to available prey.An understanding of CIBW distribution (both spatially and temporally)and their prey species is necessary to evaluate potential Project impacts on CIBWs and their critical habitat. The 2012 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Anadromous Prey Analysis consisted of literature and data reviews of the use of the Susitna River by CIBW and by key prey species (eulachon and adult Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 Page 6 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Chinook,sockeye,chum,and coho salmon).Study objectives included:(1)summarizing the life history,run timing,abundance,distribution,and habitat of CIBW anadromous prey species in the Susitna River and in other Cook Inlet tributaries used by CIBWs;(2)summarizing temporal and spatial distribution of CIBWs in Cook Inlet,the Susitna River delta,and the Susitna River relative to the availability of eulachon and adult Chinook,sockeye,chum,and coho salmon;and (3)consulting with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)for Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)and Endangered Species Act (ESA)permitting and requirements for the Project study program. Existing information on pink salmon (juveniles and adults)and all life stages of Chinook, sockeye,chum,and coho salmon above RM 50 was compiled as part of the Synthesis of Existing Fish Population Data Study,and additional data will be collected during fisheries studies conducted in 2013-2014.The study program focused on compiling and synthesizing life history and habitat use information of:eulachon,adult Chinook,sockeye,chum,and coho salmon,and CIBWs.The study area included the Susitna River within the range of anadromous fish distribution,with an emphasis on the lower river (RM 0-50),and the area of the Susitna River delta that could be affected by Project operations.Fish escapement and run timing data were also compiled for other Cook Inlet tributaries where significant salmon and/or eulachon predation by CIBWs occurs.Results of the study will be used to begin identifying potential Project-induced impacts to beluga whales and their critical habitat and identify data needs to be addressed as part of the 2013-2014 beluga whale study. AEA,in consultation with NMFS,will address MMPA and ESA permit requirements for the Project studies program and begin preparation of appropriate permit applications.A "No Impact”protocol will be developed for implementation in association with all studies that have the potential to affect CIBWs. Botanical Resources Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study The 2012 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study characterized and quantified direct loss of vegetation communities and wildlife habitat within the Project footprint,evaluated baseline wildlife habitat in the Project vicinity,and evaluated potential direct and indirect effects of Project maintenance and operations on vegetation communities and wildlife habitat.This initiated a multi-year study for locations where aerial imagery was currently available.Upon a complete assessment of the Project area,mitigation alternatives will be developed to address adverse Project-induced impacts. The overall,multi-year objectives of the Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study are to: 1)characterize the vegetation communities and wildlife habitat in the Project area;2)quantify the potential impacts due to Project construction;3)evaluate potential changes to the vegetation communities and wildlife habitat from Project maintenance and operations and related activities; and 4)develop the 2013 2014 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study Plan.The assessment of the Project area vegetation and wildlife habitat will be completed as aerial imagery becomes available and the Project area is refined (e.g.,preferred alternative access and transmission corridors). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7 December 2012 Revised Study Plan The study objective for 2012 was to develop a vegetation map using existing habitat delineations,current aerial imagery,and field verification.Vegetation and wildlife habitat surveys were conducted June through August,following the protocols described in the 2012 Study Plan.A total of 357 field plots were sampled.The vegetation and wildlife habitat field surveys focused on the proposed reservoir,the Gold Creek transmission and road corridors,and near the Denali transmission line and road corridor,where imagery of sufficient quality to identify habitat photosignatures was available.Enough field data should be available to support the preliminary mapping of vegetation and wildlife habitats in fall and winter 2012. Wetland Mapping Study Project construction,facilities,and operation and maintenance may affect wetlands upstream and downstream from the dam site,and along access and transmission line routes.A thorough understanding of how Project activities will affect wetland resources in the study area is critical for developing best management practices,rehabilitation options for promoting recovery of wetlands exposed to short term impacts,and compensatory mitigation for permanent wetland losses.Wildlife use is related to the impact of Project activities on wetlands;therefore,results from this study are necessary to evaluate baseline and future wildlife use of the Project area.The results of the Wetlands Mapping Study will also be used to supplement the Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat,Riparian,Rare Plant,and Invasive Plant studies. The overall,multi-year objectives of the Wetlands Mapping Study are to:1)characterize wetlands in the Project area;2)quantify the potential impact to wetlands and wetland function from Project construction;3)evaluate potential changes to wetlands and wetland functions from Project maintenance and operations and related activities;and 4)develop the 2013-2014 Wetlands Mapping Study Plan. The 2012 study included the following study components:1)determine appropriate scales and areal extents for wetland delineations in consultation with USACE and compile available wetland mapping at various scales for development of wetland delineations based on current aerial photography;2)incorporate data from the Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study and available data on natural fire patterns along the reservoir reach of the Susitna River;3) identify wetland delineation field sites and data from the 1980s studies for potential resampling; 4)identify sample locations and conduct initial field surveys. A complete assessment of the Project area wetlands and wetland functions will be completed as aerial imagery becomes available and the Project area is refined (e.g.preferred alternative access and transmission corridors). The study objective for 2012 was to develop a wetland map using existing habitat delineations, current aerial imagery,and field verification.Wetlands surveys were conducted June through August,following the protocols described in the 2012 Study Plan.A total of 357 field plots were sampled.The wetlands field surveys focused on the proposed reservoir and Gold Creek transmission and road corridors,where imagery of sufficient quality to identify habitat photosignatures was available.Enough field data should be available to support the preliminary mapping of wetlands in fall and winter 2012. Riparian Study Construction and operation of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project will alter the natural flow regime of the Susitna River.A thorough understanding of how Project activities will affect Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8 December 2012 Revised Study Plan riparian communities and hydrologic processes in the study area is critical for developing best management practices,developing predictive models of potential changes in riparian ecosystems downstream of the proposed dam,and assessing potential impacts to wildlife. This multi-year study will characterize and quantify riparian habitats and successional stages downstream from the dam site and evaluated potential direct and indirect effects of Project operations on riparian habitats.The study was initiated in 2012 at locations where aerial imagery was currently available.Upon a complete assessment of the Project area,mitigation alternatives will be developed from the data to address adverse Project-induced impacts. This study addresses the following issues:1)losses of vegetation and wetland communities and productivity from reservoir inundation and the development of other Project facilities (direct effects);2)changes to vegetation and wetland communities along access roads,transmission corridors,and reservoir edges due to alteration of solar radiation,temperature moderation, erosion and dust deposition,reservoir fluctuation,pathogen dispersal and abundance;and 3) potential changes in wetlands,wetland functions,riparian vegetation,and riparian succession patterns related to altered hydrologic regimes below the dam. Riparian botanical surveys were conducted June through July,following the protocols described in the 2012 Study Plan.A total of 88 field plots were sampled.The riparian botanical survey area focused on the active floodplain of the Susitna River between the proposed dam site to the north and the town of Willow to the south.Due to time constraints,some transects will need to be revisited during the 2013 surveys to collect additional plot data. Wildlife Resources Eagle and Raptor Nest Study The Project may result in eagle nest site loss or alteration and disturbance due to increased human activity.Information on eagle and other raptor nest site locations is necessary to develop avoidance and mitigation measures in compliance with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act,the Migratory Bird Treaty Act,and associated Executive Orders. The 2012 study identified and compiled existing nest site and habitat use information,developed survey areas,and completed multiple inventory and monitoring surveys for Bald and Golden eagles.Potential Project-related impacts to eagles and raptors,as well as critical data gaps,were identified.The 2013-2014 study plans will be developed in consultation with AEA,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),and other licensing participants. The inventory and monitoring methodologies established aerial and ground-based protocols for eagle nest surveys,using appropriately trained observers and suitable survey platforms (helicopter,fixed-wing aircraft).Inventory and monitoring data reporting will comply with the protocols and standards described in the Memorandum of Understanding between the FERC and the USFWS regarding implementation of Executive Order 13186.Although the primary study focus was to evaluate the potential for the Project to affect eagles and eagle nests,all nests of raptors and Common Ravens were recorded during surveys.Recommendations for survey extent and methods were developed in coordination with the USFWS before beginning surveys. The data gathered in 2012 will form the basis of future studies to evaluate the potential impacts of the Project on Bald Eagles,Golden Eagles,and other raptors.Delineation and survey results Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 9 December 2012 Revised Study Plan of all suitable habitats within the Project area will identify occupied habitats and may be used in the future to evaluate occupied versus available habitats.Eagle nest sites and ground-based observations may be compared to determine pair territory size.Data on territory size can be used to determine whether raptors displaced from nest sites due to Project-related habitat loss, alteration,or disturbance maintain alternative nest sites within their territory that would be unaffected by the Project,or whether nesting pairs may be displaced into already occupied territories.Historical and current data may also be compared to evaluate trends in raptor populations and habitat use. Occupancy surveys for nesting raptors were performed in May from a helicopter.Dozens of raptor nests were observed.Occupied nest sites were located and mapped.The raptor study area comprises the entire area within a 2-mile buffer surrounding the Project area (reservoir study area,facilities/infrastructure area,and access route and transmission-line corridors).The next fieldwork planned for raptors is nest productivity surveys,scheduled for July 8-13 and 23-27, 2013. Past and Current Big Game Harvest Study The Project would create an access road to the dam site,as well as a large water body that could be used for floatplane access to the region.These Project features,along with transmission line corridor(s),have the potential to facilitate human access to the Project area and change the pattern of human harvest of big game,furbearers,small game mammals,and upland game birds. The objective of this study is to identify,acquire,and analyze available big game and furbearer harvest and population data from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)for identification of past and current trends in hunter access modes,hunting locations,and harvest locations.Existing data from harvest reports will be compiled and reviewed for its adequacy to address Project-specific changes in human access.The analysis will also determine whether the watershed tributary-scale Uniform Coding Unit (UCU)data are adequate for detecting and predicting potential Project-related changes in total harvest and harvest locations due to potential changes in human access. This study addresses the following issues:1)potential impact of changes in predator and prey abundance and distribution related to increased human activities and habitat changes resulting from Project development;and 2)potential impacts to wildlife from changes in hunting, vehicular use,noise,and other disturbances due to increased human presence resulting from Project development. The wildlife data-gap analysis conducted for the Project identified the need for an updated drainage-specific compilation of subsistence,sport hunter,and trapper harvest data for all game animals and furbearers.Hunter access to this region has changed since the 1980s,but potential changes in patterns of harvest at this scale have not been evaluated or compared to movements of moose or caribou.Compilation of historic data could also be useful for identifying any potential trends in human access and harvest locations over the past decades and will provide input to ADF&G's management goals for big game and furbearers in the Project area. Initial efforts in 2012 focused on compilation and analysis of hunter harvest and effort within harvest report units contained within the ADF&G harvest record database.Movement and ageregation patterns of game resources were evaluated from available ADF&G telemetry databases (moose and caribou)or other available data maintained by ADF&G.Spatial resolution, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 10 December 2012 Revised Study Plan adequacy,and completeness of the harvest data record for detecting potential changes in use of wildlife resources in the Project area were evaluated.Collection of additional harvest data may be recommended if existing data are determined to be at an insufficient resolution to detect potential changes in harvest due to changes in human access.Additional information gathering may involve interviews with trappers,upon approval and in coordination with subsistence interviews that will be conducted in the affected communities in 2013-2014. Wildlife Habitat Use and Movement Study Construction and operation of the Project will result in wildlife habitat loss and alteration, blockage of movements of mammals,disturbance,and changes in human activity due to construction and operation of the Project from the proposed dam site,and along access and transmission line routes.The Project may result in loss of,or displacement from,seasonally used sensitive habitats in the middle and upper Susitna River basin,such as caribou calving areas, bear foraging habitats,and Dall sheep lambing areas and mineral licks.In order to evaluate potential Project-related effects and inform subsequent studies,the 2012 study effort aimed to characterize critical data gaps based on existing Project area wildlife abundance,distribution, movements and sensitive habitat data.This study was the initiation of a multi-year effort that will continue in 2013-2014. This study was broken into tasks by resource (species),each with specific objectives,study areas,methods,and analytical outputs.Information on the current use of the following areas was compiled:critical moose and caribou calving areas,rutting areas,wintering areas,and migration or movement corridors;bear foraging and den habitats;Dall sheep lambing areas and mineral licks;and wolf den and rendezvous sites.Data were compiled from various sources and evaluated to determine the need for additional aerial surveys,ground-based monitoring,and/or the potential establishment of remote surveillance.This information will be used to develop 2013-2014 study plans. Recreation and Aesthetic Resources Aesthetic and Recreation Resources Study Construction and operation of the Project may impact recreation resources by increasing activity, altering portions of the Susitna River and adjacent land,and/or restricting or increasing access. These impacts could result in changes in the nature of the recreation experience,changes in hunting or fishing opportunities,and/or changes in other recreation opportunities.Temporary recreation impacts could be generated by construction personnel,traffic,materials,staging areas, the worker camp,and noise.The Project is likely to also have positive recreation impacts.The proposed access roads and transmission line corridors,reservoir,and recreational facilities would provide new recreational opportunities to the public. Construction and operation of the Project also may alter the character of aesthetic resources as a result of increased human activity,noise and development.Temporary visual and noise impacts would be generated by construction personnel,traffic,materials,staging areas,and worker camps.The dam and reservoir would become a new visual feature in the middle Susitna River basin.These structures could be viewed by various categories of persons,including Project personnel and support staff,recreationists,subsistence users,and individuals flying overhead. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 Page 11 December 2012 Revised Study Plan The Project could have positive visual impacts as a result of the access roads,reservoir,and recreational facilities providing new recreational and viewing opportunities to the public. The study objectives for the 2012 Recreation and Aesthetics Study focused on information gathering activities to identify relevant recreation and aesthetic resource information that will inform the formal study planning process and environmental and social effects analysis for Project construction and operation.Information will also be used to guide Project design and mitigation of construction,operation and maintenance activities to minimize impacts,and identify opportunities for design and siting refinements that maximize opportunity and access to recreation opportunities and/or important views.Coordination across social resources (i.e., cultural,subsistence,and socioeconomic)from the outset of information gathering is considered an essential component of the Aesthetics Study.Interdisciplinary coordination focused on identifying locations of sensitive aesthetic and/or recreational resources such as cultural properties,cultural vistas,and areas used by local outfitters (i.e.,rafting,fishing,and hunting). The 2012 work effort concentrated on data collection,and an evaluation of the comprehensiveness and applicability of existing data.An evaluation of further measures that may be required to collect appropriate data will also be provided for use in 2013-2014. Cultural Resources Cultural Resources Study Construction and operation of the Project may result in damage or loss of cultural resources from construction or increased human activity in the upper Susitna River basin.Documentation of currently known cultural resources sites will help to inform the 2013-2014 studies.This information,as well as a plan for unanticipated cultural resource discoveries,will be useful to prevent inadvertent disturbance from other field studies for the Project. The cultural resources study objectives were designed primarily to provide the information necessary to enable the applicant and lead federal agency to meet the requirements of National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)and its accompanying regulations (36 CFR 800).The major objectives for 2012 work included:1)create GIS database to help enable development of predictive models and management of cultural resources information for 2013-2014 studies;2) develop a predictive model,identifying areas of high,medium,and low potential for the occurrence of cultural resources;3)continue to identify and document cultural resources within the Project study area,building upon work done between 1978-1985;and 4)prepare plans and procedures addressing unanticipated discoveries of cultural resources,human remains,and paleontological resources. Construction and operation of the Project may impact sites of cultural significance along transportation and powerline alignments,as well as in the area to be inundated by the reservoir.It is important that these resources be inventoried and evaluated,so that the Project can identify protection,mitigation and enhancement measures as appropriate.It is expected that potential impacts to many cultural resources in the Project area can be mitigated either via removal (data recovery/archaeological excavation),or minor changes to Project alignments (avoidance). In July,2012,the cultural resources subcontractor generated the first iteration of a cultural resource site locational model for the Susitna area,used the modeled surface to help develop survey strategies for the SUWA corridors/potential APE,closely examined spatial data from Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 12 December 2012 Revised Study Plan previous (legacy)cultural resource fieldwork,and designated and mapped potential test areas for use by the field crew in August 2012.In addition,spreadsheets and shapefiles of cultural resources requiring site visits within the APE,as well as of potential test areas,were created using GPS devices.Work continued on reviewing and copying relevant files and maps from the 1979-1985 studies housed at the University of Alaska Museum of the North in Fairbanks. The cultural resources survey of geotechnical borehole locations was completed in early July and the main 2012 field program was performed between late July and mid-August. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 1-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2.PROPOSED 2013 AND 2014 ILP STUDIES AEA is proposing to perform 58 individual studies in eleven resource sections listed below.Each study description follows a standard study plan template to provide a consistent presentation across disciplines.The study descriptions include:fundamental discussions of existing information and why the study is necessary to augment existing information;a description of the objectives and scope of the study;and how the information could be used to inform the development of license conditions for the Project. Implementation of the studies will commence soon after FERC's study plan determination.Each study description has information regarding the scheduling of the work efforts but in general each study will include: e Preparatory Phase,January -March 2013 and 2014; e Field Phase or Deployment Phase,spanning April -October (typically September)2013 and 2014; e Analysis Phase,June -November 2013 and 2014;and e Reporting Phase,December 2013-January 2014 and December 2014-January 2015. Upon issuance of FERC's study plan determination,AEA will finalize a comprehensive schedule for all studies.AEA has prepared a preliminary comprehensive schedule based on the 58 study plans described in this RSP (see Attachment 2-1).Due to the interrelationships among the proposed studies (discussed below)and unforeseen circumstances that may arise during implementation of the studies (e.g.,weather delays),AEA notes that all dates in the attached schedule (except mandated regulatory deadlines)are estimated at this time and will be continually updated throughout the study plan implementation phase,to account for actual events as they occur. Attachment 2-1 also includes a table entitled "Table of Study Predecessor and Successor Activities.”Because the studies in this RSP are interdisciplinary in nature,most have direct input or output needs from other resource studies.While each study plan provides a description and illustration of these interrelationships for specific information needs and requirements that will be obtained via other study efforts,the table in Attachment 2-1 is a comprehensive master listing of the flow of information among all studies in the RSP,prepared at the task level (ranging from internal exchanges of information to publicly available deliverables).While AEA believes that this table is essential in demonstrating how the interrelationships among all the studies will unfold over the two-year study program,AEA emphasizes that,like the master schedule,this table is preliminary at this time,and all dates (except mandated regulatory deadlines)are estimates.Because the table is a working document,it is subject to change and will be continually updated throughout AEA's implementation of the study plan approved by FERC. In addition,the general relationships,key information flow patterns,and interdependencies among studies are shown in Figure 2-1 (Riverine-based Studies)and 2-2 (Upland-based Studies). Some general concepts that apply to each study plan implementation effort include: e The schedule for each proposed study is reasonably flexible to accommodate unforeseen problems that may affect schedule. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 Page 2-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Field crews may make reasonable modifications to a study in the field to accommodate actual field conditions and unforeseen problems.AEA's contractor field crews will follow accepted protocols to the extent possible.When modifications are made,AEA will work to advise licensing participants of the change,particularly for any substantial modifications. When a number of alternative modifications are available to the field crew and with all other things being equal,the contractor field crew will chose the low-cost alternative. Implementation of many studies will require access to private property.AEA is in the process of obtaining permission from land owners for access.Specifically excluded from study areas are locations where access is unsafe (very steep terrain or high water flows) or private property for which AEA has not received specific approval from the landowner to enter the property to perform the study. The following studies are described in this RSP,as listed below. Geology and Soils (Section 4) l.Geology and Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5) Water Quality (Section 5) 1. 2. 3. Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5) Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6) Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study (Section 5.7) Geomorphology (Section 6) 1.Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5) 2.Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study (Section 6.6) Hydrology-Related Resources (Section 7) 3.Groundwater Study (Section 7.5) 4.Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study (Section 7.6) 5.Glacier and Runoff Changes Study (Section 7.7) Instream Flow (Section 8) 1.Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) 2.Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) Fish and Aquatic Resources (Section 9)AirpwStudy of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River (Section 9.5) Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River (Section 9.6) Salmon Escapement Study (Section 9.7) River Productivity Study (Section 9.8) Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9) The Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study (Section 9.10) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.Study of Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam (Section 9.11) 8.Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries (Section 9.12) 9.Aquatic Resources Study within the Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Construction Area (Section 9.13) 10.Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species (Section 9.14) 11.Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area (Section 9.15) 12.Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River (Section 9.16) 13.Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study (Section 9.17) Wildlife Resources (Section 10) 1.Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival (Section 10.5) 2 Caribou Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival (Section 10.6) 3 Dall's Sheep Distribution and Abundance (Section 10.7) 4.Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large Carnivores (Section 10.8) 5.|Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occupancy (Section 10.9) 6 7 8 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use (Section 10.10) Aquatic Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use (Section 10.11) .Small Mammal Species Composition and Habitat Use (Section 10.12) 9.Bat Distribution and Habitat Use (Section 10.13) 10.Surveys of Eagles and Other Raptors (Section 10.14) 11.Waterbird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study (Section 10.15) 12.Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study (Section 10.16) 13.Population Ecology of Willow Ptarmigan in Game Management Unit 13 (Section 10.17) 14.Wood Frog Occupancy and Habitat Use (Section 10.18) 15.Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use (Section 10.19) 16.Wildlife Harvest Analysis (Section 10.20) Botanical Resources (Section 11) 1.Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin (Section 11.5) 2.Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Sustina-Watana Dam (Section 11.6) 3.Wetland Mapping Study (Section 11.7) 4.Rare Plant Study (Section 11.8) 5.Invasive Plant Study (Section 11.9) Recreation and Aesthetic Resources (Section 12) 1.Recreation Resources Study (Section 12.5) 2.Aesthetic Resources Study (Section 12.6) 3.River Recreation Flow and Access Study (Section 12.7) Cultural and Paleontological Resources (Section 13) 1.Cultural Resources Study (Section 13.5) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2.Paleontological Resources Study (Section 13.6) Subsistence Resources (Section 14) 1.Subsistence Resources Study (Section 14.5) Socioeconomic and Transportation Resources (Section 15) Regional Economic Evaluation Study (Section 15.5) Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study (Section 15.6) Transportation Resources Study (Section 15.7) Health Impact Assessment Study (Section 15.8) Air Quality Study (Section 15.9)wPYnN>Project Safety (Section 16) 1.Probable Maximum Flood Study (Section 16.5) 2.Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Study (Section 16.6) As noted in Section 1,licensing participants submitted a total of 52 formal study requests,of which AEA is proposing to undertake all but one of these requested resource studies,with some alterations and adjustments as noted in study plan sections or comment response tables.For the 51 study requests that align with studies AEA is proposing,this RSP does not in every instance adopt each element or aspect of the proposed study request.Rather,AEA has incorporated the majority of the elements,with alterations or adjustments,or by providing similar approaches to the requested studies.As described in detail in Section 1.1 above,following AEA's release of the PSP,AEA consulted regularly and extensively with licensing participants to discuss any remaining differences between AEA's proposed studies and participants'formal study requests, During this intensive consultative effort,any comments raised by licensing participants regarding any differences were noted in TWG meeting notes,in other consultation documents,and in written comments recently filed with the Commission.AEA has provided responses to these concerns and others in the comment response tables in Appendix 1 and 3. Since the filing of the PSP,AEA did not receive any new formal study requests.Therefore,the previously filed 51 study requests outlined in the PSP are the study requests that been the subject of continuous consultation between AEA and interested parties and are also those study requests many interested parties refer to in their recent FERC-filed comments on the PSP.Table 2-1 presents a listing of the individual study requests,identifies the study requestor(s),and identifies where in AEA's study plan the study topic is addressed. 2.1.Tables Table 2-1.Summary of formal study requests filed with FERC. Study Request Title Requestor Date filed with FERC |PSP Section Study Request Corresponds to Probable Maximum Flood FERC 05-31-2012 Section 16 -Project Safety,16.5 Geology and Soils FERC 05-31-2012 Section 4 -Geology and SoilsAssessment Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 Page 2-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Study Request Title Requestor Date filed with FERC |PSP Section Study Request Corresponds to Site-Specific Seismic FERC 05-31-2012 Section 16 -Project Safety,16.6HazardEvaluation Noise Assessment FERC 05-31-2012 Section 12 -Recreation and Aesthetic Resources,12.7 Recreational Boating and Section 12 -Recreation and Aesthetic River Access Study FERC 05-31-2012 Resources,12.5 and 12.6 Recreation Resources FERC 05-31-2012 Section 12 Recreation and Aesthetic Study Resources,12.5 Study of Eagles and Other USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 10 -Wildlife Resources,10.14Raptors Study of Waterbird Migration,Breeding,and USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 10 -Wildlife Resources,10.15 Habitat Study of rancbis and USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 10 -Wildlife Resources,10.16Shorebirds Piscivorous Wildlife and Mercury -Risk USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 5 -Water Quality,5.7 Assessment Study Vegetation and Wildlife Section 11 -Botanical Resources,11.5;Section Habitat Mapping Study USFWS 05-31-2012 10 -Wildlife Resources,10.19 Riparian 'Study Mapping USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 11 Botanical Resources,11.6 Wetland Mapping and Functional Assessment USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 11 -Botanical Resources,11.7 Study Instream Flow for Floodplain and Riparian USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 8 -Instream Flow,8.6 Vegetation Study River Productivity Study USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.8 Fish Passage Study USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.11 Early Life History and Juvenile Fish Distribution Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.5, and Abundance in the USFWS 05-31-2012 9.6 and 9.7 Susitna River Adult and Juvenile Non- Salmon Anadromous,... Resident and Invasive Fish USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.5 _.and 9.6StudiesintheSusitna River basin (RMO0-233) Adult Salmon Distribution,USEWS 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.5Abundance,Habitat Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Study Request Title Requestor Date filed with FERC |PSP Section Study Request Corresponds to Utilization and Escapement in the Susitna River Susitna River Instream Flow and Habitat Utilization USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 8 -Instream Flow,8.5 Study Groundwater-Related Aquatic and Floodplain USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.5 Habitat Study Water Quality Study USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 5 -Water Quality,5.5 Geomorphology Study USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 6 -Geomorphology,6.5 Section 5 -Water Quality,5.6;Section 6 - .Geomorphology,6.6;Section 7 -Hydrology-Flow Routing Study USFWS 05-31-2012 Related Resources 7.6;and Section 8 Instream Flow,8.5 and 8.6 Ice Processes in the USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.6SusitnaRiver Project Effects Under Climate Change Condition USFWS 05-31-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.7 Study Fish Passage Study NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.11 Early Life History and Juvenile Fish Distribution Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.5 and Abundance in the NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 and Section 8 -Instream Flow,8.5 Susitna River Study Adult Salmon Distribution .Abundance,Habitat NOAA-NMES 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.5 Utilization and Escapement and 9.6 in the Susitna River Susitna River Instream NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 8 -Instream Flow,8.5FlowStudyRequest Susitna River Groundwater ; Study NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.5 Susiina River Water NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 5 -Water Quality,5.5QualityStudy Susitna River Geomorphology Study NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 6 -Geomorphology,6.5 Request Section 5 -Water Quality,5.6;Section 6 - Susitna River Flow Routing Geomorphology,6.6;Section 7 -Hydrology-NOAA-34. Study Request OAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Related Resources 7.6;and Section 8 Instream Flow,8.5 and 8.6 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Study Request Title Requestor Date filed with FERC |PSP Section Study Request Corresponds to Susitna River Ice . Processes Study Request NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.6 Susitna River project Effects Under Changing . Climate Conditions Study NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.7 Request Susitna-Watana Marine NOAA-NMFS 05-31-2012 Section 9 -Aquatic Resources,9.16 and 9.17MammalStudyRequest Recreation Resources USDOI-NPS 05-24-2012 Section 12 -Recreation and Aesthetic Assessment Resources,12.5 Aesthetic Resources,... Assessment of Visual and USDOI -NPS 05-24-2012 Section 12.Recreation and Aesthetic .Resources,12.6AuditoryImpacts Adult Chinook and Coho Salmon Spawner Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.5, Distribution and ADF&G 05-30-2012 9.6,and 9,7 Abundance Studies Fish Genetics ADF&G 05-30-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.14 Moose Browse survey in the Susitna-Watana ADF&G 05-30-2012 Section 10 -Wildlife Resources,10.5 Hydroelectric Project Area Instream Flow Study ADF&G 05-30-2012 Section 8 -Instream Flow,8.5 Evaluation of Surface Water and Ground Water ADF&G 05-30-2012 Section 7 -Hydrology-Related Resources,7.5 Exchange Request for Information or Study Effects of the Project and Related Activates on |Center for Water Advocacy 05-31-2012 Section 8 -Instream Flow,8.5 Hydrology for Anadromous Fish Recreational Flow Study |American White Water 05-31-2012 Section 12 Recreation and Aesthetic Resources,12.7 Mineral Resources Cook Inlet Region INC 05-31-2012 Section 4 -Geology and SoilsAssessment Temperature Impact on Natural Resources 05-30-2012 Section 5 -Water Quality,5.6;Section 8- Aquatic Community Defense Council Instream Flow,8.5 Altered Flow,Turbidity and Natural Resources .,-30-2012SedimentTransportDefenseCouncil05-30-20 Section 6 Geomorphology,6.5 Salmon Viability Criteria Natural Resources 05-30-2012 Section 9 -Fish and Aquatic Resources,9.7DefenseCouncil National-Level Economic |Natural Heritage Institute,05-31-2012 Section 3 -Studies Not Proposed Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Study Request Title Requestor Date filed with FERC |PSP Section Study Request Corresponds to Valuation et al. National-Level Economic |a nerican Whitewater 05-31-2012 Section 3 -Studies Not ProposedValuation Alaska Hydro Project National-Level Economic Alaska Survival .. Valuation Coalition for Susitna Dam 11-14-2014 Section 3 -Studies Not Proposed Alternatives Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2.2.Figures R irO .*Integrated Resources -->eservoir Operations Plan Model e MWH Model*_PROMOD J ©HEC-ResSim (Reservoir Elevations, River Flows,Power Gen) a eee --_--Reservoir Resources e Cultural e Wildlife Movement /( Flow Routing Model > Terr,and Rip.Habitat e HEC-ResSim Recreation ¢HEC-RAS «Fish Habitat ©Other Routing Models* (e.g.,Hourly Flows/Stagey,Along Length of River) XM S (river Water Quality Mode!\ (Temperature,Turbidity,Other WQ Parameters) River Ice Processes Model R 1 1 1 : Geology and Soils - (Ice Formation) Fluvial Geomorpholoy Model (Channel Morphology,Sub- strate) Productivity Model {Algae,BMIs,Food} Groundwater "Model” Hydrology (Upstream) @ USGS Records ©§6Glacial/Hydrology Runoff Model (Stream Flows,Sediment,Glacial Melt,Snow Melt,Rainfall Runoff,Groundwater) Ne (Upwelling,Pewnwetin) Reservoir Water Quality /Ice /Sedimenta- tion Model(s) e TBD (Temperature,Turbidity,ice, Other WQ Parameters,Sedi- ment)S/S Hydrology (Tributaries) «USGS Records (Stream Flows,Sediment) *Various models (¢.g., water temperature)re- quire their own routing i>i Instream Flow Habitat Models Empirical ("river Resources Recreation /Boating «Wildlife Movement/° Riparian Hab.Model e 1D Models eFish e 2D Models «Beluga Whale (Fish Habitat,Riparian Ne Habitat)yy, Figure 2-1.Interrelationships amongst Riverine-based Studies. Ld Fish Passage (Sloughs,Tributaries,Devils Canyon,Dam,Reservoir) Alaska Energy AuthoritySusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project December 2012FERCProjectNo.14241 Page 2-9 REVISED STUDY PLAN Proposed Project Developments / Construction Planning Information v Botanical Resources Geology and Soils (_Wildlife Resources LYy | VVv Transportation Recreation /Aesthetics Subsistence Resources (Noise} Air Quality Regional Economics Cultural Resources Social Goods &Services Quality of Life J / Health Impact Analysis / Figure 2-2.Interrelationships amongst Upland-based Studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-10 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2.3.Attachments ATTACHMENT 2-1.COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2-11 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 2-1 COMPREHENSIVE SCHEDULE Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule $T4630 30-Aug-13 |: Activity 1D |Activity Name Rem|Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration [|a2 |a3 [a4 [a2 [03 [a4 oTelet«+[a2 [|a3 |a4 [at [a2 [a3 4 Seb td "'..Susitna-Watana oeProject Schedulebeetesaa664d04-Jan-12 "24-Feb-15 es ..-_A Pre Filing Activities=.oe abe cen cot be sae od a.as peer '' ' :Milestones ;664d :04-Jan-12 '24-Feb-15 CS Milestones ' SS First &Second Season -Studies :SS Geology &Soils Characterization Study (4.5)een ece Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)83d!01-"May-13"-Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site a Reservoir Area): ST4660 Comprehensive Investigations (Access Road &Transmission Line)83d |01-May-14*29-Aug-14 ;!c--Compretiensive investigations (Access Road &Transmission LineST4661InitialStudyReportOd03-Feb-14*/@ Initial Study Report '; __ST4662_Updated Study Report od 02-Feb-15"|!;;;;:}@ Updated study Report ; aline St (5.5 :""om 548ci |02.Ju 2ememmeh 02-Feb-15a 7 ---Baseline Water Quality Study (5.5)Po2ST4680METStationInstallation&Data Collection 458d |15-Aug-12*30-Sep-14 ':£i MET Staton installation &Data Collection ; ST4690 Thermal Imaging 20d|15-Nov-12"|28-Dec-12 '[3 Thermal Imaging $T4720 Data Analysis &Management 427d |02-Oct-12*30-Sep-14 'Cc 4 Data Analysis Management ,A s14730 Fish Tissue Sampling 40d|03-Sep-13"31-Oct-13 ;co Fish Tissue Sampliig !|||!: :$T4740 Sediment Sampling 40d |03-Sep-13*31-Oct-13 :co Sediment Sampling:;:;;:; ST4750 Water Quality Monitoring 205d |16-Apr-13*26-Mar-14 [>:pes to ---={"Water Quality MonitoringSo oo Co ns rr oo ST4760 Deployment of Temp Monitoring Apparatus 458d |15-Aug-12*30-Sep-14 ;c-||Deployment of Temp Monitoring ApparatusST4770QAPP/SAP Preparation &Review 62d |02-Jul-12*28-Sep-12 {7 QAPPISAP Preparation &Review ': ST4771 initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*'@ Initial Study Report ||||| ST4772 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*;|@ Updated Study Report Water Quality Modeling Study (5.6}"=. _...wl ea ee)--=--A Water Quality Modeling Study (6.8)|ee $T4800 Generaterate Results for Operational Scenarios 122d |15-May-14*14-Nov-14 |;:;':-Génerate Results for Operational Stenarios ST4810 Verification Runs 63d:01-Jul-14"30-Sep-14 ;c-Verification Runs :' .ST4820 Re-Calibration Adjustments 121d |01-Apr-14*30-Sep-14 ;4 Re-Calibration|'Adjustrients "ST4840 Model Calibration (Water Quality)110d |07-Jul-13"31-Dec-13 1 Modet Calibration (Water Quality)';::: i ST4850 Model Evaluation/Selection 31d/15-Aug-12"[28-Sep-12 |::ES NodalEvaivaion/Selection res eee ene ee pore pores eenn eeenen eee enan ae |ST4860 Coordination w/Water Quality Data Collection &Analysis 306d |02-Oct-12"28-Mar-14 c 3 Coordination wi Water'Quality Data Colection a Analysis F |ST4861 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*:;'@ Initial Study Report :::': ST4862 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15";;!is Updated Study ReportenMercury.Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study ry -"ee Coe 2 mE --------Mercury Assessment and Potential for BioaccumulalST4870SoilVegetationSamplingGapopopoi'oamann]--Soi Vegetation Sampiing a ae po po ro ST4880 Sediment Sampling 52d|15-Aug-13"31-Oct-13 =Sediment Sampling:|:|!|!| $T4900 Avian Furbearer Studies 62d]01-Jul-13*30-Sep-13 ;co Avian Furbearer Studies $T4910 Fish Tissue Sampling 295d |01-Jun-12*30-Sep-13 r Fish Tissue Sampling ! $74920 Data Analysis &Management 93d |01-Oct-13"28-Mar-14 ;---Data Analysis &Management ST4940 FollowUpStudies(as needed)166d |02-Jan-14"30-Sep-14.|)rr OE --=}"Follow Up Studies (as needed)oe yo po ST4960 Water Quality Monitoring (Monthly)155d |01-Jul-13"28-Mar-14 ;;;c 3 Water Quality Monitoring (Monthly) $T4961 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*''Cd Initial Study,Report;'' ST4962 Updated 'Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|:! ' | @ Uptiated Study Report |||B ba Goomorpnoiosystudy(6.5 -:SR |ercrrsusr0 ST4970 Initial Geomorphic Reach Deliniation/Finalize Deliniation 275d |02-Jul-12*30-Sep-13 L 1 Initial Geomorphic Reach Deliniation/Finalize Déliniation' $T4980 Identify and Map Paleo Geomorphic Features &Geology 213d |02-Oct-12"30-Sep-13 C |Identify and Map Palea Geomotphic Features &:'Geology $T4990 Determine Morphometric Parameters 275d |02-Jul-12*30-Sep-13 |)C j Determine Morphometric Parameters::' $T5010 Identify Key Governing Geomorphic Process 275d |02-Jul-12*30-Sep-13 C J Identify Key Governing:Geomotphic Process ;;; $T5020 Acquire Aerial Photo 275d |02-Jul-12"30-Sep-13 fo --O----->;Acquire Aerial Photo 3 ae Po :a :oo :a :|;oo ST5030 Digitize 1980's Habitat and Geomorphic Features 110d |02-Jul-12*28-Dec-12 |:--Digitize 1980's.'Habitat and Geomorphic Features : i ST5040 Digitize 2012 Habitat and Geomorphic Features 261d |02-Oct-12*31-Dec-13 :c i Digitize 2012 Habitat and Geomorphic Features' Page 1 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -lo-. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration |a2 [|a3 |a4 }a2 {|a3 {a4 1 [a2 [a3 |a4 1 |Q2 |a3 |Q4 |a2 {a3 re | §T5050 Assess Habitat Area Change 1980-2012 257d |15-Nov-12*20-Feb-14 7::!.]Assess Habitat Area Change 350 2012 ;:': |$T5060 Assess Channel Change 1980-2012 257d |15-Nov-12"20-Feb-14 ;r _A Channel Change 1980-2012 |! 1 ST5070 Initial &Final Flow Assessment 183d|02-Oct-12"|15-Aug-13 |)i f 1 Initial &Final Flow'Assessrhent ST5080 Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization of Bed Mobilization 51d!04-Jun-13"/15Aug-13 [>ns(|"Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization "te Mobiizatin ee ST5090 initial/Detailed Sediment Balance 213d |02-Oct-12"[30-Sep-13 |:t J Initia/Detailed Sediment Balance $T5100 Recon.Level Assessment of Potential Lower River Channel Change 45d)15-Nov-12*21-Feb-13 /(ooo Recon.Level Assessment:'of Potential Lower River Channel;Change $T5120 Large Woody Debris 307d|15-May-13*[30-Sep-14 _|:i o£J Large Woody Debris | $T5130 Reservoir Geomorphology 334d |02-Apr-13*30-Sep-14 ;;;C =]Reservoir Geomorphology|$T5140 Geomorphology of Stream X-ings along Access &Trans Corridor 334d |02-Apr-13"30-Sep-14 oo :-_-aro 4 :"Geomorphology of Siream X-ings along Access &Trans,Corrid $T5150 Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results 426d |02-Jan-13"31-Dec-14 C J Integration &Support of Interpreting Fiuv.Geomorpholl$T5180 Develop Geomorphic System /Finalize Classification System 213d |03-Apr-12*29-Mar-13 |:[3 Develop Geonorphic System /Finalize Classifi cation System : '' ST5181 inital Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|);:@ ita Study Report |; 'ST5182 _Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*:';/@ Upilated Study Report 7)ogy |7 =: $RN.606d|03-Apr-12 algae]02-Feb-357)Ill ar ---Fal Gecinorpholoay Modeing Below Watana Da"ST5200 Selection of 1D and 2D Models 213d |03-Apr-12*29-Mar-13 |:f 7|Selection of 10 and 2D,Models ;1 ': |$5210 Selection of Focus Area 115d|[16-Jul-12"[34-Jan-13 |--Selection of Focus Area|$T5230 Coordination w/Other Studies on Modeling Needs Including Focus Areas 399d |15-Nov-12”30-Sep-14 Cc a Coordination w/Other Studies on Modeling Needs Including Fo:|ST5240 2013 Field Data Collection 420d |02-Apr-13*[30-Sep-13 |!;----2013 Field Data Collection ; ST5250 Supplemental Field Data Collection 2014 120d |01-Apr-14*29-Sep-14 po a a Do poe eee Ey "SpniemonialFictd Data Goliedion 2018 a oe ,ST5260 Coordinate w/Other Studies on Processes Modeled 192d |01-Nov-12*30-Sep-13 ;;c j Coordinate wi Other Studies on Processes Modeled ; $T5270 1D Model Development &Calibration 168d |02-Apr-13*31-Dec-13 |:;;c }1D Model Development &Calibration ''' |$T5280 Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &tnitial Proj Run 70d '01-Oct-13"18-Feb-14 |:;--Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Praj Run: $T5290 Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 1D Results 45d;02-Jan-14*28-Mar-14 ::|Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 4D Results ': ST5300 2D Mode!Development&Calibration 213d |01-Jul-13*30-Jun-14 Do on LE --:-----------1 2D Model Development &Calibration |a .$T5310 Perform 2D Modeling Existing Conditions 63d |01-Jul-14*30-Sep-14 |);:cc Perform 2D Modeling Existing Conditions IF sT5320 Perform 1D Modeling of Alternate Scenarios 192d|18-Feb-14" |31-Dec-14 x=3 J Perform 1D Modeling of Alternate Scenarios 4 ST5340 Perform 2D Modeling of Alternate Scenarios 110d |01-Jul-14*31-Dec-14 ;::'':I Perform 2D Modeling of Alternate Scenarios : .$T5350 Post Process &Provide Model Results to Other Studies 168d |01-Apr-14*31-Dec-14 :'t =j Post Process &Provide Model Results to Other Studies ST5360 Interpretation of Channel Change &Integration w/Other Studies 168d |01-Apr-14"31-Dec-14 7 oO 4 --7 -.a -a pe :a c --=--:--1 :interpretation of Channel Change &integration wi Othe '$T5370 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|!;@ iil Study Report |; | S15372 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*!!!!|||;A Updated Study Report ; $T5380 Existing Data Synthesis 213d|02-Jan-13"|34-Dec-13 |::4 >|Existidg Data Synthesis ' [:ST5390 Geohydrologic Process-Domains and Terrain 213d/02-Jan-13* |31-Dec13 |);SSScc ----]"Geohydroiogi¢Process-Domains and ce yo P| :$T5400 Watana Dam/Reservoir 323d/04-Jun-13*[14-Nov-14 |)no <=]Watana Dam/Reservoir |$T5410 Upwelling/Springs Broadscale Mapping 362d |02-Apr-13"14-Nov-14 |);c -Upwelling/Springs Broadscale Mapping ;/$T5420 Riparian Veg Dependency on Surface/Grdwater Interactions 407d |02-Jan-13*14-Nov-14 ;;{a Riparian Veg Dependency on Surface/Grdwater Interaction} |ST5430 Aquatic Habitat/Grdwater/Surface Water Interactions 455d |02-Oct-12*14-Nov-14 |::{3 Aquatic Habita/Grdwater/Surtace Water Interactions |$5450 Water Quality in Selected Habitats 455d/02-Oct-12*[14-Nov-14 [i J Water Quality in Sélected Habitats |ee:ST5460 Winter Ground/Surface Water Interactions 364d |02-Oct-12"30-Jun-14 |[,Wintet Ground/Surface Water Interactions $T5470 Shallow Groundwater Users 426d |02-Jan-13"31-Dec-14 -Shallow Groundwater Users /$T5480 Initial Study Plan 03-Feb-14*|!|@ Initial Study Plan |; |ST5490 |Updated Study Report _02-Feb-15*|:':::::'@ Updated Study Report y Sana RRAE AMAA GIRTE a pases 6 ;0 --_-_-_-_---------------NN Iog Processes in the Susitna River Study (76)- .$T2510 Existing Condition 1D Model Development 213d |02-Jan-13*31-Dec-13 'i i Existing Condition 1D Model Development $12520 intensive Site Models 89d 01-Oct-14"|02-Feb-15 |:;;[=Intensive Site Models |$T2530 Proposed Condition 1D Model Development 261d |01-Oct-13*31-Dec-14 ;;;c i Proposed Condition 10 Model Developmenta$T2570 Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2012)46d;04-Jan-12*30-Mar-12 |{C--J Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2012) Page 2 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -w-. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 2 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration ai |a2 |a3 [|a4 1 |a2 [@3 Q4 [az ]a3 |a4 |a2 |a3 |a4 |a2 |a3 an $T2580 Break Up Reconnaissance 58d |03-Apr-12 29-Jun-12 {---]_Break:Up Racarnatanbs '::::!:!! $T2590 Freezup Reconnaissance 93d)02-Oct-12"|29-Mar-13 -----F Freezip Recoinaissance | 7 $T2630 Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2013)45d,02-Jan-13"29-Mar-13 :Cc Open Lead Surveys,loe Thickness &Elevation (2013)'''' ST2640 Break Up Reconnaissance 58d |02-Apr-13 28-Jun-13 cS Break Up Recgnnaissance ST2650 Freezup Reconnaissance 92d |02-Oct-13 28-Mar-14 ;'-Freezup Recofinaissance $12710 Initial Study Report Prep 56d/18-Nov-13"|03-Feb-14 |)6 3:3|poe oo oo Sy inital Study Report Prep ---oe poy a $2720 Initiat Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*;©Initial Study Report::|!|! $T2730 Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2014)45d;02-Jan-14*28-Mar-14 c-Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2014) $T2740 Break Up Reconnaissance 58d |01-Apr-14 30-Jun-14 --Break:'Up Reconnaissance$T2770 Updated Study Report od 02-Feb-15 |@ Updated Study Report&Glacial &RunOff Changes Study (7.7)-=pene 438d }02-Jare-1 Samm)02-Feb-1525|cc -i-----Glacial &RunOif Changes Study (7-7)--eeST3840ReviewExistingLiterature45d|02-Jan-13"29-Mar-13 |:'-Reviewv Existing Literature ':: $T3850 Process Remote Sensing Imagery 165d |02-Jan-13"30-Sep-13 ;c |Process Remote Sensing Imagery $T3870 Spring Fieldwork 271d |02-Apr-13*30-Jun-14 'c :]Spring Fieldwork $T3880 Fall Fieldwork 245d|15-Aug-13"|30-Sep-14 i J Fall Fieldwork: $T3900 Analyze Glacier Mass Balance &Meteorological Data 2924|15-Aug-13 [31-Dec14 | :«||rn oo eee ---j||Analyzes Glacier Nass Balance &Meteorological'Dataa$T3910 Glacial Extent Variation 122d |15-May-13*15-Nov-13 ;-,Glacial Extent Variation ;; $T3930 Hydrological &Glacier Melt Model Developement 103d |02-Jan-13*28-Jun-13 ;--5 Hydrological &:'Glacier Melt Model Developementi$T3940 Hydrological &Glacier Melt Model Calibration/Validation 323d |01-Jul-13"31-Dec-14 ::;''c J Hydrlosical&&Glacier Met Modi CaltraonValiatIST3960InitialStudyReportOd03-Feb-14*;;;;;i @ Initia Study Report [i st3970 UpdatedStudy Report Od o2Feb1s [oTpo oe a Ie Usha ahaynegpe ee E Fish &Aquatics Instream Flowv Study (yi "-|Ton Eien)ET a Fish &Aquatics instream Flow Study (8.5) i:$T3000 Study Area:Selection §94d |03-Apr-12*31-Dec-14 |:+f >|Study:'Area Selection ':: [5 |_sT3110 Review of 1980's Data &Information 594d|03-Apr-12*|31-Dec-14 f ,Review of 1980)'s Data'8 InforiJ]$7320 Model Selection by Habitat Type 93d)02-Oct-12*[29-Mar-13 ||-S|Mode!'Selection by Habitat Type aeae ae a -bob}oo||ST4500 Hydraulic Flow Routing 594d |03-Apr-12*31-Dec-14 f |Hydraulic Flow Routing ; ||$T4510 Hydrology 594d |03-Apr-12"31-Dec-14 c ]Hydrology |4 $T4520 Peiodicity §94d |03-Apr-12*31-Dec-14 f ]Peiodicity ::' $T4530 HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection 594d |03-Apr-12*31-Dec-14 {}HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection : ST4540 Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling 323d |01-Jul-13"31-Dec-14 ;'c |Collect Physical &Hydtaulic Data for Habitat Modeling $T4550 Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling 536d |02-Jul-12*31-Dec14 [o SS -----1 "Coordinate with Other biscipiines Quality Data Collecti S$T4570 Hydraulic Model integration &Calibration 168d |01-Apr-14*31-Dec-14 ''';:c }Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration$T4580 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*;:@ Initial Study Report!; ST4590 UpdatedStudy Report Od 02-Feb-15*'''(@ Upiated Study Report ' iparian low §5}8 --™we emu 438¢|02-Jan-13.gmm|02-Feb-15m LS sarin instream Flow Study (8.6)| Es ST101 0 'Critical Review of 1980's Susitna River Data 213d |02-Jan-13*31-Dec-13 [J Critical Review of 1980 s Susitna River Data .i $T1020 Finalize Riparian Groundwater/Surface Water Field Design 45d |02-Jan-13”29-Mar-13 |Finalize Riparian Grouridwater/Surface Water Field Design:i $T1030 Implement Riparian Groundwater/Surfacewater Installation &Sampling 381d |02-Apr-13*31-Dec-14 :c |Implement Riparian GroundwateriSurfacewater install|$T1040 Riparian Vegetation:Field Data Collection -2013 149d |02-Apr-13*15-Nov-13 f ]Riparian Vegetation Field Data Collection -2013 :: $T1050 Riparian Vegetation:Field Data Collection -2014 121d |01-Apr-14*30-Sep-14 ;'-Riparian Vegetation:Field Data'Collection -2014 $T1060 Sediment Dating:Sampling &Analysis -2013 168d/02-Apr-13*[31-Dec13 [|3:|Spo ------="Sediment Dating :Sampling &Analysis +2013:a eeeeen eeeenes aneP| $T1070 Sediment Dating:Sampling &Analysis -2014 168d |01-Apr-14"31-Dec-14 ;c J Sediment Dating:Sampling &Analysis £2014 i”$T1080 Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling 426d |02-Jan-13"31-Dec-14 f .me |Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling|i $T1090 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*;:@ Initial Study Report !: | 'ST 100 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*;;Sd Updated Study Report a Study -phenmmih 435d }02-Jan-1Samms}02-Feb-15y (ian cr cr ell Std of Fih Distrjuton and Abundance in the Ur|$T2220 Fish Sampling 426d |02-Jan-13*31-Dec-14 |!c -J Fish Sampling: 'll $T2950 Study Site Selection 45d |02-Jan-13*29-Mar-13 CJ]Study Site Selection +;:'' Page 3 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -zZ-. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO L Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 3 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule 02-Feb-15 Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration |a2 |a3 [aa [oa |os |o |az |a3 |a4 1 |a2 |a3 |a |a2 |a3 a $T2951 Data Entry 323d |01-Jul-13*31-Dec-14 ::::']7 Entry :: $T2952 Preliminary Data Analysis 110d |01-Jul-13*31-Dec-13 |:::;--Preliminary Data Analysis =$T3050 Initial Study Report Prep 57d/15-Nov-13"|03-Feb-14 |:eepo ee cI nai Study Report Prep Co po coe vo ST3060 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 e Initial Study Report |: $T3120 Final Datal Analysis 110d |01-Jul-14*31-Dec-14 :-Final Datal Analysis ' $T3140 Updated Study Report Prep 89d |01-Oct-14"02-Feb-15 5 Updated Study Report Prep: $T3150 Updated Study Report Od Cd Updated Study Report'''1 peteeeee pete eee pee eee ee eee eee Sn|Study of Fish Distributionand AbundanceintheMiddleand Lower Susitna River(9.6)i p panama 438¢|02-Jan-J3.gumm}Sty of Fish Distribution and Abundancein the Mid $T3310 Study Site Selection 45d;02-Jan-13"29-Mar-13 -Study.Site Selection | $T3320 Fish Sampling 405d|15-Feb-13*|34-Dec-14 -3 1 ---j Fish Sampling e ST3350 Data Entry 323d |01-Jul-13*31-Dec-14 t J DataEntry : ST3360 Preliminary Data Analysis 110d |01-Jul-13 31-Dec-13 ,--Preliminary Data Analysis ;;;' $T3370 Initial Study Report Prep 67d|15-Nov-13"[03-Feb-14 |)oo PooO i oe :[==Initial Study Report Prep oo oo vo yo| $T3380 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 ''::;Initial Study,Report:':' $T3381 Final Data Analysis 110d|01-Jul-14"|31-Dec-14 ;;;--Final Data Analysis | $T3390 Updated Study Report Prep 89d |01-Oct-14"02-Feb-15 --Updated Study Report Prep: $3400 Updated Study Report_Od 02-Feb-15 ;;;|@ Updated Stiidy Report fish Salmon Escapement Study {Escapement Study (9.71 -:pane 375¢|O1-May-13.9ammy oe poe poe -Salmon Escapement Study (9.7):} $T2380 Operate Fishwheels in the Lower Susitna -2013 83d)01-May-13*|30-Aug-13 -Operate Fishwheets in tng Lower Susitna 2013 $T2390 Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 71d!04-Jun-13"16-Sep-13 -::Operaté Fishwheels at Curry -2013 ;$T2400 Conduct Aerial Surveys-2013 81d)17-Jun-13*15-Oct-13 -Conduct Aerial Surveys -2013 $T2410 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*:@ Initial Study Report ; $T2420 Operate Fishwheels in the Lower Susitna -2014 83d/01-May-14*[29Aug-14 |;3:>rr po -_-"Operate Fishwhesis in the Lower Susiina 2014pe: |i $T2430 Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2014 72d)03-Jun-14*15-Sep-14 '; '''-S:Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2014ir$T2440 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*;:@ Updated Study Report i "a -r ,--73”405d }02-Apr-13.amam bY Feb 158 SS River Productivity Study @.8) $T4020 Literature Review on Hydropower Impacts 168d |02-Apr-13"31-Dec-13 :c ::1 Literature Review on Hydropower impacts :$T4060 Sampling Benthic Macroinvertibrate &Algae Communities &Organic Matter 334d |02-Apr-13 30-Sep-14 [7 tsoo Cc SSE 1 Sampling Benthic Mactoinvertibrate &Algae Communities &Or $T4100 Invertebrate Drift Sampling 334d|02-Apr-13.|30-Sep-14 t J Invertebrate Drift Sampling $T4120 Sampling Talkeetna for Ref.Site &Feasibility Study 120d |02-Apr-13"30-Sep-13 ;--Sampling Talkeetna fot Ref.Site &Feasibility Study '' $T4140 Trophic Analysis w/Bioenergetics &Stable Isotope Analysis 381d |02-Apr-13 31-Dec-14 E =Trophic Analysis wi Bidenergetics &Stable Isotope Anz ST4150 Generate Habitat Suitability Criteria 213d |02-Jan-14*31-Dec-14 ;;c ;|Generate Habitat Suitability Criferia $T4160 Conduct a Fish Gut Analysis 334d |02-Apr-13 30-Sep-14.|:PGan c---SS J Conduct'a Fish Gut Analysis ON $T4170 Establish Baseline Colonization Rates 334d |02-Apr-13 30-Sep-14 ; c ]|Establish Basdline Colonization Rates | $4180 Data Analysis &Reporting 347d|01-Jul-13"|24-Feb-15 c '-Data Analysis &Reporting ; $T4210 Initial Study Report Prep 90d,01-Oct-13*03-Feb-14 ;>Initial Study Report Prep ;$1T4230 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 '::;@ Initial Study Report::: ST4240 Updated Study Report Prep 90d;22-Oct-14 24-Feb-15*EG er es ee pope eeoo "Updated Study Report Prep ar $T4250 Updated Study Report Od)24-Feb-15 @ Updated Study Report i haracte d Mapping of Ac abitats dy (9.9)aa -"I?1606d |03-Apr-1 2mm -F --A Characterization and Mappirig of Aquatic Habitats Ss 'ST3460 |Data Collection-2012-13 333d 03-Apr-12"|30-Sep-13 ie ]Data Collection -2012:13 |; |$T3520 Initial Study Report Prep 23d |01-Jan-14*31-Jan-14 oO Initial Study Report Prep '' :' q $T3530 Initial Study Report Od OoFeb-14°{2SritaStudyReport eee eens eee ees en :ST3600 Data Collection -2014 121d |01-Apr-14*30-Sep-14 --Data Collection -2014: $T3610 Updated Study Report Prep 89d 01-Oct-14"|02-Feb-15 --Updated Study Report Prep |$T3640 Updated Study Report ) Od |02-Feb-15*:;@ Updated Study Report Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study (9.10)®"B335d |O1-Jul1Saeame|Future Watana Reservoir Fish Comruriy aid RiskdlST1729|Reservoir Habitat Scenarios |110d |01-Jul-13*|31-Dec-13 Joppa RS BES Gir Habiltal Sceiariog >a 1 a Dd ee Page 4 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -ww. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO L Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 4 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and|UpperSusitna |River and Susitna Tributaries (9.12 :141d |02-"Apr-13*_$T4260 Data Collection-2013 31-Oct-13 $T4340 Initial Study Report Od'03-Feb-14* $T4410 Data Collection -2014 142d |01-Apr-14*31-Oct-14 $T4490 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15* Aquatic Resources wi Access Alignment,Transmission AliAlignment,and Const.AAreas Study (9.13 .335d 1}02-Jul-1Sagap}03-Feb-15-| $T2230 Conduct Fish Surveys 62d |01-Jul-13*30-Sep-13 : $T2450 Additional Surveys 62d |01-Jui-14*29-Sep-14 .4 $T3810 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14* $T3820 Updated Study Report Od 03-Feb-15* $T1230 Baseline Sample Collection 2013 101d |04-Jun-13*30-Oct-13 $T1450 Baseline Sample Collection 2014 103d |03-Jun-14"30-Oct-14 $T1670 Mixture Sample Collection 2013 62d!04-Jun-13"30-Aug-13 ij $T2000 Mixture Sample Collection 2014 63d,03-Jun-14"29-Aug-14 $1T3730 Analysis of Salmon Tissue 27d 01-Nov-13*31-Dec-13 $T3740 Initial Study Report Od)03-Feb-14* $T3750 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15* oeronisal Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration |a2 {|a3 |a4 |at |a2 |a3 |as 1 [a2 [a3 |a4 1 |a2 |a3 |a4 [a1 |a2 |93ba|$T1730 Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios 93d,01-Oct-13*28-Mar-14 :::::--Reservoir Fish:conanScenarios :: $1731 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*;;;'@ Initial Study Report:|| oq}$T2010 Reservoir Fishery Management Options 103d |02-Jan-14*30-Jun-14 ;;'--Reservoir Fishery Management Options ; $T2210 Entrainment Analysis 103d |02-Jan-14"30-Jun-14 os Entraifment Analysis |$T2460 Updated Study Report Od O2Feb-15*|)3)§|Po _-_ooi eehPassageFeasibilityatWatanaDam(9-11).438d j02-Jan;3.apam)02-FebS a)a rel Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam (9.1)ST1109 Establish Team and Define Process 45d:02-Jan-13*29-Mar-13 |:=Establish Tearh and Defiine Process ':: $T1110 Prepare for Feasibility Study 58d |02-Apr-13 28-Jun-13 (--7 Prepare for Feasibility Study ST1114 Site Reconnaissance 30d |16-May-13 28-Jun-13 fae |Site Reconnaigsance | ST1112 Develop Concepts 110d |01-Jul-13 3iDec13 |):OU}a ---iD evelop Concepts oy eee eee eee eeIAWsT1113InitialStudyReportPrep57d|15-Nov-13"03-Feb-14 /=Initial Study,Report Prep : TE s1114 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 ;:@ Initial Study Report | z $T2670 Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative 103d |02-Jan-14*30-Jun-14 :i Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative:mi S$T2671 Develope Refined Passage Strategies 110d |01-Jul-14"31-Dec-14 'a Develope Refined Passage Strategies ; $T2790 Updated Study Report Prep 101d|/15-Sep-14*|02-Feb-15 pS ES TT Updated Study Report Preprs a ae $T2800 Updated Study Report 02-Feb-15 ;'¢@ Updated Study Report ;; ---s Data Collection-2013 :; SS Aquatic Resources wi Access Alignrhent,Transmiss-Conduct Fish Surveys : '@ Initial Study Report:bec eee eee ee ee eee ee et ee ee ee ee ee ee nn nn nn tn nr ee ne nr nd errr tener ratersCc: Data Colieation =2014oUpdatedStudy Report ;' ':1 fi 1 ' -|Additiénal Sunestenenn ee nh nn te rt teeters i @ Initial Study Report ;': :Updated Study Report --|Baseline Sample Collection 2014benneententeenerer rn tn eng rrr tte neySSMireSampleCollection2013 ::c-Mixture Sample ¢Collection 2014-Analysis of Salmon Tissue ;! Cd Initial Study Report :'@ Updated Study ReportannaSo al ele ees-Analysis of Fish Harvestin and Bowistream of the§ SS Study of Figh Passage Barriersin the Middle 'and Uy -Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Spécies (g-Baseline Sample Callection 2013 ::: z__$13920 Harvest &Effort Statistics 132d)01-Feb-13*|30-Aug-13 (4 Hanvest &Effort Statistics:; |$T3950 Analyses of Potential Project-Related Effects on Harvest Levels &Opportunity 213d |02-Jan-14*31-Dec-14 C ;-Analyses of Potential Project Related Effects on Harve! $T3980 Initial Study Report Od 05-Feb-14*'@ Initial Study Report :' $T3981 Updated Study Report Od 04-Feb-15*;;is Upidated Study Report ulachonRun Timing,ing,Distribution,aand Spawning in'the SuSusitna River Study |(9.16):-"3423d |01-Feb-1S.eagep 04-Feb-1599|HAIN ---------Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in $T3340 ADF&G Permits 2013 14d |01-Feb-13"28-Feb-13 |:CC)ADF&G Permits 2013 $3450 ADF&G Permits 2014 15d 05-Feb-14*|28-Feb-14 ;;:1 ADF&G Permits 2014 $T3560 Field Study 2013 40d!01-May-13"|28-Jun-13 :(771 Field Study 2013 ST3670 Field Study 2014 40d|01-May-14*[30-Jun-14 -Field Study 2014 ST3780 Dtaa Analysis 2013 20d 01-Oct-13*30-Oct-13 SES SESE EY Dias Analysis 2013 |oe oe oe $T3890 Dtaa Analysis 2014 20d.01-Oct-14"30-Oct-14 ';;s)Diaa4 Analysis 2014 |! }$14220 Initial Study Report Od 05-Feb-14*'¢@ Initial Study ReportAp875440UpdatedStudyReportOd04-Feb-15*:@ Updated Study Report Page 5 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -z-. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14244 Attachment 2-1 Page 5 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study LJ=02-Jan-13 gaa : Activity 1D |Activity Name Rem]Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 3015 D016 ||Duration a2|93 a4 [at [a2 [a3 [as [ai [a2 [a3 [as [ai [a2 [a3 [as |at |a2 |3=ook Inlet Beluga Whale Study (9.177)..wit.Too >--.--=Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study (9.17)Lo |$T2040 Permit Applications 156d |02-Jul-12*02-Apr-13 |::I :j Permit Rpplicalions uo}$T2050 2013 Aerial Surveys 167d |03-Apr-13 31-Dec-13 c j 2013 Aerial Surveys :; ST2060 2013 Camera Surveys 167d |03-Apr-13 31-Dec-13 ::}2013 Camera Burveys_: $T2070 2013 Initial Modeling Effort 110d /01-Jul-13 31-Dec-13 C2013 Initial Modeling Effort $T3620 Initial Study Report Prep 90d |01-Oct-13*03-Feb-14 jamnasrannana Initial Study Report Prep ST3630 intial Study Report od 03-Feb-14*|)a re mo EEGTntialStudy'Report ?oo oo oe pop $T3649 2014 Aerial Surveys 168d|01-Apr-14*|31-Dec-14 ;c "]2014 Aerial Surveys: H_st3650 2014 Camera Surveys 168d|01-Apr-14.__|31-Dec-14 c 1 2014 Camera Surveys:|st3052 Revised Modeling Effort 410d |01-Jul-14 31-Dec-14 ;7}Reviséd Modeling Effott ST3653 Updated Study Report Prep 89d;01-Oct-14*02-Feb-15 ':co Updated Study Report Prep: ST3654 Updated Study Report Od o2Feb-i5 |):OSa ee po a oT oe po |@ Updated Study Report ceMooseDistribution;Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study T Ea 09d 01-Mar-1Sagme}O2-FebsSay .Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,'Produ! ST2089 Deploy Remaining Radio &Satellite Collars &Monitor”171d [O1-Mar-13"|29-Nov-13 |:;J beploy Remaining Radio 8 Satellite Collars &Monitor $T2090 Conduct Winter Browse Utilization Assessment 16d,04-Mar-14*28-Mar-14 ;o Conduct Winter Browsé Utilization Assessment !; $T2100 Monitor Radio Collars Weekly 137d |01-May-14"28-Nov-14 :-_-_-Monitor FRadio Collars WeerST5680InitialStudyReportOdo3Feb-14"{>23:tO an pores Tina Study Repon oe pe peeaST5681UpdatedStudyReportOd}02-Feb-15*|);;@ Updated Study ReportCaribouDistribution;Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study (10.6)_-_____-_Cafibou Distribution,Abundance,Movements,ProdST4670MonitorCollars-2013 213d|02-Jan-13"|31-Dec-13 |:;1 J Monitér Collars-2013: $T4780 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*ry Initial Study Report : $T4890 Monitor Collars -2014 213d/02-Jan-14*|31-Dec-14 |!)oe oe po c=--=----5 tionitor Galiars 2014 |an po yo !$T5000 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15"|);|@ Upilated Study Report ; :Dall's Sheep DistributionTr)Abundance Study (10.7).ad ds gant 375d}01-May-13 sum}02-Feb-15-!!,:DaltSs Sheep Distribution and Abundance sty (10.a "$T5110°Site Visits to Assess Lick Use-2013 40d |01-May-13*28-Jun-13 |}:\|[J Site Visits to Assess Litk Use -2013 $T5220 Aerial Surveys -2013 5d}01-Jul-13*09-Jul-13 ;;|Aerial Surveys -2013:' !\' $T5330 Data Analysis -2013 76d|01-Aug-13*[29-Nov-13 |)|soe ee ee LS Bata Analysis 20139 ee ee -poy poy ||S6620 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14"|@ Initial Study Report ;$T5630 Site Visits to Assess Lick Use -2014 40d]01-May-14*30-Jun-14 ':'co Site Visits to Assess Lick Use -'2014 ; I!$T5640 Aerial Surveys -2014 5d]01-Jul-14"08-Jul-14 ;;B Aerial Surveys-2014! |jy ST5650 Data Analysis -2014 75d|01-Aug-14*|28-Nov-14 |:::![===Data Analysis-2014 |[{ stT5660 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|:;Do a pe a poe @ Updated Study Report Se po roaneDistribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large Carnivores (10.9) SaaS pee 14¢|01-Aug-1Sammp02-Feb-1Sem ;;;EE eee!Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large ( E $T2550 Field Surveys of Bear Use -2013 22d |01-Aug-13*30-Aug-13 |::'''Field surveys of bear Usé -2013!'; F $T4330 Data Analysis -2013 48d)01-Oct-13*|31-Dec-13 ;;;cS Data Analysis +2013 |[|$T4450 initial Study Report Od 05-Feb-14*:i :;:ad Initia Study Report!:: |, $T4600 Field Surveys of Bear Use -2014 22d/01-Aug-14*[02-Sep-14 |.po po oo po oo poe ED Field Surveys of Bear Use -3014 rer rrr as io $T5610 Data Analysis -2014 47d)01-Oct-14"31-Dec-14 cA Data Analysis |+2014 :;||steer Updated Study Report ); Od 02-Feb-15*:}Updated Study Report | 7 Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occupancy Stud n424d}0t-Feb-1Samm|;SL Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occ$T2120 SUPE Survey 2013 31d/01-Feb-13*|29-Mar-13 |)c-SUPE:Survey D013 |: |$T2130 SUPE Survey 2014 31d)05-Feb-14*[28-Mar-14 |a rr rn rn ae a eS|SUPE Survey aoa a on mo poe $2140 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|'©Initial Study Report ! :$T2150 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*;:Cy Updated Study RepiotTetrestrialFurbearerAbundance and Habitat Use S| |i |§T5580 Fieldwork to Collect Genetic Samples &Conduct Track Surveys -2013 45d;02-Jan-13 29-Mar-13*:os Fieldwork to Collect Genetic Samples &Conduct Track Surveys 4+2013 ''\ fi]sts5600 Genetic Analysis -2013 101d |02-Apr-13*30-Aug-13 Co Do --oo G enetic Analysis -2013:||a oe a poor poLhj$T5690 Snowshoe Hare Pellet Count-2013 22d)01-Aug-13"[30-Aug-13 :[21 Snowshoe Hare Pellet Count-2013 Page 6 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -w-.. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO L Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 6 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule "b Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Tra Study (1 0,11 29-Mar-13 :Small,Mammat 'Species'Composition and Habitat Use $Study re0.1 $T3470 Aerial SurSurveys of River Otter &Mink Tracks 31d 'O1-Feb-13" $T3480 Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups 18d |02-Apr-13*30-Apr-13 $T3490 Aerial Survey of Beaver Colonies 21d |01-May-13*30-May-13 $T3500 Aerial Survey of Lodges 21d)01-Oct-13"31-Oct-13 $T3510 Aerial Track Survey of River Otter &Mink 14d;01-Nov-13"04-Dec-13 $T3540 Aerial Survey of River Otter &Mink Tracks 49d |05-Feb-14*30-Apr-14 $T3550 Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups 18d)01-Apr-14*30-Apr-14 $T3570 Aerial Survey of Beaver Colonies 21d)01-May-14*03-Jun-14 $T3580 Aerial Survey of Lodges 21d}01-Oct-14"31-Oct-14 ST3590 Aerial Track Survey of River Otter &Mink 14d |05-Nov-14*03-Dec-14 ST5560 Initial Study Report 03-Feb-14* $T5570 Updated Study Report 02-Feb-15* 01-Aug-13* Spring Migration/Breeding-Pair Surveye -2013 16-Apr-13* $T1260 Small Mammal Trapping 41d 30-Sep 1 3 $T1300 Data Management 21d;01-Oct-13"31-Oct-13 $T1310 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14* _$T1330_|Updated Study Report Od |02-Feb-15*, 1 sT3160 'Acoustic Monitoring -2013Ci'(i'C:«:*W 400d |15-May-13*meabiatet i $T3170 Data Analysis -2013 35d}01-Oct-13"29-Nov-13 |$T3180 Intiat Study Report Od 03-Feb-14* mI |$T3190 Acoustic Monitoring -2014 100d |15-May-14*09-Oct-14 $T3200 Data Analysis -2014 34d)01-Oct-14*28-Nov-14 ST3210 Updated Study Report ;;__Od ee 02-Feb-1 5*B Surveys of Eagles&Other Raptors Study (10.14)Sansa heel on ! $T1350 Field Surveys-2013 60d |02-May-13*31-Jul-13 ST1580 Update Regional Database -2013 22d |01-Aug-13"30-Aug-13 $T1630 Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2013 30d}15-Oct-13"06-Dec-13 |$T1680 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14* ST1690 Field Surveys -2014 62d 01-May-14*34-Jul-14 ST4090 Update Regional Database -2014 21d 01-Aug-14"29-Aug-14 $T4130 Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2014 30d |15-Oct-14*10-Dec-14 _$74131 Updated Study Report Od)02-Feb-1 5*: Activity 1D Activity Name Rem|Start Finish 2072 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration |a2 [|a3 |as [ar [a2 |]a3 |as 1 [Q2 Q3 Q4 |Q2 |a3 |a4 a2 |a3 "J -ST5700 Initial Data 19d/03-Sep-13"|30-Sep-13 ;Co Initial Par ||$T5710 Fieldworkto Collect Genetic Samples&Conduct Track Surveys-2014 45d |02-Jan-14"28-Mar-14 ';:'cy Fieldwork to Collect Genetic Samples &Conduc Track Surveys 2014=a ©ST5840 Genetic Analysis -2014 142d |01-Apr-14*31-Oct-14 |;:J Genetic Analysis-2014:F |$T5950 Snowshoe Hare Pellet Count -2014 21d)01-Aug-14"|29-Aug-14 Po oo tooe oe ee --_1G Snowe Hae Flt Count-20]4 anoo iy st5951 Initial Study Report 03-Feb-14*;@ Initial Study Report; | -ST5952 Updated Study Report 02-Feb-15"|1 @ Updated Study Report ;-----------_-_-_-_-_-_--Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use:'StudycoAerial'Surveys:of River!Otter &Mink Tracks ;: oO Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups ' ao Aerial Survey of Beaver Colonies !|Aerial Survey of LodgesCcAerialTrackSurveyof River Otter:&Mink::!cc Aerial Survey of River Otter a Mink Tracksre]Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups :Cc)Aerial Survey of Beaver Golonies :5 Aerial Survey of Lodgesfi t ''|@ Initial Study Report:1 @ Updated Study Report cm Small Mammal Trapping=Data Management ! H '@ Initial Study Report Updated Siudy Report :-9 Acoustic Monitoring -2013DataAnalysis-2013¢Intial Study'Report !:|Acoustic Nioniotng "9044 ';;'cs Data Analysis -2014 ; :'@ Updated Study Report -Ficid Surveys -2013 ; am |Update Regional |Database -2013'Co Conduct|Roostinig &Staging Surveys -2013CdInitialStudyReport'|[=Field Surveys-2014 !=)Update Regional Database -2014 |@ Updated Study Report ''Aerial Track Survey of River Otter!'&Mink | ''a Snes Dene nS a nn nT EE+1 Sniall Maminal Speties Composition and Habitat Ug Bat Distribution Distribution &Habitat Use study (10 ST Sutveys of Eagles &Other Raptors §Study (0.14) !:!|'Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2074 NS Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Hetita Study (10.1 |"$T4270 40d 14-Jun-13 ;;i=spring Migrtion/Breeding-Pair Surveys -2013 '' '$14280 Brood Surveys -2013 21d)01-Jul-13*31-Jul-13 ;[J Brood Surveys-2013 ; ||$T4290 Harlequin Duck Brood-Rearing Survey -2013 22d |01-Aug-13*30-Aug-13 ja |Hariequin Duck Brood-'Rearing Sajvey 2013 ;a oe ST4300 Fall Migration Surveys -2013 40d)15-Aug-13*15-Oct-13 ';-Fall Migration Surveys -2013:; $T4310 Data Analysis -2013 27d}01-Nov-13*31-Dec-13 ;:-Data Analysis42013 ||; |$T4420 Spring Migration/Breeding-Pair Surveys -2014 40d}15-Apr-14*16-Jun-14 '|EX]:Spring Migration /Breedifg--Pair Surveys -2014,I $T4430 Brood Surveys -2014 22d)01-Jul-14"|31-Jul-14 ;|[]Brood Surveys-2014 "Page 7 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -w-.. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO l Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 7 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use StudySelectionofWaterbodies-2013 02-Feb-15* 30-Apr-13 Activity ID Activity Name Rem|Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration ai |az [a3 |a4 [a2 [a3 [|as |ai [a2 |a3 |a [a2 [a3 |a4 [a1 |a2 |@3 ST4460 Harlequin Duck Brood-Rearing Survey-2014 21d:01-Aug-14*29-Aug-14 ::::::'[1 Harlequin Duck Brood-Rearing Survey-2014 :: $T4470 Fall Migration Surveys-2014 40d|15-Aug-14"|15-Oct-14 :[=]Fall Migration Surveys-2014:; $T4480 Data Analysis -2014 26d!05-Nov-14"|31-Dec-14 ;-Data Analysis +2014 ; $T4481 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*©Initial Study Report :CTP st4482-Updated Study Repot Od 02-Feb-15*|:;:@ Updated Study Report hoe Landbire iigration,,a ee ee BoeST--[arab and Shorea Migration,Breeding,andi|T1740 Field Planning 34d:01-Mar-13*30-Apr-13 |:,;:co Field Planning ST1850 Point-Count Survey-2013 21d)13-May-13"12-Jun-13 |):ES :Point-Count Survey -2013 $T1970 Swallow Survey-2013 13d)20-Jun-13*10-Jul-13 |:::Oo Swallow Survey -2013 $T1990 Data Analysis-2013 62d)01-Aug-13*[31-Oct-13 |):(<==)Data Analysis-2013 :$T2020 Initial Study Report Od o3-Feb-14*|)|oe oo oe 6 Initial Study Repos |yo _-oo rr on $12240 Point-Count Survey-2014 20d!12-May-14"|10-Jun-14 C2 'Point-Count Survey-2014 ; E $T2470 Swallow Survey -2014 14d]20-Jun-14*[10-Jul-14 C1 Swallow Survey -2014 ;; $T3330 Data Analysis-2014 62d;01-Aug-14*31-Oct-14 '''a Data Analysis -2014 ST5500 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|:|@ Updated Study Report 5 Populatio ,of Willow Ptarmigan in Game Management Unit 13 Study (1 !"93d}(Samm)02-Feb-1525f eeTT Pop vation Ecology of Willow Ptarmigan in Game M Tf sti1i9 First Field Season -101d |02-Apr-13"[30-Aug-13|)!C---First Field Season $T1120 Conduct Aerial Surveys 89d |01-Aug-13*31-Dec-13 ;;-Conduct Aerial Surveys ;;;; ST1560 Conduct Aerial Surveys 83d |02-Jan-14"29-May-14 |:--Conduct Aerial Surveys|S$T1780 Second Field Season 101d|01-Apr-14"[29-Aug-14 |:;;--Second Field Sedson ; $T1890 Conduct Aerial Surveys 88d)01-Aug-14* |[31-Deci4 [°°Otroe oe oo pe ET onivt hail Suey a ro ST5831 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*;i @ Initial Study Report!ST5832 Updated Study Report ;;Sd Uptiated Study Report a $T2340 34d)01-Mar-13"J Selection of Waterbodies -2013 : $T2540 Selection of Waterbodies-2014 34d/04-Mar-14*[30-Apr-14 J)po[7 'Selection of Watevboaies "2018 a po $T2560 Field Survey-2013 7d|10-May-13"|20-May-13 D Field Survey -2018$2561 Field Survey -2014 6d)12-May-14"|19-May-14 ;;a Field Survey -2014 $2890 Data Analysis -2013 40d |03-Sep-13*31-Oct-13 -Data Analysis -2013 |;:' $T3130 Data Analysis -2014 40d/02-Sep-14"[30-Oct-14 [-1 Data Analysis 2014$T4000 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*[°pspo an po ene)initial Study Reportyo po porns vo vo poST4610UpdatedStudyReportOd02-Feb-15"|:|@ Upidated Study Report | Evaluationof Wildlife HabitatUseStudy (10.19)9 ee Se Cee wv SEE Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study (10.19) $T3230 Literature Review 34d}01-Mar-13*30-Apr-13 :oc Literature Review:';;;'' $T3240 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|:!@ Initial Study Report! $T3250 Initial Habitat-Value Ranking 31d/05-Feb-14*[28-Mar-14 [>+«|i|poe po TESS initial HabitatValue Ranking;eepo $T3260 Fina!Selection of Species 20d |02-Sep-14*30-Sep-14 ;';!Oo Final Selection of Species !! $T3270 Data Analysis 67d!02-Sep-14*31-Dec-14 ;co Data Analysis |; |=§T3280 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|:';Cy Updated Study Report'ST5510 -|Initial Selection ¢off Species -15d |06-Feb-13*01-Mar-13 |:Oo Initiat Selection of Species ;;; sis Study.rn ”-1 ee eee po oeoe Po -Wldite Harvest Analysis Say (i 0:20)oe i"ST5520 Tranfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data 62d |01-Jul-13*30-Sep-13 ::e-Tranfer of 2012 HarvestSubsistence Data '; ST5530 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14"|:;;:@ Initial Study Report! S$T5540 Tranfer of 2013 Harvest/Subsistence Data 62d}01-Jul-14*29-Sep-14 :;;'::-Tranfer of 2013 HarvestSubsislonce Data |STS550 [Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|:|@ Updated Study Report a5 Vegetation.fe Habitat Ma mag 438d }O2-Jan-13gmme}02-Feb-15i-pe 1 a -Vegetation and Wildlife Hsia Mapping Study in thi $T2160 Vegatation/Habitat Mapping ha 103d |02-Jan-13"28-Jun-13 ;---;Vegatation/Habitt Mapping &Field Plot Selections ;:' |$2170 Field Surveys 120d |02-Apr-13*30-Sep-13 |:;c-----F Field Surveys: ae aan Weaod Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study (10.18 oO”8 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 8 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 20715 2016 Duration [a2 |a3 |aa im a2 |a3 |a4 1 |a2 |a3 |a4 1 |Q2 |Q3 |9 ai {|Q2 |a3$T2180 Vegetation/Habitat Map Revisions 110d |01-Jul-13"31-Dec-13 '''!{}TagaatonTabia Map ravens ; H $T2181 Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Vegatation &Habitat Maps 48d |01-Oct-13"31-Dec-13 co Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Vegatation 3;HabitattMaps ;; $T2190 Initial Study Report Prep 90d!01-Oct-13*[03-Feb-14 |rr ae oe 9 iitial Study Report Prep!vores poncnseeprescecegersess oe $T2200 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*is Initial Study Report ;|:! ST4350 Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection for Remaining Unmapped Areas 103d |02-Jan-14 30-Jun-14 |:;a |Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection for Remaining UnmayST4360FieldSurveys420d|01-Apr-14*29-Sep-14 |'::'--Field Surveys ; $14370 Final Vegetation/Habitat Map Revisions 410d|Ot-Jul-14*|34-Dec-14_|:;----Final Vegetatign/Habitat Map Revisions: $T4380 Updated Study Report Prep 89d |01-Oct-14*02-Feb-15 |;_-po po fo ae a ae mo poe y EE==SS5 Updated Study Report Prep)mores- S$T4390 Delivery of Field Data &Final Vegatation &Habitat Maps 47d |01-Oct-14*31-Dec-14 |!'=Delivery of Field Data &Final Vegatation &Habitat Mar $T4400 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15 |@ Updated Study Report ||&Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream ofthe»Proposed 'WatanaDam qa1.5)arST Riparian Vegetation:Study Downstream of the Propc02-Oct-12"|28-Dec-12 |$T2250 Preparation of RiverinePhysiography to Help Define Study Area 48d es;Prepaiation of Riverine''Physiography to'Help Défi ne Stud y Area |;; $12270 Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection 103d |02-Jan-13 zvunis |ft PEA Riparidn/Weiland/Habitat Mapping &Field Piot Selectionae a an yore fonensee denny ST2271 Field Surveys 120a/O2-Apris"[30-Sep-13 |)|2 |Field Suneys$EE $T2600 Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions 110d|01-Jul-13* [31-Dec-13_|:J Riparian Wetidnd/Habitat Map Revisions ; $T2601 Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Maps 48d |01-Oct-13"31-Dec-13 |!:cS Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary RiparianWetland/Habitat Maps $12610 Initial Study Report Prep 48d|28-Nov-13 |03-Feb-14*|:[=]Initial Study Report Prep $T2620 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*[:Po ae on nn iniGal Study Reportyo pone roe po mo yo woeroe $T5750 Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection for Remaining Unmapped Areas 403d |02-Jan-14 30-Jun-14 |:'''=Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Fie Plot Selection for Reming ST5760 Field Surveys 120d|01-Apr-14"[29-Sep-14 ||c----F Field Surveys: $T5761 Final Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions 110d |01-Jul-14*31-Dec-14 |!;;=Final Riparian/WetlandiHabitat Map Revisions ST5763 Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Reparian/Wetlant/Habitat Maps 47d]01-Oct-14"[31-Dec-14 |!;[==]Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Reperian/WetlantST5764UpdatedStudyReportPrep48d|27-Nov-14 02-Feb-15"|;po pooe oo ee i a po YET Updated Study ReporiPrep poreenesensee ST5765 Updated Study Report caret |i fF Updated Stindy Report : tone Wetland{Mapping Study ¢(11.75a -- £02- ,-_------'Ts Wetland Mapping Study (117)|$2810 Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection 103d |02-Jan-13*28-Jun-13 |---}Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection ; $T2820 Field Surveys 120d |02-Apr-13*30-Sep-13 c---Field Surveys ::; $T2830 Wetland Map Revisions 110d |01-Jul-13*31-Dec-13 |i _-poae ee ----"Wetland Map Revisions a porseess posses pocnensetsesesss qoonnee qoosecena $T2840 Initial Study Report Prep 49d|27-Nov-13 |03-Feb-14*|:'oo Initial Study Report Prep ! $T2850 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*rs Initial Study Report :;' ST2860 Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Wetland Map 47d |24-Oct-13 05-Feb-14 |!;[==Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Wetland)'Map ;; $T2870 Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection for Remaining Unmapped Areas 103d |02-Jan-14"30-Jun-14 a Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection'for Remaining Umar Area!ST2880 Field Surveys 120d|01-Apr-14*[29-Sep-14 |o a a rs oe -PO EET Fisid Surveys |roses re an ane pone $T2900 Final Wetland Map Revisions 410d |01-Jul-14*31-Dec-14 |:---Final Wetland Map Rejisions ST2910 Wetland Functional Analysis 110d/O1-Jul-14*|31-Dec-14_|)CJ}«Wetland Functional Analysis: $T2920 Updated Study Report Prep 49d |26-Nov-14 02-Feb-15*|!;:[2]Updated Study Report Prep' $T2930 Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Wetland Map 47d |28-Nov-14 02-Feb-15 : ; 'co Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Wetland Map T2940 Updated Study Report|od 02-Feb-15*|;ae Do feoo ae oO oe _-e a poe ©Updated Study Report a B Rare Plant Study (11.8)TURAN aN 336 y)\02-Feb-Smy $Y Rafe Plant Study (17.8)||| ST5770 Field Survey Site Selection 39d}02-Apr-13"{30-May-13 ||[=]Field Survey Site Selection ;; $T5780 Field Survey 40d/04-Jun-13*[31-Jul-13 |;1 Field Survey ; $T5790 Data Analysis 40d |03-Sep-13"31-Oct-13 |)a)Data Analysis ;;;; ST5800 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|"po yooo Po ee oe '@ Initial Study Reportoo oe oe mo po vo ee ST5810 Field Survey Site Selection 39d |01-Apr-14*03-Jun-14 ;'soe Field Survey Site:'Selection ; $T5820 Field Survey 40d;03-Jun-14*|29-Jul-14 ;|£7 Field Survey | ST5850 Data Analysis 40d)02-Sep-14*[30-Oct-14 |;co Data Analysis ST5860 Updated Study Report -02-Feb-1 *:::@ Updated Stisdy Report ||: i invasive Plant Study (11.9)SS __-neancene --nae---EE eb cn oT TTT fr /2si.s Plant Study (11.9)|coreeee sateen ee lPage 9 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 9 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Duration |a2 |a3 }a4 |ar [a2 |a3 |aa 1 |a2 |a3 a4 |a2 {|a3 [a4 [a1 |a2 |@3 le,t ==$T5870 Field Survey Site Selection 39d |02-Apr-13*30-May-13 ::;!co Field Survey Site Saecion :1 ,1 |ST5880 Field Survey 40d |04-Jun-13*31-Jul-13 ;co Field Survey dE ST5890 Data Analysis 40d;03-Sep-13*|31-Oct-13 :[1 Data Analysis ST5900 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|::'@ Initial Study Report ST5910 Field Survey Site Selection 30d O1-Apr-14*[03-Jun-14 [PFE_-ee TEST Field Sunvey Sie Sélectionpre $T5920 Field Survey 40d |03-Jun-14*29-Jul-14 ::::co Field Survey |$T5930 Data Analysis 40d 02-Sep-14"|30-Oct-14 |:co Data Analysis |ST5931 Updated Study Report to ody --(02-Feb-15*|);|@ Updated Study Report ; Recreation Resources Study (12.2.5}ae 548d}02-Jult 2am}02-Feb-1544 :a a a ----Recreation Resources Study (12.5): ST3410 Initial Study,Report Prep 24d 01-Jan-14"03-Feb-14 'ss initial Study Report Prep|-ST3420 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 ¢inital Study Report; ST30 Updated Study Report Prep 155d |O1-Jul-14°02-Feb-15 --s Updated Study Report Prep:; '§73440 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15 ;|@ Updated Study Report ; ST5960 Data Collection &Baseline Inventory 489d |02-Jul-12*30-Sep-14 }Data Collection &Baseline Inventory |ST5970 Analysis 334d]02-Apr-13*[30-Sep-14 |ff ---------------------JAnaysis $=) $ST5980 Coordination w/Agencies,Licensing Participants and Other Studies 316d |02-Jan-13*30-Jun-14 ;£J Coordination wi Agencies,Licensing Participants and Other Studies $T5990 Intercept Survey Deployment 358d|15-Feb-13*|30-Sep-14 ae om 1 Intercept Survey DeploymentST6000MailSurveyDevelopment82d)15-Feb-13*28-Jun-13 oc Mail Survey Development ' $T6010 Exec Interviewing &Web Survey Deployment 278d |15-Nov-12*28-Mar-14 Cc ¥Exec lnterviewing &Web suey Deployment ST6020 Survey Data Analysis 155d |01-Jul-13"2eMa-14 [2 0}U}OE =Survey Data Analysis aaa ane ene een eee ee ST6030 Impact Analysis 261d |01-Oct-13*31-Dec-14 :' 's :>|Impact Analysis Aesthetic Resources Study sit fe pen 438d |02-Jan-13)02-Feb-15 f A ASsthetic Resources Study (2.6) ST1180 Baseline Data Collection 334d |02-Apr-13 30-Sep-14 |:c J Baseline Data 'Collection : _[-=ST1190 Coordination w/Agencies,Stakeholders and Disciplines 379d |02-Jan-13 30-Sep-14 {=)Coordjnation wi Agencies,Stakeholders and Disciplines: _|p st1200 Simulation Development /Sound Modeling 307d|15-May-13*[30-Sep-14 |:: : :2 |---------]Simulation Development iSound Modeling yee $T1210 Impact Analysis 245d |15-Aug-13*30-Sep-14 /_C=7 Impact Analysis $T3710 Viewshed Modeling 45d)02-Jan-13"|29-Mar-13 ;;=Viewshed Modeling "|ST3760 initial Study Report Prep 90d)01-Oct-13*|03-Feb-14 ;cS Initial Study Report PrepS$T3770 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 :;'@ Initial Study Report: $T3790 Updated Study Report Prep 220d/01-Apr-14*[O2Feb-15 {2}OO)po poorer EEN Untated Study Report Brea!poy |§T3800 Updated Study Report ;- Od 02-Feb-15 |:;|@ Updated Study Report ; River Recreation Flow and Access Study 4 _bes B 438d }O2-Jan.1S.)02-Feb-15a |;;-''.:.-River Recreation Flow and Access Study (12,7)|__$T1130 Field Studies 168d;02-Apr-13"|31-Dec-13 --:1 Field Studies |:! $T41150 Analysis 271d |02-Apr-13*La aaa 1 Analysis ow.ee ee ne ee :$T1160 Coordination w/Agencies,Stakeholders &Disciplines 426d |02-Jan-13*31-Dec-14 {)Coordination wi Agencies,Siskehoiders &Disciplines=ST1170 impact Analysis 214d |01-Oct-13*30-Sep-14 C =|Impact Analysis ST3660 Initial Study Report Prep 90d;01-Oct-13*03-Feb-14 c-Initial Study Report Prep ; ST3680 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 '@ Initial Study Report!; ST3690 Updated Study Report Prep 220d |01-Apr-14"|02-Feb-15 ;C J}Updated Study Report Prep: $T3700 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15 ee es;ee oe :a ee po prea Updated Study Rept)ce veeeedee ec ee ST6040 Baseline Data Collection 213d |02-Jan-13*31-Dec-13 ; C }Baseline Data Collection ;;; Cultural FResources Study (" ae 4 ai 5 ----Cultural Resources Study (13.5) $T1370 Reconnaissance Level Field Study 62d 02-Jul-12"28-Sep-12.c-Reconnaissance Level!Field Study ; $T1380 Modeling &Sample Design Development from 2012 Field Reconnaissance 93d |02-Oct-12 29-Mar-13 '=,Modeling &Sample Design Development from 2012 Field Reconhaissande :: $T1390 Pre-Field Prep 52d|15-Feb-13*[15-May-13 |)co aoe vo5 Pre-Ficid Prep a rs ct arr peseeeee terceeee Jenene ete eee $T1400 Additional Modeling from 2013 Field Study Results 93d|01-Oct-13*28-Mar-14 :---Additional Modeting from 2013 Field Sui Results ; $T1410 Pre-Field Preparation 52d!18-Feb-14*|15-May-14 ;:2 Pre-ield Preparation ST3990 Archeological Field Studies -Inventory 92d |16-May-13 30-Sep-13 --Archeological Field Studies-Inventory: Page 10 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures explaining the relationship between studies. -z- SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 10 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Activity ID Activity Name Rem|Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 i Duration a2 |a3 a4 |ai |a2 |a3 {a4 |at |a2 {a3 {a4 1}Q2 |Q3 a4 |ai {a2 |a3 a |$T4010 Archeological Field Studies -Initiation of Evaluation 62d ;01-Jul-13 30-Sep-13 [2 ee ee ee [1 Archeological Field Studies -Initiation o Eton 7 ::: $T4030 Ethnogeographic Study 73d:02-Jan-13*15-May-13 ;-Ethnogeographic Study we ST4040 Ethnogeographic Field Work 121d |16-May-13 15-Nov-13":-Ethnogeographic Field Work $T4050 Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report 48d 01-Oct-13*31-Dec-13 ::;|Draft Ethnogeographic''Study Report : $T4070 Initial Study Report Prep 90d,01-Oct-13*|03-Feb-14 -S Initial Study Report Prep ST4080 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14 |::::©Initial Study Report ; $T4190 Field Studies -Inventory 63d]16-May-14 [15-Aug-14 |:oo a pe mo pe ee oo SY Field Studies -Inventory |eoneee posses mo poe I"$T4200 Field Studies -Evaluation 63d}16-May-14 15-Aug-14 ;;c-Fieid Studies -Evaluation ': : $T4201 Updated Study Report Prep 220d |01-Apr-14*02-Feb-15 |:;::f ]Updated Study Repio Prep! $T4202_|Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15 |!;;;:@ Updated Study Report gg Paleont:Toe 6yI :.mb 42401 01-Feb-1agM 2-Feb-15%:a SCI Paleontological Resources Study (13.6)qe ST1441 Applying GPS Based Classification 31d 01-Feb-13°[29-Mar-13 |.eA Appiying GPS Based Classification fF poe :$T1460 Systematic Testing in Areas of High Potential 43d 01-Jul-13*30-Aug-13 ee Systematic Testing iin Areas of High Potential i.$T1470 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*/@ Initial Study Report | :$T1480 Updated Study Report od) [02-Feb-15*|:;:|@ Updated Study Report ; :Subsistence Resourcess Study (14.4.5)'a B.603¢|03-Apr3Zaaie :a LTa 7 .;Subsistencd Resources Study (14.5), :$T1760 Subsistence Study Plan 168d |03-Apr-12*28-Deo-12 J Subsistence Sludy Plan '; ea |$T1770 Task 1:Compilation of Exis.Data 130d |01-Jun-12*28-Dec-12 ;--Task t Compilation of Exis.Data ;; |$T1800 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys -Year 2 46d)02-Jan-14"01-Apr-14 'oa Task 2 ADFaG Household Suieys--Year 2 F $T1810 Task 2:ADF&G Reporting &Community Review -Year 2 213d |02-Jan-14 31-Dec-14 ;C J Task 2:ADF&G Reporting &Community Review -Yealif$T2960 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys Pre-Field Planning -Year 1 103d |02-Jan-13 28-Jun-13 -"!Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys Pre-Field Planning 'Year ve $12970 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys -Year 1 45d,02-Jan-13 29-Mar-13 |ro 3 'Task 2:'ADF&G Household Surveys -Year tr pees pe :$T2980 Task 2:ADF&G Reporting &Community Review -Year 1 213d |02-Jan-13 31-Dec-13 f !1 Task 2:ADF&G Reporting &Community Review -Year i a $T2990 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surbeys Pre-Field Planning -Year 2 47d |02-Oct-13 31-Dec-13 ';:';oa Task 2:ADFaG Household Surbeys Pre-Field Planning 4+Year 2¥$T3010 Task 3:Household Surveys in Nonsubsistence Areas 45d:02-Jan-13 29-Mar-13 ;es!Task 3:Household Surveys iin Nonsubsistence Areas :; $T3020 Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews 103d |02-Jan-13 28-Jun-13 ::7 Task 8:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews '''':' $T3030 Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report 110d |01-Jul-13"[31-Dec-13 |)oo oo pope ae --S>?Task 1-3,5:Prepare 201 3 Study Reporta a ae oo poe.$T3040 Revise Study Plans 41d)15-Nov-13*14-Feb-14 ;cannes Revise Study Plans . ST3070 Task 4:Subsistence Mapping Inteviews 73d |02-Jan-14 15-May-14 ;-Task 4:Subsistence Mapping Inteviews |ai $T3080 Task 4-5:Additional 2014 Subsistence Data Collection (as needed)103d |02-Jan-14 30-Jun-14 ;;--Task 4.5:Additional 2014 Subsistence Data Collection (as needed) ST3090 Task 2-5:Prepare 2015 Final Updated Study Report &Community Reviews 110d |01-Jul-14 31-Dec-14 ::;::EF Task 2 5:Prepare 2015 Final Updated Study Report &||}st3100 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14"|a po i to oe |©'nial Study Reportoe ye oe |ST3101 Updated Sudy Report BS ft Bdp sf an-15*|)'©Updated Sudy Report Bi paws Regional Economic Evaluation Study (15.5)Sia aNIADINNORS ppanes 438d}02-tar-13.gmp)02-Feb-1Sa)ne Regional Eeonomic:Evaluation Study (15.5)|:$T1490 Gather/Review Existing Information 45d |02-Jan-13"29-Mar-13 |:::'-Gathet/Review Existing Information ';:;I:|ST1500 Document Existing Conditions 58d |02-Apr-13 28-Jun-13 7 :H ;c-Document Existing Conditions |'' :'!: ST1510 Develop Reasonable Foreseeable Future Action Assumptions 62d)01-Jul-13 30-Sep-13 |oe poePo "TE =4 "Develop Reasonable Foreseeable Future Action Assumptions ees-|$T1520 Inital Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report 48d:01-Oct-13 31-Dec-13 ;'oc inital Regional:Economic Evaluation Study Report ; _7 811530 initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14"!@ Initial Study,Report |:$T1540 Incorporate Information from Other Studies 135d |02-Jan-14"14-Aug-14 'C J Intorporate Information from Other Studies | ST1550 Updated Regional Econoimic Evaluation Study Report 78d |15-Aug-14 31-Dec-14 --Updated Regional Econoimic Evaluation Study Report:$T1570 UpdatedStudy Report ;|od}02-Feb-15*|:rr rr es po wo Ss Updated Study Report |oe oy |s Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study (15.6 rr mh £4380}02-Jan-13 gum)04-Feb15 gh SS Social Cond itions &'Public Goods &Services Study|$T1590 Gather/ReviewExisting Information 45d 02-Jan-13*20-Mar13 ;=Gathel Review Existing Information :'' $T1600 Document Existing Conditions 58d |02-Apr-13 28-Jun-13 c-Document Existing Coriditions ; S$T1610 Stakeholder Interviews 110d |01-Jul-13 31-Dec-13 :--Stakeholder Interviews:: $T1620 Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report 60d]13-Sep-13 |31-Dec-13 |?Do oe poy ee an-1 nitial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Siu Repot:SS \ ST1640 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*;A initial Study Report ;;: Page11 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 11 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Schedule Activity ID Activity Name Rem Start Finish 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016Duration[|a2 [a3 |a |a2 |a3 |a4 [at 7 a2 [a3 |a 1 {Q2 |a3 |a4 ||osanST1650IncorporateInformation&Other Studies 135d |02-Jan-14*14-Aug-14 :'::!£-Incorporate ironman &Other Studies ST1660 Updated Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report 78d,15-Aug-14 31-Dec-14 ':;--Updated Social Conditions &Public Good &Services §¢ 4 $T1750 Updated Study Report Od 04-Feb-15*;:@ Updated Study ReportyTransportationResourcesStudy(15.73.us pam 486d |02-Oct-12agm}02-Fete 15g cn -a eran steicas Sh or$T1820 Data Collection &Review 93d;02-Oct-12"29-Mar-13 |:--Data Collection &Review :: S$T1830 Asses Inventory &Field Studies 58d 02-Apr-13 28-Jun-13 ;js Asses''Inventory &Field Studies ; ST1840 Document Existing Conditions 62d)01-Jul-13 30-Sep-13 1 co Document Existing Conditions $T1860 Forecast Future Conditions 110d |01-Jul-13 31-Dec-13 --Forecast Future Conditions $T1870 Evaluate Impacts 48d\01-Oct-13*[31-Dec13 [oo }[==4 Evaluate impactsoo:-nnn Sanna Senn On IER OOOO $T1880 Initial Study Report Prep 48d |01-Oct-13 31-Dec-13 c-Initial Study Réport Prep ; $T1900 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*'@ Initial Study Report:':;:: ST1910 Updated Study Report Prep 213d |02-Jan-14*31-Dec-14 r ..}Updated study Report Prep | $T3300 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|@ Updated Study Report Health impact AssessmentSty (15.7 pana ASE 2-Fer.1 |ic re -Hsath inpact AssessmentStudy(18.3)$T1920 ProjectOverview &Issues Summary 103d |02-Jan-13"28-Jun-13 ;--S Project Overviéw &Issues Summary $T1930 Baseline Data Collection 213d |02-Jan-13*31-Dec-13 C ]Baseline Data CollectionS$T1940 Initial Study Report Prep 48d|01-Oct-13 [31-Dec-13 |:;;;c-Initial Study Réport Prép $T1950 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|:::;;|@ Initial Study Report!; $T1960 Impact Assessment 166d}02-Jan-14"[30-Sep-14 |)|ro roco ro ro i 1 impact Assessment |-pre peer terrreero $T1980 Updated Study Report Prep 46d,01-Oct-14 30-Dec-14 ;;C---1 Updated Study Report Prep §T2030 Updated Study Report 0d 02-Feb-15"|'is UpHlated Study Report §T1220 Review Existing Info/ldentify Needs d |02-Jan-ca 29-Mar-13 |:[--Review Existing Info/ldentify Needs . $T1240 Document Existing Conditions 58d |02-Apr-13 2Jun-13 [SFco [==F Document Existing Conditions oePo en ro neeeensen eeea Ls $T1250 Summarize Baseline Fossil Fuel Emissions 62d)01-Jul-13 30-Sep-13 [---1 Summarize Baseline Fossil Fuel Emissions ; $T1270 Initial Air Quality Study Report 48d!01-Oct-13"31-Dec-13 '1 Initial Air Quality Study;Report :: $T1280 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*Sa Initial Study Report :; '1 ' I"$T1290 Estimate Future Emissions with/without Project 103d |02-Jan-14"30-Jun-14 '':--Estimate Future Emissions with/without Project |:, ST1360 Updated Study Report Work 91d |01-Jul-14 14-Nov-14 [>oo po povo oO eeSs>Uipdated Study Report Work esoo $T3860 Updated Study Report Od 02-Feb-15*|:;;:@ Updated Study Report Probable Maximum Flood Study (16.5 aa mn pam 438¢sms Probable Maximum Flood Study (16 5) $T2300 |Site-Specific PMF 215d |02-Jan-13*03-Jan-14 |C 1 Site-Specific PMF $T2310 Initial Study Report Od 03-Feb-14*|::;1 @ Initial Study Report! 312320 Updated Study Report a Co oS Uidaied Study Rept poreSiteSpecificSeismicHazardStudy16.6)a 54 a}04Jun-1Sgmam 04-Feb-15a ;.,,.Site Specifiic Seismic Hazard Study tr.6) $T2330 Field Program 40d}04-Jun-13*31-Jul-13 cc Field Program $T2350 Deterministic &Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment 41d,02-Sep-14*31-Oct-14 ::'')Deterministic &Probabilistic Seismic'Hazard Assessment : $T2360 Initial Study Report Od 05-Feb-14*Sd titi Study Report ': _I_st2370 Updated Study Report Od O4Feb-15*|"@ Updated Stiiy Repo ee Page 12 of 12 Note:Please refer to the individual study plans in Sections 4 through 16 for a discussion and figures -a. explaining the relationship between studies.SUSITNA-WATANA HYDRO Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 2-1 Page 12 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 -Z SUSITNA-WATANA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT NO.14241 Table of Study Predecessor and,;USITNA-WATANA HYDRO 5 y Activit Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors Geology &Soils Characterization Study (4.5) $T4630 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)feeds into $T2360 Site Specific Seismic Hazard Study -Initial Study Report on September 30 ,2013. $T4630 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)feeds into $T1460 Paleontological Resources Study -Systematic Testing in Areas of High Potential on May 31,2013. $T4630 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)feeds into ive |tigati $T3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on May 31,2013. $T4630 Comprehensive Inves OA ons $T4630 Geology &Soils -Comprehensive Investigations feeds into ST4050 Cultural Resources Study -Draft(Dam Site &Reservoir Area)Ethnogeographic Study Report on October 1,2013. $ST4360 Geology &Soils Study Comprehensive Investigations feeds into Vegetation &Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study (Upper &Middle Susitna Basin)on October 1,2013. ;a ST4660 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Access Road &Transmission Line)feeds $T4660 Comprehensive Investigations into ST1480 Paleontological Resources Study -Updated Study Report on September 1,2014.(Access Road &Transmission Line) ST4661 Initial Study Report ST4662 Updated Study Report Baseline Water Quality Study (5.5) ST4680 MET Station Installation &Data Collection ST4690 Thermal Imaging $T4720 Baseline Water Quality Study -Data Analysis &Management feeds into ST1930 Health Impact Assessment Study - $T4720 Data Analysis &Management Baseline Data Collection on February 1,2013. $T4730 Fish Tissue Sampling $T4740 Sediment Sampling ST4860 Water Quality Modeling Study -Coordination w/Water Quality Data Collection &Analysis is linked to the start of $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring.Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -|ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam Water Quality Monitoring at the end of December 2013.-Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. ST4960 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Water Quality Monitoring (Monthly)is linked to the |ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General .ae start of ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring.Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on December 31,2013.ST4750 Water Quality Monitoring $T5450 Groundwater Study -Water Quality in Selected Habitats feeds into ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water _|ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Quality Monitoring.Calibration (Water Quality)at the end of September 2013 (1/2 way along the study). $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST5460 Groundwater Study -Aquatic Habitat/Surface Water Interactions on October 31,2013. $T4760 Deployment of Temp Monitoring Apparatus $T4770 QAPP/SAP Preparation &Review ST4771 Initial Study Report $T4772 Updated Study Report Water Quality Modeling Study (5.6) ..$T4180 River Productivity Study -Data Analysis &Reporting feeds into ST4800 Water Quality Modeling Study -GenerateST4800GenerateResultsforOperationalScenarios.|Results for Operational Scenarios on July 1,2014. $T4810 Verification Runs $T4820 Re-Calibration Adjustments Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 .Page 13fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 1 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model |ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Calibration (Water Quality)at the end of September 2013 (1/2 way along the study).Study -Initial Study Report Prep on December 31,2013. $T4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Flow Routing feeds into $T4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -|ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing, Model Calibration (Water Quality)on July 1,2013.Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. $T4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration at the end of December 2013. ST4840 Model Calibration (Water Quality)$T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling at the end of December 2013. $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST2530 !ce Processes in the Susitna River Study -Proposed Condition 1D Model Development at the end of December 2013. $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)will feeds into $T5150 Geomorphology Study - Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results at the end of September 2013. $T4850 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Evaluation/Selection feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish ST4850 Model Evaluation/Selection Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013. ar :ST4860 Water Quality Modeling Study -Coordination w/Water Quality Data Collection &Analysis is linked to the start ofCoordinationw/Water Quality .::aST4860DataCollection&Analysis $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring. ST4861 Initial Study Report ST4862 Updated Study Report Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study (5.7) ST4870 Soil Vegetation Sampling ST4880 Sediment Sampling $T4900 Avian Furbearer Studies $T4910 Fish Tissue Sampling $T5560 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment $T4920 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management feeds into $T2910 and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on March 31,2014.Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Functional Analysis at the end of March 2014 . ST1680 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on April 1,2014. $T4310 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Data Analysis -2013 feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment and $T4920 Data Analysis &Management Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on November 30,2014. $T1990 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2013 feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on October 31,2014. Follow Up Studies$14940 (as needed) ;a ST4960 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Water Quality Monitoring (Monthly)is linked to thetlityMonitorin$T4960 Water "Monthy.onng start of ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring. ST4961 Initial Study Report ST4962 Updated Study Report Geomorphology Study (6.5) $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST3460 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 on March 1,2043. $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST3310 Study of Fish «at .so ati Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T4970 Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/$T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST2950 Study of FishFinalizeDelineationDistribution&Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST3000 Glacial & Runoff Changes Study -Fish and Aquatics IFS study area selection on January 31,2013. ;:ST4980 Geomorphology Study -Identify and Map Paleo Geomorphic Features &Geology feeds into ST1460 PaleontologicalPaleoGhic'.$T4980 Identify ane e &Geology Resources Study -Systematic Testing in Areas of High Potential on June 1,2013. ST4990 Determine Morphometric Parameters Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 14 Page 2 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T5010 Geomorphology Study -Identify Key Governing Geomorphic Process feeds into ST4120 Cultural Resources Study - $T5010 Identify Key Governing Geomorphic Process Field Studies -Evaluation on March 31,2013. ST5020 Acquire Aerial Photo $T5030 Digitize 1980s Habitat and Geomorphic Features $T5040 Digitize 2012 Habitat and Geomorphic Features ST5050 Assess Habitat Area Change 1980-2012 ST5060 Geomorphology Study -Assess Channel Change 1980-2012 feeds into ST4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow STS060 Assess Channel Change 1980-2012 Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling on March 1,2014. $T5070 Initial &Final Flow Assessment $T5080 Geomorphology Study -Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization of Bed Mobilization feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization $T5080 Geomorphology Study -Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization of Bed Mobilization feeds into ST5270 ST5080 of Bed Mobilization Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -1D Model Development &Calibration on October 1,2013. ST4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Flow Routing feeds into ST5090 Geomorphology Study - 7 ;; Initial/Detailed Sediment Balance on June 1,2013. ST5090 Initial/Detailed Sediment Balance $T5090 Geomorphology Study -Initial/Detailed Sediment Balance feeds into $T5270 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -1D Model Development &Calibration on October 1,2013. Recon.Level Assessment of Potential Lower River$T5100 Channel Change $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling feeds into ST5120 Geomorphology $T5120 Large Woody Debris Study -Large Woody Debris on July 1,2014. $T5400 Groundwater Study -Watana Dam/Reservoir feeds into ST5130 Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology {ST5130 Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology feeds into ST1400 Cultural Resources Study -Additional on Nov 1,2013.Modeling from 2013 Field Study Results on December 31,2013. $T5130 Reservoir Geomorphology $T3930 Glacial &RunOff Changes Study -Hydrological &Glacier Melt Model Development feeds into ST5130 ST5130 Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam - Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology at the end of March 2014.Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. Geomorphology of Stream X-ings Along Access &ST5140 Trans Corridor $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)will feeds into $ST5150 Geomorphology Study -$T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results at the end of September 2013.ST3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 on April 1,2014. S$T2590 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Freeze Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST5150 Geomorphology Study-|ST5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results on May 1 2013.ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on March 1,2074. ST2580 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Break Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST5150 Geomorphology Study-|ST5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into ,tion &S rt of Int ting Fluv Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results on May 1 2013.$T2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions on $T5150 testa fon h ooy Ma 4 sing Re sat UV.-_172530 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Proposed Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST5150 October 1,2013. eomorpnology Modeling Nesulls Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results on March 31,2014.$T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into $T5270 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -1D Model Development &Calibration on October 1, 2013. $T5150 Geomorphology Study -integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into $T1170 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Impact Analysis on August 1,2074. Develop Geomorphic System/S15180 Finalize Classification System $T5181 Initial Study Report ST5182 Updated Study Report Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study (6.6) ST5200 Selection of 1D and 2D Modeis $T5210 Selection of Focus Area Coordination w/Other Studies on Modeling NeedsST5230IncludingFocusAreas $T5240 2013 Field Data Collection ST5250 Supplemental Field Data Collection 2014 $T5260 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Coordinate w/Other Studies on Processes Modeled 'Coordinate w/Other Studies on Processes feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on$T5260 Modeled October 1,2013. I Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 15 Page 3 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fiuv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into $T5270 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -1D Model Development &Calibration on October 1, 2013. $T5080 Geomorphology Study -Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization of Bed Mobilization feeds into ST5270 $T5270 1D Model Development &Calibration Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -1D Model Development &Calibration on October 1,2013. $T5090 Geomorphology Study-Initial/Detailed Sediment Balance feeds into $T5270 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -1D Model Development &Calibration on October 1,2013. S$T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run feeds into ST3652 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study on March 31,2014. $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on January 31,2013. Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj ST5280 Proj Run Run feeds into $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on December 31,2013. $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run feeds into ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration on April 1,2014. $T5290 Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 1D Results $T5300 2D Model Development &Calibration $T5310 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 2D Modeling Existing Conditions feeds into $T5310 Perform 2D Modeling Existing Conditions $T4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration on October 1,2014. $T5320 Perform 1D Modeling of Alternate Scenarios ST5340 Perform 2D Modeling of Alternate Scenarios Post Process &Provide Model Results to OtherST5350Studies Interpretation of Channel Change &Integration w/ST5360 Other Studies $T5370 Initial Study Report $T5372 Updated Study Report Groundwater Study (7.5) $T5380 Existing Data Synthesis ST5390 Geohydrologic Process-Domains and Terrain .$T5400 Groundwater Study -Watana Dam/Reservoir feeds into ST5130 Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology$T5400 Watana Dam/Reservoir onNov 1.2013 F F : ST5410 Groundwater Study -Upwelling/Springs Broadscale Mapping feeds into ST4540 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study ST5410 Upwelling/Springs Broadscale Mapping -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on October 1,2013. oe D d Surtace/G dwat $T5420 Groundwater Study -Riparian Veg Dependency on Surface/Groundwater Interactions feeds into ST1030 Riparian $T5420 Riparian Veg openvtowestions.acelrounawaler instream Study -Implement Riparian Groundwater/Surfacewater Installation &Sampling on October 1,2013. Aquatic Habitat/Groundwater/Surface WaterST5430Interactions $T5450 Groundwater Study -Water Quality in Selected Habitats feeds into ST4540 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study - Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on October 1,2013. $T5450 Water Quality in Selected Habitats $T5450 Groundwater Study -Water Quality in Selected Habitats feeds into ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring. $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST5460 Groundwater Study -Aquatic $T5460 Groundwater Study -Winter Ground/Surface Water Interactions feeds into ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study - Habitat/Surface Water Interactions on October 31,2013.Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on July 1,2014. $T2630 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2013)and ST2730 Ice ST5460 Winter Ground/Surface Water Interactions Processes in the Susitna River Study -Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2014)feeds into ST5460 Groundwater Study -Aquatic Habitat/Surface Water Interactions on March 1,2013 and March 1,2014,respectively. low G dwater U $T5470 Groundwater Study -Shallow Groundwater Users feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -ImpactST5470ShallowGroundwaterUsersAssessmentonMarch1,2013. . ST5480 Initial Study Plan |ST5490 Updated Study Report Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 16 Page 4 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study (7.6) $T2510 ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013. ST2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST3040 Subsistence Resources Study -Revise Study Plans on December 31,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Mode!Development feeds into $T1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. ST2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. .. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST3780 Eulachon S$T2510 Existing Condition 1D Model Development Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into $T1080 Riparian instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on December 31,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST4550 Fish & Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling at the end of February 2013. $T2520 Intensive Site Models $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST2530 Ice Processes in the Susitna |ST2530 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Proposed Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST5150 $T2530 Proposed Condition 1D Model Development River Study -Proposed Condition 1D Model Development at the end of December 2013.Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results on March 31,2014. -eval ST2570 Open Lead nary eel &Elevation ST2580 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Break Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST4270 Waterbird Migration, Breeding &Habitat Study -Spring Migration/Breeding-Pair Surveys -2013 on May 1,2013. $T2580 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Break Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on March 1,2013. $T2580 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj $T2580 Break Up Reconnaissance Run feeds into $T5220 Dali's Sheep Distribution and Abundance Study -Aerial Surveys -2013 on March 1,2013. $T2580 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run feeds into ST3000 Glacial &Runoff Changes Study -Fish and Aquatics IFS study area selection. ST2580 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Break Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST5150 Geomorphology Study - Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results on May 1,2013. $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2950 Ice $T2590 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Freeze Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Processes in the Susitna River Study -Freeze Up Reconnaissance on January 1,2013.Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on March 1,2013. $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST2950 Ice Processes |ST2590 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 1D Results in the Susitna River Study -Freeze Up Reconnaissance on January 1,2013.feeds into $T5220 Dall's Sheep Distribution and Abundance Study -Aerial Surveys -2013 on March 1,2013. $T2590 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 1D Results ST2590 Freeze Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST3000 Glacial &Runoff Changes Study -Fish and Aquatics IFS study area selection. $T2590 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Freeze Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST5150 Geomorphology Study - Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results on May 1,2013. $T2630 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation (2013)feeds into ST5460 $T2630 Open Lead Surveys,Ice Thickness &Elevation Groundwater Study -Aquatic Habitat/Surface Water Interactions on March 1,2013 and March 1,2014,respectively. (2013) $T2640 Break Up Reconnaissance $T2650 Freeze Up Reconnaissance sy:$T2710 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Initial Study Report Prep feeds into ST3652 Cook Inlet Beluga Whaie$T2710 Initial Study Report Prep Study on February 2,2014. $T2720 Initial Study Report $T2730 Open Lead Surveys,ae penness &Elevation $T2740 Break Up Reconnaissance $T2770 Updated Study Report Glacial &RunOff Changes Study (7.7) |S$T3840 |Review Existing Literature Zz Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 17 og ig Page 5 of 28 feed Stud aeRevisedStudyPlanPreliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST3850 Process Remote Sensing Imagery $T3870 Spring Fieldwork ST3880 Fall Fieldwork Analyze Glacier Mass Balance &$T3900 Meteorological Data ST3910 Glacial Extent Variation ;;$T3930 Glacial &RunOff Changes Study -Hydrological &Glacier Melt Model Development feeds into ST5130 $T3930 Hydrological &Glacier Melt Model Development Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology at the end of March 2014. Hydrological &Glacier Melt Model$13940 Calibration/Validation ST3960 Initial Study Report $T3970 Updated Study Report Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study (8.5) S$T2580 fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run and $T2590 fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 1D Results feeds into ST3000 Glacial &Runoff Changes Study -Fish and Aquatics IFS study area selection. $T3000 Study Area Selection $T4970 Geomorphology Study-Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation and ST3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST3000 Glacial &Runoff Changes Study -Fish and Aquatics IFS study area selection on January 31,2013. $T3110 Review of 1980s Data &Information $T3220 Model Selection by Habitat Type $T4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Fiow Routing feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. ST4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Flow Routing feeds into ST5090 Geomorphology Study - ST4500 Hydraulic Flow Routing Initial/Detailed Sediment Balance on June 1,2013. $T4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Flow Routing feeds into ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study - Model Calibration (Water Quality)on July 1,2013. $T4510 Hydrology ST3460 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Field Surveys feeds into ST4520 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Periodicity feeds into ST3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use $T4520 Periodicity $T4520 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Periodicity on August 31,2013.Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. ST5410 Groundwater Study -Upwelling/Springs Broadscale Mapping feeds into $T4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow $T4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection feeds into ST4540 Fish &Aquatics Study -HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection on October 1,2013.Instream Flow Study -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on April 1,2013 and December 31,2013. ST4360 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Field Surveys feeds into $T4530 HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection $T4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River-Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection on December 31,2013. $T5450 Groundwater Study -Water Quality in Selected Habitats feeds into ST4540 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study--_|Instream Flow Study -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling feeds into ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on October 1,2013.Study -Water Quality Monitoring. $T4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection feeds into ST4540 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on April 1,2013 and December 31,2013. $T4540 Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat 1$T5410 Groundwater Study -Upwelling/Springs Broadscale Mapping feeds into $T4540 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow StudyModeling-Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on October 1,2013. $T4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST4540 Fish & Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on May 31,2014. Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 .Page 18fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 6 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow |ST4550 Fish &Aquatics instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling at the end of December 2013.into $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013. $T5060 Geomorphology Study -Assess Channel!Change 1980-2012 feeds into ST4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow ST4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling on March 1,2044.into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. S$T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST4550 Fish &$T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling at the end of February |into ST3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep on December 31,2013.2013.$T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,ST4550 Collection &Modeling 2013. $T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. ST4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds into $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on December 31,2013. $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj |ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration feeds into ST6030 Recreation Run feeds into ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration on April 1,2014.Resources Study -Impact Analysis on October 71,2014. $T5310 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 2D Modeling Existing Conditions feeds into |ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration feeds into ST4180 River $T4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration on October 1,2014.Productivity Study -Data Analysis &Reporting on October 1,2014. $T3381 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Final Data Analysis feeds into $T4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish $T4570 Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration $T4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration on October 1,2014.Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on October 1,2014. ST4840 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into $ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration at the end of December 2013. ST4580 Initial Study Report ST4590 Updated Study Report Riparian Instream Flow Study (8.6) ST1010 Critical Review of 1980s Susitna River Data Finalize Riparian Groundwater/Surfacewater Field$T1020 Design $T5420 Groundwater Study -Riparian Veg Dependency on Surface/Groundwater Interactions feeds into ST1030 Riparian Implement Riparian Groundwater/Surfacewater Instream Study -Implement Riparian Groundwater/Surfacewater Installation &Sampling on October 1,2013.$T1030 Installation &Sampling $T1040 Riparian Vegetation:Field Data Collection 2013 $T5560 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST1050 Riparian Instream Flow $T1050 Riparian Vegetation:Field Data Collection 2014 |Study -Riparian Vegetation:Field Data Collection -2014 on March 31,2014. $T1060 Sediment Dating:Sampling &Analysis 2013 $T1070 Sediment Dating:Sampling &Analysis 2014 ST2580 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Break Up Reconnaissance and ST2590 Ice Processes in the Susitna $T1080 Riparian instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models feeds into ST3790 Aesthetic Resources Study -Updated River Study -Freeze Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models on Study Report Prep on October 1,2014. March 1,2013.ST2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models feeds into ST5120 Geomorphology Study -Large Woody $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models on December 31,2013.Debris on July 1,2014. $T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds |/ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models feeds into ST4180 River Productivity Study -Data Analysis into $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models on December 31,2013.&Reporting on October 1,2014. $T1080 Develop Riparian Models $T2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models feeds into ST5570 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat feeds into $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models on December 31,2013.Use Study -Updated Study Report on October 1,2014. $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run feeds into $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Riparian Models on December 31,2013. $T5460 Groundwater Study -Winter Ground/Surface Water Interactions feeds into ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study - Develop Riparian Models on July 1,2014. $T1090 Initial Study Report ST1100 Updated Study Report Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River (9.5) Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ..Page 19fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 7 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T2390 Saimon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into S$T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &$T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST2560 Wood Frogs Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling on October 1,2013.Occupancy &Habitat Use Study on May 1,2013. S$T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST3150 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on June 1,2013. $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013. $T2220 Fish Sampling $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST2950 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T2950 Study Site Selection $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2950 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T2951 Data Entry $T3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST2952 Study of Fish $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST3950 Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis on October 1,2014.Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2450 Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Cost Areas Study -Additional Surveys on January 31,2014. $1T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013.ST2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River-Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on December 31, 2013. $T2952 Preliminary Data Analysis $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST1730 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -HSC/HC!I Fish:Field Data Collection on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. ST3050 Initial Study Report Prep $T3060 Initial Study Report $T3120 Final Data Analysis $T3140 Updated Study Report Prep $T3150 Updated Study Report Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River(9.6) ST3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST3310 Study of :;Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T3310 Study Site Selection $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST3310 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into ST3320 Study of Fish Distribution &$T3320 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling feeds into ST2560 Wood Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling on October 1,2013.Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study on May 1,2013. ;; $T3320 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling feeds into ST3150 Surveys $T3320 Fish Sampling of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. $T3320 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling feeds into ST2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013. $T3350 Data Entry Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-4.:.agefromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.9 Page 8 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into $T4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep on December 31,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on June 1,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds $T3360 Preliminary Data Analysis into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on December 31,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2440 Salmon Escapement Study -Updated Study Report on October 1,2014. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into $T4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. $T3370 Initial Study Report Prep $T3380 Initial Study Report ST3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST3381 Study of Fish $T3381 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Final Data Analysis feeds into .Distribution &Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River on October 1,2014.$1T4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration on October 1,2014. $T3381 Final Data Analysis $T3390 Updated Study Report Prep ST3400 Updated Study Report Salmon Escapement Study (9.7) $T2380 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels in the Lower Susitna -2013 feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run $T2380 Operate Fishwheels in the Lower Susitna 2013 Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2390 Salmon $T2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into ST1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013.Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on September 1,2013. $T1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 feeds into ST2390 Salmon $T2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into $T3320 Study of Fish Distribution & Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013.Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling on October 1,2013. $T2390 Operate Fishwheels at Curry 2013 $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST2390 Salmon $T2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into ST2220 Study of Fish Distribution & Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013.Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling on October 1,2013. $T3320 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling feeds into ST2390 Salmon |ST2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013.&Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. $T2400 Conduct Aerial Surveys 2013 $T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST1690 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report on October 31,2013.Surveys -2014 on April 1,2014. $T3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study-Initial Study Report Prep feeds into ST2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Study Report on December 31,2013.Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on February 1,2014. $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam - Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on February 1,2014. $T2410 Initial Study Report $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study-Initial Study Report feeds into ST2230 Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Const.Areas Study -Conduct Fish Surveys on February 1,2014. $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on February 1,2014. $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study-Initial Study Report feeds into ST1730 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community & Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios on February 1,2014. $T2420 Operate Fishwheels in the Lower Susitna 2014 $T2430 Operate Fishwheels at Curry 2014 Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 .Page 21fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 9 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2440 Salmon Escapement Study -Updated Study Report on October 1,2014. $T2440 Updated Study Report ST3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST2440 Salmon Escapement Study -Updated Study Report on October 1,2014. River Productivity Study (9.8) ST4020 Literature Review on Hydropower Impacts ----- 7 nT 201213 --Sampling Benthic Macroinvertebrate &Algae $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -20 feeds into ST4060 River ST4060 Communities &Organic Matter Productivity Study -Sampling Benthic Macroinvertebrate &Algae Communities &Organic Matter on March 31,2013. ST4100 Invertebrate Drift Sampling Sampling Talkeetna for Ref.Site &Feasibility ||ST5010 Geomorphology Study -Identify Key Governing Geomorphic Process feeds into ST4120 Cultural Resources Study -$4120 Study Field Studies -Evaluation on March 31,2013. Trophic Analysis w/Bioenergetics &Stable Isotope$14140 Analysis $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on October 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on December 31,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds ST4150 Generate Habitat Suitability Criteria into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on December 31,2013. $T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on December 31,2013. ST3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST4150 River Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on October 31,2013. $T4160 Conduct a Fish Gut Analysis ST4170 Establish Baseline Colonization Rates ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model integration &Calibration feeds into ST4180 River $T4180 River Productivity Study -Data Analysis &Reporting feeds into ST4800 Water Quality Modeling Study -Generate Productivity Study -Data Analysis &Reporting on October 1,2014.Results for Operational Scenarios on July 1,2074. S$T4180 Data Analysis &Reporting $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling feeds into ST4180 River Productivity Study -Data Analysis &Reporting on October 1,2014. $T4210 Initial Study Report Prep $T4230 Initial Study Report ST4240 Updated Study Report Prep ST4250 Updated Study Report Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (9.9) $T4970 Geomorphology Study -Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation/Finalize Delineation feeds into ST3460 ST3460 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 on March 1,2013.Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on March 1,2014. $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST4060 River Productivity Study -Sampling Benthic Macroinvertebrate &Algae Communities &Organic Matter on March 31,2013. $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013. $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST3310 Study of ST3460 Data Collection -2012-13 Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. $T3460 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2950 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Study Site Selection on January 1,2013. ST3460 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Field Surveys feeds into $T4520 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Periodicity on August 31,2013. $T3520 Initial Study Report Prep $T3530 Initial Study Report Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 Page 22fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 10 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors © $T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into $T3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into feeds into ST4150 River ST3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 on April 1,2014.Productivity Study -General Habitat Suitability Criteria and ST1307 on October 31,2013. $T3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST2440 Salmon Escapement Study -Updated Study Report on October 1,2014. ST3600 Data Collection -2014 $T3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST3381 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River on October 1,2014. ST3600 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis on October 1,2014 $T3610 Updated Study Report Prep ST3640 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Updated Study Report feeds into ST2450 Aquatic ST3640 Updated Study Report Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Cost Areas Study -Additional Surveys on January 31,2013. Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study (9.10) $T1729 Reservoir Habitat Scenarios $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST1730 |ST1730 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios on feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on oc::F December 31,2013.December 31,2013.ST1730 Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST1730 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community & Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios on February 1,2014. $11731 Initial Study Report ST3460 Characterization &Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Data Collection -2012-13 feeds into ST2010 Future Watana|ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on March 1,2014.feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on April 1,2014. $T1112 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Develop Concepts feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish $T2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013.feeds into ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis on April 1,2014. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013.ST4850 Water Quality Modeling Study -Model Evaluation/Selection feeds into ST2010 Future Watana ..Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013. ST2010 Reservoir Fishery Management Options $T5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into $T2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013. $T2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on April 1,2014. $T2210 Entrainment Analysis $T2460 Updated Study Report Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam (9.11) $T1109 Establish Team and Define Process $T1110 Prepare for Feasibility Study $T1111 Site Reconnaissance $T1112 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Develop Concepts feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish $T1112 Develop Concepts Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013. $T1113 Initial Study Report Prep $71114 Initial Study Report Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ...Page 23fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation."ge Page 11 of 28 7 ]..Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2670 |ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013.Study -Impact Analysis on June 30,2014. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds |ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative feeds into ST2010 Future Watana into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013.Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on April 1,2014. $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam - Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on February 1,2014. $T2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on April 1,2014. S$T5130 Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam - $T2670 Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. S$T4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative on December 31,2013. $T4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST2671 Fish ST2671 Develop Refined Passage Strategies Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Develop Refined Passage Strategies on June 30,2014. $T2790 Updated Study Report Prep ST2800 Updated Study Report Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries (9.12) $T4260 Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries -Data Collection - 2013 feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31, 2013. $T4260 Data Collection -2013 $T4260 Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries -Data Collection - 2013 feeds into ST2450 Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Cost Areas Study - Additional Surveys on December 31,2013 $T4340 Initial Study Report $T4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish $T4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST2671 Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on October 1,2014.Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Develop Refined Passage Strategies on June 30,2014. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4410 |ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 feeds into ST4540 Fish & Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013.Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling on May 31,2014. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on February 1,2014. $T5080 Geomorphology Study -Determine Effective Discharge &Characterization of Bed Mobilization feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. $T4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Flow Routing feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers ST4410 Data Collection -2014 (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. $T4540 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Collect Physical &Hydraulic Data for Habitat Modeling feeds into ST4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on December 31,2013. $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj Run feeds into $T4410 Study of Fish Passage Barriers (Middle &Upper Susitna River)-Data Collection -2014 on January 31,2013. $T4490 Updated Study Report Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Const.Areas Study (9.13) ST2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST2230 Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment, $T2230 Conduct Fish Surveys Transmission Alignment,and Const.Areas Study -Conduct Fish Surveys on February 1,2014. Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 .Page 24fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 12 of 28 Revised Study Plan oeevisyPreliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST2450 Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Cost Areas Study -Additional Surveys on January 31,2014. ST3640 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study -Updated Study Report feeds into ST2450 Aquatic $T2450 Additional Surveys Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Cost Areas Study -Additional Surveys on January 31,2013. $T4260 Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries -Data Collection - 2013 feeds into ST2450 Aquatic Resources w/Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment,and Cost Areas Study - Additional Surveys on December 31,2013. $T3810 Initial Study Report $T3820 Updated Study Report Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species (9.14) $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST1230 Genetic $T1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 feeds into ST2390 Salmon Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on June 1,2013.Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 on June 1,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on June 1,2013. $T2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into ST1230 Genetic Baseline Study for $T1230 Baseline Sample Collection 2013 Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on September 1,2013. $T3560 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Field Study 2013 feeds into ST1230 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on October 31,2013. $T1450 Baseline Sample Collection 2014 $T1670 Mixture Sample Collection 2013 $T2000 Mixture Sample Collection 2014 $T3730 Analysis of Salmon Tissue $T3740 Initial Study Report ST3750 Updated Study Report Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area (9.15) $T3920 Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area -Harvest &Effort Statistics feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies | on December 31,2013. $T3920 Harvest &Effort Statistics $T3920 Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area -Harvest &Effort Statistics feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -impact Analysis on December 31,2013. $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST3950 |ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project feeds into ST6030 Recreation Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013.Resources Study -Impact Analysis on September 30,2014. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middie and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. S$T2410 Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on February 1,2014. ST4260 Study of Fish Passage Barriers in the Middle and Upper Susitna River and Susitna Tributaries -Data Collection - 2013 feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31, Analyses of Potential Project-Related Effects on |2013.$T3950 Harvest Levels &Opportunity $T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Fiow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. ST3980 Initial Study Report $T3981 Updated Study Report Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study (9.16) $T3340 ADF&G Permits 2013 ST3450 ADF&G Permits 2014 Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ....Page 25fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.#ae Page 13 of 28 Revised Study Plan .y Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST3560 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Field Study 2013 feeds into $T1230 ST3560 Field Study 2013 Genetic Baseline Study for Selected Fish Species -Baseline Sample Collection 2013 on October 31,2013. $T3670 Field Study 2014 $T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds =|ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into ST3620into$T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,{Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep on November 1,2013.2013.$T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into ST3652 $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST3780 Eulachon {Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study on December 31,2013. Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013.$T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into $ST2410 ST4750 Baseline Water Quality Study -Water Quality Monitoring feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and |Salmon Escapement Study -Initial Study Report on October 31,2013. Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013.$T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,ST3660 River Recreation Flow &Access Study -Initial Study Report Prep on October 31,2013. $T3780 Data Analysis 2013 Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. $T2380 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels in the Lower Susitna -2013 feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. ST5260 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Coordinate w/Other Studies on Processes Modeled feeds into ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 on October 1,2013. ST3890 Data Analysis 2014 $T4220 Initial Study Report $T5440 Updated Study Report Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study (9.17) $T2040 Permit Applications $T2050 2013 Aerial Surveys ST2060 2013 Camera Surveys $T2070 2013 Initial Modeling Effort $T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into ST3620|ST3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep feeds into ST2410 Salmon Escapement Study-Initial Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep on November 1,2013.Study Report on December 31,2013. $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study-Initial Study Report Prep on December 31,2013. $T3620 Initial Study Report Prep S$T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds into $T3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep on December 31,2013. ST4840 Water Quality Monitoring Study -Model Calibration (Water Quality)feeds into ST3620 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study -Initial Study Report Prep on December 31,2013. $T3630 Initial Study Report ST3649 2014 Aerial Surveys ST3650 2014 Camera Surveys $T3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds into ST3652 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study on December 31,2013. $T5280 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &Initial Proj ST3652 Revised Modeling Effort Run feeds into ST3652 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study on March 31,2014. $T2710 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Initial Study Report Prep feeds into ST3652 Cook Inlet Beluga Whale Study on February 2,2014. $T3653 Updated Study Report Prep ST3654 Updated Study Report Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study (10.5) $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST2089 Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study -Deploy Remaining Radio &Satellite Collars &$T2089 Monit Deploy Remaining Radio &Satellite Collars &Monitor on February 1,2013. onitor $T2090 Conduct Winter Browse Utilization Assessment $T2100 Monitor Radio Collars Weekly Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ...Page 26fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 14 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST5680 Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST5680 Initial Study Report $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on February 2,2014. ST5681 Updated Study Report Caribou Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study (10.6) ST4670 Monitor Collars -2013 $T4780 Caribou Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4780 Initial Study Report $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on August 31,2014. ST4890 Monitor Collars -2014 ST5000 Updated Study Report Dall's Sheep Distribution and Abundance Study (10.7) $T5110 Site Visits to Assess Lick Use -2013 ST2580 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Perform 1D Modeling of Exis Conditions &tnitial Proj Run and ST2590 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study -Reevaluate D/S Study Limits Based on 1D $T5220 Aerial Surveys -2013 Results feeds into ST5220 Dall's Sheep Distribution and Abundance Study -Aerial Surveys -2013 on March 1,2013. $T5330 Data Analysis -2013 ST5620 Initial Study Report ST5630 Site Visits to Assess Lick Use -2014 ST5640 Aerial Surveys -2014 ST5650 Dali's Sheep Distribution and Abundance Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife ST5650 Data Analysis -2014 Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST5660 Updated Study Report Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large Carnivores Study (10.8) $T2550 Field Surveys of Bear Use -2013 $T3360 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. $T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. $T2181 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Delivery of Field Data & Preliminary Vegetation &Habitat Maps feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys - 2014 on October 1,2013. $T4330 Data Analysis 2013 $T2952 Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Preliminary Data Analysis feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. $T2390 Salmon Escapement Study -Operate Fishwheels at Curry -2013 feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding & Habitat Study -Brood Surveys -2014 on October 1,2013. ST4450 Initial Study Report ST4600 Field Surveys of Bear Use 2014 $T5610 Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large Carnivores Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 ST5610 Data Analysis 2014 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST5611 Updated Study Report Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occupancy Study (10.9) $72120 SUPE Survey 2013 $T2130 Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occupancy Study -SUPE Survey 2014 feeds into ST3270 $T2130 SUPE Survey 2014 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T2140 Initial Study Report $T2150 Updated Study Report Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study (10.10) Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 27 Page 15 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST5580 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study -Fieldwork to CollectFieldworktoCollectGeneticSamples&ConductST5580TrackSurveys-2013 Genetic Samples &Conduct Track Surveys -2013 on February 1,2013. ST5600 Genetic Analysis -2013 ST5690 Snowshoe Hare Pellet Count -2013 S$T5700 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study -Initial Data feeds into ST1300 Small Mammal Species $T5700 Initial Data Composition and Habitat Use Study -Data Management on September 30,2013. Fieldwork to Collect Genetic Samples &ConductS$T5710 Track Surveys -2014 $T5840 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study -Genetic Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of ST5840 Genetic Analysis -2014 Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST5950 Snowshoe Hare Pellet Count -2014 $T5951 Initial Study Report ST5952 Updated Study Report Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study (10.11) $T3470 Aerial Surveys of River Otter &Mink Tracks $T2270 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into $T3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. ST3480 Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. $T4520 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Periodicity feeds into ST3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. ST3490 Aerial Survey of Beaver Colonies $T3500 Aerial Survey of Lodges $T3510 Aerial Track Survey of River Otter &Mink $T3540 Aerial Survey of River Otter &Mink Tracks $T3550 Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups $T3570 Aerial Survey of Beaver Colonies $T3580 Aerial Survey of Lodges $T3590 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Track Survey of River Otter &Mink feeds into ST3270 ST3590 Aerial Track Survey of River Otter &Mink Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST5560 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on March 31,2014. $T5560 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST1050 Riparian Instream Flow ST5560 Initial Study Report Study -Riparian Vegetation:Field Data Collection -2014 on March 31,2014. $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling feeds into ST5570 Aquatic Furbearer $T5570 Updated Study Report Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Updated Study Report on October 1,2014. Small Mammal Species Composition and Habitat Use Study (10.12) $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping :&Field Plot Selections feeds into ST1260 Small M |Species C iti bi - 871260 Small Mammal Trapping Trapping eee 201d ammal Species Composition &Habitat Use Study -Small Mammal $T5700 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study -Initial Data feeds into ST1300 Small Mammal Species ST1300 Data Management Composition and Habitat Use Study -Data Management on September 30,2013. $T1310 Small Mammal Species Composition and Habitat Use Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of $T1310 Initial Study Report Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. l $T1330 Updated Study Report Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ;..Page 2fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age 28 Page 16 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study (10.13) ST4630 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)feeds into $T3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on May 31,2013. $T1380 Cultural Resources Study -Modeling &Sample Design Development from 2012 Field Reconnaissance feeds into $T3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on March 31,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat MappingST3160AcousticMonitoring-2013 &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on May 31, 2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on May 31,2013. $T3170 Data Analysis -2013 $T3180 Initial Study Report $T3190 Acoustic Monitoring -2014 $T1680 Surveys of Eagies &Other Raptors Study -Initial Study Report feeds into $T3200 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use $T3200 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use ST3200 Data Analysis -2014 Study -Data Analysis -2014 on October 1,2014.Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T3210 Updated Study Report Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study (10.14) $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middie Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST3150 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST3150 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. .$T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST3150 Surveys of$T1350 Field Surveys -2013 Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. 9 $T3320 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna River)-Fish Sampling feeds into ST3150 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. $T1580 Update Regional Database -2013 $T1630 Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2013 $T1680 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST3200 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 on October 1,2014. ST1680 Initial Study Report $T1680 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment and ,Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on April 1,2014. $T2410 Salmon Escapement Study-Initial Study Report feeds into ST1690 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field ST1690 Field Surveys -2014 Surveys -2014 on April 1,2014. $T4090 Update Regional Database -2014 $T4130 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2014 feeds into ST3270 $T4130 Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2014 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on November 1,2014. $T4131 Updated Study Report Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study (10.15) $T2580 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Break Up Reconnaissance feeds into ST4270 Waterbird Migration, $T4270 Spring Migration/Breeding-Pair Surveys -2013 Breeding &Habitat Study -Spring Migration/Breeding-Pair Surveys -2013 on May 1,2013. $T4280 Brood Surveys -2013 $T4290 Harlequin Duck Brood-Rearing Survey -2013 $T4300 Fall Migration Surveys -2013 $T4310 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Data Analysis -2013 feeds into ST2240 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Point-Count Survey -2014 on December 31,2013. F $T4310 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Data Analysis -2013 feeds into ST4920 Mercury Assessment and ST4310 Data Analysis -2013 Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on November 30,2014. Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 :..PfromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age 29 Page 17 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T4420 Spring Migration/Breeding-Pair Surveys -2014 $T4430 Brood Surveys -2014 ST4460 Harlequin Duck Brood-Rearing Survey -2014 $T4470 Fall Migration Surveys -2014 ST4480 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife $T4480 Data Analysis -2014 Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on November 30,2014. ST4481 Initial Study Report ST4482 Updated Study Report Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study (10.16) $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping ST1740 Field Plannin &Field Plot Selections feeds into $T1740 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Field9PlanningonApril1,2013. $T1850 Point-Count Survey -2013 $T1970 Swallow Survey -2013 $T1990 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2013 feeds into ST4920 ST1990 Data Analysis -2013 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management on October 31,2014. $T2020 Initial Study Report $T4310 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Data Analysis -2013 feeds into ST2240 Landbird and Shorebird $T2240 Point-Count Survey -2014 Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Point-Count Survey -2014 on December 31,2013. $T2470 Swallow Survey -2014 $T3330 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 $T3330 Data Analysis -2014 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T5500 Updated Study Report Population Ecology of Willow Ptarmigan in Game Management Unit 13 Study (10.17) $T1119 First Field Season $T1120 Conduct Aerial Surveys ST1560 Conduct Aerial Surveys $T1780 Second Field Season $T1890 Population Ecology of Willow Ptarmigan in Game Management Unit 13 Study -Conduct Aerial Surveys feeds into $T1890 Conduct Aerial Surveys $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST5831 Initial Study Report $T5832 Updated Study Report Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study (10.18) $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST2340 Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study on February 28,2013. .;$T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST2340 Wood Frogs Occupancy & $T2340 Selection of Waterbodies -2013 Habitat Use Study on February 28,2013. $T2540 Selection of Waterbodies -2014 $T2220 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance in the Upper Susitna River -Fish Sampling feeds into ST2560 Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study on May 1,2013.ST3320 Study of Fish Distribution &Abundance (Middle &Lower Susitna $T2560 Field Survey -2013 River)-Fish Sampling feeds into ST2560 Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study on May 1,2013. $T2561 Field Survey -2014 I ST2890 Data Analysis -2013 Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 PfromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age 30 Page 18 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T3130 Data Analysis -2014 $T3130 Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T4000 Initial Study Report $T4610 Updated Study Report Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study (10.19) $T3230 Literature Review $T3240 Initial Study Report $T3250 Initial Habitat-Value Ranking $T3260 Final Selection of Species $T3270 Data Analysis ST5680 Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study -Initial Study Report feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on February 2,2014. $T4780 Caribou Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study -Initial Study Report feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on August 31,2014. $T5650 Dall's Sheep Distribution and Abundance Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T5610 Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Use by Large Carnivores Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2074. $T2130 Wolverine Distribution,Abundance,and Habitat Occupancy Study -SUPE Survey 2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST5840 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study -Genetic Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T3590 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Track Survey of River Otter &Mink feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2074. $T1310 Small Mammal Species Composition and Habitat Use Study -Initial Study Report feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. ST4130 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Conduct Roosting &Staging Surveys -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on November 1,2014. ST4480 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into $ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on November 30,2014. $T3330 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T1890 Population Ecology of Willow Ptarmigan in Game Management Unit 13 Study -Conduct Aerial Surveys feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T3130 Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014. $T4370 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Final Vegetation/Habitat Map Revisions feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 1,2014. ST5761 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Final Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 1,2014. $T4390 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Delivery of Field Data & Final Vegetation &Habitat Maps feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31, 2014. ST5763 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam-Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Maps feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31, 2014. $T3200 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis -2014 feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,2014.. $T3280 Updated Study Report $T5510 Initial Selection of Species Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study (10.20) Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.Page 31 Page 19 of 28 Revised Study Plan oePreliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions & Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on September 30,2013. S$T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST5970 Recreation $T5520 Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data Resources Study -Analysis on October 1,2013. $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report on October 1,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST5530 Wildlife Harvest ST5530 Initial Study Report Analysis Study -Initial Study Report on November 30,2013. $T5540 Transfer of 2013 Harvest/Subsistence Data $T5550 Updated Study Report Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin (11.5) $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST5870 Invasive Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST5770 Rare Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into $ST2340 Wood Frogs Occupancy &Habitat Use Study on February 28,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST1740 Landbird and Shorebird Migration,Breeding,and Habitat Use Study -Field Planning on April 1,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST3150 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on May 31, 2013. $T2160 Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST5580 Terrestrial Furbearer Abundance and Habitat Use Study -Fieldwork to Collect Genetic Samples &Conduct Track Surveys -2013 on February 1,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST2089 Moose Distribution,Abundance,Movements,Productivity,and Survival Study - Deploy Remaining Radio &Satellite Collars &Monitor on February 1,2013. $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST1260 Small Mammal Species Composition &Habitat Use Study -Small Mammal Trapping on June 30,2013. $T4360 Geology &Soils Study Comprehensive Investigations feeds into Vegetation &Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study (Upper $T2170 Field Surveys &Middle Susitna Basin)on October 1,2013. $T2180 Vegetation/Habitat Map Revisions $T2181 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Delivery of Field Data & Preliminary Vegetation &Habitat Maps feeds into ST2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana .;a .Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions on October 1,2013. $T2181 Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Vegetation &$T2181 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Delivery of Field Data & Habitat Maps Preliminary Vegetation &Habitat Maps feeds into ST4330 Waterbird Migration,Breeding &Habitat Study -Brood Surveys - 2014 on October 1,2013. $T2190 Initial Study Report Prep $T2200 Initial Study Report 4350 Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot SelectionSTforRemainingUnmappedAreas Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 Page 32fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.Page 20 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST4360 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Field Surveys feeds into .$T4530 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -HSC/HCI Fish:Field Data Collection on December 31,2013.ST4360 Field Surveys $T4370 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Final Vegetation/Habitat Map ST4370 Final Vegetation/Habitat Map Revisions Revisions feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 1,2014. $T4380 Updated Study Report Prep S$T4390 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middie Susitna Basin -Delivery of Field Data & Delivery of Field Data &Final Vegetation &Habitat Final Vegetation &Habitat Maps feeds into ST3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31,$T4390 Maps 2014. ST4400 Updated Study Report Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam (11.6) Preparation of Riverine Physiography to Help$12250 Define Study Area $T2270 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into $T5870 Invasive Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2270 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into S$T5770 Rare Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot $T2270 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field $T2270 Selection Plot Selection feeds into $T3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. $T2271 Field Surveys $T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into $T2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam-Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions$T2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam-Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions on jfeeds into ST1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling on December 31,2013. October 1,2013. $T2181 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Delivery of Field Data & $T2600 Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions Preliminary Vegetation &Habitat Maps feeds into ST2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions on October 1,2013. $T2830 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Map Revisions feeds into ST2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions on October 1,2013. Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary$12601 Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Maps $T2610 Initial Study Report Prep $T2620 Initial Study Report ST5750 Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection for Remaining Unmapped Areas ST5760 Field Surveys $T5761 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Final Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map ST5761 Final Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions Revisions feeds into $T3270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 1,2014. S$T5763 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam-Delivery of Final Field Data &Final ST5763 Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Maps feeds into ST2270 Evaluation of Wildlife Habitat Use Study -Data Analysis on October 31, Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Maps 2014. ST5764 Updated Study Report Prep ST5765 Updated Study Report Wetland Mapping Study (11.7) Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ;..PfromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age 38 Page 21 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into $T5870 Invasive Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST5770 Rare Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST2340 Wood Frogs Occupancy & Habitat Use Study on February 28,2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST3150 Surveys of Eagles &Other Raptors Study -Field Surveys -2013 on April 1,2013. $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on May 31,2013. ST2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST3480 Aquatic Furbearer Abundance &Habitat Use Study -Aerial Survey of Muskrat Pushups on March 31,2013. $T2820 Field Surveys ST2830 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Map Revisions feeds into ST2600 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the $T2830 Wetland Map Revisions Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Map Revisions on October 1,2013. $T2840 Initial Study Report Prep $T2850 Initial Study Report $T5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST2860 Wetland Mapping Study -Delivery of Field Data & $T2860 Delivery of Field Data &Preliminary Wetland Map |Preliminary Wetland Map on December 31,2013. Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection for$2870 Remaining Unmapped Areas $T2880 Field Surveys $T2900 Final Wetland Map Revisions $1T4920 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study -Data Analysis &Management feeds into ST2910 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Functional Analysis at the end of March 2014 . §$T2910 Wetland Functional Analysis $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST2910 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Functional Analysis October 1,2013. $T2920 Updated Study Report Prep $T2930 Delivery of Final Field Data &Final Wetland Map $T2940 Updated Study Report Rare Plant Study (11.8) ST2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into ST5770 Rare Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2270 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST5770 Rare Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. S$T5770 Field Survey Site Selection $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST5770 Rare Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T5780 Field Survey $T5790 Data Analysis ST5800 Initial Study Report $T5810 Field Survey Site Selection $T5820 Field Survey ST5850 Data Analysis ST5860 Updated Study Report Invasive Plant Study (11.9) Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 34 Page 22 of 28 i dy PI imiRevisedStudyPlanPreliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T2160 Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study in the Upper and Middle Susitna Basin -Vegetation/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selections feeds into $T5870 Invasive Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T2270 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Watana Dam -Riparian/Wetland/Habitat Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST5870 Invasive Plant Study -Field Survey Site Selection on March 31,2013. $T5870 Field Survey Site Selection $T2810 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Mapping &Field Plot Selection feeds into ST5870 Invasive Plant Study -FieldSurveySiteSelectiononMarch31,2013. ST5880 Field Survey ST5890 Data Analysis ST5900 Initial Study Report ST5910 Field Survey Site Selection ST5920 Field Survey ST5930 Data Analysis $T5931 Updated Study Report Recreation Resources Study (12.5) $T3410 Initial Study Report Prep $T3420 Initial Study Report $T3430 Updated Study Report Prep $T3440 Updated Study Report ST5960 Data Collection &Baseline Inventory $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST5970 Recreation ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study - Resources Study -Analysis on October 1,2013.Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options |ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST1400 Cultural Resources Study -Additional Modeling from 2013 feeds into ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis on April 1,2014.Field Study Results on December 31,2013. ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on ST5970 Analysis November 1,2013. $T5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST2860 Wetland Mapping Study -Delivery of Field Data & Preliminary Wetland Map on December 31,2013. S$T5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST2010 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community &Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fishery Management Options on December 31,2013. Coordination w/Agencies,Licensing ParticipantsST5980andOtherStudies ST5990 intercept Survey Deployment ST6000 Mail Survey Development ST6010 Exec Interviewing &Web Survey Deployment $T6020 Survey Data Analysis $T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on March 1,2014. ST4570 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Model Integration &Calibration feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on October 1,2014. $T2670 Fish Passage Feasibility at Watana Dam -Evaluate Feasibility/Alternative feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on June 30,2014. $T3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on September 30,2014. $T3920 Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area -Harvest &Effort ST6030 Impact Analysis Statistics feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on September 30,2013. $T1520 Regional Economic Evaluation Study -Initial Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. |Aesthetic Resources Study (12.6) Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 ...Pi 35fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 23 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T1180 Baseline Data Collection Coordination w/Agencies,Stakeholders and$T1190 Disciplines $T1200 Simulation Development /Sound Modeling ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into $ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T4040 Cultural Resources Study -Ethnogeographic Field Work feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources $T1210 Impact Analysis Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. ST1860 Transportation Resources Study -Forecast Future Conditions feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study - Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T1270 Air Quality Study -Initial Air Quality Study Report feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. $T3710 Viewshed Modeling $T3760 Initial Study Report Prep $T3770 Initial Study Report $T1080 Riparian Instream Flow Study -Develop Groundwater/Surfacewater Modeling feeds into ST3790 Aesthetic $T3790 Updated Study Report Prep Resources Study -Updated Study Report Prep on October 1,2014. $T3800 Updated Study Report River Recreation Flow and Access Study (12.7) $T1130 Field Studies $1T1150 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Analysis feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services $T1150 Analysis Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. Coordination w/Agencies,Stakeholders &$1160 Disciplines $T5150 Geomorphology Study -Integration &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorphology Modeling Results feeds into $T1170 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -impact Analysis feeds into ST1930 Health impact Assessment Study - ST1170 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Impact Analysis on August 1,2014.Baseline Data Collection on July 1,2013. ST1170 Impact Analysis $T4500 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Hydraulic Flow Routing feeds into ST1170 River Recreation Flow and $T1170 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Impact Analysis feeds into ST1870 Transportation Resources Study - Access Study -Impact Analysis on August 1,2014.Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013. ag:ST3780 Eulachon Run Timing,Distribution,and Spawning in the Susitna River Study -Data Analysis 2013 feeds intoST3660InitialStudyReportPrep$T3660 River Recreation Flow &Access Study -Initial Study Report Prep on October 31,2013. ST3680 Initial Study Report ST3690 Updated Study Report Prep $T3700 Updated Study Report ST6040 Baseline Data Collection Cultural Resources Study (13.5) $T1370 Reconnaissance Level Field Study $T1380 Cultural Resources Study -Modeling &Sample Design Development from 2012 Field Reconnaissance feeds into ST1380 Modeling &Sample Design Development from ST3160 Bat Distribution &Habitat Use Study -Acoustic Monitoring -2013 on March 31,2013. 2012 Field Reconnaissance $T1390 Pre-Field Prep $T5130 Geomorphology Study -Reservoir Geomorphology feeds into ST1400 Cultural Resources Study -Additional Modeling from 2013 Field Study Results on December 31,2013. $T1400 Additional Modeling from 2013 Field Study Results }ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST1400 Cultural Resources Study -Additional Modeling from 2013 Field Study Results on December 31,2013. ST1410 Pre-Field Preparation $T3990 Archeological Field Studies -Inventory $T4010 Archeological Field Studies -Initiation of Evaluation I ST4030 Ethnogeographic Study Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 .....Page 36fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.Page 24 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST4040 Cultural Resources Study -Ethnogeographic Field Work feeds into $T1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T3020 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews feeds into ST4040 Cultural ST4040 Ethnogeographic Field Work Resources Study -Ethnogeographic Field Work on July 1,2013. $T4630 Geology &Soils -Comprehensive Investigations feeds in to ST4050 Cultural Resources Study -Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report on October 1,2013. ST4050 Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report $T3020 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews feeds intoST4050 Cultural Resources Study -Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report on September 30,2013. $T4050 Cultural Resources Study -Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report feeds into ST3020 Subsistence Resources Study - Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews on December 31,2013. $T4070 Initial Study Report Prep $T4080 Initial Study Report $T4190 Field Studies -Inventory $T4200 Field Studies -Evaluation $T4201 Updated Study Report Prep $T4202 Updated Study Report Paleontological Resources Study (13.6) ST1441 Applying GPS Based Classification ST4630 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)feeds into S$T1460 Paleontological Resources Study -Systematic Testing in Areas of High Potential on May 31,2013. $T4980 Geomorphology Study -Identify and Map Paleo Geomorphic Features &Geology feeds into ST1460 Paleontological $T1460 Systematic Testing in Areas of High Potential |Resources Study -Systematic Testing in Areas of High Potential on June 1,2013. ST1470 Initial Study Report ST4660 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Access Road &Transmission Line)feeds $T1480 Updated Study Report into ST1480 Paleontological Resources Study -Updated Study Report on September 1,2014. Subsistence Resources Study (14.5) ST1760 Subsistence Study Plan $T1770 Task 1:Compilation of Exis.Data $T1800 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys -Year 2 - -iy Review - $T1810 Task 2:ADF&G Repowing &Community Reviewear2 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys Pre-FieldST2960Planning-Year 1 $T2970 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys -Year 1 ST2980 Task 2:ADF&G Reporting &Community Review - Year 1 Task 2:ADF&G Household Surveys Pre-FieldST2990Pianning-Year 2 $T3010 Task 3:Household Surveys in Nonsubsistence Areas $T4050 Cultural Resources Study -Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report feeds into ST3020 Subsistence Resources Study -$T3020 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews feeds into ST4040 Cultural Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews on December 31,2013.Resources Study -Ethnogeographic Field Work on July 1,2013. .. $T3020 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews feeds into ST4050 Cultural $T3020 Task 5:Traditional &Local Knowledge Interviews Resources Study -Draft Ethnogeographic Study Report on September 30,2013. Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced Attachment 2-1 :..Page 37fromPrimaveraSoftware,will be continually updated during study plan implementation.age Page 25 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST3030 Subsistence $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST1960 Health impact Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report on October 1,2013.Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on December 31,2012. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions & Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST5530 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Initial Study Report on November 30,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST3950 Analysis of Fish Harvest ST3030 Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report in (and)D/S of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project on December 31,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into $ST2910 Wetland Mapping Study -Wetland Functional Analysis October 1,2013. $T2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Modei Development feeds into ST3040 $T3040 Revise Study Plans Subsistence Resources Study -Revise Study Plans on December 31,2013. $T3070 Task 4:Subsistence Mapping Interviews . P-:$T1860 Transportation Resources Study -Forecast Future Conditions feeds into ST3080 Subsistence Resources Study -S$T3080 Task 4-5:Additional 2014 Subsistence Data |+,-4 4.5:Additional 2014 Subsistence Data Collection (as needed)on December 31,2013.Collection (as needed) $T3090 Task 2-5:Prepare 2015 Final Updated Study Report &Community Reviews $T3100 Initial Study Report $T3101 .Updated Study Report ST6070 Consultation Regional Economic Evaluation Study (15.5) $T1490 Gather/Review Existing Information $T1500 Document Existing Conditions Develop Reasonable Foreseeable Future ActionST1510Assumptions $T1520 Regional Economic Evaluation Study -Initial Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report feeds into ST6030 Recreation Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. $T1520 Initial Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report y Pp y' $T1530 Initial Study Report $T1540 Incorporate Information from Other Studies ST1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Updated Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report feeds into S$T1550 Regional Economic Evaluation Study -Updated Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report .ST1550 R eport $T1570 Updated Study Report Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study (15.6) ST1590 Gather/Review Existing Information $T1600 Document Existing Conditions ST1610 Stakeholder Interviews Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 38 Page 26 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors ST1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013. $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into $ST1910 Transportation Resource Study -Updated Study Report Prep on December 31,2013. $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into ST1550 Regional Economic Evaluation Study -Updated Regional Economic Evaluation Study Report . a .oy:..$T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study $T1620 Initial Social Conan 5 Pubte Good &Services Report feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on November 1,2013.yrep $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into $T1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on December 31,2013. ST1640 Initial Study Report $T3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions & Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T3920 Analysis of Fish Harvest in and Downstream of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Area -Harvest &Effort Statistics feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T5520 Wildlife Harvest Analysis Study -Transfer of 2012 Harvest/Subsistence Data feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions & Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T1150 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Analysis feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T1730 Future Watana Reservoir Fish Community and Risk of Entrainment Study -Reservoir Fish Community Scenarios ST1650 Incorporate Information &Other Studies feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. ST5970 Recreation Resources Study -Analysis feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study - Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. Updated Social Conditions &Public Good &ST1660 Services Study Report $T1750 Updated Study Report Transportation Resources Study (15.7) $T1820 Data Collection &Review $T1830 Assess Inventory &Field Studies $T1840 Transportation Resources Study -Document Existing Conditions feeds into ST1960 Heaith Impact Assessment $ST1840 Document Existing Conditions Study -Impact Assessment on August 31,2013. ST1860 Transportation Resources Study -Forecast Future Conditions feeds into ST3080 Subsistence Resources Study - Task 4-5:Additional 2014 Subsistence Data Collection (as needed)on December 31,2013. $T1860 Forecast Future Conditions $T1860 Transportation Resources Study -Forecast Future Conditions feeds into ST1210 Aesthetic Resources Study - Impact Analysis on November 1,2013. $T4550 Fish &Aquatics Instream Flow Study -Coordinate with Other Disciplines Quality Data Collection &Modeling feeds +[ST1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1270 Air Quality Study -Initial Air Quality Study into $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013.Report on December 1,2013. $T1170 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Impact Analysis feeds into ST1870 Transportation Resources Study-|ST1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013.Assessment on December 31,2013., ST2510 Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study -Existing Condition 1D Model Development feeds into ST1870 $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1650 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services ST1870 Evaluate Impacts Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts on December 1,2013.Study -Incorporate Information &Other Studies on December 31,2013. $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1290 Air Quality Study -Estimate Future Report feeds into ST1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts on December 4,2013.Emissions with/without Project on December 31,2013. |$T1880 Initial Study Report Prep Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 39 Page 27 of 28 Revised Study Plan Preliminary Draft December 14,2012 Activity ID Activity Name Predecessors Successors $T1900 Initial Study Report $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into ST1910 Transportation Resource Study -Updated Study Report Prep on December 31,2013.$T1910 Updated Study Report Prep $T3300 Updated Study Report Health Impact Assessment Study (15.8) $T1920 Project Overview &issues Summary ST4720 Baseline Water Quality Study -Data Analysis &Management feeds into ST1930 Health Impact Assessment Study - Baseline Data Collection on February 1,2013. $T1930 Baseline Data Collection $T1170 River Recreation Flow and Access Study -Impact Analysis feeds into ST1930 Health Impact Assessment Study - Baseline Data Collection on July 1,2013. $T1940 Initial Study Report Prep $T1950 Initial Study Report ST3030 Subsistence Resources Study -Task 1-3,5:Prepare 2013 Study Report feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on December 31,2012. $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on December 31,2013. $T1840 Transportation Resources Study -Document Existing Conditions feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on August 31,2013. ST5470 Groundwater Study -Shallow Groundwater Users feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact ST1960 Impact Assessment Assessment on March 1,2013. $T1270 Air Quality Study -Initial Air Quality Study Report feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on December 31,2013. $T1620 Social Conditions &Public Goods &Services Study -Initial Social Conditions &Public Good &Services Study Report feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Assessment on December 31,2013. ST1980 Updated Study Report Prep $T2030 Updated Study Report Air Quality Study (15.9) $T1220 Review Existing Info/Identify Needs $T1240 Document Existing Conditions $T1250 Summarize Baseline Fossil Fuel Emissions ST1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into ST1270 Air Quality Study -Initial Air Quality Study $T1270 Air Quality Study -Initial Air Quality Study Report feeds into ST1960 Health Impact Assessment Study -Impact Report on December 1,2013.Assessment on December 31,2013. $T1270 Initial Air Quality Study Report $T1270 Air Quality Study -Initial Air Quality Study Report feeds into $T1210 Aesthetic Resources Study -Impact Analysis on December 31,2013. $T1280 Initial Study Report $T1870 Transportation Resources Study -Evaluate Impacts feeds into $T1290 Air Quality Study -Estimate Future $T1290 Estimate Future Emissions with/without Project |Emissions with/without Project on December 31,2013. $T1360 Updated Study Report Work ST3860 Updated Study Report Probable Maximum Flood Study (16.5) $T2300 Site-Specific PMF $T2310 initial Study Report $T2320 Updated Study Report Site Specific Seismic Hazard Study (16.6) $T2330 Field Program Deterministic &Probabilistic Seismic HazardST2350Assessment ST4630 Geology &Soils Characterization Study -Comprehensive Investigations (Dam Site &Reservoir Area)feeds into $T2360 Initial Study Report $T2360 Site Specific Seismic Hazard Study -Initial Study Report on September 30 ,2013. Fi $T2370 Updated Study Report Note:All dates in this table are estimates,subject to change.The dates and relationships,produced from Primavera Software,will be continually updated during study plan implementation. Attachment 2-1 Page 40 Page 28 of 28 REVISED STUDY PLAN 3.STUDIES NOT PROPOSED Under FERC's ILP regulations,if a prospective applicant does not adopt a requested study,it must provide an explanation of why the request was not adopted,with reference to the criteria set forth in 18 CFR §5.9(b).18 CFR §5.13(a).In total,licensing participants filed 52 formal study requests with FERC that adhered to the study request format set forth in FERC's regulations.As outlined in Section 2,AEA intends to perform studies relating to each of the study topics requested,except for one study request that is for a National-Level Economic Valuation Study. This section describes that study request and AEA's rationale for not adopting the study. 3.1.Requested Study Not Adopted in the RSP 3.1.1.Information Regarding Study Request Several licensing participants,including Natural Heritage Institute et al.,American Whitewater, Alaska Hydro Project,Alaska Survival,and Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives (collectively,Study Proponents),"*have submitted a proposed National-Level Economic Valuation Study (Proposed Study).The following three subsections provide information directly from the study requests and these extracts are taken directly from those study requests. 3.1.2.Requester's Description of Study Goals and Objectives The Proposed Study's objectives are stated as follows: "The study will identify and analyze the economic values associated with constructing and operating project compared to alternatives,including the no-action alternative,at the national scale.If it were to be licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),the proposed 700-foot-high Susitna River dam,with an installed capacity of 600 MW,will significantly change the hydrograph of the Susitna watershed for 220 miles upstream from its mouth at Cook Inlet and transform an unregulated river into a regulated one.The construction of the project will preclude,limit,or otherwise change the existing uses of the river and other extant attributes of the river and its watershed that people value.The study will obtain information to ascertain the value of the change from the proposed project is more or less than the value of an undammed watershed the no-action alternative and in the public interest.” 3.1.3.Relevant Resource Agency Management Goals The Proposed Study's relevant resource management goals are stated as follows: "The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service have stewardship responsibilities for public-trust fish and wildlife resources in the basin. '4 See Letter from Jan Konisberg,Natural Heritage Institute,et al.,to Kimberly D.Bose,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,at 4,Project No.14241-000 (filed May 31,2012);Letter from Thomas O'Keefe,American Whitewater,to Kimberly D.Bose,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,at 8,Project No.14241-000 (filed May 31,2012);Letter from Jan Konisberg,Alaska Hydro Project,et al.,to Kimberly D.Bose,Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,at 1,Project No.14241-000 (filed Nov.14,2012). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The resource management goal of the Fish and Wildlife Service is no net loss offish and wildlife resources,to conserve the nation's existing fish and wildlife and their habitats in the Susitna River Basin,and to prescribe fishways pertaining to this project pursuant to Section 18 of the Federal Power Act. National Marine Fisheries Service has jurisdiction over the nation's marine,estuarine and anadromous fishery resources,with the goal of maintaining native and natural aquatic communities for their intrinsic and ecological value and their benefits to people,including the authority to prescribe fishways pertaining to this project pursuant to Section 18 of the Federal Power Act. The applicant should confer with resources agencies,tribes,nongovernmental organizations to develop this study.” 3.1.4.Sponsor's Description of Existing Information and Need for Additional Information The Proposed Study's description of existing information and need for additional information is stated as follows: "The PAD (Section 4.12 "Socioeconomic Resources)contains no information relating to value of products and services that businesses,such as tourism and sport and commercial fisheries, extract from the existing ecosystem,which would be useful for designing the research instruments (e.g.surveys,focus groups)to ascertain the value that the broader American public (a statistically significant sample of the national population)places on the extant watershed in comparison to the changes to the watershed that would result from the proposed project. This information is necessary for the Commission to give equal consideration to non-power and power values.” 3.1.5.AEA's Rationale for Not Adopting the Proposed Study in the PSP Several organizations and individuals requested that the socioeconomic study plan address the economic value of environmental goods and services provided by the Susitna River system, including non-market benefits.In fact,the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study,as proposed by AEA in this RSP,includes analyses that will evaluate a number of the potential changes in the environmental goods and services derived from the river system and surrounding areas in dollar terms.That study will not,however,include a national level economic valuation study. As described below,AEA's proposed analyses address both market (e.g.jobs,revenue)and non- market (e.g.recreation,aesthetics)values.However,economic (i.e.,monetary)valuations of environmental goods and services are not required,nor may they be sufficient,in order for the positive value of the environmental assets of the Susitna River system to be given full and equal consideration in the licensing decision making process for the proposed Project. As some commenters noted,there are significant challenges and obstacles to the quantification of environmental values of river systems in dollar terms.Consequently,the environmental review will incorporate a variety of qualitative and quantitative measures of impacts to the physical, biological,and socioeconomic environment.These multiple measures will be obtained through Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN an array of biological,physical,socioeconomic,transportation,recreational,aesthetics, subsistence and cultural studies. As demonstrated below,this approach does not preclude the monetization of some impacts to environmental goods and services.Rather,a combination of monetized and non-monetized measures offers the advantage of bringing a wide range of insights to the licensing decision.In accordance with FERC guidelines and practice,the environmental review will focus on reasonably foreseeable significant impacts on the human environment;remote and highly speculative consequences will not be considered. Data Collection and Analysis for Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study The Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study proposed by AEA will use a variety of methods to derive estimates of the value of affected environmental goods and services, including goods and services that are not priced in conventional markets.Methods will be used to monetize the value of some goods and service,while the value of others will be expressed in qualitative terms. The proposed Project would not start operations until 2023 under the current schedule.The Project is anticipated to operate for more than 50 years,similar to other large hydroelectric developments around the world.Given the long time frame for construction of the Project and its operations,the Project's socioeconomic effects will be estimated by comparing future socioeconomic conditions with and without the Project. The forecast of socioeconomic conditions with and without the Project will be based in part on estimates derived from the REMI model described for the Regional Economic Analysis.While the REMI model provides a wide range of output variables,the variables of interest in the socioeconomic impact analysis for the proposed Project are population,employment,labor income,output (sales),and housing.The REMI model extends economic and demographic forecasts through 2060,which is consistent with the temporal scope of the socioeconomic impact analysis.The REMI model can provide projections for all of the boroughs and census areas within the Railbelt,including the MOA,FNSB,KPB,MSB,and Denali Borough.The current REMI model also includes the Yukon-Koyukuk Census Area and Valdez-Cordova Census Area. The forecast analysis performed by the REMI model will be guided by assumptions about reasonably foreseeable future actions that would have an important and measurable effect on Alaska's economy.As the Project design becomes more developed,specific requirements for the types of construction specialties (e.g.,firms with roller-compacted concrete experience)will be identified and compared with current expertise of regional construction companies to see which opportunities can be filled by Alaska firms.This evaluation would improve the model estimates of future economic activity,and provide recommendations to increase the percentage of these opportunities captured by Alaska businesses. Here is a summary description of other AEA efforts pertinent to the planned socioeconomics study that will evaluate a number of the potential changes in the environmental goods and services derived from the river system and surrounding areas in dollar terms. e The effect of potential immigration during Project construction and operations on municipal and state services,such as police,fire protection,medical facilities and schools,will be assessed.If projected immigration would potentially burden existing municipal and state services,proposed plans to alleviate this impact will be identified. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e A fiscal impact analysis will be conducted to evaluate incremental local government expenditures in relation to incremental local government revenues that would result from construction and operation of the Project.Incremental expenditures include,but are not limited to,school operating costs,road maintenance and repair,public safety,and public utility costs.Incremental revenues include,but are not limited to,property taxes and hotel/motel occupancy taxes. e Transportation of construction equipment and materials through communities on the transportation routes to and from the Project could result in increased traffic volumes,and associated noise and congestion effects.Such conditions might require additional police and emergency response calls for traffic accidents and other incidents.These impacts will be assessed based on the results of the Transportation Resources Study. e Utilizing the results of the Recreation and Aesthetics Study (Section 10),AEA will analyze the economic impact of the Project on local tourism establishments (e.g.,river sport fishing,whitewater boating)and the regional economy.Calculations will be based on information obtained from the recreation survey,including the estimated recreation- related expenditures per recreational day or trip and changes in the number of days or trips per year.Utilizing the results of the Subsistence Study (Section 12),the regional economic impact of changes in subsistence-related expenditures due to the proposed Project will be estimated.The approximate cash expenses to generate each pound of subsistence harvest will be based on information in Goldsmith (1998).Changes in spending for recreational or subsistence related goods and services will become inputs to the REMI model to calculate regional economic impacts. e The Project,including access roads,could affect surrounding property uses and values. These effects will be described identifying the properties that are on,or in close proximity to the Project area,including the access road(s)that will be built;determining the degree to which the use of the properties would change as a result of the Project;and estimating the extent that properties'values will change as a result of the change in use. e If Project features (i.e.,reservoir and access roads)stimulate residential location, spending by new residents in the local economy will generate new economic activity, including additional jobs and labor income.Interviews will be conducted with regional businesses to identify potential opportunities for residential development and estimate the economic impacts should this development occur. To the extent that Project construction and operations will change the level of production of commercial farming,grazing,logging,mining,and fishing operations,these effects will be approximated by the change in production multiplied by the market price of the resource in question.Information on the quantity and value of market-based natural resources is available through state and federal resource management agencies.Changes that result in increases or decreases in commercial resource extraction will become inputs to the REMI model to calculate regional economic impacts. e AEA will utilize random utility model combining existing data,recreation preference functions from the published literature and new data collected to estimate changes in recreational use values associated with sport fishing,sport hunting,boating,wildlife viewing,hiking,and camping in the study area.The basis of the method is the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN assumption that the recreational experience is enhanced by high quality sites (e.g.,clean water,abundant recreational fisheries),hence the net willingness to pay for-and value of-trecreational trips depends on site quality.Different model specifications can be used to value specific qualities of the resource and attributes of the recreational experience.To value these types of amenities,economists typically rely on a variant of the basic travel cost model referred to as a discrete choice or random utility model.In addition,the benefits transfer approach will be used to supplement or compare unit values (e.g.,value per-day of sport fishing)for recreational goods and services obtained from primary valuation methods.Benefits transfer involves the application of unit value estimates, functions,data,and/or models from one or more previously conducted valuation studies to estimate benefits associated with the resource under consideration (Black et al.1998). For example,an extensive number of previously conducted studies estimated the value of sport fishing in various regions of Alaska.Similarly,several existing reports estimated the value of Alaska wildlife. e The value of changes in subsistence activities in the study area will be estimated by applying a wage compensating differential model that examines tradeoffs between time spent on subsistence and cash employment (Duffield 1997).The advantage of latter method is that it captures the cultural and social value of participating in subsistence activities as well as the product value.It requires community-specific per capita income levels and subsistence harvest per capita data,both of which will be obtained from the subsistence survey conducted for the Subsistence study. Following the methodology of Braund and Lonner (1982),information on the values, attitudes,and lifestyle preferences of residents in the Talkeetna,Trapper Creek,and Cantwell areas will be collected through informal interviews with community residents, Matanuska-Susitna Borough officials,and other knowledgeable people.Interview questions will be oriented toward identifying how the Susitna River corridor and upper basin is used and valued by local residents to identify the importance of the various bio- physical aspects important to area residents.Once the types of Project-induced changes in riverine and basin resources are known,a further analysis will be undertaken to identify how such changes might alter the resources used and valued by area residents.The results of the Project effects on subsistence,recreation and transportation can be used to further evaluate the overall effects on the residents of the region. Proposed National-Level Economic Valuation By contrast,the Study Proponents request that AEA conduct a "National-Level Economic Valuation”study in order to "identify and analyze the economic values associated with constructing and operating project compared to alternatives,including the no-action alternative,at the national scale”[sic].'*AEA disagrees.AEA's proposed Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study is more than adequate and,as set out above,more closely tracks FERC's study request standards in 18 CFR §5.9. The Study Proponents reason that "[t]he requirement of the Federal Power Act (FPA)that FERC give equal consideration to non-power values affirms the Commission's duty to evaluate the '5 Comments ofAmerican Whitewater on the PAD,Scoping Document 1,and Study Requests,at 7 Docket No.P- 14241-000 (filed May 31,2012)(hereinafter,AWA Comments). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN trade-offs that would be involved in authorizing”the Project.'®The Study Proponents further argue that,"[t]o ensure a reliable comparison of all relevant values,the Commission should use economic valuation as a means of evaluating the trade-offs involved in the licensing action;an assessment of benefits and costs should be part of the information-set available to FERC indecidingamongalternatives.””” The Commission should reject this request.FERC has consistently found that the monetization of non-market goods and services is inadequate in the context of assessing non-power values under Sections 4(e)and 10(a)(1)of the FPA.As explained by the Commission in Great NorthernPaper,Inc.'®and City of Tacoma,Washington:"” The public-interest balancing of environmental and economic impacts cannot be done with mathematical precision,nor do we think our statutory obligation to weigh and balance all public interest considerations is served by trying to reduce it to a mere mathematical exercise.Where the dollar cost of enhancement measures,such as diminished power production,can be reasonably ascertained, we will do so.However,for non-power resources such as aquatic habitat,fish and wildlife,recreation,and cultural and aesthetic values,to name just a few,thepublicinterestcannotbeevaluatedadequatelyonlybydollarsandcents.”° In the context of public interest balancing for long-term authorizations,it is inappropriate to rely too heavily on the accuracy of current dollar estimates of nonpower resource values,calculated using any number of reasonably disputableassumptionsandmethods.” Specifically,the Study Proponents'request fails to meet the Commission's requirements for requesting additional information gathering and study requests under FERC's Integrated License Application Process.18 CFR §5.9(b)(6)requires that any information gathering or study requests be "consistent with generally accepted practice[s]in the scientific community ....” Economic valuation of non-developmental values,however,while obviously having some 16 Td at 8. "7 Tq 18 85 FERC §61,316 (1998),reconsideration denied,86 FERC {61,184 (1999),aff'd,Conservation Law Foundation v.FERC,216 F.3d 41 (D.C.Cir.2000)(nothing in the FPA requires the Commission to place a dollar value on nonpower benefits;nor does the fact that the Commission assigned dollar figures to the licensee's economic costs require it to do the same for nonpower benefits.).See also,Namekegon Hydro Co.,12 FPC 203,206 (1953), aff'd,Namekegon Hydro Co.v.FPC,216 F.2d 509 (7th Cir.1954)(when unique recreational or other environmental values are present such as here,the public interest cannot be evaluated adequately only by dollars and cents);and Eugene Water &Electric Board,81 FERC {61,270 (1997),aff'd,American Rivers v.FERC,187 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir.1999)(rejecting request for economic valuation of environmental resources that were the subject of 10(j) recommendations). 19 84 FERC 4 61,107 (1998),order on reh'g,86 FERC 4 61,311 (1999),City of Tacoma v.FERC,460 F.3d 53 (D.C. Cir.2006). 20 85 FERC at p.62,244-245. 21 84 FERC at pp.61,571-72. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN support,is not generally accepted within the scientific community.”Further,the Study Proponents have not demonstrated why a national economic valuation study is necessary under18CFR§5.9(a)(7)to augment or supplant FERC's NEPA evaluation of the Project's impactsonaesthetics,cultural,and socioeconomic resources,among others.”*The Study Proponents argue that FERC's proposal is inadequate because it will only assess the regional,as opposed to the national impacts of the Project.On this point,AEA strongly disagrees.FERC's inquiry under the FPA focuses on the waterway as a starting point and extends to reasonably connected interests in a manner consistent with the revised plan for the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study.There is simply no support for the Study Proponents'assertion that public- interest balancing of environmental and economic impacts requires a national perspective to weigh and balance all public interest considerations consistent with FERC's statutory obligations under FPA. Finally,the Proposed Study does not meet criteria (6)and (7)of 18 CFR §5.9 by failing todescribethemethodologytoimplementtheproposedstudy”and by ignoring the requirement todescribeeitherthelevelofeffortandcost,as applicable,of the Proposed Study”®and not addressing how or why the proposed Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Studywouldnotbesufficienttomeetthestatedinformationneeds.”'It is well settled that contingentvaluesurveysareexpensive,subject to bias*®and even "[s]tudies conducted in controlled experimental settings suggest that ...contingent valuation ...methods may overestimatevalues”'producing "implausible”results*'that fail by trying to reduce FERC's public interest test to a mere mathematical exercise.The proposed National-Level Economic Valuation study should not be adopted. 22 See,e.g.,Steven Shavell,Contingent Valuation:A Critical Assessment at 372 (1993)."Contingent valuation should not now be used to attempt to measure nonuse values of natural resources,either in public decision making or in liability assessment.In these contexts,society is likely to be better off not seeking to estimate nonuse values with contingent valuation because of the serious problems that this would engender.” ?3 18 CFR 5.9(a)(7)provides that "[a]ny information or study request must ...[dJescribe considerations of level of effort and cost,as applicable,and why any proposed alternative studies would not be sufficient to meet the stated information needs.” 4 See Scoping Document 1 for Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project,Docket No P-14241-000 at §§4.2.7-9 (filed Feb.2 2012). 25 AWA Comments at 9 "We describe the necessary elements of the study ...but do not explain how the study would be designed and implemented.” 26 AWA states only that "the level of effort is significant,as the study will likely require focus groups and survey instruments.”AWA Comments at 11.American Whitewater ignores cost projections entirely. 27 AWA does not address the revised plan for the Social Conditions and Public Goods and Services Study,but only generally states that a regional study is not appropriate for the project. 28 Peter A.Diamond,and Jerry A.Hausman,Contingent Valuation:Is Some Number Better than No Number?, Journal of Economic Perspectives,Volume 8,Number 4,Fall 1994,pp 45-64 at 45,46. ?°National Research Council,Committee on Assessing and Valuing Aquatic and Related Terrestrial Ecosystems, Valuing Ecosystem Services:Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making,2004,at 122. 3°Kenneth Arrow et alia,Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation,1993 at 12,13. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 3-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 4.GEOLOGY AND SOILS This study plan will review the existing information on the Susitna-Watana Project (Project)area regarding geology and soils and gather additional information in order to define the geologic, geotechnical,seismic,and foundation conditions at the sites of Project works (e.g.,dam, reservoir,access road and T-Line corridors,construction camps,and materials borrow sites). This information will be used to support development of the Project design,with an emphasis on minimizing risks to dam safety.In general,the study tasks will include field investigations, laboratory testing,instrumentation,review of existing studies,studies and assessments,use of digital imagery,and engineering analyses to characterize the conditions,limitations,and constraints for the Susitna-Watana Project in the Project area.The study will also identify impacts of Project construction and operation,such as reservoir impoundment,thawing of frozen soils and bedrock,soil erosion along the reservoir rim,slope stability,excavation,and spoil disposal,on environmental resources. 4.1.Introduction A Susitna Hydroelectric Project was proposed by the Alaska Power Authority (now the Alaska Energy Authority [AEA])in the early 1980s.That project was to be composed of two major dams (the Watana Dam and Devils Canyon Dam)constructed in three stages.A draft Environmental Impact Statement was prepared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),but the application was subsequently withdrawn.The current proposed Project dam is located at river mile (RM)184,the same location as that of the previously proposed Watana Dam. The Project is anticipated to include a high concrete arch dam constructed using roller- compacted concrete (RCC)construction methods.The Project will also include a large reservoir, a spillway,cofferdams,diversion tunnels,integrated penstocks and powerhouse,construction and permanent housing,borrow and quarry areas,transmission lines,access roads,and staging and stockpile areas.Each of these features will have an impact on,or will be impacted by, geology and soils over the course of design,construction,and operation of the Project. 4.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied The soil and geological characteristics of the Project area will affect Project design,construction, operation,and maintenance because the Project facility foundations are integral to the soil and rock features of the area and also will serve as raw materials for some Project components.Also, Project design,construction,and operation,including the dam and reservoir,access road, transmission line,and construction camp/village,may affect geological resources by exposing soils and rock to new surface erosional forces,could change the stability of soil and rock slopes, change river sediment load,trigger seismic events earlier,and/or the reservoir could impound potential mineral resources,if present. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Considerations of geology and soil conditions in planning for Project construction,operation, and maintenance will include,but are not limited to the following: e Proper disposal of spoils from the excavations. e Geologic features in the foundation that may require additional excavation and foundation treatment. e Identification of poor rock conditions or the presence of geologic features in the diversion tunnel excavation that may require support and/or lining (e.g.,type and thickness). e Design of rock cut-slopes on the right abutment,particularly in the downstream portal area. Identification of seismic sources and design of structures for seismic loading. Ice-filled discontinuities in the rock foundation beneath and in the abutments of the dam. Design of cut-off walls in the cobble and boulder alluvium beneath the cofferdams. Road,transmission tower footing,or camp foundation design to address subsidence due to poor soil conditions or thawing soil. e Triggering of seismic events in the reservoir proper due to load of the reservoir on the landscape. e Reservoir sedimentation due to glacial melt and possible surging glacier event. e Changes to sediment load in the tailwater,downstream of the proposed dam. e Stability of reservoir slopes due to mass wasting potential,thawing permafrost,and higher pore pressures. Potential impact mechanisms for soils and geologic features are as follows: e Soil erosion from slope instability along the reservoir rim due to presence of fine-grained soils and thawing permafrost (discontinuous). Seismic activity due to the deep,large reservoir. Changes to river channel geomorphology based on reservoir operation. Seepage through abutments just upstream of the dam causing piping and soil erosion. Soil erosion and slope instability along access road cuts and stream/creek crossings. Impoundment of mineral resources. 4.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives No Alaskan Native resource management goals have been identified other than the provisions identified under the Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)dealing with provision of access to mineral resources.FERC's regulations require the Exhibit E environmental document to include a detailed description of the project's impacts on affected resources,including the information included in the Pre-Application Document (PAD)and developed under the applicant's approved study plan (18 CFR 5.18(b)(5)@i)(A)).The PAD must include a description of the geology and soils "of the proposed project and surrounding area”and a description of "mineral resources at the project site”(18 CFR 5.6(d)(3)(ii)(A)).The environmental analysis must also include an evaluation of beneficial and adverse effects of the proposed project on affected resources and mitigation measures if appropriate (18 CFR 5.18(b)(5)(ii)(B)and (C)).FERC's Scoping Document 2 (SD2)states that its Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)will include evaluation of the "effects of project construction and operation on access to proven or probable mineral deposits”(SD2,Section 4.2.1).FERC's Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN regulations also require the License Application to include Exhibit F,the supporting design report to show that the project structures are safe and adequate to fulfill their stated functions (18 CFR 5,18(a)(5)(ii)and 4.41(g)(3)). 4.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants Specific consultation regarding geology and soils study planning has been limited to informal discussion with the Alaska Department of Natural Resources,Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys,during 2011 as part of planning the geotechnical and seismic investigations for the Project and the Alaska Earthquake Information Center for monitoring and detection of local earthquakes in the state seismograph network.Soil erosion and the potential for reservoir sedimentation and other issues have been discussed in Technical Workgroup (TWG)meetings,and the aquatic aspects of sediments are being addressed in the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5).In FERC's May 31,2012 filing of requests for studies and comments on preliminary study plan,a geology and soils assessment study was requested.In addition,Cook Inlet Region,Inc.(CIRI)has submitted a study request (filed May 30,2012)for a minerals resource assessment that states that "CIRI owns or is entitled to receive conveyance of significant subsurface interests with the area that would be affected by the proposed Project.” Both the FERC and CIRI study requests correspond to AEA's proposed geology and soils characterization study,and through this study plan AEA is attempting to meet the expectations and objectives of those study requests. Summary tables of comments and responses from formal comment letters filed with FERC through November 14,2012 are provided in Appendix 1.Copies of the formal FERC-filed comment letters are included in Appendix 2.In addition,a single comprehensive summary table of comments and responses from consultation,dated from Proposed Study Plan (PSP filing) (July 16,2012)through release of Interim Draft RSPs,is provided in Appendix 3.Copies of relevant informal consultation documentation are included in Appendix 4,grouped by resource area. 4.5.Geology and Soils Characterization Study 4.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study The overall goals of this study are to conduct a geology and soils evaluation to define the existing geological conditions at the dam site,reservoir,and access and T-line corridors,and to develop design criteria to ensure that the proposed Project facilities and structures will be safe and adequate to fulfill their stated functions.The general objectives of the study plan are as follows: e Identify the existing soil and geology at the proposed construction site,reservoir area, and access and T-line corridors. e Determine the potential effects of Project construction,operation,and maintenance activities on the geology and soil resources (including mineral resources)in the Project area including identification and potential applicability of protection,mitigation,and enhancement (PM&E)measures. e Identify known mineral resources and mineral potential of the Project area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Acquire soils and geologic information for the Project area for use in the preparation of a supporting design report that demonstrates that the proposed structures are safe and adequate to fulfill their stated functions. The field investigation activities for each season will be coordinated with resource agencies and ANCSA Corporation landowners.Geotechnical Exploration Program Work Plans (Work Plans) will be developed that outline the field programs and information needed for submitting applications and obtaining land access permits from applicable agencies and ANCSA Corporation landowners.The Work Plans will identify known impacts to geology and soil resources in the Project area,including the dam,reservoir,and access and T-line corridors. FERC regulations require "evaluation of unconsolidated deposits,and mineral resources at the project site”(18 CFR 5.6(d)(3)Gi)(A)).For the Exhibit E,AEA must provide a report on the geological and soil resources in the proposed Project area and other lands that would be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed action and the impacts of the proposed Project on those resources.This study report will provide the basis of the information needed for the Exhibit E. 4.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Extensive field investigations and studies were undertaken during the 1970s and 1980s for the Watana Dam Site to characterize the geologic,seismic,and foundation conditions for a different type of dam (earthfill embankment)with a much larger footprint and a higher normal mean reservoir operating level. These studies included the following: e Regional mapping of surficial deposits (rock and soil)using aerial photography and geologic reconnaissance (Acres 1982b). e Studies of reservoir slope stability (Acres 1982a,1982b). Subsurface explorations through geophysical surveys,borings,test pits,and trenches (USACE 1975,1979;Acres 1982b,1982c;Harza-Ebasco 1983,1984). e Preliminary evaluations of borrow and quarry sites (USACE 1979;Acres 1982b,1982c). In situ hydraulic testing and downhole geophysical surveys of rock and soil (Acres 1982b,1982c;Harza-Ebasco 1983,1984). e Instrumentation (groundwater and ground temperature observations and monitoring [USACE 1979;Acres 1982b,1982c;Harza-Ebasco 1983,1984]). e Laboratory testing of physical properties of rock and soil (USACE 1979;Acres 1982b, 1982c;Harza-Ebasco 1983,1984). e Site-specific seismic hazard evaluations,including lineament,fault and ground motion evaluations;monitoring of local seismic events (WCC 1980,1982). e Evaluation of reservoir induced seismicity (RIS)(WCC 1982). Geology and soil resources (Harza-Ebasco 1985). In summary,the following geotechnical investigations and testing were performed prior to 1986 and in 2011-2012: e Geologic interpretation (e.g.,terrain unit mapping)and seismic source identification using aerial photography and satellite imagery. e Geologic mapping of dam site and reservoir areas. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Drilling at the dam site,construction materials source areas,geologic features (i.e.,relict channel near dam site),proposed permanent camp/village,access road corridor,etc. Instrumentation monitoring (groundwater and ground temperature). e Seismic refraction surveys,wih some electrical resistivity and ground-penetrating radar (GPR)surveys. e Test trenches and pits (Borrow Areas D,E,I,J). e Site-specific seismic hazard investigations and evaluations. e Trenching of lineaments and faults. For this study,the existing information,coupled with new field investigations and studies, geologic mapping,and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)and Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR)imagery data,will provide specific information on the properties of Project-site-specific rock and soil units that would be affected by the newly proposed Project. 4.5.3.Study Area The study area will include the dam site area,reservoir area,construction material sources, tailwater downstream of the dam,access road and transmission line corridors,airport facilities, and construction camp and permanent village sites (Figure 1.2-1). 4.5.4.Study Methods The study of geology and soils resources for supporting licensing and detailed design will include a number of components: e Develop an understanding of geologic and foundation conditions for the dam site area and specifically for each of the surface and underground components of the Project. e Evaluate abutment stability. e Develop an understanding and characterize the geology and soil resources in the Project area (dam and reservoir areas and access and T-line corridors. e Evaluate the mineral resource potential in the impoundement area,reservoir area up to approximately elevation 2,075 feet,and dam and camp facilities area. e Evaluate major geologic features,rock structure,weathering/alteration zones,etc.in the dam site and reservoir areas. e Delineate and characterize construction material sources for the dam and appurtenant structures,access road,transmission line,and construction camp. e Evaluate the surficial geology,mass wasting features,and potential thawing of localized permafrost on reservoir slope stability. e Seismic source characterization,site-specific ground motion evaluation,and probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (see Section 16). e Evaluate reservoir leakage and piping. Study methods are discussed below. Review of Project Documentation The existing documentation from the 1970s and 1980s will be brought into geo-referenced, geotechnical databases to build new information on the earlier studies in digital formats. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Regional Geologic Analysis and Mineral Resources Assessment Existing published information,air photo interpretation and reconnaissance mapping,and new LiDAR survey data will be used to:(1)update information about the geology at the proposed Project and in the surrounding area,including surficial and bedrock geology,geologic structure, seismicity and tectonics,mass wasting,and mineral resources;(2)determine siting of Project components or structures;(3)identify geologic features of significance;and (4)assess potential impacts and potential mitigation measures to address impacts (e.g.,erosion)on geology and soil resources and Project construction.A survey of the mineral resources will be performed to assess proven and probable mineral resources potential and mining activity in the impoundment area using existing data.The impoundment area is the area where access to mineral resources may be affected by the Project.In addition to the impoundment area,the road and transmission corridors will be evaluated for potential quarry and aggregate sites and known mineral deposits to identify if access to mineral resources may be adversely or beneficially affected by the Project. The survey will entail mapping of known mineral deposits,identification of likely areas of mineral resources,plus field reconnaissance of selected areas of high mineral potential,review of area mining claims,and analysis of mineral potential from borings and other sampling work done for the dam and other facilities ongoing geotechnical investigations.AEA will consult with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)and the U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)on this study plan to determine that appropriate methods and evaluation techniques are used for the mineral resource investigation. Recently-acquired LiDAR and InSAR data in the region will be used to identify lineaments of faults for evaluation of activity and Project significance.Field reconnaissance,geologic mapping,and subsurface investigations,if necessary,will be performed and the data will be used to update the seismic source characterization,site-specific ground motion evaluations,and probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA)(see Section 16). Geologic and Geotechnical Investigation and Testing Program Development The development of a geologic and geotechnical exploration and testing program Work Plan for completion of geologic field studies for final design and ultimately for construction will be undertaken.Based on review of the existing data including previous geologic mapping, subsurface investigations,and laboratory testing from the 1970s and 1980s,and recent studies (2011-2012),additional investigations and testing will be conducted as described below: e Delineate and characterize geology and soil resources including geologic features,rock structure,weathering/alteration zones. e Undertake physical and chemical testing,as well as petrographic analysis,to characterize the geology and soils materials,as appropriate. e Evaluate lineaments and faults relative level of activity and significance to site-specific ground motion evaluations for the Project. e Delineate and characterize construction material sources for the dam and appurtenant structures,access road,and construction camp. e Determine the effects of discontinuous permafrost on the dam foundation and abutments relative to foundation treatment,grouting,and drainage,as well as reservoir slope stability and access road and T-line construction. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Evaluate the effect of Project features on permafrost and periglacial features (thawing of permafrost),as well as the impact of these features on permanent structures,work camps, temporary construction areas,road corridors,transmission lines,etc. e Evaluate the need for,and potential sources of,borrow for ancillary facilities including upland structures,access roads,and transmission lines. e Evaluate potential waste stockpiles and storage sites including plans to help reduce the impact of these facilities on adjacent areas. Evaluate plans and methods for the reclamation of borrow area and quarry sites. Evaluate the Project's impact on access to geologic resources (mineral resources)by reviewing existing state and federal databases,as well as readily available geologic maps and surveys. e Conduct a preliminary evaluation of the effect of soils composition in the Project area on construction,operation,and maintenance of the proposed Project. e Evaluate potential reservoir leakage on the right abutment just upstream of the dam site (e.g.,relict channel). e Establish seismic monitoring stations in the Project area to augment the stations in the Alaska Earthquake Information Center network to monitor and detect any local earthquakes. Field Geologic and Geotechnical Investigations Geologic and geotechnical field investigations will be carried out in phases (2011-2015)with portions of that work contributing to the report on geology and soils in 2013 and updates in 2014. The geotechnical investigations and testing undertaken as part of the Project feasibility and design effort will include geologic mapping,drilling,sampling and in situ testing,test trenches, pump tests,test adit,laboratory testing,instrumentation monitoring,etc.Initial and limited geologic exploration and testing programs were undertaken in the 2011-2012 seasons to investigate the dam foundation and a new quarry site for concrete aggregate material,installation and monitoring of geotechnical instrumentation,and reconnaissance geologic mapping. Reservoir-Triggered Seismicity Seismic evaluations are being undertaken for the Project under a separate study (see Section 16) and will include installation of a long-term earthquake monitoring system.The Geology and Soils and Seismic Characterization Studies would contribute information to that study. Reservoir Slope Stability Study An assessment will be made of reservoir rim stability based on the geologic conditions in the reservoir area,particularly in the reservoir drawdown zone.Geologic information from the previous study on reservoir slope stability (Acres 1982a)as well as LIDAR imagery,geologic mapping,field investigations,and instrumentation monitoring will be used to assess the stability concerns of the reservoir rim area.Key factors in this study are the planned reservoir level and anticipated range of drawdown,rock and soil type and conditions,presence of permafrost, topography,and slope aspect and conditions. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Geologic and Engineering Analyses The analysis will identify and evaluate construction material sources to provide adequate quantities for construction,suitable alignments and foundation design for the access road, construction,permanent camps,and transmission lines;and identify re-use of excavated materials and/or disposal areas.The study will also assess the soil erosion potential along the transmission and road corridors,along with other effects of design and construction on geology and soils,and identify the suitability of measures to reduce and mitigate impacts. Additionally,a number of geologic,seismic,and engineering analyses will be undertaken to develop the geologic model and to assess foundation design,abutment stability,seepage and piping potential,slope stability,ground motion evaluations,and site-specific probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the dam site area.The study will also identify impacts and measures to mitigate impacts to geology and soil resources. 4.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice Studies,field investigations,laboratory testing,engineering analysis,etc.will be performed in accordance with general industry accepted scientific and engineering practices.The methods and work efforts outlined in this study plan are the same or consistent with analyses used by applicants and licensees and relied upon by FERC in other hydroelectric licensing proceedings. 4.5.6.Schedule The proposed study includes a limited field investigation program in 2012 for interpretation of digital imagery,reconnaissance geologic mapping,drilling,paleoseismic or lineament analysis, installation of a long-term earthquake monitoring system,assessment of slope stability for the reservoir rim,and reservoir triggered seismicity study.For 2013-2015,comprehensive investigations will focus on the dam site,reservoir area,and access road and transmission line corridors.Initial and Updated Study Reports explaining actions taken and information collected to date will be issued within 1 and 2 years,respectively,of FERC's Study Plan Determination (i.e.,February 1,2013).Updates on the study progress will be provided during Technical Workgroup meetings which will be held quarterly in 2013 and 2014. The primary activities and planned schedule are shown in Table 4.5-1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 4.5-1.Schedule for implementation of the Geology and Soils Study. 2012 2013 2014 2015 Activity 1Q 2Q |3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q/3Q 4Q 1Q Geo-Reference 1980s Investigations Regional Geologic and Mineral Assessment Field Investigations Geology and Soils Mapping Reservoir Slope Stability Analysis Initial Study Report L_A Follow-on Investigations as Needed Updated Study Report Legend: --Planned Activity ---Follow-up activity (as needed) A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report 4.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies The Geology and Soils Study will provide information that will be used in several other studies, as shown in Figure 4.5-1.The geology and soils mapping will be important to complete in 2013 to provide the baseline spatial data to the cultural and botanical resources studies.The reservoir slope stability analysis will take place in 2013,which will then feed into the geomorphology study using the initial reconnaissance-level information as input into the geomorphology analysis. 4.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost The study plan will involve a phased,multiple-year approach that will include field investigations from 2012 through 2015 with associated studies and engineering analysis.The estimated level of effort is estimated to be in excess of 4,500 hours plus expenses.The total cost of the study will be between an estimated $1,000,000 and $1,500,000.This work is part of a much larger geotechnical investigation program for the Project that will be undertaken through the engineering design activities. 4.5.9.Literature Cited Acres.1982a.Reservoir Slope Stability and Erosion Studies,Closeout Report.Final Draft. Prepared for Alaska Power Authority. Acres.1982b.Susitna Hydroelectric Project 1980-81 Geotechnical Report,Volumes 1 through 3.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority. Acres.1982c.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,1982 Supplement to the 1980-81 Geotechnical Report.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-9 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Harza-Ebasco.1983.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Watana Development,1983 Geotechnical Exploration Program.Volumes 1 and 2. Harza-Ebasco.1984.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,1984 Geotechnical Exploration Program, Watana Dam Site.Final Report,Document 1734,Volumes 1 through 3. Harza-Ebasco.1985.Susitna Hydroelectric Project Draft License Application.Volume 12 Exhibit E Chapter 6.Geologic and Soil Resources. USACE (U.S.Army Corps of Engineers).1975.Hydroelectric Power and Related Purposes, Southcentral Railbelt Area,Alaska Upper Susitna River Basin.Department of the Army, Alaska District,Corps of Engineers.December 12,1975. USACE.1979.Hydroelectric Power and Related Purposes,Supplemental Feasibility Report, Southcentral Railbelt Area,Alaska Upper Susitna River Basin.Department of the Army, Alaska District,Corps of Engineers.February 1979. WCC (Woodward-Clyde Consultants Inc.).1980.Interim Report on Seismic Studies for Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Prepared for Acres American,Inc. WCC.1982.Final Report on Seismic Studies for Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Prepared for Acres American,Inc. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-10 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 4.5.10.Figures Study Interdependencies for Geology &Soils Study Engineering Studies Layouts/Con- figurations 10-2013 Facility Predecessor Studies Predecessor information (quarter-year) This Study's activities Figure 4.5-1.Interdependencies for Geology and Soils Study. Output InformationMinerals.Poe AreasiIdentification..Geologt Potential and Soils &Rock of Faulte&,||Susceptible to (going to to other 2013 Current Uses 30-2013 Lineaments ]|WS"E92 |studies)30-2013 \!4Q-2013 Paleontological Vegetation &Project Design Site-Specific Geomorphology Name of StudyResourcesWildlifeHabitat&Resource Seismic Hazard Study information Goes to uay ji Plan udyMs .study”Output Study Title Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-11 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.WATER QUALITY 5.1.Introduction Construction and operation of the Susitna-Watana Project (Project)will change the Susitna River reach inundated by the Project reservoir,as well as portions of the drainage down-gradient. Changes will include flow,water depth,surface water elevation,water chemistry,channel characteristics,and sediment deposition.The potential effects of the Project need to be carefully evaluated as part of the licensing process because changes to these parameters may adversely affect aquatic and riparian habitat quality,which can in turn affect fish populations,riparian- dependent species,and recreation opportunities along the river corridor. This section of the RSP describes the water quality studies that will be conducted to characterize and evaluate these effects.These studies will be subject to revision and refinements with input from licensing participants as part of the continuing study program identified in the (Integrated Licensing Process (ILP).The impact assessments will inform development of any protection, mitigation,and enhancement measures to be presented in the draft and final License Applications,as appropriate.A glossary of commoly used terms and acronyms is included in Attachment 5-4. Water quality studies each generate data that will be used to assess current conditions,calibrate a predictive water quality model,and assess presence and potential impact of toxics (e.g.,mercury) on aquatic life.The three water quality studies are integrated by using products from each (e.g., water quality data,predicted water quality conditions under various operational scenarios,and evaluation of potential toxics effects on aquatic life)and then combined to assess potential for water quality impacts from an ecosystem perspective.Objectives described for Study Plan 5.5 (Baseline Water Quality Monitoring),Study Plan 5.6 (Water Quality Modeling),and Study Plan 5.7 (Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation)reflect the focus on establishing a baseline description of pre-dam water quality and evaluation of water quality conditions and impacts during a post-dam period. 5.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied As discussed above,the Project will change elements of the physical environment,which in turn will affect other resources (riparian communities,biological resources,recreational opportunities).Having a clear understanding of Project effects on water quality allow a better analysis of impacts to the physical environment within the Susitna River corridor,which will be critical to the environmental analysis of the Project. 5.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives Water quality in Alaska is regulated by a number of state and federal regulations.This includes the federal Clean Water Act (CWA),and the State of Alaska Title 18,Chapter 70,of the Alaska Administrative Code (18 AAC 70).Aquatic resources including fish and their habitats,and wildlife resources,are generally protected by a variety of state and federal mandates.In addition, various land management agencies,local jurisdictions,and non-governmental interest groups Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-12 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN have specific goals related to their land management responsibilities or special interests.These goals are expressed in various statutes,plans,and directives. In addition to providing information needed to characterize the potential Project effects,these water resources studies will inform the evaluation of possible conditions for inclusion in the Project license.These studies are designed to meet Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)licensing requirements and also to be relevant to recent,ongoing,and/or planned resource management activities by other agencies. 5.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants These study plans have been modified in response to comments from various agency reviewers, including the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS);the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC);and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).Consultation on the study plan occurred during licensing participant meetings on April 6,2012,and during the June 14,2012 Water Resources Technical Workgroup (TWG)meeting.At the June 2012 TWG meeting,study requests and comments from the various licensing participants were presented and discussed,and refinements were determined to address agreed-upon modifications to the draft study plans.Additional comments were received during the August 17 and October 23,2012 TWG meetings. Summary tables of comments and responses from formal comment letters filed with FERC through November 14,2012,are provided in RSP Appendix 1.Copies of the formal FERC-filed comment letters are included in RSP Appendix 2.In addition,a single comprehensive summary table of comments and responses from consultation,dated from Proposed Study Plan (PSP)filing (July 16,2012)through release of Interim Draft RSPs,is provided in RSP Appendix 3.Copies of relevant informal consultation documentation are included in RSP Appendix 4,grouped by resource area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.Baseline Water Quality Study 5.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study The collective goal of the water quality studies is to assess the effects of the proposed Project and its operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin,which will inform development of any appropriate conditions for inclusion in the Project license.The Project is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage once the dam is in place as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir. The objectives of the Baseline Water Quality Study are as follows: e Document historical water quality data and combine with data generated from this study. The combined data set will be used in the water quality modeling study to predict Project impacts under various operations (Section 5.6). e Add three years of current stream temperature and meteorological data to the existing data.An effort will be made to collect continuous water temperature data year-round, with the understanding that records may be interrupted by equipment damage during river floods,ice formation around the monitoring devices,ice break-up and physical damage to the anchoring devices,or removal by unauthorized visitors to a site. e Develop a monitoring program to adequately characterize surface water physical, chemical,and bacterial conditions in the Susitna River within and downstream of the proposed Project area. e Measure baseline metals concentrations in sediment and fish tissue for comparison to state criteria. e Perform a pilot thermal imaging assessment of a portion (between Talkeetna and Devils Canyon)of the Susitna River.Discussion of thermal refugia data collection is located in Section 5.5.4.9. 5.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Historical water quality data available for the study area includes water temperature data,some general water quality data,and limited metals data primarily collected during the 1980s (URS 2011).Additional data has been recently collected by the U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)at limited mainstem Susitna sites describing flow,in situ,general,and metals parameters.The following is a summary of existing water quality data: Lower Susitna from Cook Inlet to the Susitna -Chulitna -Talkeetna confluence (River Mile 0- 98) e Large amounts of data were collected in this reach during the 1980s.Very little data are available that describe current water quality conditions. e Metals data are not available for the mouth of the Chulitna River.The influence of major tributaries (Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers)on Susitna River water quality conditions is unknown.There are no monitoring stations in receiving water at these mainstem locations. e Metals data are not available for the Skwentna River or the Yentna River. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-14 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Continuous temperature data,general water quality data,and metals data are not available for the Susitna River mainstem and sloughs potentially used for spawning and rearing habitat. Middle Susitna River and tributaries from the Susitna -Chulitna-Talkeetna confluence to the mouth of Devils Canyon (River Mile 98-150) e The source(s)for metals detected at high concentrations in the mainstem Susitna River is unknown. e Current data reflects large spatial data gaps between the upper river and the mid to lower portions of the river. e Continuous temperature data are not available for the Susitna River mainstem,tributary, and sloughs potentially used for spawning and rearing. Middle Susitna River from Devils Canyon to the proposed Watana Dam site (River Mile 150- 184) e Temperature data are not available above and below most tributaries on the mainstem Susitna River. e Overall,very limited surface water data are available for this reach. Metals monitoring data do not exist or are limited. e Concentrations of metals in sediment immediately below the proposed Project are unknown.Metals in these sediments may become mobile once the Project begins operation. e Monitoring of Susitna River mainstem and sloughs (ambient conditions and metals)is needed for determining the potential for metal bioaccumulation in fishes. Upper Susitna River including headwaters and tributaries above the proposed Watana Dam site (River Mile 184-313) e Surface water and sediment analysis for metals are not available for the Susitna River mainstem,only for one tributary. e Information on concentrations of metals in media and current water quality conditions is needed to predict if toxics can be released in a reservoir environment. e Continuous temperature data are not available for Susitna River mainstem,tributary,and sloughs potentially used for spawning and rearing. Overall e Limited fish tissue sampling has been performed in the Susitna River by ADEC and USGS (ADEC 2012;Frenzel 2000). A large-scale assessment of water quality conditions throughout the Susitna River drainage has not been completed.The proposed overall assessment will be used to establish background water quality parameters.This need was identified in the Data Gap Analysis for Water Quality (URS 2011). Water temperature monitoring was primarily done in the middle river portion of the Project area during the 1980s.The purpose for collection of this data was to model post-dam temperature conditions and to predict the potential for impact on thermal refugia for fish downstream of the proposed dam site.An expanded network of continuous temperature monitoring data and water Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-15 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN quality data (including sediment,surface water,and potentially pore water)collection is required _for the Project because of the following: e More information is needed to define existing thermal refugia throughout the Susitna drainage. e Limited information is available on natural,background conditions for water quality. e [tis unknown if seasonal patterns exist for select water quality parameters. Additional information is required for calibrating the water quality model to be used (Section 5.6).More recent water quality data will be used for predicting reservoir conditions and predicting riverine conditions downstream of the proposed dam. The current proposal includes expansion of the temperature monitoring effort from river mile (RM)15.1 to 233.4,encompassing both the lower end of the riverine portion of the Project area and above the proposed area of inundation by the reservoir.Monitoring sites are located at the same sites characterized during the 1980s studies,as well as at additional sites.Monitoring of areas of the mainstem Susitna River or tributaries with high metals concentrations or temperature measurements (based on the Data Gap Analysis for Water Quality (URS 2011)will confirm previous observations and will describe the persistence of any water quality exceedances that might exist. Locations in the mainstem Susitna River and tributaries where high metals concentrations were historically identified in surface water lack sediment analysis data to determine potential sources that can be mobilized.The linkage between sediment sources,mobilization into the water column (dissolved form),and the potential for bioaccumulation in fish tissue presents a potential human health concern with respect to mercury contamination.The consumption of mercury in fish tissue will be addressed by co-locating a limited number of surface water,sediment,and fish tissue monitoring sites (and sampling events)where there is the greatest likelihood for bioaccumulation.The proposed Project may have the potential to exacerbate bioaccumulation of toxics beyond that occurring under current conditions.The initial monitoring will identify select monitoring locations and media (e.g.,surface water,pore water,and sediment)for sampling and suggest the need for more detailed,site-specific sampling if a potential risk from bioaccumulation is found. The available historical data are not continuous over time or over spatial areas of the Susitna drainage.The discontinuities in the data record limit the opportunity for conducting a complete assessment of current water quality conditions that define natural background,the spatial extent of higher than expected concentrations of metals (and select parameters),and identification of source and timing of pollutant entry into the Susitna drainage.The expanded data record beyond existing information will be used to develop a model of the proposed reservoir and for evaluating water quality changes in the existing riverine system resulting from reservoir operations. 5.5.3.Study Area The study area for water quality monitoring includes the Susitna River from RM 15.1 to RM 233.4,and select tributaries within the proposed transmission lines and access corridors.Water quality and water temperature data loggers were installed at 33 of 39 sites identified in Table 5.5- 1 and Figure 5.5-1 as part of the 2012 Baseline Water Quality Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-16 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.4.Study Methods The Baseline Water Quality Study has several components that address needs for water quality modeling and for detecting the location and magnitude of water quality issues.The proposed water quality monitoring locations and water quality parameter list fill in substantial data gaps throughout the project area from historical data collected beginning 1975 through 2003 (URS 2011).Besides the utility of water quality data in calibrating the water quality model, establishment of a comprehensive baseline of water quality descriptions will be useful for comparison to historical water quality data and future scenarios based on model predictions and with future data collection. Data will be collected from multiple aquatic media including surface water,sediment,and fish tissue.Continuous temperature monitoring will inform the predictive model on how the mainstem river and tributaries will respond to Project operations and if changes in water quality conditions could affect aquatic life use and survival in the Project area.In addition,several other requirements of the 401 Water Quality Certification Process will be addressed with collection and description of additional data,including the following: Conducting a water quality baseline assessment Describing how existing and designated uses are met Using appropriate field methods and models Using acceptable data quality assurance methods Scheduling of technical work to meet deadlines Deriving load calculations of potential pollutants (pre-Project conditions) Two types of water quality monitoring activities will be implemented:(1)routine monitoring for characterizing water quality baseline conditions,and (2)a single,comprehensive survey for a larger array of parameters (Section 5.5.4.5).Frequency of sampling water quality parameters varies by category and potential for mobilization and bioavailability.Most of the general water quality parameters and select metals will be sampled on a monthly basis because each parameter has been demonstrated to be present in one or both of surface water and sediment (URS 2011). An initial screening survey has been proposed for several other toxics that might be detected in sediment and tissue samples (Table 5.5-4).The single surveys for toxics in sediment,tissue,or water will trigger additional study for extent of contamination and potential timing of exposure if results exceed criteria or thresholds (e.g.,LAETs,LCsos,etc.).The general list of water quality parameters and metals will be used in calibrating the water quality model (Section 5.6)in both a riverine and reservoir environment. Twelve mainstem Susitna River monitoring sites are located below the proposed dam site and two mainstem sites above this location.Six sloughs will be monitored that represent a combination of physical settings in the drainage and that are known to support important fish- rearing habitat.Tributaries to the Susitna River will be monitored and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow including the Talkeetna,Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna rivers.A partial list of the remaining tributaries that will be monitored represent important spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous and resident fisheries and include Gold Creek, Portage Creek,Tsusena Creek,Watana Creek,and Oshetna Creek.The operation of temperature monitoring sites will continue as part of water quality monitoring activities in 2013/2014.These sites were selected based on the following rationale: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-17 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site for the purpose of a baseline water quality characterization. e Location on tributaries where proposed access road-crossing impacts might occur during and after construction (upstream/downstream sampling points on each crossing). e Preliminary consultation with licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g.,instream flow,ice processes). Access and land ownership issues. e Eight of the sites are mainstem monitoring sites that were previously used for SNTEMP modeling (see Section 5.6)in the 1980s.Thirty-one of the sites are Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations,most of which were monitored in the 1980s. Monitoring sites are spaced at approximately five-mile intervals so that the various factors that influence water quality conditions are captured and support the development (and calibration)of the water quality model.Frequency of sites along the length of the river is important for capturing localized effects from tributaries and from past and current human activity.Additional sampling to characterize variability in water quality conditions on six cross-sections of the river will be completed.This objective for this sampling strategy will address potential influence of channel complexity (multiple channels,braiding,etc.)on both the Susitna River and tributary water quality.These data will also enable the water quality model (Section 5.6)to predict conditions in 3-dimensions (longitudinally,vertically,and laterally). 5.5.4.1.Water Temperature Data Collection Water temperatures are being recorded in 15-minute intervals using Onset TidbiT v2 water temperature data loggers (or equivalent instrumentation).Data collection began in late June 2012 and will continue through the winter of 2012/2013.At this time it is unclear if the equipment will survive physical damage or interruption of temperature logging from ice break- up and sedimentation during the winter.Temperature data has been retrieved from 33 of 39 sites representing a partial or whole record from third week in July 2012 through end of September 2012.Deployment and continuous temperature data logging will continue for each of the two following years (2013 and 2014)using the same apparatus and deployment strategy at all 39 sites.The TidbiT v2 (or equivalent)has a precision sensor for plus or minus 0.4 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)(0.2 degrees Celsius [°C])accuracy over an operational range of -4°F to 158°F (- 20°C to 70°C).Data readout is available in less than 30 seconds via an Optic USB interface. To reduce the possibility of data loss,a redundant set of data loggers will be used at each site (where possible).In general,the two sets of sensors will be installed differently (depending on site characteristics).One logger will be inserted into the bottom of an 8.2-foot (2.5-meter)length of perforated steel pipe housing that is fastened to a large bank structure via clamps and rock bolts.A shorter or longer perforated steel pipe may be used depending on location of suitable anchoring places.The logger will be attached to a cable that allows it to be easily retrieved for downloads.To prevent theft or vandalism,the top pipe cap will contain a locking mechanism that can only be opened using the appropriate Allen key.The second set of temperature loggers will be anchored to a 2-foot section of a steel rail and buoyed to record continuous bottom,mid, and surface temperature conditions throughout the water column.The anchor rail will be placed at a channel location that is accessible during routine site visits and will be attached with a steel Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-18 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN cable to a post that is driven into the bank or to some other structure.The proposed installation procedures may require some alteration based on site-specific conditions. The sensors will be situated in the river to record water temperatures that are representative of the mainstem or slough being monitored,avoiding areas of groundwater upwelling,unmixed tributary flow,direct sun exposure,and isolated pools that may affect the quality of the data. The 2012 Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study installed water-level loggers with temperature recording capability at several study sites and are further described in Section 8.5.4.4 of the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study Plan. Where these study sites overlap the water temperature monitoring study sites (Figure 5.5-1),the water-level logger temperature sensors may be used.However,a redundant TidbiT v2 would be deployed at these sites for backup temperature recording,especially for year-round temperature monitoring. 5.5.4.2.Meteorological Data Collection Meteorological (MET)data collection stations were installed in three new locations during 2012. Table 5.5-2 lists those MET station locations as well as three additional MET stations to be installed,if needed,by the Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6). The three MET stations installed in 2012 are located between RM 136.8 and RM 224.0.One MET station near the Susitna-Watana Dam site was established above the projected height of the pool elevation and proposed dam height.The upland MET station was established at about the 2,300-foot elevation on the north side of the river,in the area of the proposed field camp,and will record snowfall data and precipitation.The near river site MET station was located on the north abutment just above river level based on the suitability of location for establishing the structure. Existing MET stations were fitted with additional monitoring equipment to expand data collection that meets project needs and to use historical information collected from each of these sites (Table 5.5-2).Data records from other studies will be used,wherever available,to help generate information for the required parameters needed for construction of the water quality models (Section 5.6).The linkage between historical records and continuing data records may be used in evaluating the utility of 1980s temperature data for modeling. All six possible MET stations are spatially distributed on the Susitna River from RM 25.8 to RM 224.0 and represent a range of distinct physical settings throughout the Project area.MET stations transfer data generated at 15 minute intervals by a telemetry system and stored on a digital server in Talkeetna,AK.The three additional MET station sites may be necessary if current site placement is inadequate to represent the needs of water quality model development. This determination will be made in the spring of 2013.Parameters measured by each of the MET stations will be compared with the nearest down-gradient site and evaluated for adequacy of representation of weather conditions in that reach.If data recorded between successive sites are distinctly different,then additional sites will be proposed so that weather descriptions for use in the water quality model calibration phase (Section 5.6)will be improved with greater detail. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-19 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.4.3.|MET Station Parameters MET stations will collect parameters that support the activities of the engineering design team and the development of the water quality temperature model.Snow depth will be estimated from the precipitation gage with the onset of the winter season.Evapotranspiration is measurable within deciduous canopies;however,the MET station placement will not be under vegetation canopies so that parameters (like wind speed,etc.)necessary for establishing conditions on the reservoir can be measured.Precipitation will be an added parameter to each station beginning in 2013 and estimated as snow depth as the season progresses following October 2013.Solar radiation will be measured using proposed meteorological instruments and solar degree days derived from these measurements.The following is a comprehensive list of parameters required for use in this Project and will be measured by each of the MET stations: Temperature (maximum,minimum,mean) Relative humidity Barometric pressure Precipitation Wind speed (maximum,minimum,mean) Wind direction Wind gust (maximum) Wind gust direction Solar degree days (from solar radiation) §.5.4.3.1.MET Station Installation and Monitoring Protocol Each MET station will consist of,at a minimum,a 10-foot (3-meter)tripod with mounted monitoring instrumentation to measure the parameters identified above (Figure 5.5-2).The station loggers will have sufficient ports and programming capacity to allow for the installation of instrumentation to collect additional MET parameters as required.Such installation and re- programming can occur at any time without disruption of the data collection program. MET station installation is intended to provide instrumentation that will work continuously with little maintenance and produce high quality data through a telemetry system. A Campbell Scientific CR1000 data logger will be used to record data.The archiving interval for all MET parameters will be 15 minutes,with a 2-year storage capacity.The MET station will be powered by a 12 Vdc 8 amp-hour battery and a 20-watt solar panel complete with charge regulator. To protect the stations from wildlife intrusion and to discourage any potential vandalism,the stations may be protected by fencing as appropriate. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-20 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.4.3.2 Satellite or Radio Telemetry Communications System Real-time data will be downloaded from MET stations using satellite transmission or radio telemetry hardware.This will enable study staff to download,inspect,and archive the data as well as monitor station operational parameters for signs of problems without visiting the site. The communication will ensure that problems,if they occur,are resolved promptly to minimize data loss between service periods. 5.5.4.4.Baseline Water Quality Monitoring The purpose of the Baseline Water Quality Study is to collect baseline water quality information that will support an assessment of the effects of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin.Effects of the proposed Project operations will be determined by using baseline water quality monitoring data in the EFDC (Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code) model described in Section 5.6,Water Quality Modeling Study.There are two types of monitoring programs proposed for characterizing surface water conditions that are distinguished by the frequency of water sampling and the density of sampling effort in a localized area (Baseline Water Quality Monitoring and Focus Area Monitoring).The large-scale monitoring program (at sites from RM 15.1 to RM 233.4)will be used to calibrate the Susitna River water quality model. Baseline water quality collection can be broken into two components:in situ water quality sampling and general water quality sampling.In situ water quality sampling consists of on-site monthly measurements of physical parameters at fixed locations using field equipment.General water quality sampling will consist of monthly grab samples that will be sent to an off-site laboratory for analysis.The laboratory will have at a minimum,National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP)certification in order to generate credible data for use by state,federal,and tribal regulatory programs for evaluating current and future water quality conditions.In general,these samples represent water quality components that cannot be easily measured in situ,such as metals concentrations,nitrates,etc. Water quality data collection will be at the locations in bold in Table 5.5-1.The initial sampling will be expanded if general water quality,metals in surface water,or metals in fish tissue exceed criteria or thresholds.Additional contiguous sample sites will be visited on this list beginning the following sampling month wherever criteria or thresholds have been exceeded by individual parameters.This proposed spacing follows accepted practice when segmenting large river systems for development of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)water quality models. Sampling during winter months will be focused on locations where flow data is currently collected (or was historically collected by USGS)and will be used for water quality modeling (Section 5.6). 5.5.4.4.1 Monitoring Parameters Water quality samples will be analyzed for several parameters reported in Table 5.5-3.Metals monitoring for total and dissolved fractions in surface water include the full set of parameters used by ADEC in fish health consumption screening.The creation of a reservoir and potential alteration of surface water downstream of the proposed dam site may change characteristics of groundwater in the upper and middle Susitna basin.The water quality parameters identified in Table 5.5-3 will address the influence surface water may have on adjoining groundwater supplies Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-21 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN in the vicinity of each sampling site.Changes to groundwater quality may have an effect on drinking water supplies,so several parameters included on the inorganic chemical contaminants list have been included as part of this sampling program (ADEC 2003).The criteria that will be used for comparison with sampling results are the drinking water primary maximum contaminant levels. Additional parameters will be measured from all sites in a single survey that occurs during low water conditions (e.g.,August/September)in the Susitna basin.The following is a list of pollutants for which Alaska Water Quality Standards have established water quality criteria (18 ACC 70.020(b))for protecting designated uses in fresh water: e Continuous temperature monitoring program -Temperature,already included as part of the continuous temperature monitoring program. e Insitu monitoring program -pH,included as part of the monthly water quality sampling routine. -Color,categorical observation. -Residues,categorical assessment (floating solids,debris,sludge,deposits,foam,or scum). e General water quality program -Dissolved gas,included in the monitoring program (dissolved oxygen). -Dissolved inorganic substances (total dissolved solids),included in monthly monitoring. -Turbidity,already included as part of the monthly water quality sampling routine. -Toxic and other deleterious organic and inorganic,already included in monitoring for metals and mercury/methylmercury (organometals). e One-time survey -Fecal coliform bacteria,included in monthly monitoring. -Sediment,already included in assessing mercury and other metals from sediments. -Petroleum hydrocarbons,oil,and grease,included in a one-time survey. -Radioactivity;radionuclide concentrations to be generated from surface water samples. -Toxic and other deleterious organic and inorganic,already included in monitoring for metals and mercury/methylmercury (organometals). Table 5.5-4 lists the water quality parameters to be collected and their frequency of collection. 5.5.4.4.2 Sampling Protocol Water quality grab samples will be collected during each site visit in a representative portion of the stream channel/water body,using methods consistent with ADEC and U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)protocols and regulatory requirements for sampling ambient water and trace metal water quality criteria. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-22 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Mainstem areas of the river not immediately influenced by a tributary will be characterized with a single grab sample.Areas of the mainstem with an upstream tributary that may influence the nearshore zone or are well-mixed with the mainstem will be characterized by collecting samples at two locations:in the tributary and in the mainstem upstream of the tributary confluence.All samples will be collected from a well-mixed portion of the river/tributary. These samples will be collected on approximately a monthly basis (four samples from June to September)and used for calibrating the same model framework used for predicting temperature. The period for collecting surface water samples will begin at ice break-up and extend to beginning of ice formation on the river.Limited winter sampling (once in December,and again in March)will be conducted where existing or historic USGS sites are located.Review of existing data (URS 2011)indicated that few criteria exceedances occur with metals concentrations during the winter months.Existing data show that conventional water quality parameters do not change during the winter months and appear to be mediated by constancy in flow and by water temperature.Initial assessment of this existing data suggests that samples be collected twice during the winter months for analysis of early and late season conditions when the hydrograph declines (near the beginning of winter)and when the hydrograph begins to increase (near the beginning of spring).If the 2013 data sets suggest that metals and other general water quality parameters exceed criteria or thresholds,then an expanded 2014 water quality monitoring program will be conducted to characterize conditions on a monthly basis throughout the winter months. Water quality indicators like conductivity (specific conductance)have been suggested as a surrogate measure for transfer of metals from groundwater to surface water or in mobilization of metals within the river channel.Should the one-time survey for metals at each of the sampling sites show elevated concentrations of select parameters,then sampling of a full list of metals will be conducted one time that analyzes groundwater concentrations in order to adequately characterize current conditions.Available USGS data from select continuous gaging stations will be reviewed for increases in specific conductance during monthly and seasonal intervals,and these results will be used to determine if further metals sampling is warranted during additional winter months. Water quality grab samples will be collected during each site visit along a transect of the stream channel/water body,using methods consistent with ADEC and EPA protocols and regulatory requirements for sampling ambient water and trace metal water quality criteria. Mainstem areas of the river not immediately influenced by a tributary will be characterized with a single transect.Areas of the mainstem with an upstream tributary that may influence the nearshore zone or that are well-mixed with the mainstem will be characterized by collecting samples at two transect locations:in the tributary and in the mainstem upstream of the tributary confluence.Samples will be collected at 3 equi-distant locations along each transect (i.e.25% from left bank,50%from left bank,and 75%from left bank).Samples will be collected from a depth of 0.5 meters below the surface as well as 0.5 meters above the bottom.This will ensure that variations in concentrations,especially metals,are captured and adequately characterized throughout the study area. Variation of water quality in a river cross-section is often significant and is most likely to occur because of incomplete mixing of upstream tributary inflows,point-source discharges,or variations in velocity and channel geometry.Water quality profiles at each location on each site Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-23 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN transect will be conducted for field water quality parameters (e.g.,temperature,pH,dissolved oxygen,and conductivity)to determine the extent of vertical and lateral mixing. Additional details of the sampling methods will be provided in a combined Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)and the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)for this study.More detail describing study design,field sampling procedures,and evaluation of data quality is provided in the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring QAPP (Attachment 5-1). In Situ Water Quality Sampling.During each site visit,in situ measurements of dissolved oxygen,pH,specific conductance,redox potential,turbidity,and water temperature will be made.A Hanna Instruments HI 98703 Portable Turbidity Meter will be used to measure turbidity,while a Hydrolab®datasonde (MS5)will be used to measure the remaining field parameters during each site visit.Continuous turbidity measurement may be conducted with the Hydrolab datasonde at select locations (e.g.,former/current USGS sites where turbidity data are available from the 1980s)and operated during summer and winter conditions.The following list of former and current USGS mainstem Susitna River monitoring sites will be considered for continuous turbidity monitoring:Susitna Station,Sunshine,Gold Creek,Tsusena Creek,and near Cantwell.These locations have historic and current flow data that will be used in water quality modeling (Section 5.6)of effects on turbidity from Project operations.Continuous logging of water quality parameters using a multi-parameter probe (e.g.,temperature,pH,dissolved oxygen, and conductivity)may be placed at Focus Area locations (identified in Section 5.5.4.5).The period of deployment will be focused on summer months June through September (four months) as water conditions permit deployment and routine download of data.Maintenance of a multi- parameter probe and risk from damage is high during winter months.Also,freezing conditions will damage sensor apparatus and the logging unit if enclosed by formation of ice. Standard techniques for pre-and post-sampling calibration of in situ instrumentation will be used to ensure quality of data generation and will follow accepted practice.If calibration failure is observed during a site visit,field data will be corrected according to equipment manufacturer's instructions. General Water Quality Sampling.Sampling will avoid eddies,pools,and deadwater.Sampling will avoid unnecessary collection of sediments in water samples,and touching the inside or lip of the sample container.Samples will be delivered to EPA-approved laboratories within the holding time frame.Each batch of samples will have a separate completed chain of custody sheet.A field duplicate will be collected for 10 percent of samples (i.e.,1 for every 10 water grab samples).Laboratory quality control samples including duplicate,spiked,and blank samples will be prepared and processed by the laboratory. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)samples will include field duplicates,matrix spikes, duplicate matrix spikes,and rinsate blanks for non-dedicated field sampling equipment.The results of the analyses will be used in data validation to determine the quality,bias,and usability of the data generated. Sample numbers will be recorded on field data sheets immediately after collection.Samples intended for the laboratory will be stored in coolers and kept under the custody of the field team at all times.Samples will be shipped to the laboratory in coolers with ice and cooled to approximately 4°C.Chain of custody records and other sampling documentation will be kept insealedplasticbags(Ziploc®)and taped inside the lid of the coolers prior to shipment.A temperature blank will accompany each cooler shipped.Packaging,marking,labeling,and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-24 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN shipping of samples will be in compliance with all regulations promulgated by the U.S. Department of Transportation in the Code of Federal Regulations,49 CFR 171-177. Water quality samples will be labeled with the date and time that the sample is collected and preserved/filtered (as appropriate),then stored and delivered to a state-certified water quality laboratory for analyses in accordance with maximum holding periods.A chain of custody record will be maintained with the samples at all times. The state-certified laboratory will report (electronically and in hard copy)each chemical parameter analyzed with the laboratory method detection limit,reporting limit,and practical quantification limit.The laboratory will attempt to attain reporting detection limits that are at or below the applicable regulatory criteria and will provide all laboratory QA/QC documentation. The procedures used for collection of water quality samples will follow protocols from ADEC and EPA Region 10 (Pacific Northwest).Water samples will be analyzed by a laboratory accredited by ADEC or recognized under NELAP.Water quality data will be summarized in a report with appropriate graphics and tables with respect to Alaska State Water Quality Standards (ADEC 2005)and any applicable federal standards. Additional details of the sampling procedures and laboratory protocols is included in the SAP and QAPP. 5.5.4.5.|Water Quality Characterization in Focus Areas The second type of water quality monitoring is distinguished from the large-scale program by a higher density of sampling within a pre-defined reach length and a higher frequency of sample collection (greater than once per month).The purpose for the intensive water quality monitoring in select Focus Areas of the proposed Project area is to evaluate effects from dam operations on resident and anadromous fisheries.Potential Focus Areas in the middle river portion of the Susitna drainage have been selected in consultation with the water resources leads.The Focus Area sites are fully discussed in the Instream Flow Study Plan in Section 8.5.4.2. Changes in water quality conditions from Project operations may influence usable habitat by individual species of fish and various life stages.Water quality conditions influence usability of areas within the river and sloughs by supporting required physicochemical characteristics that range from metabolic needs to predator avoidance.Adequate temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations are required to sustain basic metabolic needs and these can differ for life stages of a species.Successful predator avoidance improves survivability of a population and this is commonly achieved by using physical structures in the aquatic environment.In the case of water quality,early life stages of a species may benefit from increased turbidity in the water column. Changes to turbidity in the water column may result in increased predation on certain life stages of fish and present a negative impact to a population. The Focus Areas will have a higher density of sampling locations,in contrast to the mainstem network,so that prediction of change in water quality conditions from Project operations can be made with a higher degree of resolution.The resolution expected for predicting conditions will be as short as 100-meter (m)longitudinal distances within the Focus Areas.Depending on the length of the Focus Area,transects will be spaced every 100 m to 500 m and water quality samples collected at three locations along each transect.The collection locations along a transect will be in open water areas and have 3 to 5 collection points.These will be discrete samples Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-25 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN taken at each collection point.The density of monitoring locations within the Focus Areas will be used as a grid to detect and describe groundwater input.Plumes of groundwater input to a Focus Area will be traceable using thermal data or conductivity.The area of groundwater input will be described using the monitoring grid network represented by the transects and sampling points along each transect.The location of open water transects and piezometers will be coordinated with the Instream Flow Study (Section 8)and the Groundwater Study (Section 7.5) to efficiently implement common elements in each of the studies.Piezometers will be installed as part of the Water Quality Monitoring Study so that surface water and groundwater samples are collected at the same time for determination of influence of groundwater on surface water. Collection of groundwater and surface water during each site visit will be used to evaluate the influence of groundwater on surface water quality.Frequency of sampling will be every 2 weeks for a total duration of 6 weeks and coordinated with the Instream Flow and Groundwater studies. Water quality parameters measured in Focus Areas will be used to calibrate the EFDC model, but at a higher level of resolution than used for the main channel beginning from RM 15.1 and ending at RM 233.4 in the Susitna River.The focus for EFDC model predictions will be on the following parameters that could affect habitat used by anadromous and resident fish in this drainage: Field Parameters e Water temperature e Dissolved oxygen e Conductivity e pH General Chemistry Turbidity Hardness Total nitrogen Nitrate+nitrite-nitrogen Total phosphorus Soluble reactive phosphorusao)Metals Mercury(total) Methylmercury (dissolved) Aluminum (dissolved and total) Iron (dissolved and total) The water quality parameter list is divided further into two categories:(1)contaminants of concern (e.g.,metals),and (2)general water quality conditions that may adversely affect fish species. Inclusion of the nutrient parameters will be used to inform the productivity studies and potentially be used to develop habitat suitability criteria (HSC)curves for select aquatic communities.Response of biological communities like periphyton and benthic Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-26 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN macroinvertebrates to nutrient concentrations will be predicted for alternative operational scenarios. 5.5.4.6.|Sediment Samples for Mercury/Metals in the Reservoir Area This task is designed to gather specific information on the distribution of Susitna River sediment contaminants of concern in potential source areas.In general,all sediment samples will be taken from sheltered backwater areas,downstream of islands,and in similar riverine locations in which water currents are slowed,favoring accumulation of finer sediment along the channel bottom. Samples will be analyzed for total metals,including aluminum,arsenic,cadmium,chromium, copper,iron,lead,mercury,nickel,selenium,and zinc.In addition,sediment size and total organic carbon (TOC)will be included to evaluate whether these parameters are predictors for elevated metal concentrations.Samples will be collected just below and above the proposed dam site.Additional samples will be collected near the mouths of tributaries near the proposed dam site,including Fog,Deadman,Watana,Tsusena,Kosina,Jay,and Goose creeks,and the Oshetna River.The purpose of this sampling will be to determine where metals,if found in the water or sediment,originate in the drainage.Toxics modeling will be conducted to address potential for bioavailability in resident aquatic life.Comparison of bioaccumulation of metals in tissue analysis with results from sediment samples will inform on potential for transfer mechanisms between source and fate. Two types of modeling analysis will be completed:(1)pathway model analysis,and (2) numerical modeling using EFDC (Section 5.6).First,pathway models will be constructed for preliminary evaluation of potential for transfer between media (e.g.,sediment-pore water,pore water-surface water,surface water-fish tissue).Exposure concentrations will be estimated for each toxic within the medium sampled (e.g.,sediment,pore water,surface water)and companion parameters (e.g.,hardness and pH)will be collected that enable calculation of chronic and acute toxics concentrations to aquatic life.Potential for transfer of toxics between media will be facilitated by surrounding physicochemical conditions like low dissolved oxygen conditions,low pH resulting from low dissolved oxygen concentrations,or low redox potential.These companion field measurements will be made along with all media sampled at each site.Transfer potential of toxics between media will be identified under two conditions:(1)when field parameters listed above are at levels that result in mobilization of toxics between media,and (2) when toxics mobilize along a concentration gradient and transfer from high concentration to media with a lower concentration.Potential for bioaccumulation in aquatic life is determined when chronic thresholds for toxics exposure in a medium are identified.Potential for mortality is determined when acute criteria for toxics in a medium are exceeded. Most of the contaminants of interest are typically associated with fine sediments,rather than with coarse-grained sandy sediment or rocky substrates.Therefore,the goal of the sampling will be to obtain sediments with at least 5 percent fines (i.e.,particle size less than 0.0025 inches [63 micrometers],or passing through a #230 sieve).At some locations,however,larger-sized sediments may be all that are available. The sediment samples will be collected using an Ekman dredge or a modified Van Veen grab sampler.Sampling devices will be deployed from a boat.Samples may also be collected by wading into shallow nearshore areas.To the extent possible,samples will consist of the top 6 inches (15 centimeters)of sediment.Comparison of results from the Susitna drainage will be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-27 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN made with other studies for Blue Lake,Eklutna Lake,and Bradley Lake when similar data are available and where physical settings are comparable. 5.5.4.7.|Baseline Metals Levels in Fish Tissue Two screening level tasks will be conducted.The first will be for methylmercury in sport fish. Methylmercury bioaccumulates and the highest concentrations are typically in the muscle tissue of adult predatory fish.Final determination of tissue type(s)for analysis will be coordinated with ADEC's Division of Environmental Health and guidance on fish tissue sampling.Results can be shared by ADEC with the State Health Department to develop fish consumption advice,if necessary.Target fish species in the vicinity of the Watana Reservoir will be Dolly Varden, Arctic grayling,whitefish species,long nose sucker,lake trout,burbot,and resident rainbow trout.If possible,filets will be sampled from seven adult individuals from each species.Adult fish from each of the species will be collected in order to estimate the metals concentrations in fish tissue (metals to be analyzed in fish tissue are listed in Table 5.5-3).Collection times for fish samples will occur in late August and early September.Filet samples will be analyzed for methyl and total mercury. Liver samples will also be collected from burbot and analyzed for mercury,methylmercury, arsenic,cadmium,and selenium. Field procedures will be consistent with those outlined in applicable Alaska state and/or EPA sampling protocols (USEPA 2000).Clean nylon nets and polyethylene gloves will be used during fish tissue collection.The species,fork length,and weight of each fish will be recorded.Fish will be placed in Teflon®sheets and into zipper-closure bags and placed immediately on ice. Fish samples will be submitted to a state-certified analytical laboratory for individual fish muscle tissue analysis.Results will be reported with respect to applicable Alaska and federal standards as well as published scientific literature based on both field observations and controlled laboratory experiments. Results from fish tissue analysis will also be used as a description of bioaccumulative baseline toxics prior to the proposed Project.Results from the toxics pathways model and from the numeric model will be used to determine how the proposed Project may increase the potential of current metals concentrations to become bioavailable.The projected water conditions in the reservoir will be estimated and current results for metals concentrations re-evaluated for determining potential toxicities to resident and anadromous fish species.Detection of mercury in fish tissue and sediment will prompt further study of naturally occurring concentrations in soils and plants and how parent geology contributes to concentrations of this toxic in both compartments of the landscape.The focused study will estimate the extent and magnitude of mercury contamination so that an estimate of increased bioavailability might be made once the reservoir inundates areas where high concentrations of mercury are sequestered.Detectable concentrations of mercury may prompt additional sampling and analysis of tissues in the benthic macroinvertebrate community.The biomagnification of mercury contamination from sediments and plants to the fish community may be facilitated through consumption of contaminated food sources like the benthic macroinvertebrates.Contamination of this component of a trophic level may also be a conduit for mercury biomagnification in waterfowl and other wildlife that consume this food source. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-28 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.4.8.|Technical Report on Results The technical report will include a description of the study goals and objectives,assumptions made,sample methods,analytical results,models used,and other background information.Field data,laboratory report,and quality assurance information will be attached. A summary data report will be constructed that includes a description of patterns and an explanation for field parameters and general chemistry conditions.The origin of patterns in water quality data sets collected as part of this study may be due to seasonal influence (e.g.,changes mediated by climate patterns),influence of tributary water chemistry on mainstem conditions,or in the case of sloughs may be moderated by groundwater influence. The intensity of sampling effort is expected to be greater at Focus Areas and so resolution of changes in field parameters,general chemistry,and metals chemistry is expected to be described in finer detail.Spatial water quality conditions will be described in greater detail at these Focus Areas (Section 5.5.4.5)and be sampled every two weeks.Select field parameters (water temperature and dissolved oxygen concentration)will be collected on a continuous basis and downloaded during each of the Focus Area visits and will be able to describe daily diurnal patterns from these data. Comparison of data will be made with existing and appropriate water quality criteria,sediment thresholds,and fish tissue screening levels.Surface water results will be compared to Alaska Water Quality Standards (18 ACC 70.020(b))for protection of beneficial uses in fresh water. Sediment and fish tissue results will be compared to the Screening Quick Reference Tables (SQuiRTs)used by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)to determine if thresholds for toxicity to aquatic life have been exceeded. The focused effort in characterizing current mercury conditions through monitoring and modeling in the vicinity of the proposed dam site is described further in Sections 5.6 and 5.7.A general description of the approach and reporting of results for the mercury study is summarized here. Mercury will be modeled using two methods: 1.Water quality modeling of the reservoir will predict whether the conditions for the formation of methylmercury will be present,and where in the reservoir this may occur. 2.The linear model of Harris and Hutchinson (2008)will provide an initial prediction of peak mercury concentrations in fish. The phosphorous release model may be used if there is a need to evaluate when peak methylmercury production may occur. The report will include a conceptual model showing mercury inputs to the reservoir,mercury methylation,mercury circulation among different media (fish,air,water,sediment,etc.),and bioabsorption and transfer.Strategies to manage mercury methylation,bioaccumulation,and biomagnification will be reviewed (Mailman et al.2006). Sediment,water,and tissue results from toxics analysis will use NOAA Screening Quick Reference Tables (SQuiRTs).These are thresholds used as screening values for evaluation of toxics and potential effect to aquatic life in several media and will be implemented where ADEC water quality,sediment,or tissue criteria are not available. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-29 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN An example for SQuiRT values can be found at the following website: http://mapping2.orr.noaa.gov/portal/sanfranciscobay/sfb_html/pdfs/otherreports/squirt.pdf Specific thresholds and criteria for toxics in each of the media will be included in a QAPP.The Water Resources Technical Workgroup will be consulted before final criteria and thresholds are finalized and used to interpret toxics monitoring results from sediment,water,and fish tissue. 5.5.4.9.Pilot Thermal Imaging Assessment of a Portion of the Susitna River Thermal imagery data using Forward Looking Infra-Red (FLIR)technology of the entire middle portion of the Susitna River was collected in October 2012.The data from the thermal imaging will be ground-truthed and the applicability and resolution of the data will be determined in terms of identifying water temperatures and thermal refugia/upwelling.Ground-truthing will occur by using the existing continuous temperature monitoring data from buoy systems and bank installation equipment for the 2012 Temperature Monitoring Study.In coordination with the instream flow and fish studies,a determination will be made as to whether thermal imaging data will be applicable and whether or not additional thermal imagery will be collected during the 2013 field season to characterize river temperature conditions.The results of the thermal imaging pilot test will be available by January 2013. If the pilot study is successful,then a description of thermal refugia throughout the Project area can be mapped using aerial imagery calibrated with on-the-ground verification.The verification data used will be collected at the same time as the aerial imagery (or nearly the same time)using the established continuous temperature monitoring network and additional grab sample temperature readings where there may be gaps,such as in select sloughs.The elements described in the following sections are important considerations for data collection,specifications for data quality,and strategy for relating digital imagery and actual river surface water temperatures. If the thermal imaging is not successful,the study component will be reevaluated.Future actions will depend on the causes of the failure.Potential causes for failure could include: e Poor timing for the data acquisition flight. e Insufficient differences in temperature between groundwater and surface water. e Complex missing or dilution of the groundwater signal. Potential solutions would include: e Hand held FLIR meters that could be used during stream side studies,and a more focused thermal mapping task within focus areas using hand-held temperature meters and probes may prove useful. Use of documentation of open water leads as a substitute. e Outfit the R44 helicopter to take advantage of regular field presence.Thermal imagery could be shot all summer long and brief intervals of ideal conditions could be used. e The Focus Area results represent habitat identified as representative of the most important for fisheries use as described by the rational for site selection in Section 8.5.4.2 of the RSP.These results can be extrapolated to similar reaches,side channels,and sloughs in other areas of the Susitna drainage not directly monitored in this study to determine thermal refugia for fish. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-30 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.4.10.Re-fly the thermal imaging under better conditions (a greater contrast in temperature between groundwater and surface water).Radiant Temperature Remotely sensed thermal images allow for spatially distributed measurements of radiant temperatures in the river.Radiant temperature measurements are made only on the surface layer of the water (top 4 inches [10 centimeters]).Temperature readings can vary depending on the amount of suspended sediment in the water and the turbidity of the water.Collection of data will occur near the end of October when the freeze begins and the contrast between cold surface water and warmer groundwater influence is accentuated.The suspended sediment and turbidity will be diminished during this period of the year when the glacial flour content in the water column from glacial meltwater is reduced. Spatial Resolution The key to good data quality is determining the pixel size of the thermal infra-red (TIR)sensor and how that relates to the near-bank environment.Best practice is three pure-water pixels (ensures that the digital image represented by any three contiguous pixels discriminates water from land).Very fine resolution (0.7 to 3.3 feet [0.2 to 1 meter])imagery is best used to determine groundwater springs and cold water seeps.Larger pixels can be useful for determining characteristic patterns of latitude and longitude thermal variation in riverine landscapes. 5.5.4.11.Calibrating Temperature Water temperatures change during the day;therefore,measurements should occur near the same time each day and when water temperature is most stable (early afternoon).Data used from the continuous temperature probes throughout the middle reach will be the same time interval as thermal imaging collected at each location.Site selection for validation sampling will be determined by channel accessibility and where there is not known influences of tributaries or seeps in the area.Hand-held ground imaging radiometers can provide validation as long as the precision is at least as good as that expected from airborne TIR measurements.Availability of historical satellite imagery for thermal analysis will be investigated.Historical thermal imagery may enable exploration of potential trends in water temperature both spatially and temporally. 5.5.4.12.Groundwater Quality in Selected Habitats The purpose of studying groundwater quality will be to characterize the water quality differences between a set of key productive aquatic habitat types (three to five sites)and a set of non- productive habitat types (three to five sites)that are related to the absence or presence of groundwater upwelling to improve the understanding of the water quality differences and related groundwater/surface water processes.Concern for sensitive fisheries habitat in floodplain shallow alluvial aquifers and changes to this habitat from Project operations is the focus for identifying environmental conditions that will affect food-chain elements (e.g.,periphyton and benthic macroinvertebrates).The groundwater/surface water exchange (Section 7.5)is expected to influence the energy flow from primary producers (periphyton)to consumers at an intermediate level in the trophic food web (Section 9.8,River Productivity Study).An estimate of density and mass for each of these trophic food web components in target habitats will represent production of the food base and be compared against production necessary to support current fisheries populations.These sites will be co-located within the Focus Areas (Section 5.5.4.5)in order to measure groundwater input and influence on surface water chemistry. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-31 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Basic water chemistry information (temperature,dissolved oxygen [DO],conductivity,pH, turbidity,redox potential)that defines habitat conditions will be collected at selected instream flow,fish population,and riparian study sites.These data will be used to characterize groundwater and surface water interactions. 5.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice Studies,field investigations,laboratory testing,engineering analysis,etc.will be performed in accordance with general industry accepted scientific and engineering practices.The methods and work efforts outlined in this study plan are the same or consistent with analyses used by applicants and licensees and relied upon by FERC in other hydroelectric licensing proceedings. The process for developing and implementing a water quality monitoring program ensures that high quality data is generated for use in regulatory decision-making and management of aquatic resources.Products like the:Quality Assurance Project Plan,use of NELAP Certified laboratory to analyze water samples,and sampling design for appropriate characterization of current water quality will ensure that complete documentation improves performance in implementing the Study Design. 5.5.6.Schedule Baseline Water Quality Study elements will be completed in several stages and based on the timeline shown in Table 5.5-5.The thermal imaging data was acquired in October 2012,and will be processed and available for use in January 2013.Met stations were installed in August of 2012,and will collect data till the end of the project.The QAPP and SAP has been completed and is attached to this RSP.It will continue to be refined as the project goes forward.The temperature sensors were deployed in the river in August of 2012.They will continue recording data till the third quarter of 2014.It is anticipated that the sensors will have to be periodically replaced due to damage by ice,current,or battery replacement.Water quality monitoring will start in March 2013,and continue periodically throughout the remainder of the year.Sediment and fish tissue sampling will occur in July and August.Some fish tissue sampling has already been completed,in August of 2012.Data management will occur throughout the data acquisition phase of the project.The initial study repot will be completed by December 2014,with the final due in the first quarter of 2015. 5.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies A flow chart describing interdependencies (Figure 5.5-3)outlines origin of existing data and related historical studies,specific output for each element of the Water Quality studies,and where the output information generated in the Water Quality studies will be directed.This chart provides detail describing flow of information related to the Water Quality studies,from historical data collection to current data collection.Data were examined in a Water Quality Data Gap Analysis (URS 2011),and this information was used,in part,to assist in making decisions about the current design for the Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Study and for ensuring that the current modeling effort would be able to compare the 1980s study results with results of planned modeling efforts. Integral portions of this interdependency chart are results from the Ice Processes Study and from the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study.The Ice Processes Study will support water quality Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-32 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN model development (Section 5.6)with information about timing and conditions for ice formation and ice break-up.The Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study represents the effort to develop a hydraulic routing model that will be coupled with the EFDC water quality model.Water quality monitoring efforts for field parameters,general chemistry,and metals (including mercury)will be used as a calibration data set for developing the predictive EFDC model. 5.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost The estimated cost for the Water Quality Baseline Monitoring Study in the Susitna basin in 2013 and 2014 is approximately $6,000,000,not including the cost of the thermal imaging. 5.5.9.Literature Cited Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2003.Alaska Water Quality Criteria Manual for Toxic and Other Deleterious Organic and Inorganic Substances.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water.Juneau,Alaska.5Ip. ADEC.2005.Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Program.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water.Juneau,Alaska.58p. ADEC.2012.Mercury concentration in fresh water fish Southcentral Susitna Watershed. Personal communication with Bob Gerlach,VMD,State Veterinarian.June 2012. Edwards,T.K.,and D.G.Glysson.1988.Field methods for measurement of fluvial sediment. U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-531,118p. Frenzel,S.A.2000.Selected Organic Compounds and Trace Elements in Streambed Sediments and Fish Tissues,Cook Inlet Basin,Alaska.USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4004.Prepared as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. Harris,R.,and Hutchinson,D.2008.Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project Environmental Baseline Report:Assessment of the Potential for Increased Mercury Concentrations.Prepared by Tetra Tech Inc.March 4,2008. Mailman,M.,Stepnuk L.,Cicek N.,Bodaly R.A.2006.Strategies to lower methylmercury concentrations in hydroelectric reservoirs and lakes:A review.Science of the Total Environment 368:224-235. URS.2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska. 62p.+Appendixes. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).2000.Guidance for Assessing ChemicalContaminantDataforuseinFishAdvisories:Volume 1 Fish Sampling and Analysis,3" Edition.EPA-823-B-00-007.United States Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Water.Washington,D.C.485p. Ward,J.C.,and C.A.Harr (eds.).1990.Methods for collection and processing of surface-water and bed-material samples for physical and chemical analyses.U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-140,71p. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-33 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.10.Tables Table 5.5-1.Proposed Susitna River Basin Temperature and Water Quality Monitoring Sites. Susitna River Description Susitna River Slough Latitude LongitudeMileID(decimal degrees)(decimal degrees) 15.1 Susitna above Alexander Creek NA 61.4014 -150.519 25.83 Susitna Station NA 61.5454 -150.516 28.0 Yentna River NA 61.589 -150.468 29.5 Susitna above Yentna NA 61.5752 -150.248 40.63 Deshka River NA 61.7098 -150.324 55.0'Susitna NA 61.8589 -150.18 83.83 Susitna at Parks Highway East NA 62.175 -150.174 83.98 Susitna at Parks Highway West NA 62.1765 -150.177 97.0 LRX 1 NA 62.3223 -150.127 97.2 Talkeetna River NA 62.3418 -150.106 98.5 Chulitna River NA 62.5574 -150.236 103.023 Talkeetna NA 62.3943 -150.134 113.02 LRX 18 NA 62.5243 -150.112 120.723 Curry Fishwheel Camp NA 62.6178 -150.012 126.0 -8A 62.6707 -149.903 126.12 LRX 29 NA 62.6718 -149.902 129.23 -9 62.7022 -149.843 130.82 LRX 35 NA 62.714 149.81 135.3 -11 62.7555 -149.7111 136.5 Susitna near Gold Creek NA 62.7672 -149.694 136.83 Gold Creek NA 62.7676 149.691 138.0'-16B 62.7812 -149.674 138.63 Indian River NA 62.8009 -149.664 138.72 Susitna above Indian River NA 62.7857 -149.651 140.0 -19 62.7929 -149.615 140.12 LRX 53 NA 62.7948 -149.613 142.0 -21 62.8163 -149.576 148.0 Susitna below Portage Creek NA 62.8316 -149.406 148.8?Susitna above Portage Creek NA 62.8286 -149.379 148.8 Portage Creek NA 62.8317 -149.379 148.83 Susitna above Portage Creek NA 62.8279 -149.377 165.01 Susitna NA 62.7899 -148.997 180.31 Susitna below Tsusena Creek NA 62.8157 148.652 181.33 Tsusena Creek NA 62.8224 -148.613 184.5)Susitna at Watana Dam site NA 62.8226 -148.533 194.1 Watana Creek NA 62.8296 -148.259 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-34 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Susitna River Description Susitna River Slough Latitude Longitude Mile ID (decimal degrees)(decimal degrees) 206.8 Kosina Creek NA 62.7822 -147.94 223.73 Susitna near Cantwell NA 62.7052 147.538 233.4 Oshetna Creek NA 62.6402 -147.383 1 Site not sampled for water quality or temperature in the 1980s or location moved slightly from original location. 2 Proposed mainstem Susitna River temperature monitoring sites for purposes of 1980s SNTEMP model evaluation. 3.Locations with overlap of water quality temperature monitoring sites with other studies.Locations in bold font represent that both temperature and water quality samples are collected from a site. Table 5.5-2.Proposed Susitna-Watana Meteorological Stations. .: .Latitude LongitudesusRiverDescription(Naw Existing)(Decimal (Decimalilegdegrees)degrees) .Existing (Talkeetna44.3 Willow Creek RWIS)61.765 -150.0503 80.0 Susitna River near Sunshine Gage mS)62.1381 150.1155 ..Existing (Talkeetna95.9 Susitna River at Talkeetna Airport)62.32 -150.095 136.8 Susitna River at Indian River New 62.8009 -149.664 Susitna River at Watana Dam Camp 62.8226 -148.5330 184.1 New(upland on bench) 62.7052 -147.53799 224.0 Susitna River above Cantwell New Note:Our ability to upgrade existing met stations is currently being evaluated.If existing met stations cannot be upgraded,new met stations may be installed. Table 5.5-3.Parameters for water quality monitoring and laboratory analysis (Baseline Water Quality Monitoring and Focus Area monitoring). Parameter Analysis Method Sample Holding Times In Situ Water Quality Parameters Dissolved Oxygen (DO)Water Quality Meter Not Applicable pH Water Quality Meter Not Applicable Water Temperature Water Quality Meter Not Applicable Specific Conductance Water Quality Meter Not Applicable Turbidity Water Quality Meter Not Applicable Redox Potential Water Quality Meter Not Applicable Color Platinum-Cobalt Scale (SM)Not Applicable Residues Defined in 18 ACC 70 Not Applicable General Water Quality Parameters (grab samples for laboratory analysis) Hardness EPA -130.2 180 days Nitrate/Nitrite EPA -353.2 48 hours Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-35 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REviISED STUDY PLAN Parameter Analysis Method Sample Holding Times Alkalinity EPA -2320 14 days Ammonia as N EPA -350.1 28 days Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen EPA -351.2 28 days Total Phosphorus EPA -365.3 28 days Ortho-phosphate EPA -365.3 48 hours Chlorophyll-a SM 10300 28 days Total Dissolved Solids EPA -160.1 7 days Total Suspended Solids EPA -160.2 7 days Turbidity EPA -180.1 48 hours TOC EPA -415.1 28 days DOC EPA -415.1 28 days Fecal Coliform EPA 1604 30 hours Petroleum Hydrocarbons EPA 6021624 (TAdH)14 daysEPA610/625 (TAH) Radionuclides"a»Aipha Spectroscopy 5 days Metals -(Water)Dissolved and Total Aluminum EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Arsenic EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Barium EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Beryllium EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Cadmium EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Chromium (III &IV)EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Cobalt EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Copper EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours tron EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Lead EPA 6010B/6020A 48 hours Magnesium EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Manganese EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours 48 hours1talandmethylmercury)EPA-7470A Molybdenum EPA 6010B/6020A 48 hours Nickel EPA 6010B/6020A 48 hours Selenium EPA 6010B/6020A 48 hours Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-36 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Parameter Analysis Method Sample Holding Times Thallium EPA-6010B/6020A 48 hours Vanadium EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Zine EPA -6010B/6020A 48 hours Metals -Sediment (Total) Aluminum EPA -200.7 180 days Arsenic EPA -200.7 180 days Cadmium EPA -200.7 180 days Copper EPA -200.7 180 days Iron EPA -200.7 180 days Lead EPA -200.7 180 days Mercury EPA -245.5 /7470A 28 days Zine EPA -200.7 180 days Metals -Fish Tissue (Use EPA Sampling Method 1669)(Mercury Assessment Study Plan 5.7 only) Total Mercury EPA -1631 7 days Methylmercury EPA -1631 7 days Arsenic EPA -1632,Revision A 7 days Cadmium EPA -1632 7 days Selenium EPA -1632 7 days Note:List of Radionuclides suggested for analysis includes the following:Americium-241;Cesium-137;Lead-210;Plutonium- 238,239,240;Potassium-40;Radium-226;Radium-228;Strontium-90;Thorium-230,232;Uranium-234,235,238;Tritium Gross Alpha,Gross Beta Table 5.5-4.List of water quality parameters and frequency of collection. Parameter Task Frequency of Collection In Situ Water Quality Parameters Dissolved Oxygen (DO)Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event pH Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Water Temperature Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Specific Conductance Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Turbidity Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Redox Potential Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Color Baseline WQ (Visual)Monthly Residues Baseline WQ (Visual)One Survey-summer General Water Quality Parameters (grab samples for laboratory analysis) Hardness Baseline WQ Monthly Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-37 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Parameter Task Freamency of Alkalinity Baseline WQ Monthly Nitrate/Nitrite Baseline WQ Monthly Ammonia as N Baseline WQ Monthly Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Baseline WQ Monthly Total Phosphorus Baseline WQ Monthly Ortho-phosphate Baseline WQ Monthly Chlorophyll-a Baseline WQ Monthly Total Dissolved Solids Baseline WQ Monthly Total Suspended Solids Baseline WQ Monthly Turbidity Baseline WQ Monthly TOC Baseline WQ One Survey-summer DOC Baseline WQ Monthly Fecal Coliform Baseline WQ One Survey-summer Petroleum Hydrocarbons Baseline WQ One Survey-summer Radioactivity Baseline WQ One Survey-summer Metals -(Water)Dissolved and Total Aluminum Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)One Survey-summer Arsenic Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Barium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Beryllium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Cadmium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Chromium (Ill &IV)Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)One Survey-summer Cobalt Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Copper Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Iron Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Lead Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Manganese Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Magnesium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Mercury Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Molybdenum Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Nickel Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Selenium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)One Survey-summer Thallium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Vanadium Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-38 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Parameter Task Frequency ofCollection Zinc Baseline WQ (Total &Dissolved)Monthly Metals -Sediment (Total) Aluminum Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Arsenic Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Cadmium Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Copper Sediment Samples One Survey-summer tron Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Lead Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Mercury Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Zine Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Metals -Fish Tissue (Use EPA Sampling Method 1669) Total Mercury Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Methylmercury Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Arsenic Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Cadmium Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Selenium Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-39 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 5.5-5.Schedule for Implementation of the Baseline Water Quality Study. Activity 2012 2013 2014 2015 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q|2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q/4Q4;1Q Thermal Imaging (one survey) MET Station Installation and Data Collection QAPP/SAP Preparation and Review Deployment of Temperature Monitoring Apparatus Water Quality Monitoring (monthly) Sediment Sampling Fish Tissue Sampling Data Analysis and Management Initial Study Report Updated Study Report Legend: -Planned Activity A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-40 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.5.11.Figures 184°1$3°w -¥at '\)Mekinley PaPark " .eeLegend Proposed Rar aieCollectionSitesALaul 'tee Fe*y?\*.Proposed ! Watana Dam Site[esSusitna Basin63°30'N63"NLi Gold Creek Hi Sherman.-;62°30'N62°N61°30'Ni) a ry ra.: hsFortRichardson'!*a Projection Alaske Alters NAD 1883*o Oste Created 12:4:2012 Map Author.Tetra Tech File.WO_ProposedCotectionSides md Figure 5.5-1.Proposed 2012 Stream Water Quality and Temperature Data Collection Sites for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority'Orr No.14241 PC)"Decembe REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 5.5-2.Example of a 10-foot (3-meter)tripod MET station installed above the proposed Watana Dam site. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-42 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR WATER RESOURCES STUDIES Water Quality Data (1975-2003) Ice Processes in the Susitna River (7.6) Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (9) Ice Dynamics Hydraulic *Formation Routing «Breakup Model *(4Q-2013?){1Q-2013) ADEC Mercury in Fish Tissue (2006) Water Quality Characterization (Monthly Monitoring) a)Surface Water b)Sediment c)Groundwater *In Situ parameters ¢General parameters *Metals (one-time) (10-2014) Baseline River Productivity Study Water Quality (nutrient availability)Monitoring (9.08)Study (5.5) Groundwater-| Water Quality Model (EFDC) Ice Dynamics WaQ Calibration Data Mercury (metals)Dataoeeooe Fish Tissue Analysis Sediment Toxics Analysis Surface Water Analysis (20-2014) Hydraulic Routing Model (10-2014) Reservoir Trap Efficiency a)Focus Study Areas i b)Mainstem Conditions Wetlands Wildlife Study {|}Riparian Study«Riverine Model Study (10.1)(11.6)*Reservoir Model (11.7) Related Aquatic Habitat Study (7.5) Water Quality Geomorphology Modeling Study Study (5.6)(6) Figure 5.5-3.Interdependencies for water resources studies. Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study (5.7) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-43 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.6.Water Quality Modeling Study 5.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study The collective goal of the water quality studies is to assess the impacts of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin with particular reference to state water quality standards.Predicting the potential impacts of the dam and its proposed operations on water quality will require the development of a water quality model.The goal of the Water Quality Modeling Study will be to utilize the extensive information collected from the Baseline Water Quality Study to develop a model(s)to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed. A large number of water quality models are available for use on the Susitna-Watana Project. Selection of the appropriate model is based on a variety of factors,including cost,data inputs, model availability,time,licensing participant familiarity,ease of use,and available documentation.Under the current study,a multi-dimensional model capable of representing reservoir flow circulation,temperature stratification,and dam operations among other parameters is necessary.The proposed model must account for water quality conditions in the proposed Susitna-Watana Reservoir,including temperature,dissolved oxygen (DO),suspended sediment and turbidity,chlorophyll-a,nutrients,and metals,as well as water quality conditions in the Susitna River downstream of the proposed dam.The model must also simulate current Susitna River baseline conditions (in the absence of the dam)for comparison to conditions in the presence of the dam and reservoir. The objectives of the Water Quality Modeling Study are as follows: e With input from licensing participants,implement an appropriate reservoir and river water temperature model for use with past and current monitoring data. e Using the data developed in Sections 5.5 (Baseline Water Quality Study)model water quality conditions in the proposed Susitna-Watana Reservoir,including (but not necessarily limited to),temperature,DO,suspended sediment and turbidity,chlorophyll- a,nutrients,ice,and metals. e Model water quality conditions in the Susitna River from the proposed site of the Susitna- Watana Dam downstream,including (but not necessarily limited to)temperature, suspended sediment and turbidity,and ice processes (in coordination with the Ice Processes Study). 5.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information In the 1980s,hydrologic and temperature modeling was conducted in the Susitna River basin to predict the effects of one or more dams on downstream temperatures and flows.The modeling suite used was called HEOBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM.The modeling suite addressed temperature and had some limited hydrodynamic representation,but it lacked the ability to predict vertical stratification or local effects.In addition,the modeling suite lacked a water quality modeling component. Review of existing water quality and sediment transport data revealed several gaps that present challenges for calibrating a water quality model (URS 2011).Analysis of existing data was used to identify future studies needed to develop the riverine and reservoir water quality models and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-44 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN to eventually predict pre-Project water quality conditions throughout the drainage.Some general observations based on existing data are as follows: e Large amounts of data were collected during the 1980s.A comprehensive data set for the Susitna River and tributaries is not available. e The influence of major tributaries (Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers)on Susitna River water quality conditions is unknown.There are no monitoring stations in receiving water at these mainstem locations. e Continuous temperature data and seasonal water quality data are not available for the Susitna River mainstem and sloughs potentially used for spawning and rearing habitat. Concentrations of water quality parameters including metals in sediment immediately below the proposed Project are unknown.Metals in these sediments may become mobile once the Project begins operation.Monitoring information in the immediate vicinity of the reservoir and riverine habitat will be important for developing two models (reservoir and riverine)and coupled for predicting expected water quality conditions below the proposed dam. 5.6.3.Study Area Water quality samples will be collected at the same locations where temperature data loggers were installed (Table 5.6-1 and Figure 5.6-1)as part of the 2012 Baseline Water Quality Study. The study area begins at RM 15.1 and extends past the proposed dam site to RM 233.4.The lowermost boundary of the monitoring that will be used for developing and calibrating models is above the area protected for beluga whale activity.Twelve mainstem Susitna River monitoring sites are located below the proposed dam site and two mainstem sites above this location for calibration of the models.Six sloughs will be included in the models and represent important fish-rearing habitat.Tributaries to the Susitna River will be monitored and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow like the Talkeetna,Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna rivers.A partial list of the remaining tributaries that will be included in modeling and that represent important spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous and resident fisheries include Gold Creek,Portage Creek,Tsusena Creek,Watana Creek,and Oshetna Creek.These sites were selected based on the following rationale: e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site. e Preliminary consultation with licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g.,instream flow,ice processes). e Access and land ownership issues. Eight of the sites are mainstem monitoring sites that were previously used for SNTEMP modeling in the 1980s.Thirty-one of the sites are Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations,most of which were also monitored in the 1980s. 5.6.4.Study Methods This section provides the rationale for selection of the water quality model to be used for this Project.For the current Project,the model needs to be capable of simulating both river and reservoir environments.It also needs to be a multi-dimensional dynamic model that includes Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-45 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN hydrodynamics,water temperature,water quality,and sediment transport modules and considers ice formation and break-up. Ice dynamics evaluated in the Ice Processes Study will be used to inform the water quality model.Ice formation and break-up will have a profound impact on hydrodynamics and water quality conditions in the reservoir and riverine sections of the basin.Ice cover affects transfer of oxygen to and from the atmosphere and this directly affects the dissolved oxygen concentration at points along the water column.The output from the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)will provide boundary conditions for the water quality model. The model will need to be configured for the reservoir and internally coupled with the downstream river model.This will form a holistic modeling framework that can accurately simulate changes in the hydrodynamic,temperature,and water quality regime within the reservoir and downstream.The model for use in this study should feature an advanced turbulence closure scheme to represent vertical mixing in reservoirs,and be able to predict future conditions.Thus,it will be capable of representing the temperature regime within the reservoir without resorting to arbitrary assumptions about vertical mixing coefficients. The model will need to have the ability to simulate an entire suite of water quality parameters, and the capacity for internal coupling with the hydrodynamic and temperature modeling processes.The model will need to be configured to simulate the impact of the proposed Project on temperature as well as DO,nutrients,algae,turbidity,total suspended solids (TSS),and other key water quality features both within the reservoir and for the downstream river.This avoids the added complexity associated with transferring information among multiple models and increases the efficiency of model application. Other important factors used for selecting the water quality model included the following: The model and code are easily accessible and are part of the public domain. e The model is commonly used and accepted by EPA and other regulatory agencies. The water quality model will be available for current and future use and remain available for the life of the project and beyond (including upgraded versions). e Model output can be compared to relevant ADEC water quality criteria (18 ACC 70.020(b)). The following sections summarize the capabilities of models considered for use on this project and outline characteristics of those previously used with historical data from the Susitna River drainage and others commonly used for water quality modeling for regulatory decision-making. 5.6.4.1.H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM Model Review The existing H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM model of the Susitna River basin is perhaps the most obvious candidate model to implement when assessing the effects of the originally proposed Project.The existing model was expressly configured to represent the unique conditions in the Susitna River basin.However,the modeling suite is limited to flow and temperature predictions.Hydrodynamics are simplified,and water quality is not addressed. The Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (AEIDC)previously completed a study that examined the temperature and discharge effects if the proposed Project was completed and compared the effects to the natural stream conditions,without a dam and reservoir system (AEIDC 1983a).The study also assessed the downstream point at which post-Project flows Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-46 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN would be statistically the same as natural flows.Multiple models were used in the assessment: SNTEMP,a riverine temperature model;H2OBAL,a water balance program;and DYRESM,a reservoir hydrodynamic model. The simulation period covered the years 1968 through 1982.Only the summer period was simulated,using historical meteorological and hydrological data to represent normal,maximum, and minimum stream temperature conditions,represented by the years 1980,1977,and 1970, respectively (AEIDC 1983a).Post-project modifications were applied to these summer periods to compare natural conditions to post-Project stream temperatures.Due to a lack of data,a monthly time-step was used in these summer condition simulations. Mainstem discharges from the Susitna-Watana Dam site were estimated from statistically-filled stream flow data and the H2OBAL program,which computes tributary inflow on a watershed area-weighted basis.Post-Project flows were predicted for both a one-dam scenario and a two- dam scenario using release discharge estimates from a reservoir operation schedule scenario in the FERC License Application.Flows derived from H2OBAL were input into SNTEMP. SNTEMP is a riverine temperature simulation model that can predict temperature on a daily basis and for longer time periods.This allows for the analysis of both critical river reaches at a fine scale and the full river system over a longer averaging period (AEIDC 1983b).SNTEMP was selected because it contains a regression model that can fill in data gaps in temperature records.This is useful because data records in the Susitna River watershed are sparse.SNTEMP can also be calibrated to adjust for low-confidence input parameters.SNTEMP outputs include average daily water temperatures and daily maximum and minimum temperatures. SNTEMP contains several sub-models,including a solar radiation model that predicts solar radiation based on stream latitude,time of year,topography,and meteorological conditions (AEIDC 1983b).SNTEMP was modified to include the extreme shading conditions that occur in the basin by developing a monthly topographic shading parameter.Modifications were also made to represent the winter air temperature inversions that occur in the basin.Sub-models are also included for heat flux,heat transport,and flow mixing. SNTEMP validation indicated that upper tributary temperatures were under-predicted (AEIDC 1983b).Most of the data for the tributaries were assumed or estimated,leading to uncertainty. Five key poorly defined variables were identified as possible contributors to the under-prediction of temperatures:stream flow,initial stream temperature,stream length,stream width and distributed flow temperatures.Distributed flow temperatures were highlighted as the most important of the five variables.During calibration,groundwater temperature parameters were adjusted to modify distributed flow and improve tributary temperature prediction. Water temperatures are derived from USGS gages,but when data were lacking,SNTEMP computed equilibrium temperatures and then estimated initial temperatures from a regression model.AEIDC noted that the reliability of the regression models "restricts the accuracy of the physical process temperature simulations”(1983a).The level of confidence in the regression model varies by the amount of gage data available.Continuous data yielded higher confidence, while years with only grab sample data notably decreased the confidence in the predicted temperatures. The DYRESM model is a one-dimensional,hydrodynamic model designed specifically for medium size reservoirs (Patterson et al.1977).The size limitation ensures that the assumptions Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-47 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN of the model algorithm remain valid.DYRESM predicts daily temperature and salinity variations with depth and the temperature and salinity of off-take supply.The reservoir is modeled as horizontal layers with variable vertical location,volume,temperature and salinity.Mixing between layers is through amalgamation.Inflow and withdrawal are modeled by changes in the horizontal layer thickness and insertion or removal of layers,as appropriate.The model incorporates up to two submerged off-takes and one overflow outlet.Model output is on a daily time-step. The DYRESM model was run to simulate the reservoir scenario for 1981 conditions (AEIDC 1983a).Other reservoir release temperature estimates were not available.The AEIDC report cautions that the results from 1981 may not be representative of other years due to annual variations in meteorology,hydrology,reservoir storage,and power requirements.The lack of reservoir release temperature data limited the simulation of downstream temperatures under operational conditions to one year.AEIDC noted that the "effort to delineate river reaches where post-project flows differ significantly from natural flows has been unsuccessful”(AEIDC 1983a).This was attributed in large part to the lack of estimates for the reservoir release temperatures.Additional data were needed to increase the predictive ability of SNTEMP. Perhaps the biggest limitations of the existing H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM modeling suite are the lack of suitable data,simplified hydrology,and the lack of a water quality component. Modeling is limited to discharge and temperature.Other issues that limit the suitability of the modeling suite for the Water Quality Modeling Study are the chronic under-prediction of upper tributary temperatures,and the inability to predict vertical stratification within the reservoir. 5.6.4.2.|Other Modeling Approaches Two other modeling approaches may provide better results than the previously used H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM model.These are discussed below. 5.6.4.3.|Two-Dimensional Approach (CE-Qual-W2) The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers'CE-QUAL-W2 model is a_two-dimensional, longitudinal/vertical (laterally averaged),hydrodynamic and water quality model (Cole et al. 2000).The model can be applied to streams,rivers,lakes,reservoirs,and estuaries with variable grid spacing,time-variable boundary conditions,and multiple inflows and outflows from point/nonpoint sources and precipitation. The two major components of the model include hydrodynamics and water quality kinetics.Both of these components are coupled (i.e.,the hydrodynamic output is used to drive the water quality output at every time-step).The hydrodynamic portion of the model predicts water surface elevations,velocities,and temperature.The water quality portion of the model can simulate 21 constituents including DO,suspended sediment,chlorophyll-a,nutrients,and metals.A dynamic shading algorithm is incorporated to represent topographic and vegetative cover effects on solar radiation. 5.6.4.4.Three-Dimensional Approach (EFDC) The Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC)model was originally developed at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science and is considered public domain software (Hamrick 1992). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-48 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN This model is now being supported by EPA.EFDC is a dynamic,three-dimensional,coupled water quality and hydrodynamic model.In addition to hydrodynamic,salinity,and temperature transport simulation capabilities,EFDC is capable of simulating cohesive and non-cohesive sediment transport,near field and far field discharge dilution from multiple sources, eutrophication processes,the transport and fate of toxic contaminants in the water and sediment phases,and the transport and fate of various life stages of finfish and shellfish.The EFDC model has been extensively tested,documented,and applied to environmental studies world-wide by universities,governmental agencies,and environmental consulting firms. The structure of the EFDC model includes four major modules:(1)a hydrodynamic model,(2)a water quality model,(3)a sediment transport model,and (4)a toxics model.The water quality portion of the model simulates the spatial and temporal distributions of 22 water quality parameters including DO,suspended algae (three groups),periphyton,various components of carbon,nitrogen,phosphorus and silica cycles,and fecal coliform bacteria.Salinity,water temperature,and total suspended solids are needed for computation of the 22 state variables,and they are provided by the hydrodynamic model.EFDC incorporates solar radiation using the algorithms from the CE-QUAL-W2 model. 5.6.4.5.|Qualitative Comparison of Models Table 5.6-2 presents an evaluation of the models'applicability to a range of important technical needs that support baseline water quality monitoring study objectives along with regulatory,and management considerations.Technical criteria refer to the ability to simulate the physical system in question,including physical characteristics/processes and constituents of interest.Regulatory criteria reflect the ability of a model to use and compare results to water quality standards or procedural protocol.Management criteria outline another set of selection elements for a water quality model and these comprise operational or economic constraints imposed by the end-user and include factors such as financial and technical resources.The relative importance of each group of criteria for model selection,as it pertains to the Project,are presented alongside the models'applicability ratings.Although the evaluation is qualitative,it is useful in selecting a model based on the factors that are most critical to this Project. 5.6.4.6.|Technical Considerations The following discussion highlights some of the key technical considerations for modeling associated with the Project and compares the ability of CE-QUAL-W2 and EFDC to address these considerations.For informational purposes,the HOOBAL/SYNTEMP/DYRESM modeling suite is also discussed in the technical considerations.Based on a review of the literature,some key factors that will likely be important in the modeling effort include the following: 1.Prediction of vertical stratification in the reservoir when the dam is present 2.Nutrient and algae representation 3.Sediment transport 4.Ability to represent metals concentrations 5.Integration between temperature and ice dynamics models 6.Capability of representing local effects (i.e.,Focus Areas) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-49 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.6.4.6.1.Predicting Vertical Stratification Both EFDC and CE-QUAL-W2 are equipped with turbulence closure schemes that allow prediction of temporally/spatially variable vertical mixing strength based on time,weather condition,and reservoir operations.Therefore,both are capable of evaluating the impact of dam/reservoir operations/climate change on reservoir stratification.In contrast,the existing H2OBAL/SYNTEMP/DYRESM model does not have the necessary predictive capability because vertical stratification is represented based on parameterization through calibration. Therefore,it cannot represent the response of vertical mixing features to the changes in external forces. 5.6.4.6.2.Nutrient and Algae Representation Both EFDC and CE-QUAL-W2 are capable of simulating dynamic interactions between nutrients and algae in reservoirs and interactions between nutrients and periphyton in riverine sections.This is very important for addressing the potential impact of the proposed Project on water quality and ecology in the river.EFDC has better nutrient predictive capabilities due to its sediment diagenesis module,which simulates interactions between external nutrient loading and bed-water fluxes.EFDC is thus capable of predicting long-term effects of the proposed Project. CE-QUAL-W2 does not have such a _predictive capability.The existing H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM modeling suite is not capable of representing nutrient and algae interactions. 5.6.4.6.3.Sediment Transport EFDC is fully capable of predicting sediment erosion,transport,and settling/deposition processes.CE-QUAL-W2 has limited sediment transport simulation capabilities.It handles water column transport and settling;however,it is not capable of fully predicting sediment bed re- suspension and deposition processes.HXOBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM is not capable of simulating sediment transport.Reservoir trap efficiency will be simulated using EFDC and will use estimates for sediment inflow determined by the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5). 5.6.4.6.4.Ability to Represent Metals Concentrations EFDC is fully capable of simulating fate and transport of metals in association with sediments in both rivers and reservoirs.CE-QUAL-W2 does not have a module to simulate metals;however,a simplified representation can be implemented using the phosphorus slot in the model and simple partitioning (to couple with its basic sediment transport representation).The H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM is not capable of addressing metals issues. 5.6.4.6.5.Toxicity Modeling The EFDC model will generate the water quality input for the Biotic Ligand Model (BLM).The BLM will be utilized to predict potential toxicity of copper,silver,cadmium,zinc,nickel,and lead to aquatic life.The BLM is focused on determining toxicity of individual metals to binding sites on tissue like gill filaments of freshwater fish while considering other factors that compete for the same binding sites. The BLM will be restricted from use if the combination of water quality monitoring results for metals concentrations in sediments and surface water show little or no detectable concentrations and the water quality model shows that changes,if any,to water quality conditions that mobilize metals does not occur.This is part of the pathways analysis for individual metals toxics and is Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-50 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN where decisions for use of secondary models (like BLM)in addition to the EFDC primary model will be made. Borgmann et al.2008 outline several assumptions under which toxicity of metals concentrations at sites of bioaccumulation interactions are additive.The use of the BLM to estimate a toxic effect from mixtures of metals must satisfy several unknowns and,as stated by the authors, should be used with caution and other strategies for these toxicity estimates considered. §.6.4.6.6.Integration between Temperature and Ice Dynamics Models The CE-QUAL-W2 model has a coupled temperature-ice simulation module,which is of moderate complexity and predictive capability.EFDC has a slightly simpler ice representation that was previously applied to a number of Canadian rivers (e.g.,Lower Athabasca River and the North Saskatchewan River in Alberta,Canada).Both models,however,can be coupled to external ice models with a properly designed interface to communicate temperature results.Fully predictive simulation within either model would require code modification to handle the interaction between temperature simulation,ice formation and transport,hydrodynamics simulation,and water quality simulation. 5.6.4.6.7.Capability of Representing Local Effects CE-QUAL-W2 is a longitudinal-vertical two-dimensional model;therefore,it is capable of resolving spatial variability in the longitudinal and vertical directions.It is not capable of representing high-resolution local effects such as lateral discharge,areas affected by secondary circulation,or certain habitat characteristic changes.EFDC is a three-dimensional model that can be configured at nearly any spatial resolution to represent local effects. H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM is a one-dimensional modeling suite and therefore has limited capability representing local effects. 5.6.4.7.|Conclusion Based on the evaluation of each model presented in Section 5.6.4.6,the EFDC model has been selected for further use in this study.A Water Quality Modeling Study,Sampling and Analysis, Quality Assurance Project Plan is included in Attachment 5-2. 5.6.4.8.|Reservoir and River Downstream of Reservoir Modeling Approach Reservoir modeling will focus on the length of the river from above the expected area of reservoir inundation to the proposed dam location.It will involve first running the without project scenario,or initial condition.This initial condition represents current baseline conditions in the absence of the dam.Subsequently,the model will represent the proposed reservoir condition when the dam is in place.The reservoir representation will be developed based on the local bathymetry and dimensions of the proposed dam.A three-dimensional model will be developed for the proposed reservoir to represent the spatial variability in hydrodynamics and water quality in longitudinal,vertical,and lateral directions.The model will be able to simulate flow circulation in the reservoir,turbulence mixing,temperature dynamics,nutrient fate and transport,interaction between nutrients and algae,sediment transport,and metals transport.The key feature that needs to be captured is water column stratification during the warm season and the de-stratification when air temperatures cool down.The capability of predictively representing Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-51 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN the stratification/de-stratification period is of critical importance for evaluating the impact of the dam because this is the critical water quality process in the reservoir. With the dam in place,the original river will be converted into a slow flowing reservoir; therefore,any sediment previously mobilized will likely settle in the reservoir,disrupting the natural sediment transport processes.Before the construction of the dam,primary production is likely driven by periphyton.After construction of the dam,periphyton will be largely driven out of existence due to deep water conditions typical of a reservoir environment.In lieu of periphyton,phytoplankton will likely be the dominant source of primary production of the ecological system with the dam in place.Nutrients from upstream will have longer retention in the reservoir,providing nutrient sources to fuel phytoplankton growth.All processes would need to be predictively simulated by both the reservoir model and the pre-reservoir river model for the same river segment. Because the dam is not in place when the model is constructed,proper calibration of the model using actual reservoir data is not possible.To achieve reasonable predictions of water quality conditions in the proposed reservoir,a literature survey will be conducted to acquire parameterization schemes of the model.An uncertainty analysis approach will also be developed to account for the lack of data for calibration,therefore enhancing the reliability of reservoir model predictions. Downstream of the proposed dam location,a river model will also be developed to evaluate the effects of the proposed Project.The same model platform used for the reservoir model will be implemented for the river model (at a minimum the two models will be tightly coupled).The river model will be capable of representing conditions in both the absence and presence of the dam.The downstream spatial extent of this model will be the lowermost monitoring site on the Susitna River mainstem (RM 15.1)extending downstream of the Susitna-Talkeetna-Chulitna confluence.Water quality modeling will extend into the lower river and will use channel topography and flow data at select locations in order to develop a model for predicting water quality conditions under various Project operational scenarios. Flow,temperature,TSS,DO,nutrients,turbidity (continuous at USGS sites and bi-weekly at additional locations required for calibrating the model),and chlorophyll-a output from the reservoir model will be directly input into the downstream river model.This will enable downstream evaluation of potential impacts of the proposed Project on hydrodynamic, temperature,and water quality conditions. The river model will be calibrated and validated using available data concurrently with the initial reservoir condition model (representing absence of the dam).Output from the models will be used directly in other studies (e.g.,Ice Processes,Productivity,and Instream Flow studies). The EFDC model will be calibrated in order to simulate water quality conditions for load- following analysis.Organic carbon content from inflow sources will be correlated with mercury concentrations determined from the Baseline Water Quality Study discussed in Section 5.5. Predicted water quality conditions established by Project operations and that promote methylation of mercury in the bioaccumulative form will be identified by location and intensity in both riverine and reservoir habitats.Water temperature modeling and routing of fluctuating flows immediately prior to and during ice cover development may be conducted with a separate thermodynamics-based ice process model River 1-D ice-processes model;the Susitna Hydraulic and Thermal Processes Model (Section 7.6.3.2). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-52 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Modeling of mercury concentrations in dissolved and in methylated form will be done by updating the EFDC model to simulate three sorptive toxic variables representing mercury (Hg) states.Algorithms have been successfully used with EFDC in other studies and will be modified to account for potential sources of Hg as the reservoir is filled (e.g.,soils,vegetation,air deposition).Other metals parameters will be modeled if significant concentrations are identified from surface water and sediment.However,cumulative impacts of multiple metals on aquatic life are difficult to predict using the proposed modeling strategy because there are associated uncertainties.Measuring additivity or synergism of toxics effects is possible using laboratory bioassays,but may not be adequately predicted by a model.The level of uncertainty in extrapolating results from laboratory to field conditions is large and potentially unreliable.A suggested approach for estimating toxicity mixtures would be to develop a weight of evidence (WOE)algorithm that produces a weighting factor for re-calculating the potential chronic and acute toxic effects of a mixture (Mumtaz et al.1998). 5.6.4.8.1 Focus Areas The EFDC model will be used to predict water quality conditions at a finer scale of resolution for Focus Areas.The increased intensity of sampling at transects 100 m apart and at three locations across each transect will improve resolution for predictions at approximately 100 m longitudinally and a smaller distance laterally.This model will be embedded within the larger- scale EFDC model used for the entire riverine component of the Project area.An embedded model can also be used for predicting conditions in sloughs and selected braided areas of the mainstem Susitna River. Some of the water quality parameters listed in Section 5.5.4.4 will be used to predict conditions within the Focus Areas to determine if suitability of habitat for life stages of select fish species is maintained or changes under each of the operational scenarios.The EFDC model calibrated for each of the Focus Areas will have a time-step component so that conditions and areal extent are described for each of the water quality parameters and are associated with load-following. 5.6.4.8.2 Scales for Modeling and Resolution of the Output The large-scale EFDC model calibrated using the mainstem water quality monitoring data will have a longitudinal predictive resolution between 250 m and 1 kilometer (km)depending on lateral variability of conditions and the run-time selected.Single channel areas of the mainstem Susitna River and sloughs may not require higher resolution predictions if water quality conditions are uniform.The uniformity of conditions will be evaluated by measuring across transects at a few locations in the drainage to determine if lateral variability is low. Grid size in the model determines spatial resolution of predicted water quality conditions.The riverine (and reservoir)areas of the Project are divided into equal-sized grids and the center of each represents the predicted water quality condition.The grid size is dependent on a number of characteristics of the Project area.These characteristics include elevation changes throughout the length of the drainage,length of the water body that will be modeled,surrounding terrain,and length of time the model is run for predicting temporal changes.Each of the factors ultimately determines the resolution of the predictive capability of the EFDC model. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-53 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice Models will be the primary method used for predicting potential impacts to water quality conditions in both the proposed reservoir and the riverine portion of the Susitna basin.The models will be developed for each of the reservoir and riverine sections of the Susitna River and will be used to predict conditions resulting from Project operations under several operational scenarios.In the absence of a dam and data describing actual water quality conditions in the proposed reservoir,models are the only way to predict potential changes that may occur in the Susitna River from the presence of a dam.The 401 Water Quality Certification process includes the use of baseline assessment information and the use of models.The use of models is a scientifically accepted practice for predicting impacts to water quality and generating operational scenario outputs to inform the Project certification.The model selection process evaluated model features required for use in a river setting with braided channels,glacial water source,and ability to predict conditions in more than two-dimensions.The evaluation and proposed documentation describing performance and use of the model are accepted scientific practice for generating defensible and high quality data.The output from model calibration and predictions are consistent with recommended steps in generating high quality data as guided by a Credible Data Policy. 5.6.6.Schedule The planned schedule for the study plan is presented in Table 5.6-3.Close coordination will be maintained with the water quality studies to make sure the data generated is sufficient and appropriate for the modeling effort.The model selection was made in July 2012,and the selection process is provided here.The water quality model will begin to be calibrated starting in the middle of 2013,as the data becomes available from the field.We anticipate producing an initial study report in the first quarter of 2014.After that will be a period of re-calibrations, verification runs,and generating operating scenarios for the proposed reservoir.The final modeling report will be complete in the first quarter of 2015. 5.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies Figure 5.6-2 shows the interdependencies between existing data and related historical studies, specific output for each element of the Water Quality studies,and where the output information generated in the Water Quality studies will be directed.This chart provides details describing the flow of information related to the Water Quality studies,from historical data collection to current data collection.Data were examined in a Water Quality Data Gap Analysis (URS 2011)and this information was used,in part,to assist in making decisions about the current design for the Baseline Water Quality Modeling Study and for ensuring that current modeling efforts would be able to compare the 1980s study results with current modeling results. Integral portions of this interdependency chart are results from the Ice Processes Study and from the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study.The Ice Processes Study will support water quality model development (Section 5.6)with information about timing and conditions for ice formation and ice break-up.The Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study represents the effort to develop a hydraulic routing model that will be coupled with the EFDC water quality model.Water quality monitoring efforts for field parameters,general chemistry,and metals (including mercury)will be used as a calibration data set for developing the predictive EFDC model. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-54 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost The estimated cost for the proposed water quality modeling effort in 2013 and 2014,including planning,model calibration and development,modeling various operational scenarios,and reporting is approximately $1,750,000. 5.6.9.Literature Cited Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (AEIDC),1983a.Examination of Susitna River Discharge and Temperature Changes Due to the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project -Final Report.Prepared by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Anchorage,AK.Submitted to Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Anchorage,AK. Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK. AEIDC.1983b.Stream Flow and Temperature Modeling in the Susitna Basin,Alaska,Prepared by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Anchorage,AK.Submitted to Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Anchorage,AK.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK. Cole,T.M.and S.A.Wells.2000.CE-QUAL-W2:A two-dimensional,laterally averaged, Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model,Version 3.0,Instruction Report EL-2000.US Army Engineering and Research Development Center,Vicksburg,MS. Hamrick,J.M.1992.A Three-Dimensional Environmental Fluid Dynamics Computer Code: Theoretical and Computational Aspects,Special Report 317.The College of William and Mary,Virginia Institute of Marine Science.63 pp. Mumtaz,M.M.,C.T.De Roza,J.Groten,V.J.Feron,H.Hansen,and P.R.Durkin.1998. Estimation of Toxicity of Chemical Mixtures through Modeling of Chemical Interactions. Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 106:Supplement 6.1353-1360. Patterson,John,J.Imberger,B.Hebbert,and I.Loh.1977.Users Guide to DYRESM -A Simulation Model for Reservoirs of Medium Size.University of Western Australia, Nedlands,Western Australia. URS.2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska. 62p.tAppendixes. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-55 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.6.10.Tables Table 5.6-1.Proposed Susitna River Basin Water Quality and Temperature Monitoring Sites. Susitna Description Susitna River Latitude Longitude River Mile Slough ID (decimal degrees)(decimal degrees) 15.1 Susitna above Alexander Creek NA 61.4014 -150.519 25.83 Susitna Station NA 61.5454 150.516 28.0 Yentna River NA 61.589 -150.468 29.5 Susitna above Yentna NA 61.5752 -150.248 40.63 Deshka River NA 61.7098 -150.324 55.01 Susitna NA 61.8589 -150.18 83.83 Susitna at Parks Highway East NA 62.175 -150.174 83.93 Susitna at Parks Highway West NA 62.1765 -150.177 97.0 LRX 1 NA 62.3223 150.127 97.2 Talkeetna River NA 62.3418 -150.106 98.5 Chulitna River NA 62.5574 -150.236 103.023 Talkeetna NA 62.3943 -150.134 113.02 LRX 18 NA 62.5243 150.112 120.723 Curry Fishwheel Camp NA 62.6178 -150.012 126.0 -8A 62.6707 -149.903 126.12 LRX 29 NA 62.6718 -149.902 129.23 -9 62.7022 -149.843 130.82 LRX 35 NA 62.714 -149.81 135.3 -11 62.7555 -149.7111 136.5 Susitna near Gold Creek NA 62.7672 -149.694 136.83 Gold Creek NA 62.7676 -149.691 138.01 16B 62.7812 149.674 138.63 Indian River NA 62.8009 -149.664 138.72 Susitna above Indian River NA 62.7857 -149.651 140.0 19 62.7929 149.615 140.12 LRX 53 NA 62.7948 -149.613 142.0 21 62.8163 -149.576 148.0 Susitna below Portage Creek NA 62.8316 -149.406 148.82 Susitna above Portage Creek NA 62.8286 -149.379 148.8 Portage Creek NA 62.8317 149.379 148.83 Susitna above Portage Creek NA 62.8279 -149.377 165.0!Susitna NA 62.7899 -148.997 180.3!Susitna below Tsusena Creek NA 62.8157 -148.652 181.33 Tsusena Creek NA 62.8224 -148.613 184.5!Susitna at Watana Dam site NA 62.8226 -148.533 194.1 Watana Creek NA 62.8296 -148.259 206.8 Kosina Creek NA 62.7822 -147,94 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-56 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Susitna Description Susitna River Latitude Longitude River Mile Slough ID (decimal degrees)(decimal degrees) 223.73 Susitna near Cantwell NA 62.7052 147.538 233.4 Oshetna Creek NA 62.6402 -147.383 1 Site not sampled for water quality or temperature in the 1980s or location moved slightly from original location. 2 Proposed mainstem Susitna River temperature monitoring sites for purposes of 1980s SNTEMP model evaluation. 3.Locations with overlap of water quality temperature monitoring sites with other studies. Locations in bold font represent that both temperature and water quality samples are collected froma site. Table 5.6-2.Evaluation of models based on technical,regulatory,and management criteria. @ High Suitability O Medium Suitability O Low Suitability :.Relative H2OBAL/SNTE CE QUALConsiderationsImportance|MP/DYRESM |W2 EFDC Technical Criteria Physical Processes: e advection,dispersion High ©®@ ®momentum High O e e e compatible with external ice . simulation models High O e bd e reservoir operations High ©e e e predictive temperature simulation (high latitude High ©e @ shading) Water Quality: e total nutrient concentrations High Oo e @ e dissolved/particulate . partitioning Medium O e e e predictive sediment : diagenesis Medium O O bd e -sediment transport High O ©e e algae High O e e e dissolved oxygen High O e @ e metals High O ©e Temporal Scale and Representation: e long term trends and Medium ©©e averages e continuous -ability to predict . small time-step variability High e Spatial Scale and Representation: ©-multi-dimensional : representation High O ©bad e -grid complexity -allows predictions at numerous . locations throughout model High O ©e domain Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-57 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN @ High Suitability O Medium Suitability O Low Suitability ..Relative H2OBAL/SNTE |CE QUALConsiderationsImportance|MP/DYRESM |W2 °EFDC e -suitability for local scale analyses,including local Medium O ©@ discharge evaluation Regulatory Criteria Enables comparison to AK criteria High O e e reatiy crraisccisms Tan |e |e Technically defensible (previous inpeerreviewedferatue,TMDL |Sh ©e e studies) Management Criteria Existing model availability High e @ e Data needs High e @ @ Public domain (non-proprietary)High ®@ @ @ Cost Medium @ ©© Time needed for application Medium N/A ©© familar participant community Low e ©© Level of expertise required Low @ ®@ User interface Low ©©© Model documentation Medium ©e@ @ Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-58 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 5.6-3.Schedule for Implementation of the Modeling Study. 2012 2013 2014 2015 1Q}2Q|3Q/4Q/1Q|2Q/3Q|/4Q;1Q/2Q)3Q]4Q{1QActivity Coordination with water quality data collection and analysis Model Evaluation/Selection Model Calibration (Water Quality) Initial Study Report A Re-calibration adjustments Verification runs Generate Results for Operational Scenarios Updated Study Report A Legend: -Planned Activity A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-59 December 2012 R_..--)STUDY PLAN 5.6.11.Figures 154°w 149°W -amsane Nd :-aa ei-McKinley Park " :'; \s Legend Proposed Collection Sites 1 thee ne Seg yy 's |WatanaDam Site [Nos Gf,2X Park and ProseryaSwans«aeNON63*30'N63°N'fTcold creek > -Sherman,a soe 62°30°N4"\AY Ni ere RuMaiteuoeSAS\}<Q @.Talkeetna ©Se4 Ny 'Trapper Creek(i ' . S38 +tfo:aan!62*N4,certAb!SER Ls °peo'f SOON5ret,Soke AonfeeWebs .x - _-FortRichardsont "fig 3 i Promction:Alanis Albers NAD 1083DateCreated:12/4/201261°30'N--_ses Coane i”owe?{Alchorage'*pane ee ee Map Author Tetra Tech '%4 nes ane: |File.WO ProposedCollecttonSites med\ Figure 5.6-1.Proposed 2012 Stream Water Quality and Temperature Data Collection Sites for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-60 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR WATER RESOURCES STUDIES |ce Processes Fish and AquaticsntheSusitnaInstreamFlowRiver(9)(7-6)Pa Water Quality Ice Dynamics Hydraulic ADEC Data *Formation Routing Mercury in (1975-2003)*Breakup Model Fish Tissue *(4Q-2013?)(1Q-2013)(2006) Water Quality Characterization (Monty Monitoring)Ice Dynamicsa)Su race Water WQ Calibration Datab)Sediment c)Groundwater oeeoeeRiver Productivity Study (nutrient availability) (9.08) Water Quality Model (EFDC) Mercury (metals)Data Fish Tissue Analysis Sediment Toxics Analysis Surface Water Analysis Hydraulic Routing Model (10-2014) .Reservoir Trap Efficiency*In Situ parameters :Generel "one.time)a)Focus Study Areas | (10-2014)b)Mainstem Conditions Wetlands Wildlife Study Riparian Study*Riverine Model Study (10.1)(11.6)*Reservoir Model (11.7) Baseline (20-2014)Groundwater-}heWaterQualityRelatedAquatic Habitat Study (7.5) Monitoring Water Quality Study (5.5)(5.6) Figure 5.6-2.Interdependencies for water resources studies. Modeling Study Geomorphology Study (6) Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study (5.7) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-61 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN 5.7.Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study 5.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study Many studies have documented increased mercury concentrations in fish and wildlife following the flooding of terrestrial areas to create hydroelectric reservoirs.The purpose of this study is to assess the potential for such an occurrence in the proposed Project area. Based on several studies,the mercury that is found in newly formed reservoirs originates predominantly from inundation of organic soils.Receptors are and will be present in the inundation area (macroinvertebrates,fish,birds,etc.).Mercury methylation in reservoirs is a fairly well understood process,and numerous models exist to predict the occurrence and magnitude of the phenomena. Given these known factors,key questions that need to be answered by this study include the following: 1)Whether conditions within the reservoir will cause mercury methylation from this source. 2)The concentrations of methylmercury that might occur. 3)Whether a mechanism exists (fish and small invertebrates living in the methylation zone) to transfer that methylmercury to wildlife,resulting in detrimental impacts. Based on these questions,specific objectives of this study are as follows: e Summarize available and historic water quality information for the Susitna River basin, including data collection from the 1980s Alaska Power Authority (APA)Susitna Hydroelectric Project. e Characterize the baseline mercury concentrations of the Susitna River and tributaries. This will include collection and analyses of vegetation,soil,water,sediment pore water, sediment,piscivorous birds and mammals,and fish tissue samples for mercury. e Utilize available geologic information to determine if a mineralogical source of mercury exists within the inundation area. e Map mercury concentrations of soils and vegetation within the proposed inundation area. This information will be used to develop maps of where mercury methylation may occur. e Use the water quality model to predict where in the reservoir conditions (pH,dissolved oxygen,turnover)are likely to be conducive to methylmercury formation. e Use modeling to estimate methylmercury concentrations in fish. e Assess potential pathways for methylmercury to migrate to the surrounding environment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-62 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Coordinate study results with other study areas,including fish,instream flow,and other piscivorous bird and mammal studies. 5.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information The process by which mercury enters ecosystems is fairly well understood.Inorganic mercury from the atmosphere is deposited in lakes and rivers.Where conditions are right (anoxic, available sulfur),inorganic mercury can be converted by bacteria to methylmercury.Transfer of elemental mercury occurs from atmospheric deposition to surface water,and surface water to sediments.Production of methylmercury,mediated by bacterial activity is promoted or suppressed by one or combination of several factors in the aquatic environment. Factors known to enhance methylation of mercury either in surface water or sediment are the following: e Presence of aquatic vegetation and low oxygen concentrations e Increased nutrients,temperature,microbial respiration,and dissolved organic carbon e Neutral to low pH Factors known to suppress methylation of mercury either in surface water or sediment are as follows: e High oxygen concentrations e Presence of sulfides and acid-volatile sulfides e Presence of Selenium in sediments Transfer of bioaccumulated mercury outside of the aquatic environment occurs between top of food chain animals with consumption of aquatic organisms by terrestrial animals. At each level in a food chain,from bacteria to plankton,small fish,larger fish,and ultimately piscivorous terrestrial wildlife and humans,organisms take in more mercury than they excrete thereby accumulating the excess.This results in elevated concentrations of methylmercury at higher trophic levels.Fish-eating birds and mammals can suffer a wide range of impacts from accumulated methylmercury,including behavioral,neurochemical,hormonal,and reproductive effects. While this process occurs all over the world in natural wetlands,it can be especially acute in newly formed reservoirs.This is because organic-rich soils can absorb mercury from the atmosphere over decades,and their degradation at the bottom of the reservoir will generate a spike in methylmercury production (Stokes and Wren 1987;Bodaly et al,1984;Bodaly el al. 2007;Rudd,1995;Hydro-Quebec 2003). Many studies have documented increased mercury levels in fish following the flooding of terrestrial areas to create hydroelectric reservoirs (Bodaly et al.1984;Bodaly et al 1997;Bodaly et al 2004;Bodaly et al.2007;Rylander et al.2006;Lockhart et al 2005;Johnston et al.1991; Kelly et al.1997;Morrison 1991b).Increased mercury concentrations have also been noted at other trophic levels within aquatic food chains of reservoirs,such as aquatic invertebrates (Hall et al.1998).These problems have been particularly acute in hydropower projects from northern climates including Canada and Finland (Rosenberg et al.1997).When boreal forests with large Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-63 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN surface-area-to-volume ratios are flooded,substantial quantities of organic carbon and mercury stored in vegetation biomass and soils become inputs to the newly formed reservoir (Bodaly et al.1984;Grigal 2003;Kelly et al.1997).This flooding accelerates microbial decomposition, causing high rates of microbial methylation of mercury.Studies have shown this increase is temporary,lasting between 10 and 35 years (Hydro-Quebec 2003;Bodaly et al.2007), whereupon methylmercury concentrations return to background levels.It should be noted that background methylmercury concentrations are rarely zero,and many natural water bodies have shown elevated concentrations of methylmercury. Inorganic mercury deposition from the atmosphere is not a significant source of mercury concentrations that are elevated above background;however,it can be a source of background mercury concentrations.For example,Rudd (1995)has shown that just 0.3 and 3%of the mercury in a reservoir is derived from precipitation,the remainder from inundated fine organic soil particles.As explained in Section 5.7.1,the goal of this study is to quantify mercury resulting from filling the reservoir,not necessarily background mercury. Background mercury concentrations are better predicted from studying mercury levels in nearby natural lakes,not quantifying atmospheric deposition.Background lake studies are included as part of the fish tissue sampling (see Section 5.7.4.2.6). Mercury in organic soils is common.Background concentrations in organic soils of the Kuskokwim area of Alaska were found to be 0.10 to 1.2 parts per million (ppm)(Bailey and Gray 1997;Gray et al 2000);however,this area is well known to have large ore bodies of cinnabar,a mercury ore.Soils in Norway and Sweden were found to have mercury concentrations only as high as 0.24 ppm (Lindqvist 1991).In the United States,the mean concentrations reported from organic soils and loamy soils are 0.28 ppm and 0.13 ppm, respectively (Kabata-Pendias and Pendias 1992).Background concentrations for organic soils in Canada as high as 0.40 ppm have been reported (Kabata-Pendias and Pendias 1992).Shacklette and Boerngen (1984)report an average value of 0.058 ppm in all soil types in the contiguous United States. In organic soils,mercury is mainly present in its inorganic form;the methylated form usually represents less than |percent of the total.Mercury does not appear to be mobile in soils,where it is firmly bound to the humus (Hydro-Quebec 2003). Methylmercury can be detected in nearly every fish analyzed,from nearly any water body in the world.This is because the primary source of mercury to most aquatic ecosystems is deposition from the atmosphere.Mercury deposition worldwide has been steadily increasing due to the widespread burning of coal.In 2007,an international panel of experts concluded,"remote sites in both the Northern and Southern hemispheres demonstrate about a threefold increase in Hg deposition since preindustrial times”(Lindberg et al.2007).Lakes at Glacier Bay,Alaska,have shown that current rates of atmospheric mercury deposition are about double what was observed in pre-industrial times (Engstrom and Swain 1997). Mercury of non-atmospheric origin has been occasionally found in water bodies.The source can be industrial processes,mercury mining,or simply the presence of sulfate-rich mercury ores, which occur in very limited areas.In the study area,no mining has occurred,and there are no industrial sources.Point sources have been documented on the Kuskokwim River in Alaska,but are relatively rare,and are associated with known sulfate-rich ore bodies (Saiki and Martin 2010; Gray et al 2000).Based on the available geologic information,the inundation area consists Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-64 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN largely of diorite and granodiorite,which are not typically associated with massive sulfide mineral deposits.For this reason,such a point source appears to be unlikely in the inundation area for the dam. In areas that lack the necessary mercury mineralization,the mercury concentration in parent geologic materials is typically very low,and cannot explain the mercury concentrations observed in sediment in aquatic ecosystems (Fitzgerald et al.1998;Swain et al.1992;Wiener et al.2006). Historical mercury data from the study area are limited.Some samples were collected during previous studies of the APA Susitna Hydroelectric Project in the 1980s (AEA,2011).This consisted of the collection of water samples at Gold Creek (RM 136)in 1982.Total mercury was found to be 0.12 micrograms per liter (ug/L)in turbid,summer water,and 0.04 pg/L in the clear,winter water (AEA,2011).The same results were found downriver at Susitna Station (RM 26). Frenzel (2000)collected sediment samples from the Deshka River and Talkeetna River,as well as from Colorado Creek and Costello Creek,which are tributaries to the Chulitna River (Table 5.7-1).Based on these results,mercury concentrations in the drainage appear to be elevated overthenationalmedian,and appear to vary significantly by drainage.The report indicated that both Colorado and Costello Creeks appear to drain a portion of Denali National Park and Preserve that is highly mineralized,which likely causes the higher than background mercury concentrations.Previous studies (St.Louis et al.1994)have shown that methylmercury occurrence is positively correlated with wetland density,and the Deshka River has significantly more wetlands in the drainage than other tributaries to the Susitna River. Additional samples were collected by Frenzel (2000)of slimy sculpin from the Deshka River, Talkeetna River,and Costello Creek (Table 5.7-2).Whole fish samples tend to underestimate the presence of methylmercury,given that this compound concentrates in muscle tissue. Samples of fish tissue and sediment from the Deshka River and Costello Creek were speciated for metallic mercury and methylmercury (Table 5.7-3).As anticipated,the ratio of methylmercury to inorganic mercury in the Deshka River is relatively high due to extensive wetlands in the drainage area.Costello Creek was found to have a higher inorganic mercury component due to possible mineralogical sources of mercury in the drainage area. Overall mercury concentrations in water were also found to be positively correlated with the turbidity of the water.Very little mercury was found in filtered water samples (Frenzel 2000). This is consistent with methylmercury being strongly bound to organic particles. These results are in agreement with the results from Krabbenhoft et al.(1999).In nationwide mercury sampling,in a wide array of hydrological basins and environmental settings,wetland density was found to be the most important factor controlling methylmercury production.It was also found that methylmercury production appears proportional to total mercury concentrations only at low total mercury levels.Once total mercury concentrations exceed 1,000 nanograms per gram (ng/g),little additional methylmercury was observed to be produced.Atmospheric deposition was found to be the predominant source for most mercury.Subbasins characterized as mixed agriculture and forested had the highest methylation efficiency,whereas areas affected by mining were found to be the lowest. A more recent study has been done by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation's Department of Environmental Health (ADEC 2012).ADEC is currently analyzing salmon (all Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-65 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN five species)as well as other freshwater species for total mercury in the Susitna River drainages (Table 5.7-4).These results appear to be consistent with those in other areas of the state. 5.7.3.Study Area Water quality and sediment samples will be collected at the sites identified in Table 5.7-5.The study area begins at RM 15.1 and extends past the proposed dam site to RM 233.4.Tributaries to the Susitna River will be sampled and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow such as the Talkeetna,Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna rivers.Also included are smaller tributaries such as Gold,Portage,Tsusena,and Watana creeks,and the Oshetna River.These sites were selected based on the following rationale: e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site for the purpose of a baseline mercury characterization. e Location on tributaries where proposed access road crossing impacts might occur during and after construction (upstream/downstream sampling points on each crossing). e Consultation with licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g., instream flow,ice processes). e Sites that are in the Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations,most of which were monitored in the 1980s. The proposed study will describe impacts from road crossings on mercury concentrations. Several access road corridors have been identified,one of which will be utilized to access the proposed dam site.Road crossings are expected to impact streams at each of the crossings and these locations will be surveyed for toxics concentrations above background in sediment and surface water. Soil and vegetation samples will be collected from the proposed inundation area.Piscivorous birds and mammals,and fish samples,will be collected from a variety of drainages in the study area;however,the focus will be on the proposed inundation area for the dam to establish background concentrations of methylmercury in fish prior to site development. 5.7.4.Study Methods This study responds to comments from NMFS and USFWS,among other licensing participants. Originally the study components described here were spread into several other sections of the overall study plan.They have been consolidated here to provide an overview of the proposed mercury assessment and bioaccumulation plans. This study consists of six study components: e Summarize available information for the Susitna River basin,including data collection from the 1980s APA Susitna Hydroelectric Project,and existing geologic information to determine if a mineralogical source of mercury exists within the inundation area. e Collect and analyze background vegetation,soil,water,sediment,sediment pore water, piscivorous birds and mammals,and fish tissue samples for mercury.This will include Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-66 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN mapping vegetation types and the lateral extent,thickness,and mercury concentrations of soils within the proposed inundation area.These data will be used to provide background concentrations for mercury,but will also help evaluate potential mitigation methods (soil and vegetation removal)should that become necessary. e Use the water quality model to predict where in the reservoir conditions (pH,dissolved oxygen,turnover)are likely to be conducive to methylmercury formation (see Section 5.6). e Utilize specialty models to predict potential fish methylmercury concentrations. e Assess potential pathways for mercury movement from different areas of methylmercury formation to the surrounding environment. e Prepare a technical report on analytical results,modeling,and mercury pathway assessment. 5.7.4.1.Summary of Available Information Existing literature will be reviewed to summarize the current understanding of the occurrence of mercury in the environment.Much of that work has already been performed as part of this work plan and during previous studies (URS 2011)for this project.This review will include the following: e Asummary of 1980s APA Susitna Hydroelectric Project water quality studies,including data. e Data collected in Alaska by both USGS and ADEC. e A summary of the findings during development of other cold region hydroelectric projects. 5.7.4.2.Collection and Analyses of Soil,Vegetation,Water,Sediment,Sediment Pore Water,Piscivorous Birds and Mammals,and Fish Tissue Samples for Mercury Data will be collected from soil,vegetation,surface water,sediment pore water,sediment, piscivorous birds and mammals,and fish tissue.Each of these media has been carefully selected on the following basis: 1.Applicability.Does measurement of background mercury contributions in the specified media contribute to understanding and predicting methylmercury concentrations after impoundment? 2.Measurability.Can we collect accurate data?Is the data representative of what is occurring in the environment?Will we be able to collect the same data post- impoundment? 3.Impact.Is the media likely to be impacted by the impoundment?Will the sampling damage the resource? At this time there are media not being sampled as part of this study plan because it violates one of more of these decision points.The following is a summary of the most important media we are not sampling,and the reasoning for their exclusion from the sampling program: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-67 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Macroinvertebrates.Current mercury concentrations in macroinvertebrates are poor indicators post impoundment methylmercury concentrations in fish and wildlife,and most methylmercury models do not utilize this data for that reason (Harris and Hutchison,2008;Hydro Quebec,2003, etc.). There appears to be no predictive model that can utilize current macroinvertebrate methylmercury concentration to predict future macroinvertebrate concentrations.Rennie et al (2011)has developed a predictive model for benthic macroinvertebrates,but not for other macroinvertebrates.Modeling of methylmercury in benthic invertebrates is of limited value, given these organisms are primarily predated by fish,which are already being modeled elsewhere in the study. Methylmercury concentrations in macroinvertebrates can vary significantly by species,location, life stage,feeding behavior,and fish predation (Henderson et al,2011).Sample mass can also be an issue.Even with the relatively low mass required for analyses,macroinvertebrates often require mixing of several individuals specimens,or even species,sometimes from collection locations far apart,into a single sample analytical result. We are aware of only one study (Gerrard and St Louis,2001)where terrestrial wildlife has been directly impacted by methylmercury in macroinvertebrates post-impoundment,bypassing migration via fish.However,while that study showed an approximate doubling of methylmercury concentrations in the swallows,they found no overt toxicological affects.In fact increased dipteran productivity (the primary food source of tree swallows)after reservoir creation resulted in earlier nest initiation,larger eggs,and faster growth rates of wing and bill length in nestlings. Sampling of macroinvertebrates would need to be conducted based on pathway analysis to define methylmercury generation and potential bioexposure routes.Current macroinvertebrates communities may have little bearing on post impoundment communities. Methylmercury in fish tissues is generally an order of magnitude higher than that of their food sources (Rennie et al,2011).Therefore methylmercury is typically not damaging to macroinvertebrates,and may not be damaging to their predators due to the position at a lower trophic level than piscivorous fish,birds,and mammals.Well-developed predictive models for fish and piscivorous wildlife should be generally protective of wildlife that feed directly on macroinvertebrates.Sampling for fish,piscivorous birds,and aquatic wildlife is planned in this study. In summary,macroinvertebrate sampling at this time would appear to have limited applicability, in that it does not contribute significantly to predicting future methylmercury concentrations or impacts.There are concerns regarding whether that data can be collected and interpreted accurately,and other studies are focused on more sensitive and easily measured methylmercury impacts. Atmosphere.As illustrated in Figure 5.7-1,mercury cycles between the water soil,and atmosphere.Net accumulation rates are low.Also,the rate and amount of atmospheric deposition doesn't depend on whether the water body is a natural lake or reservoir. Previous studies have found that increases in methylmercury concentrations in a reservoir after filling are not related to atmospheric deposition.As previously stated,Rudd (1995)has shown that just 0.3 and 3%of the mercury in a reservoir is derived from precipitation,the remainder Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-68 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN from inundated fine organic soil particles.While inorganic mercury deposition from the atmosphere is not a significant source of mercury concentrations that are elevated above background,it can be a source of background mercury concentrations.The goal of this study is to quantify mercury resulting from filling the reservoir,not necessarily background mercury. Background mercury concentrations are better predicted from studying mercury levels in nearby natural lakes,not quantifying atmospheric deposition.Background lake studies are included as part of the fish tissue sampling. Mercury in reservoirs typically isn't source limited,but is related to methylation rates in the reservoir.The water quality model will predict methylation rates in the reservoir (Section 5.6.4.8). In summary,mercury deposition from the atmosphere represents an impact not related to creation of the reservoir.Measurements of atmospheric deposition are unlikely to advance our understanding and prediction of methylmercury concentrations after impoundment.The media (air)is unlikely to be impacted by filling of the reservoir. Large Terrestrial Wildlife.Large terrestrial wildlife such as bears and foxes can consume fish and even piscivorous birds,however it is not their primary food source in the area,therefore net accumulation of methylmercury should be relatively low.Population density is anticipated to be low,and food sources may include areas well outside the drainage.The proposed study includes sampling of lower trophic levels (fish and birds),which should be protective of these apex predators. Salmon.Limited numbers of salmon (estimated at 30 to 50)are currently in the inundation zone.Sampling a sufficient number of these fish to generate statistically usable data would be harmful to the fish run.As a small run,it currently serves as a very limited food source to the area.Salmon typically have higher mercury concentrations than resident fish,however,this mercury is predominately oceanic in origin. The following sections describe these planned study components.A Quality Assurance Project Plan/Sampling and Analysis Plan (QAPP/SAP)has been developed for the Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study (Attachment 5-3).This QAPP/SAP includes specific detail describing study design,sampling procedures,and determining quality of data collected that satisfy objectives.This document is a required document when generating environmental data intended for use in making regulatory decisions.The QAPP/SAP ensures that defensible and high quality data is generated in this study by establishing performance goals and a process for evaluation of each of the study elements. 5.7.4.2.1.Vegetation The principal concern for the vegetation portion of this study is to determine the mass of organics and mercury concentrations in the reservoir area.Plant species differ in their ability to take up mercury.At the Red Devil and Cinnabar Creek mines,alders and willows concentrate mercury at levels as much as 20 times higher than those in the other species collected in this study (Baily and Gray 1997).The mechanism of mercury uptake and reason for variation in mercury uptake by species is unclear.Siegal et al.(1985,1987)have suggested that some species are mercury accumulators,whereas other plant species release their absorbed mercury as mercury vapor and thus lower their total concentration of mercury.Overall,leaves and needles Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-69 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN have been found to hold the greatest accumulations of mercury in Alaska plants (Baily and Gray 1997). The degradation rate for organic materials in water seems to be a primary source of the spike in methylmercury concentrations after filling of a reservoir (Hydro-Quebec 2003).Only the green part of the vegetation (leaves of trees and shrubs as well as forest ground cover)and the top centimeters of humus decompose quickly.Tree branches,trunks and roots,as well as deeper humus,remain almost intact decades after flooding (Morrison and Thérien 1991).Previous studies by Hydro-Quebec have shown that woody debris,even if it contains mercury,is not a problem for mercury methylation because the decay rate is slow in cold water (Hydro-Quebec 2003). Based on these studies,up to 50 samples will be collected from various plants within the proposed inundation area.Studies are currently being completed on the distribution of types of species in the inundation zone,thus this information is currently unavailable.The sampling will be biased toward total vegetative mass,that is to say species that are present in the inundation area at low frequency and size may not be sampled,because even if these plants contain mercury,their contributions to mercury methylation will be low.Multiple samples (five to seven)will be collected at different locations for each species in the inundation area.Based on the available preliminary data,it is anticipated that a majority of the samples will consist of alder (Alnus crispa),willow (Salix sp.),white spruce (Picea glauca),cottonwood (Populus balsamifera),black spruce (Picea mariana),paper birch (Betula papyrifera),and dwarf birch (Betula nana).Leaves and needles will be collected. Additional details of the sampling methods are provided in a combined Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)and the Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)for this study. 5.7.4.2.2.Soil Studies have found that the primary source of mercury to new reservoirs was the inundated soils (Meister et al.1979),especially the upper organic soil horizon,which often has higher mercury levels than the lower inorganic soil layers (Bodaly et al.1984).Measuring the thickness and mercury content of these soils prior to inundation may allow predictions of possible mercury methylation,and assist with evaluating potential mitigation methods,if necessary. To the extent possible,soil samples are coincident with vegetative samples.The primary concern is to document the thickness and extent of organic rich soils,because these soils will have the highest concentrations of mercury and will provide most of the organic material resulting in the generation of methylmercury. Additional details of the sampling methods are provided in a combined SAP and the QAPP for this study. 5.7.4.2.3.Water The purpose of the water sampling is to collect baseline water quality information to support an assessment of the effects of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-70 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Mercury in water will be tested monthly during the summer along with two sampling events during the winter.Mercury has been shown to vary in concentrations throughout the year (Frenzel 2000). Water samples will be collected at the locations shown on Table 5.7-5.The proposed spacing of the sample locations follows accepted practice when segmenting large river systems for development of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)water quality models.Water sampling during winter months will be focused on locations where flow data are currently collected,or were historically collected by USGS.Water samples will be analyzed for the parameters reported in Table 5.7-6. Grab samples will be collected along a transect of the stream channel/water body,using methods consistent with ADEC and EPA protocols and regulatory requirements for sampling ambient water and trace metal water quality criteria.Mainstem areas of the river not immediately influenced by a tributary will be characterized with a single transect.Areas of the mainstem with an upstream tributary that may influence the nearshore zone or that are well-mixed with the mainstem will be characterized by collecting samples at two transect locations:in the tributary and in the mainstem upstream of the tributary confluence.Samples will be collected at 3 equi- distant locations along each transect (i.e.25%from left bank,50%from left bank,and 75%from left bank).Samples will be collected from a depth of 0.5 meters below the surface as well as 0.5 meters above the bottom.This will ensure that variations in concentrations,especially metals, are captured and adequately characterized throughout the study area. These samples will be collected on approximately a monthly basis (four samples from June to September).The period for collecting surface water samples will begin at ice break-up and extend to beginning of ice formation on the river.Limited winter sampling (once in December, and again in March)will be conducted where existing or historic USGS sites are located. Review of existing data (URS 2011)indicates that few exceedances occur with metals concentrations during the winter months.If the 2013 data sets suggest that mercury concentrations exceed criteria or thresholds,then an expanded 2014 water quality monitoring program will be conducted to characterize conditions on a monthly basis throughout the winter months. Variation of water quality in a river cross-section is often significant and is most likely to occur because of incomplete mixing of upstream tributary inflows,point-source discharges,or variations in velocity and channel geometry.Water quality profiles at each location on each transect will be conducted for field water quality parameters (e.g.,temperature,pH,dissolved oxygen,and conductivity)to determine the extent of vertical and lateral mixing.Additional details of the sampling methods are provided in a combined SAP and the QAPP for this study. 5.7.4.2.4.Sediment and Sediment Pore Water In general,all sediment samples will be taken from sheltered backwater areas,downstream of islands,and in similar riverine locations in which water currents are slowed,favoring accumulation of finer sediment along the channel bottom.Samples will be analyzed for mercury (Table 5.7-6).In addition,sediment size and total organic carbon (TOC)will be included to evaluate whether these parameters are predictors for elevated mercury concentrations.Samples will be collected just below and above the proposed dam site.Additional samples will be collected near the mouth of tributaries near the proposed dam site,including Fog,Deadman, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-71 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Watana,Tsusena,Kosina,Jay,and Goose creeks,and the Oshetna River.The purpose of this sampling will be to determine where metals,if found in the water or sediment,originate in the drainage. Mercury occurrence is typically associated with fine sediments,rather than with coarse-grained sandy sediment or rocky substrates.Therefore,the goal of the sampling will be to obtain sediments with at least 5 percent fines (i.e.,particle size <63 jum,or passing through a #230 sieve). Surficial sediment sampling will be conducted with a Van Veen sampler lowered from a boat by a power winch.This sampling device collects high-quality sediment samples from the top four to six inches of sediment.Three sediment samples will be collected at each of the sites sampled. These three samples will be collected and analyzed separately to characterize the presence of mercury and generate statistical summaries for site characterization.A photographic record of each sediment sample will be assembled from images of newly collected material. Care will be taken to ensure the following: e The sampler will not be overfilled with sediment. e The overlying water is present when the sampler is retrieved. e Atleast two inches of sediment depth is collected. e There is no evidence of incomplete closure of the sampling device. If a sediment sample does not meet all of the criteria listed above,it will be discarded and another sample will be collected. Sediment interstitial water,or pore water,is defined as the water occupying the space between sediment particles.Interstitial waters will be collected from sites listed above and separated from sediments in the field house laboratory using a pump apparatus to draw pore water from each of the replicate samples.Filtering of samples will utilize a 0.45-m pore size filter in both the lab apparatus and field apparatus.In some cases,pore water may be drawn from sediment samples in the field by using 100-milliliter (mL)syringes immersed in the dredge sample once a sediment sample is collected in a sample jar.These would be cases where sediment samples have slightly coarser particle sizes and pore water extraction in the field is possible.In other instances,where sediment samples have finer particle sizes requiring more time to draw samples for laboratory analysis,these samples will be transferred to the field laboratory for pore water extraction. Additional details of the sampling methods are provided in a combined SAP and QAPP for this study. 5.7.4.2.5.Piscivorous Birds and Mammals The potential impacts of methylmercury on upper trophic level species can by influenced by a variety of factors including animal behavior and physiology (e.g.,foraging behavior,diet composition)and physical/chemical properties of the receiving environment (e.g.,organic carbon content,anaerobic conditions,sulfides,etc.).Fish,in particular,absorb methylmercury efficiently from dietary sources and store this material in organs and tissues (U.S.EPA,1997). Because fish are the primary source of methylmercury migration into the terrestrial ecosystem, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-72 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN this evaluation focuses on the impact of methylmercury generated in the proposed reservoir on fish-eating (piscivorous)upper trophic species. 5.7.4.3.Bird Species Waterbirds such as loons,grebes,terns,and kingfishers consume varying amounts of small fish. Small fish tend to have lower mercury concentrations than larger fish.Previous studies have shown that mercury levels in waterbirds are highly variable (Braune et al.1999;Langis et al. 1999).This variability results from the propensity of waterbirds to migrate between drainages, and the variability of mercury concentrations between drainages and food sources.Because of dietary preferences,the belted kingfisher and loon are likely to be a more conservative indicator species than grebe and other aquatic bird species that could be exposed to mercury. For raptors,ospreys typically consume a diet exclusively of fish,whereas bald eagles feed on fish,birds and other animals including carrion (Watson and Pierce 1998).These birds have a long life span (15 to 30 years in the wild),so they are likely to have the opportunity to accumulate significant amounts of mercury throughout their lifespans.A study in northern Quebec found that ospreys nesting near reservoirs had high burdens of methylmercury in their muscle tissues (DesGranges et al.1998).However,the ospreys there did not appear to suffer reproductive problems that are typical of high methylmercury exposure,and it has been suggested that the tolerance of fish-eating raptors to this compound may be higher than other species (DesGranges et al.1998). Predicting site-specific mercury exposure in raptors from feather or tissue residue concentrations is difficult because that they tend to feed over wide ranges (osprey are migratory),and that while both species feed on salmon,eagles tend to favor this type of fish.Salmon mercury concentrations are generally higher than other species of fish,but are typically only available seasonally in freshwater environments.This means that mercury concentrations in raptors may vary seasonally as well.In addition,salmon are not anticipated to be in the area after completion of the reservoir. 5.7.4.4.Aquatic Mammal Species Aquatic furbearers that eat fish are at the highest risk of accumulating mercury.River otter and mink,both of which occur in the study area at low numbers,can accumulate the highest concentrations of mercury in their body tissues (Yates et al,2005).As with birds,predicting how methylmercury in the aquatic food chain will affect mammal populations is difficult.The concentration of methylmercury in mammal tissue depends on diet,range,and longevity of the animal.Studies have documented mercury levels in river otter ranging from 0.89 to 36.0 ng/g wet weight in muscle tissue,and from 0.02 to 96.0 ug/g wet weight in liver tissue (Wren et al. 1980).Mink have similar mercury levels,ranging from 0.71 to 15.2 ug/g wet weight in muscle tissue and from 0.04 to 58.2 pg/g wet weight in liver tissue.Because mink and otter represent an aquatic and terrestrial species,both species will be considered as part of this study. 5.7.4.5.|Sampling Program There are two significant challenges to the proposed sampling program.The first is that the populations of most piscivorous birds and aquatic mammals are relatively small in the proposed study area.For that reason,sampling efforts are likely to collect few samples,or may be entirely Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-73 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN unsuccessful for some species.From a statistical standpoint,low sample returns (<5 samples), coupled with high variability in methylmercury concentrations,and may reduce the accuracy of results and conclusions for this study.In addition,damaging relatively small populations of these species as part of this study is undesirable,and therefore non-destructive sampling methods are preferred. The second challenge is that some species may be feeding in areas outside the area of project effects.Species that feed in more than one area may be exposed to widely varying methylmercury dietary loads that are not specific to the inundation zone. To compensate for these problems,the proposed study will: 1)Utilize data obtained in other studies on background concentrations of methylmercury in natural northern environments. 2)Utilize samples in the muscle and liver of various fish species and from feathers and fur, where it does not degrade quickly (Thompson,1996;Strom 2008).These types of samples can be collected without harvesting or even harassing the species being sampled. Feathers will be collected from nests of raptors (principally bald eagles,given that ospreys are rare in the study area),loons,grebes,arctic terns,and kingfishers found during the wildlife surveys planned for 2013 and 2014.Feathers from raptors and waterbirds will only be collected after the nests have been vacated for the season.Kingfisher feathers will be collected from borrows during the planned survey of colonially nesting swallows. Fur samples from river otters and mink will be sought from animals harvested by trappers in the study area;river otter furs must be presented to ADF&G for sealing,at which time fur samples can be obtained from animals known to have been harvested in or near the study area.In view of the low level of trapping expected to occur in the area,however,it is possible that this approach will yield few samples.If this approach does not yield fur samples in 2013,fur will be collected by placing hair-snag "traps”at or near the mouths of tributaries near the proposed dam site, including Fog,Deadman,Watana,Tsusena,Kosina,Jay,and Goose creeks,and the Oshetna River. Studies have shown that a vast majority of the mercury found in fur and feathers will consist of methylmercury,therefor the analyses will be for total mercury only (Evers et al 2005).Samples will be analyzed using Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)Method 7473.Additional details on the sampling are included as part of the SAP/QAPP (Attachment 5-1). 5.7.4.6.Predictive Risk Analyses A predictive risk analysis is likely to be a better indicator of potential mercury impacts on the terrestrial environment than measured concentrations of mercury at the project site,since the number of samples that may be collected will be low,and methylmercury concentrations in fur and feathers can change seasonally (U.S.EPA,1997).In addition,mercury sequestration in feathers may not be a good indicator of current or relevant exposure levels.For example,a study measuring feather mercury concentrations in seabirds during various growth and development stages of the birds suggest that in seabirds molting may be an efficient means of eliminating mercury (Becker et al.,1994;Burger et al.,1994). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-74 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The potential impacts of the Project on mercury levels on piscivorous birds and aquatic furbearers will be assessed using a risk characterization approach.This approach uses exposure and toxicity assessments to link a chemical of potential concern,in this case methylmercury, with adverse ecological effects (known as the toxicity reference value or TRV).The hazard quotient (HQ)is the ratio of average anticipated concentration of mercury being ingested to the known concentration where adverse effects may occur.It will be calculated for all species for which significant samples are available. The global assumptions and limitations of the mercury models are as follows: e The reservoir is flooded and mercury baseline is measured as Day 1 of operation. ¢Herbivores and omnivores accumulate less total mercury in tissue than piscivores, therefore this type of assessment is protective of other terrestrial species. ¢Mercury concentrations in fish are expected to peak in 3 to 7 years after filling of the reservoir. e Fish concentrations will be predicted using other modeling methods outlined in Section 5.7.4.2.6. e Because total mercury levels in piscivores are highly correlated with the ingestion rates of fish,total mercury bioaccumulation will approximate the rate of increase and decline in fish. In order for the predicted exposure to be compared against the TRV,the daily intake (D)will be calculated.D is defined as the amount of chemical an organism is exposed to on a mg/kg body weight/day basis and is normalized for body mass.Because the sediment and water intake of mercury is likely to be minimal as compared to the food ingestion pathway,only dietary intake will be quantified.The formula for calculating D is as follows: D=Fsite_x [(IF x EPC x PF)] BW Where: e IF is the Intake Factor (kg fish/kg body weight per day) e EPC is the Exposure Point Concentration (mg methylmercury/kg fish) e PF is portion of total food containing a particular chemical of concern. ¢BW =body weight (kg) ¢Fite is the fraction of total ingestion from the site. The IF is calculated using the ingestion rate (IR)of fish (kg/day)on a dry weight basis.The model can be adjusted to account for the consumption of piscivorous and non-piscivorous fish species. TRV values for mercury incorporated a chronic lowest-observed adverse effects level threshold for adverse effects to reproduction,growth,and/or survival.As previously stated,the HQ =D/TRV.Typically,a HQ >1 indicates that the exposure concentration has surpassed the threshold and adverse effects are possible.A HQ <1 means the exposure concentration has not surpassed the threshold and consequently adverse effects are unlikely to occur.These values Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-75 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN will be derived from the extant literature.For example,USEPA (1997)set reference doses for methylmercury in avian and mammalian wildlife at 21 and 18 pg/kg body weight per day, respectively.It also suggested the wildlife criterion as measured in water for several key species as follows: Species Methylmercury in water (pg/L) Kingfisher (Ceryle alcyon)27 Mink (Mustela vison)57 Loon (Gavia immer)67 Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)67 River otter (Lutra canadensis)42 Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)82 pg/L=picograms per liter 5.7.4.6.1.Fish Tissue Methylmercury is ubiquitous in the environment,and can be found in fish throughout Alaska. The primary concern of this study is not to catalogue this source of mercury in the environment; rather,it is to evaluate the potential for increasing mercury concentrations above background due to filling of the reservoir. Methylmercury bioaccumulates,and the highest concentrations are typically in the muscle tissue of adult predatory fish.Targeting adult fish is a good way of monitoring methylmercury migration to the larger environment.While it may be possible for methylmercury generated by the reservoir to affect other species,there does not appear to be any pathway by which this could happen without also affecting fish.Avian species have the potential to bypass fish by feeding on small fish species and macroinvertebrates;however,bird species can move between drainages and sources of mercury,and it is difficult to determine what contributions may be from the reservoir or from outside sources. Target fish species in the vicinity of the Susitna-Watana Reservoir will be Dolly Varden,arctic grayling,stickleback,long nose sucker,whitefish species,lake trout,burbot,and resident rainbow trout.If possible,filets will be sampled from seven adult individuals from each species. The larger number of samples from existing fish species will allow for some statistical control over the results. For comparison purposes,Hydro-Quebec,in their extensive study of methylmercury impacts from existing reservoirs,collected 131 lake trout from 7 lakes over a period of 22 years (Hydro Quebec,2003).This comes to less than 1 fish per water body per year.AEA is proposing collecting many more fish over a shorter period of time. Methylmercury concentrations in fish vary predominately by species,age,water body size,and location.For example,ADEC has reported statewide concentrations of methylmercury in pike to be 420 ppb (n =532),while in arctic grayling it is 84 ppb (n=44)(ADEC 2012),a 400% Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-76 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN difference.Increases in methylmercury above background post impoundment are typically measured in units of 100%(Harris and Hutchison,2008). There is a well-known positive correlation between fish size (length and weight)and mercury concentration in muscle tissue (Bodaly et al.1984;Somers and Jackson 1993).Larger,older fish tend to have higher mercury concentrations.These fish will be the targets for sampling.Body size targeted for collection will represent the adult phase of each species life cycle.For stickleback,whole fish samples will need to be used. Collection times for fish samples will occur in August and early September.Intensive studies of methylmercury concentrations in the zooplankton of boreal lakes (Garcia et al.2007)has shown that average methylmercury concentrations increased by 48%between spring and mid-summer, and decreased by just 12%between mid and late summer.This is very consistent with Bodaly et al (1993)which showed that methylmercury concentrations in fish,when controlled for age and reservoir size,were strongly related to shallow water temperatures.As water temperatures are reduced,methylmercury concentrations in fish tissue also tend to decrease.Therefore the proposed sampling period should represent the highest concentrations of methylmercury in fish tissue,and also the most likely time when the fish may be harvested by terrestrial wildlife. Samples will be analyzed for methyl and total mercury (Tables 5.7-6).It is anticipated that most of the mercury found in the fish with be methylmercury.Liver samples will also be collected from burbot and analyzed for mercury and methylmercury.Salmon will not be sampled. Preliminary data suggests that approximately 30 Chinook (king)salmon spawn in the Watana area.Collecting a sufficient number of samples from this resource would seriously deplete it. Instead,sampling data from ADEC will be used to evaluate mercury concentrations in this resource (ADEC 2012).It should be noted that most of the mercury in salmon is oceanic in origin. Field procedures will be consistent with those outlined in applicable ADEC and/or EPA sampling protocols (USEPA 2000).Clean nylon nets and polyethylene gloves will be used during fish tissue collection.Species identification,measurement of total length (mm),and weight (g)will be recorded,along with sex and sexual maturity.If possible,efforts will be made to determine the age of the fish,including an examination of otoliths and scales. It is possible that adult fish of all species may not be present or available in the drainage.In this case,younger fish may be sampled.To eliminate the bias associated with differences in fish size,appropriate statistical procedures will be used to determine the mean mercury concentration for a specific fish size (Hydro Quebec 2003). Additional details of the sampling methods are provided in a combined SAP and the QAPP for this study. 5.7.4.7.Modeling Reservoir impoundments have been documented to cause significant increases in fish mercury levels by factors that generally ranged from 3 to 7 (Hydro-Quebec 2003).The phenomenon is temporary,and mercury concentrations generally returned to baseline values after 7 to 30 years. Reservoir construction involves raising the water level and flooding a large quantity of terrestrial organic matter (vegetation and the surface layers of soils).During the early years of a reservoir's existence,this organic matter is subject to accelerated bacterial decomposition,which increases Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-77 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN methylation of the mercury accumulated in the soil from the atmosphere.The production of methylmercury is governed by the amount and type of flooded organic matter and by biological and physical factors such as bacterial activity,water temperature,oxygen content of the water, etc. Part of the methylmercury produced is released into the water column where it may be transferred to fish via zooplankton.Insect larvae feeding in the top centimeters of flooded soils can assimilate the methylmercury available and transfer it to fish (Figure 5.7-2). There is evidence that mercury concentrations in fish correlate closely with environmental parameters such as pH (Qian et al.2001;Ikingura and Akagi 2003),organic carbon (Cope et al. 1990;Suns and Hitchin 1990;Driscoll et al.1995),and wetland area (Greenfield et al.2001). However,because fish assimilate the vast majority of their mercury burden from their diet,such correlations are indirect (Westcott and Kalff 1996;Lawson and Mason 1998).It is,however, possible to predict the potential for mercury methylation based on the pH,dissolved oxygen content,organic carbon,and wetland area of an individual drainage. There are several ways to predict the occurrence of methylmercury in a newly formed reservoir. One way is to model the physical conditions that create methylation of mercury.If the conditions for methylation are present (low DO,low pH,organic content,etc.),then it is presumed that methylation will occur,and the methylmercury will be transferred outside the reservoir.This type of modeling will be done as part of the model for the reservoir (see Section 5.6 Water Quality Modeling Study).This type of modeling does not predict specific impacts to the ecosystem,but merely suggests that such impacts could occur,and where in the reservoir methylmercury may be forming.Such an approach has considerable value in evaluating potential mitigation measures. The other way of predicting the occurrence of methylmercury is to model concentrations in fish tissue after filling of the reservoir.Schetagne et al.(2003)found a strong correlation between the ratio of flooded area,the mean annual flow through of the reservoir,and maximum mercury concentrations in fish tissue.This approach was further refined by Harris and Hutchinson (2008) to provide a predictive tool for methylmercury concentrations in fish.Regression calculations using historical data from multiple reservoirs have determined the coefficients that control these equations.The drawback to these models is that they only predict peak methylmercury concentrations,not when these concentrations will occur or subside. Phosphorous release modeling is a semi-empirical way to derive the same result,but has the added benefit of being able to predict when peak methylmercury concentrations will occur,and when they are likely to subside (Hydro-Quebec 2003).Unfortunately,they require considerably more input parameters,which can create additional uncertainty in the results. 5.7.4.7.1.Harris and Hutchison Model The model assumes that the primary source of methylmercury in a new reservoir is the flooded terrain,while the primary methylmercury removal mechanism is outflow/dilution.The highest methylmercury concentrations in fish are therefore associated with reservoirs that flood large areas,but have low flow-through. The formula is as follows: Peak Increase factor=1+K,x Area Flooded Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-78 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Q+K2 x (Area Total) Where Peak increase factor =peak increase factor in fish methylmercury over background Area flooded =flooded area (km7) Q =mean annual flow (km?/yr.) K,=regression coefficients (km/yr.) K>=regression coefficients (1/yr.) Area total =Total reservoir area (km') The values of K1 and K2 are adjusted for piscivorous and non-piscivorous species of fish.The use of area in the denominator reflects an assumption that methylmercury removal mechanisms other than outflow are primarily related to area (e.g.,photodegradation,burial and sediment demethylation)rather than volume.This approach has been calibrated and tested in the field, with good results (Harris and Hutchinson 2008).This method will be used to estimate methylmercury concentrations in fish at the proposed reservoir. 5.7.4.8.|Phosphorous Release Model The more complex method of estimating methylmercury impacts was pioneered by Messier et al. (1985)based on the phosphorus release model of Grimard and Jones (1982),whole-ecosystem reservoir experiments at the Experimental Lakes Area (ELA)in Ontario,Canada (Bodaly et al. 2005),and confirmed by decades-long studies of reservoirs by Hydro-Quebec (2003).It predicts peak fish mercury levels and the timing of the response to flooding.The model pays special attention to flood zone characteristics,because decomposition after flooding is a key driver for increases in methylmercury levels in new reservoirs. Studies have shown that a simple model cannot explain all the differences observed between reservoirs with regard to maximum fish mercury levels (Hydro-Quebec 2003).The filling time is another important factor in determining the maximum levels in fish;several authors have demonstrated that mercury is released into the water column very rapidly when organic matter from soils and vegetation is flooded (Morrison and Thérien 1991;Kelly et al.1997).Chartrand et al.(1994)showed that the changes in reservoir water quality correspond to bacterial decomposition of organic matter (as does mercury release)and peak two or three years after impoundment in reservoirs filled in one year or less,but after six to ten years in impoundments that took 35 months to fill.Thus,a longer filling time leads to lower peak values,but prolongs the period of elevated mercury levels. The percentage of flooded land area located in the drawdown zone is another important factor because it is an indicator of the active transfer of methylmercury to fish by periphyton and benthic organisms.In fact,this transfer can occur for over 14 years in shallow areas that are rich in flooded organic matter and protected from wave action (Tremblay and Lucotte 1997).Where Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-79 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN forest soil cover is thin,wave action along the exposed banks of the drawdown zone quickly erodes the mercury-rich organic matter and deposits it in deeper,colder areas that are less conducive to methylation.This erosion considerably reduces the area of flooded soil that still has organic matter colonized by the benthic organisms responsible for much of the transfer of methylmercury to fish.Therefore,the larger the percentage of flooded land area in a reservoir drawdown zone,the smaller and shorter in duration the increase in fish mercury levels is likely to be.Colder water and the vegetation and soil cover that contained less decomposable organic matter (Association Poulin Thériault-Gauthier &Guillemette Consultants Inc.1993)may also help mitigate the increase in fish mercury levels. The Hydro-Quebec model is semi-empirical,not mechanistic:decaying organic material releases phosphorous at a set rate (the phosphorus release curve),which controls decomposition of the organic material in the inundation zone.This turns out to be a fairly accurate measure of the bioavailability of mercury for fish,and can be used to predict mercury concentrations in muscle tissues. The basic equation used by Hydro-Quebec is as follows: V (P;):=Py X (1-e”)+rB x ete Mt +e Petty +V (P;)oe™" Q a-r (@-r Q-r ) Where: Vv =Reservoir volume (m°) P,=Concentration of total phosphorous in the reservoir at time t (mg/m°) t =time in years after reservoir filling Pi =Total phosphorous from inflows (mg/yr.) @ =The sum of the sedimentation coefficient and the flushing coefficient (r) r =The reservoir flushing coefficient (per year) a =The phosphorous release coefficient =%(365/X) x =The half-life of the organic matter in days B =a1)SmaxSmx=Maximum surface area flooded (m?) T =Time (year) When solved for Pr,this allows for the calculation of the amount of decomposable organic matter (mgC/m2)at a specific time (It),calculated by: Tr =(Prot 4((Pr):Py)o) Where It is the decomposition factor at the time t.This result can then be used to calculate mercury concentrations in non-piscivorous (NP)species and piscivorous (P)species of fish: (Henp)t=(Hgnp)-1 X (C1)+dl;(276) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-80 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Where: Hgnp =mercury concentration in non-piscivorous muscle tissue (mg/kg) u =half-life of mercury in fish (days).This is typically set at 700 days in northern climates,but can be adjusted. d =a transfer factor For the predatory species,the decomposition factor was replaced by a factor (f)for mercury transfer from the prey to the predator: (Hgph=(Hgpha x C1)+fe)oer) Where Hgp =mercury concentration in piscivorous muscle tissue. These formulas have been tested,and found to be very effective in predicting mercury concentrations in fish tissue (Figure 5.7-2).Note that the predictions generally tend to overestimate the changes actually recorded.This situation reflects a conscious choice on the part of the developers of the formula to be conservative with their predictions. The phosphorous release model will be used if the previous methods (the water quality model or the Harris and Hutchison model)suggest there may be significant methylmercury production in the reservoir. 5.7.4.9.Pathway Assessment Assessment of the potential pathways for mercury in the environment will be based on readily available literature (Hydro-Quebec 1993;Johnston et al.1991;Therriault and Schneider 1998), and additional mercury studies,to ensure the most applicable methods are used to meet Project needs.The goal of the pathway assessment will be to evaluate the potential pathways for methylmercury to move into the ecosystem,both from the reservoir and downstream of the reservoir. The pathway assessment will incorporate both existing conditions,and conditions with the reservoir and dam in place.The reservoir representation will be developed based on the local bathymetry and dimensions of the proposed dam.The Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6)provides for a three-dimensional model to be developed for the proposed reservoir to represent the spatial variability in hydrodynamics and water quality in longitudinal,vertical,and lateral directions.The model will be able to simulate flow circulation in the reservoir,turbulence mixing,temperature dynamics,nutrient fate and transport,interaction between nutrient and algae,and potentially sediment and metal transport. §.7.4.10.Technical Report on Analytical Results and Mercury Assessment The technical report will include a description of the study goals and objectives,assumptions made,sample methods,analytical results,models used,and other background information.Field Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-81 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN data,laboratory report,and quality assurance information will be attached.Mercury will be modeled using two methods: 1.Water quality modeling of the reservoir will predict whether the conditions for the formation of methylmercury will be present,and where in the reservoir this may occur. 2.The linear model of Harris and Hutchinson (2008)to provide an initial prediction of peak mercury concentrations in fish. The phosphorous release model may be used if there is a need to evaluate when peak methylmercury production may occur. The report will include a conceptual model showing mercury inputs to the reservoir,mercury methylation,mercury circulation among different media (fish,air,water,sediment,etc.),and bioabsorption and transfer.Strategies to manage mercury methylation,bioaccumulation,and biomagnification will be reviewed (Mailman et al.2006). Sediment,water,and tissue results from toxics analysis will use the federal NOAA Screening Quick Reference Tables (SQuiRTs).These are thresholds used as screening values for evaluation of toxics and potential effect to aquatic life in several media and will be implemented where ADEC water quality,sediment,or tissue criteria are not available. An example for SQuiRT values can be found at the following website: http://mapping2.orr.noaa.gov/portal/sanfranciscobay/sfb_html/pdfs/otherreports/squirt.pdf Specific thresholds and criteria for toxics in each of the media are included in a QAPP. Coordination will occur with the instream flow,ice processes,productivity,and fish studies to obtain information needed to reflect the results of this study in the context of the various Project scenarios. 5.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice Field sampling practices proposed in this study are consistent with ADEC (2003,2005);USGS (Ward and Harr 1990);Edwards and Glysson 1988);and EPA (USEPA 2000).Results will be compared to established NOAA cleanup levels (NOAA 2012).Studies,field investigations, laboratory testing,engineering analysis,etc.will be performed in accordance with general industry-accepted scientific and engineering practices.The methods and work efforts outlined in this study plan are the same or consistent with analyses used by applicants and licensees and relied upon by FERC in other hydroelectric licensing proceedings. The Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification process includes a baseline assessment of mercury conditions and will determine if existing conditions will result in a potential for bioaccumulation.The monitoring strategy used in this study follows scientifically accepted practice for identifying impacts to water quality and will be used for Project certification.ADEC and USGS are currently pursing similar sampling programs for fish tissue in the state (ADEC 2012;Frenzel 2000;and Krabbenhoft et al.1999). FERC has a long history of performing similar studies during hydroelectric permitting,including most recently at the Middle Fork American River Project (FERC Project No.2079)in 2011;and Yuba County Water Agency Yuba River Development Project (FERC Project No.2246). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-82 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.7.6.Schedule The study elements will be completed in several stages and based on the timeline shown in Table 5.7-7.Water quality monitoring will start in March 2013,and continue periodically throughout the remainder of the year.Sediment and fish tissue sampling will occur in July and August. Bird and aquatic furbearer samples will be collected in the third quarter of 2013.Some fish tissue samples have already been collected in 2012,the remainder will be collected in the third quarter of 2013.The initial study report will be completed by December 2014,with the final due in the first quarter of 2015.Additional follow-up studies will be performed between these two dates,as necessary. 5.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies A flow chart (Figure 5.7-3)describing interdependencies outlines origin of existing data and related historical studies,specific output for each element of the Water Quality studies,and where the output information generated in the Water Quality studies will be directed.This chart provides details describing the flow of information related to the Water Quality studies,from historical data collection to current data collection.Data were examined in a Water Quality Data Gap Analysis (URS 2011)and this information was used,in part,to assist in making decisions about the current design for the Water Quality Monitoring studies and for ensuring that the current modeling effort would be able to compare the 1980s study results with current modeling results. Integral portions of this interdependency chart are results from the Ice Processes Study and from the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study.The Ice Processes Study will support water quality model development (Study Plan 5.6)with information about timing and conditions for ice formation and ice break-up.The Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study represents the effort to develop a hydraulic routing model that will be coupled with the EFDC water quality model. Water quality monitoring efforts for field parameters,general chemistry,and metals (including mercury)will be used as a calibration data set for developing the predictive EFDC model. 5.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost The estimated cost for the proposed work in 2013 and 2014,including planning and reporting is approximately $500,000.This presumes that the costs for sampling and analyses all non- biological media are covered within the water quality costs. 5.7.9.Literature Cited ADEC.2005.Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Program.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water.Juneau,Alaska.58p. ADEC.2012.Mercury concentration in fresh water fish Southcentral Susitna Watershed. Personal communication with Bob Gerlach,VMD,State Veterinarian.June 2012. Alaska Energy Authority (AEA).2011.Pre-Application Document:Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241.Volume I of II.Alaska Energy Authority, Anchorage,AK.395p.Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (AEIDC),1985. Preliminary draft impact assessment technical memorandum,Volume 1.Main text. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-83 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Association Poulin Thériault -Gauthier &Guillemette Consultants Inc.1993.Méthode de caractérisation de la phytomasse appliquée aux complexes Grande-Baleine et La Grande. Report by Association Poulin Thériault -Gauthier &Guillemette Consultants Inc.for Hydro-Québec.152 p.and appendices. Bailey,E.A.,and Gray,J.E.1997.Mercury in the terrestrial environment,Kuskokwim Mountains region,southwestern Alaska,in Dumoulin,J.A.and Gray J.E.,ed.,Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S.Geological Survey,1995:U.S.Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1574,p.41-56. Becker,P.H.,Henning,D.,and Furness,R.W.1994.Differences in mercury contamination and elimination during feather development in gull and tern broods.Arch.Environ.Contam. Toxicol.27:162-167. Bodaly,R.A.,Hecky,R.E.,and Fudge,R.J.P.1984.Increases in fish mercury levels in lakes flooded by the Churchill River diversion,northern Manitoba.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.41: 682-691. Bodaly,R.A.,J.W.M.Wudd,R.J.P.Fudge,and C.A.Kelly.1993.Mercury concentrations in fish related to size.Can.Jounal of Fish.Aquat.Sci.SO:980-987. Bodaly,R.A.,St.Louis,V.L.,Paterson,M.J.,Fudge,R.J.P.,Hall,B.D.,Rosenberg,D.M.,and Rudd,J.W.M.,1997,Bioaccumulation of mercury in the aquatic food chain in newly flooded areas,in Sigel,A.,and Sigel,H.,eds.,Metal ions in biological systems:Mercury and its effects on environment and biology:New York,Marcel Decker,Inc.,p.259-287. Bodaly R.A.,Beaty K.G.,Hendzel L.H.,Majewski A.R.,Paterson M.J.,Rolfhus K.R.,Penn A.F.,St.Louis V.L.,Hall B.D.,Matthews C.J.D.,Cherewyk K.A.,Mailman M.,Hurley, J.P.,Schiff S.L.,Venkiteswaran J.J.,2004.Experimenting with hydroelectric reservoirs, Environmental Science &Technology,American Chemical Society.pp.346A-352A. Bodaly,R.A.,Beaty,K.G.,Hendzel,L.H.,Majewski,A.R.,Paterson,M.J.,Rolfhus,K.R.,Penn, A.F.,St.Louis,V.L.,Hall,B.D.,Matthews,C.J.D.,Cherewyk,K.A.,Mailman,M.,Hurley, J.P.,Schiff,S.L.,and Venkiteswaran,J.J..2005.Mercury and the FLUDEX project: response.Environ.Sci.Technol.39:185A-186A. Bodaly R.A.,Jansen W.A.,Majewski A.R.,Fudge R.J.P.,Strange N.E.,Derksen A.J.,Green D.J. 2007.Post impoundment time course of increased mercury concentrations in fish in hydroelectric reservoirs of Northern Manitoba,Canada.Arch.Environ.Con tam.Toxicol. 53:379-389. Braune,B.;Muir,D.;DeMarch,D.;Gamberg,M.;Poole,K.;Currie,R.;Dodd,M.;Duschenko, W.;Eamer,J.;Elkin,B.;Evans,M.;Grundy,S.;Hebert,C.;Johnstone,R.;Kidd,K.; Koenig,B.;Lockhart,L.;Marshall,H.;Reimer,K.;Sanderson,J.;Shutt L.;1999.Spatial and Temporal Trends of Contaminants in Canadian Arctic Freshwater and Terrestrial Ecosystems:A Review.Science of the Total Environment,Volume 230,Issues 1-3,1 June 1999,Pages 145-207. Burger,J.,I.C.T.Nisbet and M.Gochfeld (1994).Heavy metal and selenium levels in feathers of known-aged common terns (Sterna hirundo).Arch.Environ.Contam.Toxicol.26:351- 355.Bodaly R.A.,Hecky R.E.,Fudge R.J.P.1984.Increases in fish mercury levels in lakes Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-84 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN flooded by the Churchill River Diversion,Northern Manitoba.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci. 41:682-691.Chartrand,N.,Schetagne,R.,Verdon,R.1994.Enseignements tirés du suivi environnemental au complexe La Grande.18th Congress of the International Commission on Large Dams,Durban (South Africa).Paris:International Commission on Large Dams. p.165-190. Cope,W.G.,Wiener,J.G.,and Rada,R.G.1990.Mercury accumulation in yellow perch in Wisconsin seepage lakes -relation to lake characteristics.Environ.Toxicol.Chem.9: 931-940. DesGranges,J.L.;Rodrigue,J.,Tardif,B.;and Laperle M.,1998.Mercury Accumulation and Biomagnification in Ospreys (Pandion haliaetus )in the James Bay and Hudson Bay Regions of Québec.Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.Volume 35,Number 2 (1998),330-341,DOI:10.1007/s002449900384. Driscoll,C.T.,Blette,V.,Yan,C.,Schofield,C.L.,Munson,R.,and Holsapple,J.1995.The role of dissolved organic carbon in the chemistry and bioavailability of mercury in remote Adirondack lakes.Water Air Soil Pollut.80:499-508. Edwards,T.K.,and D.G.Glysson.1988.Field methods for measurement of fluvial sediment. U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 86-531,118 p. Engstrom,D.R.,and Swain,E.B.1997,Recent declines in atmospheric mercury deposition in the Upper Midwest:Environmental Science and Technology,v.31,no.4,p.960-967. Evers,D.Burgess,N.Champux,L.Hoskins,B.Major,A.Goodale,W.,Taylor,R.Poppenga,R. and Daigle,T.,2005.Patterns and interpretation of mercury exposure in freshwater avian communities in northeastern North America.Exotoxicology 14:193-221. Fitzgerald,W.F.,Engstrom,D.R.,Mason,R.P.,and Nater,E.A.1998.The case for atmospheric mercury contamination in remote areas:Environmental Science and Technology,v.32,no. 1,p.1-7. Frenzel,S.A.2000.Selected Organic Compounds and Trace Elements in Streambed Sediments and Fish Tissues,Cook Inlet Basin,Alaska.USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4004.Prepared as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. Garcia.E.,Carignan,R.and Lean,D.R.S.2007.Seasonal and inter-annual variations in methyl mercury concentrations in zooplankton from boreal lakes impacted by deforestation or natural forest fires.Environ Monit Assess 131:1-11. Gray J.E.,Theodorakos P.M.,Bailey E.A.,Turner R.R.,2000.Distribution,speciation,and transport of mercury in stream-sediment,stream-water,and fish collected near abandoned mercury mines in southwestern Alaska,USA.Science of the Total Environment 260:21- 33. Greenfield,B.K,Hrabic T.R.,Harvey C.J.Carpenteer S.R.2001.Predicting mercury levels in yellow perch.Use of water chemistry,tropi ecology and spatial traits.Can J.Fish Aquat. Scie.Vol 58 :1419 -1429. Grigal D.F.,2003.Mercury sequestration in forests and peatlands:a review.Journal of Environmental Quality 32:393-405. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-85 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Grimard,Y.,Jones,H.G.1982.Trophic upsurge in new reservoirs:a model for total phosphorous concentration,Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences,Vol.39 (1982).p.1473-1483. Hall,B.D.,Rosenberg D.M.,Wiens A.P.1998.Methylmercury in aquatic insects from an experimental reservoir.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.55:2036-2047. Harris,R.,and Hutchinson,D.,2008.Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project Environmental Baseline Report:Assessment of the Potential for Increased Mercury Concentrations.Prepared by Tetra Tech Inc.March 4,2008. Henderson,B.L.,Chumchal,M.M.,Drenner,R.W.,Deng,Y.,Diaz,P.,and Nowlin,W.H.2011. Effects of Fish on mercury contamination of macroinvertebarte communities of grassland ponds.Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry,Vol.31,No.4,pp.8370-876,2012. Hydro-Quebec.1993.Grande-Baleine complex.Feasibility study.Part 2:Hydroelectric complex.Book 6:Mercury,Hydro-Quebec,Montreal,Quebec. Hydro-Quebec.2003.Environmental Monitoring at the La Grande Complex Summary Report 1978-2000:Evolution of Fish Mercury Levels.Joint Report:Direction Barrages et Environment Hydro-Quebec Production and Groupe Conseil,Genivar Inc.December 2003. Ikingura,J.R.,and Akagi,H.2003.Total mercury and methylmercury levels in fish from hydroelectric reservoirs in Tanzania.Sci.Total Environ.304:355-368. Johnston,T.A.,Bodaly R.A.,Mathias J.A.1991.Predicting fish mercury levels from physical characteristics of boreal reservoirs.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.48:1468-1475. Kabata-Pendias,A.,Pendias H.,1992.Trace elements in soils and plants.2nd ed.CRC Press, Inc.,Boca Raton,Florida,pp.365. Kelly C.A.,Rudd J.W.M.,Bodaly R.A.,Roulet N.P.,St.Louis V.L.,Heyes A.,Moore T.R., Schiff S.,Aravena R.,Scott K.J..Dyck B.,Harris R.,Warner B.,Edwards G.1997. Increases in fluxes of greenhouse gases and methylmercury following flooding of an experimental reservoir.Environmental Science &Technology 31:1334-1344. Krabbenhoft,D.P.,Wiener,J.G.,Brumbaugh,W.G.,Olson,M.L.,DeWild,J.F.,and Sabin,T.J. 1999.A national pilot study of mercury contamination of aquatic ecosystems along multiple gradients,in Morganwalp,D.W.,and Buxton,H.T.,eds.,U.S.Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program-Proceedings of the Technical Meeting,Charleston, South Carolina,March 8-12,1999-Volume 2,Contamination of hydrologic systems and related ecosystems:U.S.Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99- 4018B,p.147-162. Langis,R.,Langlois,C.and Morneau,F.,1999.Mercury in birds and mammals.In M.Lucotte, R.Schetagne,N.Therien,C.Langlois and A.Tremblay (eds).Mercury in the Biogeochemical Cycle.pp.131-144.Springer,Germany. Lawson,N.M.,and Mason R.P.1998.Accumulation of mercury in estuarine food chains. Biogeochemistry.40:235-247. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-86 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Lindberg,S.,Bullock,R.,Ebinghaus,R.,Engstrom,D.,Feng,X.,Fitzgerald,W.,Pirrone,N., Prestbo,E.,and Seigneur,C.,2007.A synthesis of progress and uncertainties in attributing the sources of mercury in deposition:Ambio,v.36,no.1,p.19-32. Lindqvist,O.,1991.Mercury in the Swedish environment:9.Mercury in terrestrial ecosystems bioavailability and effects.Water,Air,and Soil Pollution,55(1-2):101-108. Lockhart,W.L.,Stem G.A.,Low G.,Hendzel M.,Boila G.,Roach P.,Evans M.S.,Billeck B.N., DeLaronde J.,Friesen S.,Kidd K.A.,Atkins S.,Muir D.C.G.,Stoddart M.,Stephens G., Stephenson S.,Harbicht S.,Snowshoe N.,Grey B.,Thompson S.,DeGraff N.,2005.A history of total mercury in edible muscle of fish from lakes in northern Canada.Science of the Total Environment 351-352:427-463. Mailman,M.,Stepnuk L.,Cicek N.,Bodaly R.A.2006.Strategies to lower methylmercury concentrations in hydroelectric reservoirs and lakes:A review.Science of the Total Environment 368:224-235. Meister,J.F.,DiNunzio J.,Cox J.A.1979.Source and level of mercury in a new impoundment. Journal of the American Water Works Association 71:574-576. Messier,D.,Roy,D.and Lemire R.,1985.Reseau de surveillance ecologique du complexe La Grande 1978-1984.Evolution du mercure dans la chair des poissons.Societe d'energie de la Baie James.179 pages. Morrison,K.and Thérien,N.1991.Influence of Environmental Factors on Mercury Release in Hydroelectric Reservoirs,Montréal,Quebec,Canadian Electrical Association,122 p. Morrison,K.,Thérien,N.1991b.Experimental evolution of mercury release from flooded vegetation and soil.Water,Air and Soil Pollution,Vol.56 (1991).p.607-619. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).2012.Screening Quick Reference Tables (SQuiRTs),National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,Office of Response and Restoration,http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/SQuiRTs.pdf. Qian,S.S.,Warren-Hicks,W.,Keating,J..Moore,D.R.J.,and Teed,R.S.2001.A predictive model of mercury fish tissue concentrations for the southeastern United States.Environ. Sci.Technol.35:941-947. Rosenberg,D.M.,Berkes F.,Bodaly R.A.,Hecky R.E.,Kelly C.A.,Rudd J.W.M.1997.Large scale impacts of hydroelectric development.Environ.Rev.5:27-54. Rudd,W.M.,1995.Sources of Methyl Mercury to Freshwater Ecosystems :A Review.Plenary address to the International Conference on Mercury as a Global Pollutant.Publication #10 of the Experimental Lakes Area Reservoir Project (ELARP). Rylander,L.D.,Grohn J.,Tropp M.,Vikstrom A.,Wolpher H.,De Castro e Silva E.,Meili M., Oliveira L.J.2006.Fish mercury increase in Lago Manso,a new hydroelectric reservoir in tropical Brazil.Journal ofEnvironmental Management 81:155-166. Saiki,M.K.,and Martin,B.A.2010.Mercury concentrations in fish from a Sierra Nevada foothill reservoir located downstream from historic gold-mining operations Environ. Monit.Assess 163:313-326. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-87 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Schetagne,R.,J.Therrien,J.and R.Lalumiére.2003.Environmental Monitoring at the La Grande Complex.Evolution of Fish Mercury Levels.Summary Report 1978-2000. Direction Barrages et Environment,Hydro-Québec Production and Groupe Conseil GENIVAR ince.185 p.and appendix. Shacklette,H.T.,and Boerngen,J.G.1984.Element Concentrations in Soils and Other Surficial Materials of the Conterminous United States.USGS Professional Paper 1270. Siegal,S.M.,Siegal,B.Z.,Lipp,C.,Kruckeberg,A.,Towers,G.H.N.,and Warren,H.1985. Indicator plant-soil mercury patterns in a mercury-rich mining area of British Columbia: Water,Air,and Soil Pollution,v.25,p.73-85. Siegal,S.M.,Siegal,B.Z.,Barghigiani,C.,Aratani,K..Penny,P.,and Penny,D.,1987.A contribution to the environmental biology of mercury accumulation in plants:Water,Air, and Soil Pollution,v.33,p.65-72. Somers,K.M.and D.A.Jackson.1993.Adjusting mercury concentration for fish-size covariation:a multivariate alternative to bivariate regression.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.50: 2388-2396. St.Louis,V.L.,Rudd,J.W.M,Kelly,C.A.,Beaty,K.G.,Bloom,N.S.and Flett,R.J.1994.The importance of wetlands as sources of methylmercury to boreal forest ecosystems.Can.J. Fish.Aquat.Sci.51:1065-1076. Stokes,P.M.,and Wren,C.D.1987.Bioaccumulation of mercury by aquatic biota in hydroelectric reservoirs:A review and consideration of mechanisms.In Lead,Mercury, and Arsenic in the Environment (T.C.Hutchinson and K.M.Meema,Eds.),pp.255-278. John Wiley and Sons,New York. Strom SM.,2008.Total mercury and methylmercury residues in river otters (Lutra canadensis) from Wisconsin.Arch Environ Contam Toxicol.2008 Apr;54(3):546-54.Epub 2007 Oct 10. Suns,K.,and Hitchin,G.1990.Interrelationships between mercury levels in yearling yellow perch,fish condition and water-quality.Water Air Soil Pollut.50:255-265. Swain,E.B.,Engstrom,D.R.,Brigham,M.E.,Henning,T.A.,and Brezonik,P.L.1992. Increasing rates of atmospheric mercury deposition in midcontinental North America: Science,v.257,p.784-787. Therriault,T.W.and Schneider,D.C.1998.Predicting change in fish mercury concentrations following reservoir impoundment.Environmental Pollution 101:33-42. Thompson,D.R.1996.Mercury in birds and terrestrial mammals.In Beyer,W.N.,G.H.Heinz, and A.W.Redman-Norwood (eds.).Environmental contaminants in wildlife:interpreting tissue concentrations.Lewis Publ.,Boca Raton,FL.341-356. Tremblay,A.and Lucotte,M.1997.Accumulation of total mercury and methylmercury in insect larvae of hydroelectric reservoirs.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.54:832-841. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-88 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN URS 2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska. 62p.t+Appendixes. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),1997a.Mercury Study Report to Congress Volume I:Executive Summary.December 1997.EPA-452/R-97-003. USEPA,1997b.Volume VI:An Ecological Assessment for Anthropogenic Mercury Emissions in the United States.Office of Air Quality Planning &Standards and Office of Research and DevelopmentEPA-452/R-97-008,December. USEPA.2000.Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for use in Fish Advisories:Volume 1 Fish Sampling and Analysis,3"Edition.EPA-823-B-00-007.United States Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Water.Washington,D.C.485p. Ward J.C.,Harr,C.A.1990.Methods for collection and processing of surface-water and bed material samples for physical and chemical analyses.U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-140.71. Watson,J.W.,and Pierce,D.J,1998.Ecology of bald eagles in western Washington with an emphasis on the effects of human activity.Final Report,Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,Olympia,Washington,USA. Westcott,K.and Kalff,J.1996.Environmental Factors Affecting Methyl Mercury Accumulation in Zooplankton.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.53:2221-2228. Wiener,J.G.,Knights,B.C.,Sandheinrich,M.B.,Jeremiason,J.D.,Brigham,M.E.,Engstrom, D.R.,Woodruff,L.G.,Cannon,W.F.,and Balogh,S.J.2006.Mercury in soils,lakes,and fish in Voyageurs National Park (Minnesota}-Importance of atmospheric deposition and ecosystem factors:Environmental Science and Technology,v.40,p.6261-6268. Wren,C.D.,MacCrimmon,H.R.,Frank,R.and Suda,P.,1980.Total and methylmercury levels in wild mammals from the Precambrian Shield area of south central Ontario.Bull.Environ. Contam.Toxicol.25,100-5. Yates,D.E.,Mayack,D.T.,Munney,K.,Evers,D.C.,Major,A.,Tranjit,K.,and Taylor,R.L., 2005.Mercury Levels in Mink (Mustela vison)and River Otter (Lontra canadensis)from Northeastern North America.Ecotoxicology,14,263-274,2005. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-89 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.7.10.Tables Table 5.7-1.Sediment Results from the Susitna River Drainage Location Mercury (\1g/g dry weight) Talkeetna River 0.04 Deshka River 0.46 Colorado Creek 0.18 Costello Creek 0.23 National median value 0.06 From Frenzel (2000) Table 5.7-2.Whole Body Slimy Sculpin Results from the Susitna River Drainage Location Mercury (g/g dry weight) Talkeetna River 0.08 Deshka River 0.11 Costello Creek 0.08 From Frenzel (2000) Table 5.7-3.Speciated Mercury Results from Susitna River Drainage (g/g dry weight) Sediment Fish Water Location Inorganic Methylmercury Inorganic Inorganic Methylmercury mercury mercury mercury Deshka River 0.021 0.00510 0.246 (SS)Not sampled Not sampled Costello Creek 0.169 0.00004 0.101 (DV)0.00497 0.00002 SS =whole slimy skulpin DV =Dolly Varden fillet From Frenzel (2000) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-90 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 5.7-4.Summary of ADEC Data for Mercury in Fish Tissue,Susitna River Drainage Species Number of Samples Mean Std.Deviation Arctic Char 3 0.21000 0.052915 Burbot 1 0.09400 0 Grayling 18 0.10239 0.033477 Northern Pike 98 0.21071 0.206272 Salmon -Pink 16 0.25813 0.051279 Salmon -Red 14 0.02907 0.017398 Salmon -Silver 5 0.09520 0.053905 Stickleback -Nine Spine*1 0.07600 0 Stickleback -Three Spine*2 0.07350 0 Lake Trout 3 0.38000 0.319531 Rainbow Trout 27 0.11187 0.086007 Whitefish -Round 7 0.10929 0.048623 Concentrations in mg/kg.*indicates sample analyzed as whole body composite sample.All other fish samples analyzed as skinless fillets. Samples that were below detection limits were listed as 1/2 of detection limit.NOTE:If Std.Dev.is listed as 0,all the samples were below detection limits (ADEC,2012). Table 5.7-5.Proposed Susitna River Basin Mercury Monitoring Sites Susitna River Description Susitna River Latitude Longitude Mile Slough ID (decimal degrees)(decimal degrees) 25.8 Susitna Station NA 61.5454 -150.516 28.0 Yentna River NA 61.589 150.468 29.5 Susitna above Yentna NA 61.5752 -150.248 40.6 Deshka River NA 61.7098 -150.324 55.0 Susitna NA 61.8589 -150.18 83.8 Susitna at Parks Highway East NA 62.175 -150.174 97.2 Talkeetna River NA 62.3418 -150.106 98.5 Chulitna River NA 62.5574 -150.236 103.0 Talkeetna NA 62.3943 -150.134 120.7 Curry Fishwheel Camp NA 62.6178 -150.012 136.8 Gold Creek NA 62.7676 -149.691 138.6 Indian River NA 62.8009 -149.664 138.7 Susitna above Indian River NA 62.7857 -149.651 148.8 Susitna above Portage Creek NA 62.8286 -149.379 148.8 Portage Creek NA 62.8317 -149.379 184.5 Susitna at Watana Dam site NA 62.8226 -148.533 223.7 Susitna near Cantwell NA 62.7052 147.538 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-91 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 5.7-6.List of parameters and frequency of collection. Media Analyses Frequency of Collection Holding Time Surface Water,Total and methylmercury Monthly 48 hours sediment pore water (EPA-7470A) ;Total mercury (EPA One Survey-summer 28 daysSoil,Sediment 245,2/7470A) Avian,Terrestrial 7 days Furbearers,and Fish Kee a methylmercury One Survey-late summerTissue(EPA-1631) Table 5.7-7.Schedule for Implementation of the Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study. Activity 2012 2013 2014 2015 1Q|2Q)3Q 4Q 1Q|2Q/3Q 1Q 2Q)3Q |4Q 1Q Water Quality Monitoring (monthly) Soil and Vegetation Sampling Sediment Sampling Bird and Aquatic Furbearer Sampling Fish Tissue Sampling Data Analysis and Management Initial Study Report Follow-up studies (as needed) Updated Study Report Legend: w=Planned Activity Optional Activity A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-92 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.7.11.Figures of 4 Hg°Volatilization oo _--gas 7 Deposition”:OS oo|eP 5 Volatilization A y Hg?+Hge Maximum water level iH ix Periphytonq(t >ae -|Y ,wi (ae -Drawdown ,TK *%,7 eg -e ; Hes EI} Active Ground Natural lake levelbiotransfercoverandee -;humus a ats F -MeH 5,.As Loe7310.30%Passive a release iments Hoi sei mend tury lock Addecbicod ion buiktvsria Methylmercury transfer Hg2+and Hg®:Inorganic mercury Melg:Methylmercury SPM:Suspended particulate matter Figure 5.7-1.Transfer of Methylmercury to Fish Shortly after Impoundment from Hydro-Quebec (2003). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-93 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN per eh es eens ne ie eset pment "een -_ieee prone vest ne ame pnt ROBERT-BOURASSA RESERVOIR i 1.0;-___ y 3Lakewhitefish--Predicted values tor probable :'simulation hypethesia -1985 iFond0.84 --Predicted valuea tor probabe 5oesimulationhypothesis-1992 437Measuredvalues,and Pacm06;:Lu =e €=o 1 éani=0.4 4 £z.4 -P 2ad: 0.0 i 40 Northern pike --Predicted values for probableqsirwaationFypothesis-1985 ,=--Predicted values for probable &is 3.0 4 aimulation hypotresia -1992 33_ -@®-Measured values gEeoo!:BS,2.04Po=':: 5 1.04 :: 0.0 .' 1975 .1980 (1}1985 (6)1990(11)34995 (14)2000 {21)2005 (26)2010 (31) iYEAR(reservoir age)|i e+--Data avaliable at the tre of prediction i cu .Zama Z Figure 5.7-2 Example of Predicted and Actual Mercury Concentrations in Fish (from Hydro-Quebec 2003). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-94 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR WATER RESOURCES STUDIES Water Quality Data (1975-2003) Water Quality Characterization (Monthly Monitoring) a)Surface Water b}Sediment ¢c)Groundwater ¢In Situ parameters ©General parameters *Metals (one-time) Ice Processes in the Susitna River (7.6) Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (9) Ice Dynamics Hydraulic «Formation Routing *Breakup Model *(4Q-2013?)(10-2013) ADEC Mercury in Fish Tissue (2006) (19-2014) Baseline River Productivity Study Water Quality {nutrient availability)Monitoring (9.08)Study (5.5) Groundwater-| Water Quality Model (EFDC) *Ice Dynamics *WQ Calibration Data *Mercury (metals)Data *Hydraulic Routing Model ©Reservoir Trap Efficiency a)Focus Study Areas Fish Tissue Analysis Sediment Toxics Analysis Surface Water Analysis (10-2014) it b)Mainstem Conditions ¢Riverine Model ¢Reservoir Model (20-2014) ae Wetlands Study (11.7) Wildlife Study (10.1) Riparian Study (11.6) Related Aquatic Habitat Study (7.5) Water Quality Geomorphology Modeling Study Study (5.6)(6) Figure 5.7-3.Interdependencies for water resources studies. Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study (5.7) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-95 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5.8.Attachments ATTACHMENT 5-1.BASELINE WATER QUALITY MONITORING - SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP). ATTACHMENT 5-2.WATER QUALITY MODELING STUDY -SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP). ATTACHMENT 5-3.MERCURY ASSESSMENT AND POTENTIAL FOR BIOACCUMULATION STUDY -SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP). ATTACHMENT 5-4.GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS - WATER QUALITY. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5-96 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 5-1 BASELINE WATER QUALITY MONITORING SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP) Sampling and Analysis Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Study Susitna River,Southcentral Alaska FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Contract No.AEA-11-025 Preparedfor: Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Anchorage,AK 99503 Prepared by: URS/Tetra Tech,Inc. 700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage AK,99501 November 7,2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 This quality assurance project plan (QAPP)has been prepared according to guidance provided in Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/R-5,EPA/240/B- 01/003,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),Quality Assurance Division,Washington,DC,March 2001 [Reissued May 2006])to ensure that environmental and related data collected,compiled,and/or generated for this project are complete,accurate,and of the type,quantity,and quality required for their intended use.Tetra Tech will conduct work in conformance with the quality assurance program described in the quality management plan for Tetra Tech's Fairfax Group and with the procedures detailed in this QAPP. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Approvals: Betsy McGregor Assistant Director Alaska Energy Authority Robert Plotnikoff Technical Lead Tetra Tech,Inc. Harry Gibbons Project Manager Tetra Tech,Inc. Gene Welch QA Officer Tetra Tech,Inc. Date Date Date Date Paul Dworian Principal Manager URS Corporation Date Mark Vania Field Team Lead URS Corporation Date Shannon Brattebo Field Team Lead Tetra Tech,Inc. Date William Loskutoff QA Officer URS Corporation Date Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Study SAP/QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page iv of vi Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1..uii..cccccccsseccccccsccsssscecccsssecccncssccneecsucecnenssscesceeecsscaseeseseees Vv DISTRIBUTION(uu...ce eccceccscccccccecssscccccossscscscscersssscecceseeeesssesceseueecesccessceseecsssessenevessseesececssscessees VI Al1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION ............ccccscsssssceccccsssceccssseccescesseesensssccesssccouseseoeseeues 1 A2.0 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACK GROUND 1.cccccseesesesscccseccssscscsenssusessseseseceseseeees 4 A3.0 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION oui cccccsssceesesecececscecsesseecccecceceasesseeeeveuseseseucueseseves 6 A4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA...oi ec ccccecccccscessessestesstssesssesees 7 A5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS/CERTIFICATION uo.eccecetceeseeeseeeee 11 A6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS ..uuicccceccccccsccsescsccscccssssesencsessecenscsssssesssnssevass 12 B1.0 SAMPLING DESIGN 2 ccccececscsssssssscesssssncssesececessecescceseusaseesecessaeccusseaessescssnsssnens 12 B2.0 SAMPLING METHODS uu...cciccscsscsssesssssccessnssersssecceccccecescsscccsscccsscccsssscesssssestssssesenaes 36 B3.0 SAMPLE DOCUMENTATION AND SHIPPING .......ccccccccssscssscsssssscnssssssssceescesnseens 40 B 4.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY uu oiococc cece ceeeccessscseeccsccescecescescaceeceseseececeeeenees 41 B5.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS wou ccccsccnsccsscctessrccnccesncecsccescensesevecsesesscecesceesaceanenes 42 B6.0 QUALITY CONTROL ooo ccc cccscsccsssesseesccecceccscescccecessecccacsscercassseseescecssseesscessenens 43 B7.0 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING,INSPECTION,AND MAINTENANCE..45 B8.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCYuuu.eecccscccccccceseeeenseceseeees 45 B9.0 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLES...45 B10.0 NONDIRECT MEASUREMENTS ..uuu..eecccccccsscccccccccsceesseseeecsccesecesesesessveseceseesssseuenees 46 B110 DATA MANAGEMENT .2uuui.....ccecescccccssssscssssscesccccccccusesscccssescercuceseccecusseseceesecausensestes 46 C10 ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE ACTIONS .uuuiiiccccccccccscssssscsecsesececsceccecsssssssesssssseeens 47 C2.0 QA REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT..uuu.....ccccccscccsscsscssccceceeceusecescescccscssceuscuseuseussenssseees 48 D1.0 DATA REVIEW,VERIFICATION,AND VALIDATION....eccesssscessssssssssseees 48 D2.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS2...cc ccccccccccccccseeececsessenensnsens 48 D3.0 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENT............cccccccsssesccccssssesecesenseeeees 49 REFERENCES uu.icccccccccssccccsssccccscscccccscecvsccceveceesccssscceccesescesceuseccuescccnsecaucessuceseccasecscacessecaseseeeees 50 APPENDIX A:LOCATION MAPS APPENDIX B:TEMPERATURE PROBE FIELD DATA FORMS Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Study SAP/QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page v of vi ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AAC Alaska Administrative Code ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation AEA Alaska Energy Authority °C degrees Celsius cm centimeters DO Dissolved oxygen DQI Data quality indicators DQO Data Quality Objectives EPA U.S.Environmental Protection Agency g grams m meter(s) uS/em microSiemens per centimeter mg/L milligrams per liter NPS Nonpoint source PDF Portable Document Format PM Project Manager QA Quality assurance QAM Quality Assurance Manager QAO Quality Assurance Officer QAPP Quality assurance project plan QC Quality control QCO Quality Control Officer RPD Relative percent difference RSD Relative standard deviation SNTEMP Stream Network Temperature SOP Standard Operating Procedure TIR Thermal infrared TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load TL Technical Lead Tt Tetra Tech,Inc. TWG Technical Workgroup Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Baseline Water Quality Monitoring Study SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page vi of vi DISTRIBUTION This document will be distributed to the following,Alaska Energy Authority,URS,and Tetra Tech staff members who are involved in this project,as well as to all responsible project participants. Name Phone,Fax Title E-mail Mailing Address Alaska Energy Authority Betsy McGregor 907-771-3957 (phone)Alaska Energy Authority Assistant Director bmcgregor@aidea.org 411 W.4th Ave,Suite 1 Anchorage,AK 99501 URS Corporation Paul Dworian 907-261-6735 (phone)URS Corporation mark.vania@urs.com Principal Manager 907-562-1297 (fax)700 G Street,Suite 500 paul.dworian@urs.com Anchorage,AK 99501 Mark Vania (907)261-9755 (phone)URS Corporation URS Field Team Lead 907-562-1297 (fax)700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage,AK 99501 Tetra Tech,Inc.(Tt) Harry Gibbons Project Manager 206-728-9655 Ext.107 (phone) 206-728-9670 (fax) harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Robert Plotnikoff Technical Lead 206-728-9655 Ext.124 (phone) 206-728-9670 (fax) robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.com Tetra Tech,Inc. 1420 Fifth Avenue,Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 Shannon Brattebo Tt Field Team Lead 509-232-4312 (phone) 509-744-9281(fax)shannon.brattebo@tetratech.com Tetra Tech,Inc. 316 W.Boone Avenue,Suite 363 Spokane,WA 99203 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 1 of 73 A.PROJECT MANAGEMENT ELEMENTS A1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)is preparing a License Application that will be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (Project). The Project is located on the Susitna River,an approximately 300 mile long river in the South-central region of Alaska.The Project's dam site will be located at River Mile (RM)184.The results of this study and of other proposed studies will provide information needed to support the FERC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)analysis for the Project license. Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-Application Document (PAD,AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir.This study plan outlines the objectives and methods for developing a monitoring program that will adequately characterize surface water quality,stream temperatures and meteorological data in the Susitna River within and downstream of the proposed Project area. This Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)/Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)is being prepared to document the quality assurance (QA)and quality control (QC)measures that will be observed to ensure the following objectives are met:data are consistent,correct,and complete,with no errors or omissions; QC sample results have been reviewed and are included;established criteria for QC results are met; measurement quality objectives have been met,or data qualifiers are properly assigned where necessary; and data specified in the sampling process design are obtained.Data collection methods will follow established state and federal (e.g.,Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation;ADEC,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;EPA)guidelines. The purpose of this document is to present the quality assurance project plan (QAPP)for conducting a baseline water quality study of the Susitna River. This QAPP provides general descriptions of the work to be performed to collect in-river data,the objectives to be met,and the procedures that will be used to ensure that the data are scientifically valid and defensible and that uncertainty has been reduced to a known and practical minimum.The QAPP describes procedures used to prepare for the field effort,conduct field sampling using standard protocols, and post-process field data. The organizational aspects of a program provide the framework for conducting tasks.The organizational structure can also facilitate project performance and adherence to quality control (QC)procedures and quality assurance (QA)requirements.Key project roles are filled by those persons responsible for ensuring the collection of valid data and the routine assessment of the data for precision and accuracy,as well as the data users and the person(s)responsible for approving and accepting final products and deliverables.The key personnel involved in the Baseline Water Quality Study of the Susitna River are listed in Table A1-1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 2 of 73 Table A1-1.Project/Task Organization and Responsibility Summary Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Betsy McGregor,Responsible for project Alaska Energy Authority 907-771-3957 coordination with local,411 W.4"Ave,Suite 1 county,state,and federal Anchorage,AK 99501 government officials;and for reviewing drafts of the study |pbmcgregor@aidea.orgplan,QAPP and summary data reports Paul Dworian Responsible for directing URS Corporation 907-261-6735 daily project activities and 700 G Street,Suite 500 tracking product delivery.Anchorage,AK 99501 Communicates with AEA Environmental Manager on project schedule and timing paul.dworian@urs.com for product delivery. Mark Vania Responsible for field URS Corporation 907-261-9755 sampling assistance,quality 700 G Street,Suite 500 assurance and quality control |Anchorage,AK 99501 of field protocols.mark.vania@urs.com Robert Plotnikoff Responsible for preparing the |Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 project QAPP,coordinating 1420 5th Ave.Suite 550 and completing sampling Seattle,WA 98101 activities,analyzing project data,and preparing the draft |robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.candfinaldatareports.Serves |om as the principal project team contact for field staff for the duration of the study Harry Gibbons Responsible for managing the |Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 project,overseeing preparation of the project QAPP,reviewing analysis of project data,and review of the draft and final data reports.Serves as the principal project team contact for the technical aspects of the study 1420 5th Ave.Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Shannon Brattebo Responsible for water quality and toxics field sampling, quality assurance and quality control of field protocols. Tetra Tech,Inc. 316 W.Boone Ave.Suite #363 Spokane,WA 99203 shannon.brattebo@tetratech.c om 509-232-4312 Gene Welch Reviews QAPP and all Ecology quality assurance programs.Provides technical assistance on QA/QC issues during the implementation and assessment of the project. Tetra Tech,Inc. 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 gene.welch@tetratech.com 206-728-9655 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 3 of 73 Additional technical staff will be responsible for conducting specific tasks during the project (e.g., performing field sampling and collecting surface water quality data)at the direction and discretion of the Project Manager (PM).The Project Manager will supervise the technical staff participating in the project, including implementing the QC program,completing assigned work on schedule with strict adherence to procedures established in the approved QAPP,and completing required documentation.The PM will direct the work of the field sampling team including collection,preparation,and shipment of samples and completion of field-sampling records.To perform the required work effectively and efficiently,the field- sampling team will include scientific staff with specialization and technical competence in field-sampling activities,as required to ensure the highest quality data are collected without incident,and experience qualifications set forth by ADEC.They must perform all work in adherence with the project work plan and QAPP,including maintenance of field sample documentation.Where applicable,custody procedures are required to ensure the integrity of the samples with respect to preventing contamination and maintaining proper sample identification during handling.Where field samples are collected the sampling team is responsible for the following: Receiving,inspecting,and inventorying the sample containers Receiving,inspecting,calibrating,and maintaining field instrumentation Completing,reviewing,and signing appropriate field records Assigning tracking numbers to each sample (sample identification numbers) Controlling and monitoring access to samples while in their custody Verifying the completeness and accuracy of chain-of-custody documentation Initiating shipment and verifying receipt of samples at their appropriate destinations Verifying the results of sample measurements collected for compliance with the requirements of the reference methods,data quality objectives (DQOs)and this QAPP Additional oversight will be provided by the QC Officers (QCO),who are responsible for performing evaluations to ensure that QC is maintained throughout the sampling process,that the data collected will be of optimal validity and usability,and that limitations of the data set are minimized as much as is possible given the challenges of the routine field investigation.The QCO is any senior technical staff assigned the responsibility of providing a second-level review of all documentation and records developed during the sample and data collection process.The QC evaluations will include double- checking work as it is completed and providing written documentation of these reviews (minimally initialing and dating documents as they are reviewed)to ensure that the standards set forth in the QAPP are met or exceeded.QCOs may be assigned at the task or subtask level allowing teams to efficiently divide work processes or tasks required and exchanging project documentation for review prior to departure from a sampling station.In this regard,QCOs ensure that all required data and information are recorded for each sampling station prior to physically leaving the collection site.Other QA/QC staff,such as technical reviewers and technical editors selected as needed,will provide peer review oversight on the content of work products and ensure that work products comply with the client's specifications. Technical staff involved with the program will be responsible for reading and understanding this QAPP and complying with and adhering to its requirements in executing their assigned tasks relative to this project. Water quality samples will be collected and temperature data loggers installed at 39 sites as defined by the 2012 Baseline Water Quality Study.The study area begins at RM 15.1 and extends past the proposed dam site to RM 233.4.The lowermost boundary of the monitoring is above the area protected for Beluga whale activity.Twelve mainstem Susitna River monitoring sites are located below the proposed dam site and two mainstem sites above this location for calibration of the models.Six sloughs will be included in Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 4 of 73 the monitoring and represent important fish-rearing habitat.Tributaries to the Susitna River will be monitored and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow like the:Talkeetna, Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna rivers.A partial list of the remaining tributaries that will be included in monitoring and represents important spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous and resident fisheries include:Gold Creek,Portage Creek,Tsusena Creek,Watana Creek,and Oshetna Creek.These sites were selected based on the following rationale: e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site; e Preliminary consultation with AEA and licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g.,instream flow,ice processes); e Access and land ownership issues;and Eight of the sites are mainstem monitoring sites that were previously used for Stream Network Temperature Modeling (SNTEMP)in the 1980s (refer to Table B1-2).Thirty-one of the sites are Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations,most of which were also monitored in the 1980s by the Alaska Energy Authority. A2.0 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-Application Document (PAD,AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir. The study area includes the Susitna River within the proposed Watana Reservoir and downstream of the proposed Watana Dam.Water quality studies will be conducted from river mile 15.1 (Susitna River above Alexander Creek)to river mile 233.4 (at Oshetna Creek,just above the upper extent of the proposed reservoir area)and within select tributaries.The proposed dam would be located at river mile 184.5.The dam would create a reservoir 42.5 miles long and 1 to 2 miles wide,with a normal reservoir surface area of approximately 23,546 acres and a normal maximum pool elevation of 2,050 feet.The lowermost boundary of the monitoring activity is above the area protected for Beluga whale activity. The collective goal of the water quality studies is to assess the impacts of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin with particular reference to state water quality standards set forth in ADEC regulations Title 18-Health,Safety,and Housing;Chapters:70-Water Quality Standards [surface water];75-Oil and Other Hazardous Substances Pollution Control [groundwater],and 80- Drinking Water Standards;of the Alaska Administrative Code (AAC);18 AAC 70,18 AAC 75,and 18 AAC 80,respectively (ADEC 2012a;ADEC 2012b;and ADEC 2012c).Predicting the potential impacts of the dam and its proposed operations on water quality will require the development of water quality models.The goal of the Water Quality Modeling Study will be to utilize the extensive information collected from the Baseline Water Quality Study to develop a model(s)in which to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed. The specific objectives of the Baseline Water Quality Study are to: e Document historical water quality data and combine with data generated from this study.The combined data set will be used in the water quality modeling study to predict Project impacts under various operations. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 5 of 73 e Add three years of current stream temperature and meteorological data to the existing data. Stream temperatures and meteorological data was collected in 2012 (Tetra Tech 2012)and will continue to be collected in 2013-2014. e Develop a monitoring program to adequately characterize surface water physical,chemical,and bacterial conditions in the Susitna River within and downstream of the proposed Project area. e Measure baseline inorganic metals concentrations in sediment and fish tissue for comparison to federal and state criteria. e Perform a pilot thermal imaging assessment of a portion of the Susitna River. A large-scale assessment of water quality conditions throughout the Susitna drainage has not been completed.Historical water quality data available for the study area includes water temperature data, some general water quality data,and limited metals data primarily collected during the 1980s.Additional data has been recently collected at limited mainstem Susitna sites describing flow,in-situ,general,and metals parameters by the United States Geological Study (USGS).In 2012,water temperature data loggers and meteorological stations were installed throughout the Project area.A data gap analysis was conducted for water quality and sediment transport in 2011 (URS 2011)summarizing mainstem and tributary data available.Some general observations based on existing data are as follows: e Large amounts of data were collected during the 1980s.A comprehensive data set for the Susitna River and tributaries is not available. e The influence of major tributaries (Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers)on Susitna River water quality conditions is unknown.There are no monitoring stations in receiving water at these mainstem locations. e Continuous temperature data and seasonal water quality data are not available for the Susitna River mainstem and sloughs potentially used for spawning and rearing habitat. Concentrations of water quality parameters including metals in sediment immediately below the proposed Project are unknown.Metals in these sediments may become mobile once the Project begins operation. Monitoring information in the immediate vicinity of the reservoir and riverine habitat will be important for developing two models (reservoir and riverine)and coupled for predicting expected water quality conditions below the proposed dam. An expanded network of continuous temperature monitoring data and water quality data (including sediment,surface water,potentially pore water)collection is required for this Study because: e More information is needed to define existing thermal refugia throughout the Susitna drainage. e Limited information is available on natural,background conditions for water quality. e It is unknown if seasonal patterns exist for select water quality parameters. e Additional information is required for calibrating the water quality model to be used in the water quality modeling study.More recent water quality data will be used for predicting reservoir conditions and predicting riverine conditions downstream of the proposed dam. An expanded network of water quality and temperature monitoring sites is proposed from approximately RM 15.1 to RM 234.Monitoring sites are located at the same sites characterized during the 1980s studies, as well as additional sites.Monitoring of areas of the mainstem Susitna River or tributaries with high Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 6 of 73 metals concentrations or temperature measurements (based on the Data Gap Analysis for Water Quality, URS 2011)will confirm previous observations and will describe the persistence of any water quality exceedances that might exist. A3.0 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION This section provides an overview of the staffing organization and schedule.The key personnel involved in the Water Quality Monitoring Study of the Susitna River are listed in Table A3-1. Table A3-1.Project/Task Organization and Responsibility Summary Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Betsy McGregor,Responsible for project Alaska Energy Authority 907-771-3957 Alaska Energy Authority {coordination with local,813 W.Northern Lights Blvd county,state,and federal Anchorage,AK 99503 government officials;and for reviewing drafts of the |bmcgregor@aidea.orgstudyplan,SAP/QAPP and summary data reports Paul Dworian,URS Responsible for directing URS Corporation 907-261-6735 daily project activities and |700 G Street,Suite 500trackingproductdelivery.|Anchorage,AK 99501 Communicates with AEA Environmental Manager on |paul.dworian@urs.com project schedule and timing for product delivery. Mark Vania,URS Responsible for field URS Corporation 907-261-9755 sampling assistance,700 G Street,Suite 500 quality assurance and Anchorage,AK 99501 quality control of field mark.vania@urs.com protocols. Robert Plotnikoff,Tetra Responsible for preparing |Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 Tech,Inc.the project SAP/QAPP,1420 5th Ave.Suite 550 coordinating and Seattle,WA 98101 completing sampling activities,analyzing project |robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.c data,and preparing the om draft and final data reports. Serves as the principal project team contact for field staff for the duration of the study Harry Gibbons Tetra Responsible for managing |Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 Tech,Inc.the project,overseeing 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 preparation of the project QAPP,reviewing analysis of project data,and review of the draft and final data reports.Serves as the principal project team contact for the technical Seattle,WA 98101 harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 7 of 73 Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number aspects of the study Shannon Brattebo,Responsible for field Tetra Tech,Inc.509-232-4312 Tetra Tech,Inc.sampling assistance,316 W.Boone Ave Suite 363 quality assurance and Spokane,WA 99201 quality control of field protocols.shannon.brattebo@tetratech.c om Gene Welch,Reviews SAP/QAPP and Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 Tetra Tech,Inc.all Ecology quality 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 assurance programs.Seattle,WA 98101 Provides technical assistance on QA/QC gene.welch@tetratech.com issues during the implementation and assessment of the project. The Water Quality Monitoring Study for the Susitna River will begin October 2012 and continue through March 2014.The exact scheduling of the monthly and seasonal sampling will be coordinated between AEA and Tetra Tech staff.Table A3-2 gives the projected schedule of activities and deliverables. Table A3-2.Schedule for the Baseline Water Quality Study Elements and Production of Associated Deliverables Monitoring Activity Timeline Thermal Imaging (one survey)October 2012 MET Station Installation and Data Collection (as_|July 2012 part of the 2012 Water Temperature Monitoring and MET Station Installation Study) QAPP/SAP Preparation and Review January 2013-March 2013 Deployment of Temperature Monitoring June 2013 (retrieve in October 2014) Apparatus (if removed before winter ice-up) Water Quality Monitoring (monthly)June 2013-October 2013 (one sampling event in each of December 2013 and March 2014) Sediment Sampling (one survey)August-September 2013 Fish Tissue Sampling (one survey)August-September 2012/2013 Thermal Imaging (one survey)October 2013 Data Analysis and Management June 2013-November 2013 Initial Study Report December 2013 Updated Study Report December 2014 A4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA Measurement quality objectives (MQOs)are the performance or acceptance criteria for individual dataqualityindicators,including precision,bias,and sensitivity (Ecology,2004).The MQOs'for this project are presented in Table A4-1.Industry standard field methods will be used throughout this project to minimize measurement bias (systematic error)and to improve precision (to reduce random error).MQOs are listed for each of the parameters measured in water and from meteorological sites established in the upper river region of the Project area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 8 of 73 Table A4-1.Measurement Quality Objectives Check Standard Duplicate Lowest (LCS)M P Measurement ofeasurementsExpectedRangeofInterestParameter'i :%Calibration Measurements Units ofChecks/Recovery RPD nits 0 MeasurementLimits Baseline WQ -In-situ Temperature +0.1°C +10%0-25 °C 0.1 °C pH +0.2 pHunits |+0.1 pH units 6.0 -9.0 pH units 0.1 pH units Dissolved oxygen +0.2 mg/L +10%1.0 -12 mg/L 0.2 mg/L Specific ) _ Conductance +10 pS/em +10%50 -500 pS/em 25 pS/cem Redox Potential N/A +10%-400 -+400 mv 25-50 mv Turbidity 5 NTU +10%5 -1000 NTU 5 NTU Color N/A N/A N/A N/A Residues N/A N/A N/A N/A Baseline WQ -General WQ Parameters Hardness +3.0 mg/L as £20%3.0 -200 mg/L as 3.0 mg/L as CaCO;°CaCO;CaCO; Nitrate/Nitrite +0.10 mg/L +20%0.1 -30 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Alkalini +10 mg/L as 0 _ 10 mg/L astyCaCO;+20%20 -200 mg/L as CaCO;CaCO; Ammonia-N +0.10 mg/L +20%0.1 -30 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Total Kjeldahl 0 _Nitrogen +0.10 mg/L +20%0.1 -30 mg/L 0.1 mg/L Total Phosphorus +0.01 mg/L +20%0.01 -10 mg/L 0.01 mg/L Ortho-Phosphorus +0.01 mg/L +20%0.01 -5 mg/L 0.01 mg/L Chlorophyll a +0.1 pg/L +20%0.1 -200 pg/L 0.1 pg/L Total Dissolved +10 mg/L +20%1 -10,000 mg/L N/ASolids Total Suspended +10 mg/L 420%1 -10,000 mg/L N/ASolids Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2072 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 9 of 73 Check Standard Duplicate Lowest (LCS)P Measurement ofMeasurementsExpectedRangeofInterestParameter;F%Calibration Measurements Units ofChecks/Recovery RPD es MeasurementLimits Turbidity 5 NTU +20%5 -1000 NTU 5 NTU TOC +0.5 mg/L +20%0.5 -20 mg/L 0.5 mg/L DOC +0.5 mg/L +20%0.5 -20 mg/L 0.5 mg/L Fecal Coliform +11 mg/L +20%Not Known Not Known Not KnownPetroleum60%+20%Not KnownHydrocarbons Radionuclides Not Known +20%Not Known Not Known Baseline WQ -Metals (Water)Dissolved and Total Aluminum 85 %+20%Not Known 50 pg/L Arsenic 85 %+35%Not Known 100 pe/L Barium 85 %+20%Not Known Not Known Beryllium 85 %+20%Not Known Not Known Cadmium 85%+5%Not Known 5 ug/L Cobalt 85%+20%Not Known 10 pg/L Copper 85%+20%Not Known 10 pg/L Iron 85%+20%Not Known 20 pg/L Lead 85%+25%Not Known 50 pg/L Magnesium 85%+20%Not Known 20 pg/L Manganese 85%+20%Not Known 5 pe/L Mercury 85%+15%Not Known 0.2 pg/L Molybdenum 85 %+20%Not Known 10 pg/L Nickel 85%+20%Not Known 20 po/L Selenium 85%+20%Not Known 100 pg/L Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 10 of 73 Check Standard Duplicate Lowest (LCS)M P Measurement ofeasurementsExpectedRangeofInterestParameter;;%Calibration Measurements Units ofChecks/Recovery RPD nis © Limi MeasurementImits Thallium 85 %+20%Not Known Not Known Vanadium 85%+20%Not Known 10 pg/L Zinc 85%+20%Not Known 10 pg/L Baseline WQ -Metals (Sediment)Total Aluminum NA +20%Not Known Not Known Arsenic NA +35%Not Known 3.0 mg/kg Cadmium NA +20%Not Known 1.0 mg/kg Copper NA +20%Not Known Not Known Iron NA +20%Not Known Not Known Lead NA +25%Not Known 1.5 mg/kg Mercury NA +30%Not Known 0.1 mg/kg Zinc NA +20%Not Known 3.5 mg/kg Baseline WQ -Metals,Fish Tissue Total Mercury +10 +10%Not Known 5 ng/L Methyl-mercury +10 +10%Not Known 5 ng/L Arsenic +10 +10%Not Known 10 ng/L Cadmium +10 +10 %Not Known 10 ng/L Selenium +10 +10%Not Known 10 ng/L (a)Field temperatures will be verified by comparing pre-deployed instrument readings and in-situ temperature readings collected on a monthly schedule when data downloads are completed. Precision -Precision is defined as the degree to which a set of observations or measurements of the same property,obtained under similar conditions,conform to subsequent (repeated)measurements.Precision is usually expressed as standard deviation,variance,or range,in either absolute or relative terms.Field sample replicates for assessment of precision will be analyzed at no less than a 5 percent frequency of the total number of samples.Laboratory replicates for assessment of precision will be analyzed at no less than a 5 percent frequency of the total number of samples submitted to the laboratory. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 11 of 73 For sample results that exceed the reporting detection limit (RDL),the relative percent difference (RPD) will be less than or equal to 20 percent.No criteria are presented for duplicates that are below the RDL,as these data are provided for informational purposes only.When one or more of the results is below the RDL,professional judgment will be used in determining the compliance of the data to project requirements. Representativeness -Sample representativeness is the degree to which data accurately and precisely represent a characteristic of a population.Representativeness will be addressed at two distinct points in the data collection process.During sample collection,the use of generally accepted sampling procedures applied in a consistent manner throughout the project will help ensure that samples are representative of conditions at the point where the sample was taken.During subsampling (sample aliquot removal)in the laboratory,samples will be inverted several times to ensure that the analytical subsample is well mixed and therefore representative of the sample container's contents. Completeness -Completeness is a measure of the amount of valid data needed to meet the project's objectives.Completeness will be judged by the amount of valid data compared to the data expected.Valid data are those data in compliance with the data quality criteria as presented in this section,and in compliance within expected range of conditions and daily fluctuation patterns.While the goal for the criteria described above is 100 percent completeness,a level of 95 percent completeness will be considered acceptable.However,any time data are incomplete,decisions regarding re-sampling and/or re- analysis will be made.These decisions will take into account the project data quality objectives as presented above. Comparability -Comparability is a measure of the confidence with which one dataset can be compared to another.This is a qualitative assessment and is addressed primarily by sampling design through use of comparable sampling procedures or,for monitoring programs,through consistent sampling of stations over time.In the laboratory,comparability is assured through the use of comparable analytical procedures and ensuring that project staff are trained in the proper application of the procedures.Within-study comparability will be assessed through analytical performance (quality control samples). A5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS/CERTIFICATION This QAPP and supporting materials will be distributed to all participants.The local Project Manager, Paul Dworian and/or Mark Vania,will conduct a procedural review before the field team is mobilized for sampling.The procedural review will include the requirements of the QAPP and referenced SOPs,as well as instrument manufacturers'operation and maintenance instructions.It will be performed concurrently with a check that all equipment and sampling gear are fully functional and ready for deployment.In addition,there will be discussions and demonstrations of sampling method(s)to be used and discussions regarding specific health and safety concerns.Each sampling team will consist of,at a minimum,one sample collector and a scientist familiar with QC requirements,which will ensure strict adherence to the project protocols,check all documentation for completeness and correctness,and verify that no transcription errors or omissions have been made in preparing sample custody records and other project documentation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 12 of 73 A6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS Thorough documentation of all field sample collection is necessary for proper processing of data and, ultimately,for interpreting study results.Field sample collection will be documented in writing,on forms as well as on the following forms and labels: e A field log notebook for general observations and notes e A Field Data Record Form that contains information about observations and measurements made and samples collected at the site e Checklists for each sampling event,sampling point,and sampling time. The Technical Leads,and the appropriate PMs within subcontractor organizations will maintain files,as appropriate,as repositories for information and data used in preparing any reports and documents during the project and will supervise the use of materials in the project files.The following information will be included: Any reports and documents prepared Contract and Task Order information Project QAPP Results of technical reviews,data quality assessments,and audits Communications (memoranda;internal notes;telephone conversation records;letters; meeting minutes;and all written correspondence among the project team personnel, subcontractors,suppliers,or others) Maps,photographs,and drawings Studies,reports,documents,and newspaper articles pertaining to the project Special data compilations Spreadsheet data files:physical measurements,analytical chemistry data (hard copy and disk) Copies of the field log books and physical characterization/water quality data sheets and sampling checklists will be supplied to the Field PMs at the close of each sampling event.These data will be used in conjunction with inspection checklists to compile the sampling event reports.Formal reports that are generated from the data will be subject to technical and editorial review before submission to Alaska Energy Authority and will be maintained at Tt's Seattle,Washington office in the central file (disk and hard copy).The data reports will include a summary of the types of data collected,sampling dates,and any problems or anomalies observed during sample collection. If any change(s)in this QAPP are required during the study,a memo will be sent to each person on the distribution list describing the change(s),following approval by the appropriate persons.The memos will be attached to the QAPP.All written records relevant to the sampling and processing of samples will be maintained at Tt's Seattle,Washington office in the central file.Unless other arrangements are made, records will be maintained for a minimum of 5 years following expiration of the contract. B.MEASUREMENT AND DATA ACQUISITION B1.0 SAMPLING DESIGN This SAP and QAPP is prepared as part of the implementation of the 2013-2014 Baseline Water Quality Study Plan.The SAP and QAPP is standard documentation prepared before any water model development begins.These documents follow guidelines for the State of Alaska and U.S.Environmental Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 13 of 73 Protection Agency Region 10 Credible Data Policy (ADEC 2005).The following sections document how water quality data will be collected such that existing and post-Project water quality conditions within the Susitna River basin can be characterized.Data collected as part of this study will be used in the Water Quality Model to predict how operational scenarios will impact water quality conditions in both the reservoir and riverine portions of the basin. Water quality data will be collected from multiple aquatic media including surface water,sediment,and fish tissue.The fish tissue collection will be conducted as part of Study Plan 7.5/7.6 (Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Upper Susitna River and the Middle/Lower Susitna River, respectively).Tissue or whole fish samples will be collected in the mainstem Susitna River under Study Plan 7.5 and Study Plan 7.6 for use in analysis of potential for bioaccumulation.Continuous temperature monitoring will inform the predictive model on how the mainstem river and tributaries will respond to alternative Project operational scenarios and if changes in water quality conditions could affect aquatic life use and survival in the Project area.In addition,several other requirements of the 401 Water Quality Certification Process will be addressed with collection and description of additional data including the following: conducting a water quality baseline assessment; description of how existing and designated uses are met; use of appropriate field methods and models; use of acceptable data quality assurance methods; scheduling of technical work to meet deadlines;and derivation of load calculations of potential pollutants (pre-Project conditions). Two types of water quality monitoring activities will be implemented:1)routine monitoring for characterizing water quality baseline conditions,and 2)a single,comprehensive survey for a larger array of parameters.Frequency of sampling water quality parameters varies by category and potential for mobilization and bioavailability.Most of the general water quality parameters and select metals will be sampled on a monthly basis since each parameter has been demonstrated to be present in one or both of surface water and sediment (URS 2011).An initial screening survey has been proposed for several other toxics that might be detected in sediment and tissue samples (Table 6-1).The single surveys for toxics in sediment,tissue,or water will trigger additional study for extent of contamination and potential timing of exposure if results exceed criteria or thresholds (e.g.,LAETs,LC50s,etc.).The general list of water quality parameters and metals will be used in calibrating the water quality model in both a riverine and reservoir environment. The operation of temperature monitoring sites (Tetra Tech 2012)will continue as part of water quality monitoring activities in 2013/2014.Table 3-1 lists the temperature monitoring sites.These sites were selected based on the following rationale: e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site for the purpose of a baseline water quality characterization; e Location on tributaries where proposed access road-crossing impacts might occur during and after construction (upstream/downstream sampling points on each crossing); e Preliminary consultation with AEA and licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g.,instream flow,ice processes); e Access and land ownership issues;and e Eight of the sites are mainstem monitoring sites that were previously used for SNTEMP modeling in the 1980s.Thirty-one of the sites are Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations, most of which were monitored in the 1980s. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 14 of 73 Water Quality Data Collection:Longitudinal Profile of the Susitna River Twelve mainstem Susitna River monitoring sites are located below the proposed dam site and two mainstem sites above this location.Five sloughs will be monitored that represent a combination of physical settings in the drainage and that are known to support important fish-rearing habitat.Tributaries to the Susitna River will be monitored and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow like the Talkeetna,Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna rivers.A partial list of the remaining tributaries that will be monitored represent important spawning and rearing habitat for anadromous and resident fisheries and include:Gold Creek,Portage Creek,Tsusena Creek,Watana Creek,and Oshetna Creek. Monitoring sites are spaced at approximately 5 mile intervals so that the various factors that influence water quality conditions are captured and support the development (and calibration)of the water quality model.Frequency of sites along the length of the river is important for capturing localized effects from tributaries and from past and current human activity. These sites were selected based on the following rationale: e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site for the purpose of a baseline water quality characterization. e Location on tributaries where proposed access road-crossing impacts might occur during and after construction (upstream/downstream sampling points on each crossing). e Preliminary consultation with licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g.,instream flow,ice processes). Access and land ownership issues. Eight of the sites are mainstem monitoring sites that were previously used for SNTEMP modeling (see Section 5.6)in the 1980s.Thirty-one of the sites are Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations,most of which were monitored in the 1980s. Water quality data collection will be at the locations in bold in Table B1-2.The initial sampling will be expanded if general water quality,metals in surface water,or metals in fish tissue exceed criteria or thresholds.Additional contiguous sample sites will be visited on this list beginning the following sampling month wherever criteria or thresholds have been exceeded by individual parameters.This proposed spacing follows accepted practice when segmenting large river systems for development of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)water quality models.Sampling during winter months will be focused on locations where flow data is currently collected (or was historically collected by the USGS) and will be used for water quality modeling. Water quality collection can be broken into two components:in-situ water quality sampling and general water quality sampling.In-situ water quality sampling consists of on-site monthly measurements of physical parameters at fixed locations using field equipment.General water quality sampling will consist of monthly grab samples that will be sent to an off-site laboratory for analysis.The laboratory will have at a minimum,National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP)Certification in order to generate credible data for use by state,federal,and tribal regulatory programs for evaluating current and future water quality conditions.In general,these samples represent water quality components that cannot be easily measured in-situ,such as metals concentrations,nitrates,etc. Water quality samples will be analyzed for several parameters reported in Table B1-3.Metals monitoring for total and dissolved fractions in surface water include the full set of parameters used by ADEC in fish health consumption screening.The creation of a reservoir and potential alteration of surface water downstream of the proposed dam site may change characteristics of groundwater in the upper and middle Susitna basin.The water quality parameters identified in Table B1-3 will address the influence surface water may have on adjoining groundwater supplies in the vicinity of each sampling site.Changes to groundwater quality may have an effect on drinking water supplies so several parameters included on the inorganic chemical contaminants list have been included as part of this sampling program (ADEC 2003). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 15 of 73 The criteria that will be used for comparison with sampling results are the drinking water primary maximum contaminant levels. Additional parameters will be measured from all sites in a single survey that occurs during low water conditions (e.g.,August/September)in the Susitna basin.The following is a list of pollutants for which Alaska Water Quality Standards has established water quality criteria (18 ACC 70.020(b))for protecting designated uses in freshwater: e Continuous temperature monitoring program -Temperature,already included as part of the continuous temperature monitoring program. e In-situ monitoring program -pH,included as part of the monthly water quality sampling routine. -Color,categorical observation. -Residues,categorical assessment (floating solids,debris,sludge,deposits,foam,or scum). e General water quality program -Dissolved gas,included in the monitoring program (Dissolved Oxygen). -Dissolved inorganic substances (Total Dissolved Solids),included in monthly monitoring. -Turbidity,already included as part of the monthly water quality sampling routine. --Toxic and other deleterious organic and inorganic,already included in monitoring for inorganic metals and mercury/methyl-mercury (organometals). e One time survey -Fecal coliform bacteria,included in monthly monitoring. -Sediment,already included in assessing mercury and other metals from sediments. -Petroleum Hydrocarbons,oil,and grease,included in a one-time survey. -Radioactivity;radionuclide concentrations to be generated from surface water samples. -Toxic and other deleterious organic and inorganic,already included in monitoring for inorganic metals and mercury/methyl-mercury (organometals). Water quality parameters listed above that do not exceed Alaska Water Quality Standards will not be collected in succeeding months;the exception are those parameters in Table A4-1 associated with monthly sample collection from surface water. Water Quality Data Collection:Focus Areas on the Susitna River A total of ten Focus Areas were presented and discussed with the TWG and are proposed for detailed study within the Middle Segment of the river.The Focus Areas are intended to serve as specific geographic areas of the river that will be the subject of intensive investigation by multiple resource disciplines including water quality.The proposed Focus Areas were selected during an interdisciplinary resource meeting that involved a systematic review of aerial imagery within each of the Geomorphic Reaches (MR1 through MR8)for the entire Middle Segment of the river.Focus Areas were selected within MR1,MR2,MR5,MR6,MR7,and MR8.Focus Areas were not selected for MR3 or MR4 due to safety considerations related to Devils Canyon. The areas selected were those deemed representative of the major features in the Geomorphic Reach and included mainstem habitat types of known biological significance (i.e.,where fish have been observed based on previous and/or contemporary studies),as well as some locations (e.g,Slough 17)where previous sampling revealed few/no fish.The areas included representative side channels,side sloughs, upland sloughs,and tributary mouths. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 16 of 73 The Focus Area selections considered: o All major habitat types (main channel,side channel,side slough,upland slough,tributary delta). o Atleast one Focus Area per geomorphic reach (excepting reaches associated with Devils Canyon)will be included that are representative of other areas. o Areplicate sampling strategy will be used for measure habitat types within each Focus Area which many include random selection process. o Areas that are known (based on existing and contemporary data)to be biologically important for salmon spawning/rearing in mainstem and lateral habitats will be sampled (i.e.,critical habitats)and o Areas for which little or no fish use has been documented or for which information on fish use is lacking,will also be sampled. Maps of each FA with River Mile numbers included are shown below in Figure B1-1 through B1-10. eR Se eeOKTSreeiss:Sox SAF 80aARERRESSYRES :we SisayarA,eum ={nstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €-FlowArrow [eo]Project River Mile Proposed:éYasDawSyn,er Projection:Alaska Afbers NAD 19837DataSources:See Map References Men Alten Ra donite ZabictneyOrSources:2011 h Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File.Mep_RSP_HS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure B1-1.Map of Focus Area 1 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 17 of 73 eum =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €= Flow Arrow °Project River Mile Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1883 Dete Created:11/27/2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author R2-Jowtta Zabl.lotrreryOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File,Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MAumxd Figure B1-2.Map of Focus Area 2 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 18 of 73 ae atic Genie,Pe: meme instream Fiow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)viata DasoO€=FlowArrow © °Project River Mile Proyection:Alesha Albers NAD 1983 Data Sources:See Map References oercajsarzeigZablomneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure B1-3.Map of Focus Area 3 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 19 of 73 a ProposedYrasuasDara?ae *. gees instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €Flow Arrow [9]Project River Mile o_OZz°8Provection:Ataska Albers NAD 1983 Date Created:11/27/2012DataSources:See Map References ;;Map Author R2-Joeta ZablotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &imagery Project File.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure B1-4.Map of Focus Area 4 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 20 of 73 ae 34 oeREAgayta Fate ae alr HP Sees Pe IMG TS Wome dosernieegasaniaesEpeer oeERRINTaKepaNeeTeUeTMeIRRD que =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)t€==FlowArow °Project River Mile Proyection:Alaske Albers NAD 1983. Data Sources:See Map References ;;;Cee in ed soca zebtomneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fue.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAress_MR.mxd Figure B1-5.Map of Focus Area 5 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 21 of 73 Sigh Xe &45 Osi te reSRSSGPeRCESBSPAINSAe Proposed ,me =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)y Yatane Dam”€Flow Arrow 0 1,000 a : ...ee _-ayOssProjectRiverMileFeet Propection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983. Data Sources:See Map References baadhates RO geatte ZabiemneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &imagery Project Fue.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.rd Figure B1-6.Map of Focus Area 6 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 22 of 73 Proposed.eum instream Fiow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)via baw? €Flow Arrow t 0 1,000 °Project River Mile ae Feet Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Data Sources:See Map References ,a.Paice a ssiaie ablomeyaSource:2011 Susitna B jh LIDAR &tmagery Project Fie.Map_RSP_UFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure B1-7.Map of Focus Area 7 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP Page 23 of 73 oPropesedYiwuGe”ques =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) Flow Arrow€ °Project River Mile Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 File Mep_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Date Created:11/27/2012 Map Author,R2 -Joettn ZabictneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Data Sources:See Map References B1-8.Map of Focus Area 8Figure Alaska Energy AuthorityAttachment5-1Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 24 of 73 Ogte Se aCea*Ng y 4 eoeontisdese ae ieueh 5 BeeA7.CswEytse,pth Pos Pree 3°Re at Bis Seeee Sees°f,%3 4!r <4 my Leger”wy.Fi aes gids eee,ae ay pay aOFNeYSSegheesgteSf.AahayifefiSanPropusyll-Yau Gam? ye ===instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €_ -Flow Arrow on,fe}Project River Mile aProyection:Aleske Albers NAD 1983 ” Date Created:1127/2012 acta!pase ' Data Sources:See Map References Map Author R2 -Joota Zablotney sts Map Key:Orthophoto Source:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MRxd Aten Figure B1-9.Map of Focus Area 9 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 25 of 73 ry eetBeans8gIegIEMesaB5AENWEIS, eer eum instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €Flow Arrow a 0 1.000 °Project River Mile Feet Proyection:Aiaska Albers NAD 1983 Data Sources:See Map References.aeSreated,{1272012OrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mzd Figure B1-10.Map of Focus Area 10 a =Map Key”"Maree PF op ae The Focus Areas will have a higher density of sampling locations,in contrast to the mainstem network,so that prediction of change in water quality conditions from Project operations can be made with a higher degree of resolution.The resolution expected for predicting conditions will be as short as 100-meter (m) longitudinal distances within the Focus Areas.Depending on the length of the Focus Area,transects will be spaced every 100 m to 500 m and water quality samples collected at three locations along each transect.The collection points along a transect will be in open water areas and have 3 to 5 collection points.These will be discrete samples taken at each collection point.The density of monitoring locations within the Focus Areas will be used as a grid to detect and describe groundwater input.Plumes of groundwater input to a Focus Area will be traceable using thermal data or conductivity.The area of groundwater input will be described using the monitoring grid network represented by the transects and sampling points along each transect.The location of open water transects and piezometers will be coordinated with the Instream Flow Study (Section 8)and the Groundwater Study (Section 7.5)to efficiently implement common elements in each of the studies.Piezometers will be installed as part of the Water Quality Monitoring Study so that surface water and groundwater samples are collected at the same time for determination of influence of groundwater on surface water.Collection of groundwater and surface water during each site visit will be used to evaluate the influence of groundwater on surface water quality.Frequency of sampling will be every 2 weeks for a total duration of 6 weeks and coordinated with the Instream Flow and Groundwater studies. The following parameters that could affect habitat used by anadromous and resident fish in this drainage: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 26 of 73 Field Parameters e Water temperature e Dissolved oxygen e Conductivity e pH General Chemistry e =Turbidity e Hardness e Total nitrogen e Nitrate+nitrite-nitrogen e Total phosphorus Soluble reactive phosphorus Metals Mercury(total) Methylmercury (dissolved) Aluminum (dissolved and total) Iron (dissolved and total) Sediment Samples for Mercury/Metals in Reservoir Area Data Collection This portion of the study was designed to gather specific information on the distribution of Susitna River sediment contaminants of concern in potential source areas.In general,all sediment samples will be taken from sheltered backwater areas,downstream of islands,and in similar riverine locations in which water currents are slowed,favoring accumulation of finer sediment along the channel bottom.Samples will be analyzed for total metals,including aluminum,arsenic,cadmium,chromium,copper,iron,lead,mercury, nickel,selenium,and zinc.In addition,sediment size and total organic carbon (TOC)will be included to evaluate whether these parameters are predictors for elevated metal concentrations.Samples will be collected just below and above the proposed dam site.Additional samples will be collected near the mouth of tributaries near the proposed dam site,including Fog,Deadman,Watana,Tsusena,Kosina,Jay, and Goose creeks,and the Oshetna River.The purpose of this sampling will be to determine where metals,if found in the water or sediment,originate in the drainage.Toxics modeling will be conducted to address potential for bioavailability in resident aquatic life.Comparison of bioaccumulation of metals in tissue analysis with results from sediment samples will inform on potential for transfer mechanisms between source and fate. Most of the contaminants of interest are typically associated with fine sediments,rather than with coarse- grained sandy sediment or rocky substrates.Therefore,the goal of the sampling will be to obtain sediments with at least 5 percent fines (i.e.,particle size less than 0.0025 inches [63 micrometers],or passing through a #230 sieve).At some locations,however,larger-sized sediment may be all that are available. Baseline Metals Levels in Fish Tissue Two screening level tasks will be conducted.The first will be for methyl mercury in sport fish.Methyl mercury bioaccumulates and the highest concentrations are typically in the muscle tissue of adult predatory fish.Final determination of tissue type(s)for analysis will be coordinated with ADEC's Division of Environmental Health and guidance on fish tissue sampling.Target fish species in the vicinity of the Susitna-Watana Reservoir will be Dolly Varden,Arctic grayling,long nose sucker,lake trout, whitefish species,burbot and resident rainbow trout.Filet samples will be analyzed for methyl and total mercury.Liver samples will also be collected from burbot and analyzed for mercury,methyl-mercury, arsenic,cadmium,and selenium.Fish samples will be submitted to a state-certified analytical laboratory Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 27 of 73 for individual fish muscle tissue analysis.Results will be reported with respect to applicable State and federal standards. Results from fish tissue analysis will also be used as a baseline for determining how the proposed Project may increase the potential of current metals concentrations to become bioavailable.The projected water conditions in the reservoir will be estimated and current results for metals concentrations re-evaluated for determining potential toxicities to resident and anadromous fish species.Detection of mercury in fish tissue and sediment will prompt further study of naturally occurring concentrations in soils and plants and how parent geology contributes to concentrations of this native element in both compartments of the landscape.The focused study will estimate the extent and magnitude of mercury centamination so that an estimate of increased bioavailability might be made once the reservoir inundates areas where high concentrations of mercury are sequestered.Detectable concentrations of mercury may prompt additional sampling and analysis of tissues in the benthic macroinvertebrate community.The bio-magnification of mercury impact from sediments and plants to the fish community may be facilitated through consumption of impacted food sources like the benthic macroinvertebrates.Impact of this component of a trophic level may also be a conduit for mercury biomagnification in waterfowl and other wildlife that consume this food source. Pilot Thermal Imaging Assessment of a Portion of the Susitna River Thermal imagery of a portion of the Susitna River (e.g.,10 miles of the Middle River)was collected in the 2012 season.The primary goal is to establish baseline data for assessing the availability and spatial extent of thermal refugia/upwelling.Data from the thermal imaging will be ground-truthed using in- stream thermographs that will be utilized to calibrate the thermal imagery,assess absolute accuracy,and provide a temporal context for the thermal infrared data collection.In coordination with the Instream Flow and fish studies,a determination will be made as to whether thermal imaging data will be applicable and if additional thermal imagery will be collected during the 2013 field season. If the pilot study is successful,then a description of thermal refugia throughout the Project area can be mapped using aerial imagery calibrated with on-the-ground verification.The verification data will be collected at the same time as the aerial imagery (or nearly the same time)using the established continuous temperature monitoring network and additional grab sample temperature readings where there may be gaps,such as in select sloughs.The following elements are important considerations for data collection, specifications for data quality,and strategy for relating digital imagery and actual river surface water temperatures. Remotely sensed thermal images allow for spatially distributed measurements of radiant temperatures in the river.Radiant temperature measurements are made only on the surface layer of the water (top 4 inches [10 centimeters]).Temperature readings can vary depending on the amount of suspended sediment in the water and the turbidity of the water.Collection of data will occur near the end of October when the freeze begins and the contrast between cold surface water and warmer groundwater influence is accentuated.The suspended sediment and turbidity will be diminished during this period of the year when the glacial flour content in the water column is reduced from glacial meltwater. If the thermal imaging is not successful,the reason for the failure will be evaluated.Future actions will depend on the causes of the failure.Potential causes for failure could include: e Poor timing for the data acquisition flight. e Insufficient differences in temperature between groundwater and surface water. e Complex missing or dilution of the groundwater signal. Potential solutions would include: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 28 of 73 e Re-fly the thermal imaging under better conditions (a greater contrast in temperature between groundwater and surface water). e Hand held FLIR meters that could be used during stream side studies,and a more focused thermal mapping task within focus areas using handheld temperature meters and probes may prove useful. e Use of documentation of open water leads as a substitute. e Outfit the R44 helicopter to take advantage of regular field presence.Thermal imagery could be shot all summer long and brief intervals of ideal conditions could be used. e The Focus Area results represent habitat identified as representative of the most important for fisheries use as described by the rational for site selection in Section 8.5.4.2 of the RSP.These results can be extrapolated to similar reaches,side channels,and sloughs in other areas of the Susitna drainage not directly monitored in this study to determine thermal refugia for fish. Groundwater Quality in Selected Habitats The purpose of this portion of the study will be to characterize the water quality differences between a set of key productive aquatic habitat types (3 to 5 sites)and a set of non-productive habitat types (3 to 5)that are related to the absence or presence of groundwater upwelling to improve the understanding of the water quality differences and related groundwater/surface water processes. The density of monitoring locations within the Focus Areas will be used as a grid to detect and describe groundwater input.Plumes of groundwater input to a Focus Area will be traceable using thermal data or conductivity.The area of groundwater input will be described using the monitoring grid network represented by transects and sampling points along each transect.The location of open water transects and piezometers will be coordinated with the Instream Flow Study (Section 8)and the Groundwater Study (Section 7.5)to efficiently implement common elements in each of the studies.Piezometers will be installed as part of the Water Quality Monitoring Study so that surface water and groundwater samples are collected at the same time for determination of influence of groundwater on surface water.Collection of groundwater and surface water during each site visit will be used to evaluate the influence of groundwater on surface water quality.Frequency of sampling will be every 2 weeks for a total duration of 6 weeks and coordinated with the Instream Flow and Groundwater studies. Basic water chemistry (temperature,DO,conductivity,pH,turbidity,redox potential)that define habitat conditions will be collected at selected instream flow,fish population,and riparian study sites.These data will be used to characterize groundwater and surface water interactions. Table B1-1.List of water quality parameters and frequency of collection Parameter Task Becawency of In-Situ Water Quality Parameters Dissolved Oxygen (DO)Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event pH Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Water Temperature Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Specific Conductance Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Turbidity Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Redox Potential Baseline WQ and Sediment Each Sampling Event Color Baseline WQ (Visual)Monthly Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 29 of 73 Parameter Task Frequency ofCollection Residues Baseline WQ (Visual)One Survey-summer General Water Quality Parameters (grab samples for laboratory analysis) Hardness Baseline WQ Monthly Alkalinity Baseline WQ Monthly Nitrate/Nitrite Baseline WQ Monthly Ammonia as N Baseline WQ Monthly Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen Baseline WQ Monthly Total Phosphorus Baseline WQ Monthly Ortho-phosphate Baseline WQ Monthly Chlorophyll a Baseline WQ Monthly Total Dissolved Solids Baseline WQ Monthly Total Suspended Solids Baseline WQ Monthly Turbidity Baseline WQ Monthly TOC Baseline WQ One Survey-summer DOC Baseline WQ Monthly Fecal Coliform Baseline WQ One Survey-summer Petroleum Hydrocarbons Baseline WQ One Survey-summer Radioactivity Baseline WQ One Survey-summer Metals -(Water)Dissolved and Total Aluminum Baseline WQ (Total &One Survey-summerDissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyArsenicDissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyBariumDissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyBerylliumDissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyCadmiumDissolved) Chromium (III &IV)Baseline WQ (Total &One Survey-summer Dissolved) Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyCobaltDissolved) Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyCopperDissolved) I Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyronDissolved) Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyLeadDissolved) Manganese Baseline WQ (Total &Monthly Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 30 of 73 Parameter Task Frequency ofCollection Dissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyMagnesiumDissolved) Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyMercuryDissolved) Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyMolybdenumDissolved) Nickel Baseline WQ (Total &Monthly Dissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &One Survey-summerSelenium:Dissolved) Thallium Baseline WQ (Total &Monthly Dissolved) Vanadium Baseline WQ (Total &Monthly Dissolved) .Baseline WQ (Total &MonthlyZinc.Dissolved) Metals -Sediment (Total) Aluminum Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Arsenic Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Cadmium Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Copper Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Iron Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Lead Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Mercury Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Zinc Sediment Samples One Survey-summer Metals -Fish Tissue (Use EPA Sampling Method 1669) Total Mercury Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Methyl-mercury Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Arsenic Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Cadmium Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Selenium Fish Tissue Screening One Survey-late summer Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 31 of 73 Table B1-2.Proposed Susitna River Basin Temperature and Water Quality Monitoring Sites Susitna Description Susitna River Latitude Longitude River Mile Slough ID (decimal (decimal degrees) degrees) 15.1 Susitna above Alexander NA 61.4391 150.4851 Creek 25.8°Susitna Station NA 61.5454 -150.516 28.0 Yentna River NA 61.5876 -150.4831 29.5 Susitna above Yentna NA 61.5759 150.4270 40.6°Deshka River NA 61.7095 -150.3248 55.0'Susitna NA 61.8622 -150.1844 83.8°Susitna at Parks Highway NA 62.1748 -150.1732 East 83.9"Susitna at Parks Highway NA 62.1811 -150.1679 West 95.8 LRX 1 NA 62.3063 -150.1087 97.2 Talkeetna River NA 62.3424 -150.1122 98.1 Chulitna River NA 62.5676 -150.2379 103.0°°Talkeetna NA 62.3943 -150.134 103.3 Talkeetna NA 62.3972 -150.1373 113.0°LRX 18 NA 62.5252 -150.1144 120.7”Curry Fishwheel Camp NA 62.6178 -150.0136 126.0 --8A 62.6704 -149.9029 126.17 LRX 29 NA 62.6739 -149.899] 129.2°--9 62.7025 149.8412 130.87 LRX 35 NA 62.7136 -149.8089 136.5 Susitna near Gold Creek NA 62.7673 -149.6935 136.8°Gold Creek NA 62.7675 149.6919 138.0'--16B 62.7802 -149.6853 138.6°Indian River NA 62.8009 -149.664 138.7"Susitna above Indian NA 62.7854 149.6484 River 140.0 --19 62.7939 -149.6143 140.17 LRX 53 NA 62.7945 -149.6129 142.0 --21 62.8163 -149.576 148.0 Susitna below Portage NA 62.8303 149.3827 Creek 148.8”Susitna above Portage NA 62.8304 -149,3803 Creek 148.8 Portage Creek NA 62.8267 -149,3693 165.0 Susitna NA 62.7916 -148.997 180.3"Susitna below Tsusena NA 62.8134 -148.6568 Creek Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 32 of 73 Susitna Description Susitna River Latitude Longitude River Mile Slough ID (decimal (decimal degrees) degrees) 181.3?Tsusena Creek NA 62.8217 -148.6068 184.5"Susitna at Watana Dam NA 62.8226 -148.533 site 194.]Watana Creek NA 62.8296 -148.259 206.8 Kosina Creek NA 62.7822 -147.94 223.7 Susitna near Cantwell NA 62.7052 147.538 233.4 Oshetna Creek NA 62.6402 -147.383 1 Site not sampled for water quality or temperature in the 1980s or location moved slightly from original location. 2 Proposed mainstem Susitna River temperature monitoring sites for purposes of 1980s SNTEMP model evaluation. 3 Locations with overlap of water quality temperature monitoring sites with other studies. Locations in bold font represent that both temperature and water quality samples are collected from a site.Locations in italics represent sites which were not installed during the 2012 sampling year. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 33 of 73 Table B1-3.Parameters for water quality monitoring and laboratory analysis. Parameter Analysis Method Detectinn timit Sampre Holding In-Situ Water Quality Parameters Dissolved Oxygen (DO)Water Quality Meter 0.2 mg/L Not Applicable pH Water Quality Meter 0.1 pH units Not Applicable Water Temperature Water Quality Meter 0.1°C Not Applicable Specific Conductance Water Quality Meter 0.1 uS/cm Not Applicable Turbidity Water Quality Meter .05 NTU Not Applicable Redox Potential Water Quality Meter Unknown Not Applicable Color ww Scale N/A Not Applicable Residues Defined in 18 ACC 70 N/A Not Applicable General Water Quality Parameters (grab samples for laboratory analysis) Hardness EPA -130.2 Mone,as 180 days Nitrate/Nitrite EPA -353.2 0.031 mg/L 48 hours Alkalinity EPA -2320 3.1 mg/L 14 days Ammonia as N EPA -350.1 0.031 mg/L 28 days Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen EPA -351.2 0.2 mg/L 28 days Total Phosphorus EPA -365.3 0.0031 mg/L 28 days Ortho-phosphate EPA -365.3 0.01 mg/L 48 hours Chlorophyll a SM 10300 0.2 pg/L 28 days Total Dissolved Solids EPA -160.1 3.1 mg/L 7 days Total Suspended Solids EPA -160.2 0.15 mg/L 7 days Turbidity EPA -180.1 0.05 NTU 48 hours TOC EPA -415.1 .15 mg/L 28 days DOC EPA -415.1 0.07 mg/L 28 days Fecal Coliform EPA 1604 1 30 hours Petroleum Hydrocarbons EPA 602/624 (TAH)31 ug/L 14 daysEPA610/625 (TAH) EPA 900.0,901.1,903.1,|Varies from 0.7 to 904.0,905.0,Alpha 1,000 pCi/LRadionuclides'Spectroscopy 5 days Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 34 of 73 Parameter Analysis Method Detection Limit Sampee Holding Metals -(Water)Dissolved and Total Aluminum EPA -6010B/6020A .62 pg/L 48 hours Arsenic EPA -6010B/6020A 15 pg/L 48 hours Barium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.025 pg/L 48 hours Beryllium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.025 pg/L 48 hours Cadmium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.015 pg/L 48 hours Chromium (III &IV)EPA -6010B/6020A 0.062 pg/L 48 hours Cobalt EPA -6010B/6020A 0.01 pg/L 48 hours Copper EPA -6010B/6020A 0.05 pg/L 48 hours Iron EPA -6010B/6020A 6.2 pg/L 48 hours Lead EPA -6010B/6020A 0.031 pg/L 48 hours Magnesium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.015 pg/L 48 hours Manganese EPA -6010B/6020A 0.015 pg/L 48 hours Mercury EPA -7470A 1.5 ng/L 48 hours Molybdenum EPA -6010B/6020A 0.015 pg/L 48 hours Nickel EPA -6010B/6020A 0.062 pg/L 48 hours Selenium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.31 pg/L 48 hours Thallium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.0062 pg/L 48 hours Vanadium EPA -6010B/6020A 0.31 pg/L 48 hours Zinc EPA -6010B/6020A 0.4 pg/L 48 hours Metals -Sediment (Total) Aluminum EPA -200.7 Not Known 180 days Arsenic EPA -200.7 3.0 mg/kg 180 days Cadmium EPA -200.7 1.0 mg/kg 180 days Copper EPA -200.7 Not Known 180 days Iron EPA -200.7 Not Known 180 days Lead EPA -200.7 1.5 mg/kg 180 days Mercury EPA -245.5 /7470A 0.1 mg/kg 28 days Zinc EPA -200.7 3.5 mg/kg 180 days Metals -Fish Tissue (Use EPA Sampling Method 1669) Total Mercury EPA -1631 Not Known 7 days Methylmercury EPA -1631 Not Known 7 days Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 35 of 73 Parameter Analysis Method Detection tant Sampre Hoang Arsenic EPA -1632,Revision A Not Known 7 days Cadmium EPA -1632 Not Known 7 days Selenium EPA -1632 Not Known 7 days Note:List of Radionuclides suggested for analysis includes the following:Americium-241;Cesium-137;Lead-210; Plutonium-238,239,240;Potassium-40;Radium-226;Radium-228;Strontium-90;Thorium-230,232;Uranium- 234,235,238;Tritium Gross Alpha,Gross Beta 1s4ew iso°w 14g8w 148°W 147-w 146°W T T ss >rs Legend Proposed Collection Sites Proposed Watana Dam Site 2sSusitna Basin63230N.Tle ee aSeBESThA "yeee 67Nae Gold Creek aASherman. f SfieSayeennaeNT°'62930'NaPetersville.'Oo Talkeetna =62°HFigure B1-11.Proposed 2012 Stream Water Quality and Temperature Data Collection Sites for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 :aes)a,8FGSpain=alaska.}/:.fat S"te 7 =°asiaae bg ; ;(QED ENERGY AUTHORITY .i : f - 8 eS Data S :See Map Refe °ca jo 110 2 30 " 5 _f::fe Sees mi a n MC ay |is Fortrt Richardson¥Jet:Proc:Ala Aber NAD 1883 5Pars°'7 ted 124.2012iNoerg"ARlcnorage ca Map Autor Teva Tach dz Ly :mee Ae -wo?NL?File WO ProposedCobectonSrtes md os S Coal,nied 7 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 36 of 73 B2.0 SAMPLING METHODS Water Quality Data Collection:Monitoring Protocol Water quality grab samples will be collected during each site visit along a transect of the stream channel/water body,using methods consistent with ADEC and EPA protocols for sampling ambient water and trace metal water quality criteria. Mainstem areas of the river not immediately influenced bya tributary will be characterized with a single transect.Areas of the mainstem with an upstream tributary that may influence the nearshore zone or that are well-mixed with the mainstem will be characterized by collecting samples at two transect locations:in the tributary and in the mainstem upstream of the tributary confluence.Samples will be collected at 3 equi-distant locations along each transect (i.e.25%from left bank,50%from left bank,and 75%from left bank).Samples will be collected from a depth of 0.5 meters below the surface as well as 0.5 meters above the bottom.This will ensure that variations in concentrations,especially metals,are captured and adequately characterized throughout the study area. These samples will be collected on approximately a monthly basis (four samples from June to September).The period for collecting surface water samples will begin at ice break-up and extend to beginning of ice formation on the river.Limited winter sampling (once in December,and again in March) will be conducted where existing or historic USGS sites are located. Review of existing data (URS 2011)indicates that few exceedances occur with metals concentrations during the winter months.If the 2013 data sets suggest that mercury concentrations exceed criteria or thresholds,then an expanded 2014 water quality monitoring program will be conducted to characterize conditions on a monthly basis throughout the winter months. Variation of water quality in a river cross-section is often significant and is most likely to occur because of incomplete mixing of upstream tributary inflows,point-source discharges,or variations in velocity and channel geometry.Water quality profiles at each location on each transect will be conducted for field water quality parameters (e.g.,temperature,pH,dissolved oxygen,and conductivity)to determine the extent of vertical and lateral mixing. Water quality samples will be collected using a davit/cable/winch system.A 501b+weight will be attached to the end of the cable to ensure that both the cable and sampling equipment remain vertical throughout the water column.Water quality grab samples are anticipated to be collected via a Kemmerer Sampler,made out of Teflon for low level metals analysis,which will be attached to the davit cable.The sampler will be lowered into the water column via the wench until the desired sampling depth is reached. At that point the rope/cable attached to the sampler will be pulled tight and messenger sent down to close the sampler.Water from the sampler will be then be poured into the appropriate sample containers.If troubles are encountered while using the Kemmerer sampler due to high velocities in the Susitna river,a second sample collection method could be utilized where Tygon tubing is attached to the davit cable and water is pulled from the desired depth via a peristaltic pump.It is unknown at this time which sampling technique is better suited for conditions on the Susitna River and tributaries. Water quality indicators like conductivity (specific conductance)has been suggested as a surrogate measure for transfer of metals from groundwater to surface water or in mobilization of metals within the river channel.Available USGS data from select continuous gaging stations will be reviewed for increases in specific conductance during monthly and seasonal intervals,and these results will be used to determine if further metals sampling is warranted during additional winter months. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 37 of 73 In-Situ Water Quality Sampling During each site visit,in situ measurements of dissolved oxygen,pH,specific conductance,redox potential,turbidity,and water temperature will be made.A Hanna Instruments HI 98703 Portable Turbidity Meter will be used to measure turbidity,while a Hydrolab®datasonde (MSS)will be used to measure the remaining field parameters during each site visit.Continuous turbidity measurement may be conducted with the Hydrolab datasonde at select locations (e.g.,former/current USGS sites where turbidity data are available from the 1980s)and operated during summer and winter conditions.The following list of former and current USGS mainstem Susitna River monitoring sites will be considered for continuous turbidity monitoring:Susitna Station,Sunshine,Gold Creek,Tsusena Creek,and near Cantwell.These locations have historic and current flow data that will be used in water quality modeling (Section 5.6)of effects on turbidity from Project operations.Continuous logging of water quality parameters using a multi-parameter probe (e.g.,temperature,pH,dissolved oxygen,and conductivity) may be placed at Focus Area locations (identified in Section 5.5.4.5.The period of deployment will be focused on summer months June through September (four months)as water conditions permit deployment and routine download of data.Maintenance of a multi-parameter probe and risk from damage is high during winter months.Also,freezing conditions will damage sensor apparatus and the logging unit if enclosed by formation of ice. Standard techniques for pre-and post-sampling calibration of in situ instrumentation will be used to ensure quality of data generation and will follow accepted practice.If calibration failure is observed during a site visit,field data will be corrected according to equipment manufacturer's instructions. General Water Quality Sampling Water quality grab sampling will avoid eddies,pools,and deadwater.For sites upstream of the proposed Project site,samples will have to be collected nearshore via wading since sites are only accessible by helicopter.Samples will be collected using a Kemmerer sampler when collecting from a boat or a HDPE collection bottle mounted on an extendable pole when collecting from the river bank.Samples will be collected at 3 equi-distant locations along each transect (i.e.25%from left bank,50%from left bank,and 75%from left bank).Samples will be collected from a depth of 0.5 meters below the surface as well as 0.5 meters above the bottom.Sampling will avoid unnecessary collection of sediments in water samples, and touching the inside or lip of the sample container.Sample collection container will be rinsed with deionized water after each station to avoid cross-contamination.Samples will be delivered to ADEC approved laboratories within the holding time frame.Each batch of samples will have a separate completed chain of custody sheet.A field duplicate will be collected for 10 percent of samples (i.e.,1 for every 10 water grab samples).Laboratory quality control samples including duplicate,spiked,and blank samples will be prepared and processed by the laboratory. Sample numbers will be recorded on field data sheets immediately after collection.Samples intended for the laboratory will be stored/preserved in coolers and kept under the custody of the field team at all times. Samples will be shipped/transported to the laboratory in coolers with ice and cooled to approximately 4 °C.Chain of custody records and other sampling documentation will be kept in sealed plastic bags (Ziploc®)and taped inside the lid of the coolers prior to shipment.Packaging,marking,labeling,and shipping of samples will be in compliance with all regulations promulgated by the U.S.Department of Transportation in the Code of Federal Regulations,49 CFR 171-177. Sediment Samples for Mercury/Metals in Reservoir Area Data Collection:Monitoring Protocol Sediment samples will be collected using an Ekman dredge or a modified Van Veen grab sampler. Sampling devices will be deployed from the boat.Samples may also be collected by wading into shallow near shore areas.To the extent possible,samples will consist of the top 6 inches (15 centimeters)of Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 38 of 73 sediment.Comparison of results from the Susitna drainage will be made with other studies for Blue Lake,Eklutna Lake,and Bradley Lake when similar data are available and where physical settings are comparable. Sediment samples will be stored in cooler and kept under the custody of the field times at all times. Samples will be shipped/transported to the laboratory in coolers with ice and cooled to approximately 4 °C.Chain of custody records and other sampling documentation will be kept in sealed plastic bags (Ziploc®)and taped inside the lid of the coolers prior to shipment.Packaging,marking,labeling,and shipping of samples will be in compliance with all regulations promulgated by the U.S.Department of Transportation in the Code of Federal Regulations,49 CFR 171-177. Baseline Metals Levels in Fish Tissue:Monitoring Protocol Target fish species in the vicinity of the Susitna-Watana Reservoir will be Dolly Varden,Arctic grayling, whitefish species,burbot,long nose sucker,lake trout,and resident rainbow trout.If possible,filets will be sampled from 7 adult individuals from each species.Body size targeted for collection will represent the non-anadromous phase of each species life cycle (e.g.,Dolly Varden will be 3.5 to 5 inches [90 to 125 millimeters]total length to represent the resident portion of the life cycle).Collection times for fish samples will occur in late August and early September 2013.Filet samples will be analyzed for methyl and total mercury.Liver samples will also be collected from burbot and analyzed for mercury,methyl- mercury,arsenic,cadmium,and selenium. Field procedures will be consistent with those outlined in applicable ADEC and/or EPA sampling protocols (USEPA 2000).Clean nylon nets and polyethylene-gloves will be used during fish tissue collection.The species,fork length,and weight of each fish will be recorded.Fish will be placed in Teflon®sheets and into zipper-closure bags and placed immediately on ice.Fish samples will be submitted to a state-certified analytical laboratory for individual fish muscle tissue analysis.Results will be reported with respect to applicable state and federal standards. Pilot Thermal Imaging Assessment of a Portion of the Susitna River:Monitoring Protocol Pilot Thermal Imaging Assessment of a Portion of the Susitna River Thermal imagery of a portion of the Susitna River (e.g.,10 miles of the Middle River)was collected in the 2012 season.The primary goal is to establish baseline data for assessing the availability and spatial extent of thermal refugia/upwelling.Data from the thermal imaging will be ground-truthed using in- stream thermographs that will be utilized to calibrate the thermal imagery,assess absolute accuracy,and provide a temporal context for the thermal infrared data collection.In coordination with the Instream Flow and fish studies,a determination will be made as to whether thermal imaging data will be applicable and if additional thermal imagery will be collected during the 2013 field season. Remotely sensed thermal images allow for spatially distributed measurements of radiant temperatures in the river.Radiant temperature measurements are made only on the surface layer of the water (top 4 inches [10 centimeters]).Temperature readings can vary depending on the amount of suspended sediment in the water and the turbidity of the water.Collection of data will occur near the end of October when the freeze begins and the contrast between cold surface water and warmer groundwater influence is accentuated.To maximize thermal contrast between warmer ground water discharge and cooler river temperatures,the sensor will be flown during early morning when solar loading is minimized.The suspended sediment and turbidity will be diminished during the fall when the glacial flour content in the water column is reduced from glacial meltwater. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 39 of 73 After processing,the resulting TIR image mosaic will be visually inspected to look for spatial variability in surface temperatures within the study area.Analysts will identify thermal features and areas of ground water discharge either through direct detection of a spring or inferred from bulk temperature patterns.The median temperatures for each sampled image will be plotted versus the corresponding river mile to develop a longitudinal temperature profile.The profile will illustrate how stream temperatures vary spatially along the stream gradient.The location and median temperature of all sampled surface water inflows (e.g.tributaries,surface springs,etc.)will be included on the plot to illustrate how these inflows influence the main stem temperature patterns. If the pilot study is successful,then a description of thermal refugia throughout the Project area can be mapped using aerial imagery calibrated with on-the-ground verification.The verification data will be collected at the same time as the aerial imagery (or nearly the same time)using the established continuous temperature monitoring network and additional grab sample temperature readings where there may be gaps,such as in select sloughs.The following elements are important considerations for thermal data collection,specifications for data quality,and strategy for relating digital imagery and actual river surface water temperatures. Radiant Temperature e Remotely sensed thermal images allow for spatially distributed measurements of radiant temperatures in the river. e Radiant temperature measurements are made only on the surface layer of the water (top 10cm). e Temperature readings can vary depending on the amount of suspended sediment in the water and the turbidity of the water. Spatial Resolution e The key to good data quality is determining the pixel size of the thermal infrared (TIR)sensor and how that relates to the near-bank environment. e Best practice is 3 pure-water pixels (ensures that the digital image represented by any 3 contiguous pixels identifies water versus land). e Very fine resolution (0.2 -1m)imagery is best used to determine ground water springs and cold- water seeps. e Larger pixels can be useful for determining characteristic patterns of latitude and longitude thermal variation in riverine landscapes. Calibrating Temperature e Water temperatures change during the day,therefore collection will be measured near the same time daily and when water temp is most stable (early afternoon). e Validation sampling site selections are determined where there is channel accessibility and where there are not known influences of tributaries,or seeps in the area. e Hand-held ground imaging radiometers can provide validation as long as the precision is at least as good as that expected from airborne TIR measurements. Availability of historical imagery for thermal analysis will be also being investigated. Water Sample Processing Field equipment used for collection,measurement,and testing will be subject to a strict program of control,calibration,adjustment and maintenance.The Kemmerer sampler or tygon tubing/pump used to collect surface water samples will be routinely inspected to verify that it is working properly.The Van Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 40 of 73 Veen grab sampler used to collect sediment sample will also be routinely inspected.Routine maintenance of all sample equipment will be conducted prior to each sampling event.Maintenance will include a visual inspection that all parts are present,attached correctly and devoid of any obvious contamination.. The project manager will coordinate ordering replacement parts and repairing samplers.Spare sampling equipment will be available on-site in case of primary equipment failure. QA/OC and Blank Samples and Frequency Quality control activities in the field will consist of the following items: e Adherence to documented procedures in this SAP and the companion QAPP; e Cross-checking of field measurements and recording to ensure consistency and accuracy;and e Comprehensive documentation of field observations,sample collection and sample identification information. Multiple field quality control samples will be collected:one blind field duplicate sample will be collected for every ten sites sampled and sent to the laboratory to test for precision (e.g.,repeatability)of analytical procedures.A trip blank will be submitted to the lab to ensure that equipment handling and transport procedures do not introduce contamination to transported project samples.Rinsate blanks will be collected at different periods throughout the program to assure that cross-contamination between samples does not occur. B3.0 SAMPLE DOCUMENTATION AND SHIPPING Field Logbook and Field Log Forms Thorough documentation of all field sample collection is necessary for proper processing of data and, ultimately,for interpreting study results.Field sample collection will be documented in writing,on forms included in (to be included in Appendix B),as well as on the following forms and labels: e A field log notebook for general observations and notes e A Field Data Record Form that contains information about observations and measurements made and samples collected at the site e Checklists for each sampling event,sampling point,and sampling time. Copies of the field log books and physical characterization/water quality data sheets and sampling checklists will be supplied to the Field Project Managers at the close of each sampling event.These data will be used in conjunction with inspection checklists to compile the sampling event reports.Formal reports that are generated from the data will be subject to technical and editorial review before submission to AEA,and will be maintained at Tetra Tech's Seattle,Washington,office in the central file (disk and hard copy).The data reports will include a summary of the types of data collected,sampling dates,and any problems or anomalies observed during sample collection. Samples will be documented and tracked on Field Data Record forms,Sample Identification labels,and Chain of Custody records.The Field Task Leaders (one for each team)will be responsible for ensuring that these forms are completed and reviewed for correctness and completeness by the designated field QC Officer.Tt will maintain copies of these forms in the project files.A sampling report will be prepared following each sampling event.Another person will manually check data entered into any spreadsheet or other format against the original source to ensure accurate data entry.If there is any indication that requirements for sample integrity or data quality have not been met (for samples or measurements collected by Tetra Tech),the Tetra Tech QAO will be notified immediately (with an accompanying explanation of the problems encountered). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 41 of 73 Photographic Records Recording of sampling locations will be documented with photographs using a conventional photo-point procedure.Photographs will be taken at each sampling location and the photograph number and the associated date,description of the photograph,site identification number and GPS coordinates will be recorded in the photographic log.The photos will be stored as digital images and maintained as files,as appropriate,in repositories for information and data used in preparing any reports and documents during the project.Digital photos will be submitted with an index for each set of photographs,identifying the project,site identification number and a description of the photograph. Investigation-Derived Wastes Excess sample water collected from each site will be returned to the reservoir or river.Excess preservatives,when needed for preservation of field samples for transport to the laboratory,will be either returned to the original sample reservoir or will be disposed of safely according to the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS)directions. B4.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY Field Data Recording In-situ field data measurements will be recorded immediately following collection,both,electronically (stored within Hydrolab Surveyor)and on a field data sheet for each station.Field data sheets will be printed on Rite in the Rain paper.Promptly following each sample event,scanned copies of field data sheets will be made and stored electronically. Each sample bottle will have a waterproof sample identification label,tag,or permanent marker identification.All sample bottles will be labeled with an indelible marker before the time of collection. Sample labels will include station designation,date,time,collector's initials,and sample/analysis type. Special analyses to be performed and any pertinent remarks will also be recorded on the label. Sample Packaging and Shipping Requirements Samples for laboratory analysis will be collected in containers appropriate for the analytes of interest, filtered if necessary and will be properly preserved until delivery to the analytical laboratory.All samples will be immediately placed in coolers and packed with gel ice after sampling and will remain chilled to 4°C (42°C)during transportation to the contract laboratory.All samples will be accompanied with completed chain-of-custody forms when shipped,and coolers will be sealed with signed and dated fiber tape for shipment.Tetra Tech maintains specific SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures)for sample chain of custody,sample shipping,and supporting sample documentation. Chain of Custody Chain of custody (COC)can be defined as a systematic procedure for tracking a sample or datum from its origin to its final use.Chain of custody procedures is necessary to ensure thorough documentation of handling for each sample,from field collection to data analysis.The purpose of this procedure is to minimize errors,maintain sample integrity,and protect the quality of data collected. A data sample is considered to be under a person's custody if it is: e In the individual's physical possession e In the individual's sight e Secured in a tamper-proof way by that person,or e Secured by the person in an area that is restricted to authorized personnel. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 42 of 73 Elements of chain-of-custody include: e Sample identification Security seals and locks Security procedures Chain-of-custody record The analytical laboratory will provide blank COCs with each bottle order and provide scanned copies of finished COCs with sample results. B5.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS This study will employ both field measurements and collection of samples to be analyzed in the laboratory.Field and laboratory analytical procedures will follow APHA et al.(1998)methods.The expected detection or reporting limits for field parameters and laboratory analyses are listed in Table B1-3 along with the anticipated analytical method. Field Sampling Decisions Damage to equipment from wildlife,physical forces of the river,or equipment failure will be addressed using the following protocol.Field sampling decisions to deviate or modify field sampling locations or methods will only be made with the approval of the field crew chief.The field crew chief will document the decision on the field note sheets,and email a copy of the sheet or telephone the information to the study manager.If the field decision is large enough in scale to significantly affect the study's data,scope, schedule or budget,the field crew chief is authorized to stop work until further contact and coordination with the study manager can be performed. Laboratory Operations Documentation Laboratory data results will be recorded on laboratory data sheets,bench sheets and/or in laboratory logbooks for each sampling event.These records as well as control charts,logbook records of equipment maintenance records,calibration and quality control checks,such as preparation and use of standard solutions,inventory of supplies and consumables,check-in of equipment,equipment parts and chemicals will be kept on file at the laboratory. Any procedural or equipment problems will be recorded in the field notebooks.Any deviation from this Sampling and Analysis Plan will also be noted in the field notebooks.Data results will include information on field and/or laboratory QA/QC problems and corrective actions. Standard turnaround time for the analytical samples taken to the contract laboratory will be seven to ten working days and will not exceed twenty-two working days for reporting of data. Chain-of-custody forms will be kept with the sample during transport and will accompany data results back to Tetra Tech.Training records and data review records will be kept on file at Tetra Tech and the contract laboratory and will be available on request.All sample analysis records and documents are kept at the contract laboratory and will be available to AEA for inspection at any time.In addition to any written report,data collected for the project will be provided electronically via a CD-ROM or e-mail ZIP file format. All records will be retained by the contract laboratory for five years.All project records at Tetra Tech are retained permanently. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 43 of 73 B6.0 QUALITY CONTROL Data quality is addressed,in part,by consistent performance of valid procedures documented in the SOPs (Appendix B to this QAPP).It is enhanced by the training and experience of project staff and documentation of project activities This QAPP including its appendices will be distributed to all sampling personnel.A QC Officer (or equivalent)will ensure that samples are taken according to the established protocols and that all forms,checklists,and measurements are recorded and completed correctly during the sampling event. Measurement performance criteria for data to be collected during this project are discussed in the following sections. Precision Precision is a measure of internal method consistency.It is demonstrated by the degree of mutual agreement between individual measurements or enumerated values of the same property of a sample, usually under demonstrated similar conditions.The usability assessment will include consideration of this condition in evaluating field measures from the entire measurement system.Although precision evaluation within 20 percent relative percent difference (RPD)are generally considered acceptable for water quality studies and analyses,no data validation or usability action will be taken for results in excess of the 20 percent limit (unless RPD is specified as acceptable when >20%).Instead,the results will be noted and compared with the balance of the parameters analyzed for a more comprehensive assessment before any negative assessment,disqualification,or exclusion of data. This QC calculation also addresses uncertainty due to natural variation and sampling error.Precision is calculated from two duplicate samples by RPD as follows: p =!=©2l sagesCy where C;=the first of the two values and C;=the second of the two if precision is to be calculated from three or more replicate samples (as is often the case in laboratory analytical work),the relative standard deviation (RSD)will be used and is calculated as RSD == x where x is the of the replicate samples,and s is the standard deviation and is determined by the following equation: where 7,is the measured value of the replicate,vis the mean of the measured values,and n is the number of replicates. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 44 of 73 Accurac Accuracy is defined as the degree of agreement between an observed value and an accepted reference or true value.Accuracy is determined by using a combination of random error (precision)and systematic error (bias)due to sampling and analytical operations.Bias is the systematic distortion of a measurement process that causes errors in one direction so that the expected sample measurement is always greater or lesser to the same degree than the sample's true value.EPA now recommends that the term accuracy not be used and that precision and bias be used instead. Because accuracy is the measurement of a parameter and comparison to a truth,and the true values of environmental physicochemical characteristics cannot be known,use of a surrogate is required.Accuracy of field measurements will be assumed to be determined through use of precision. The accuracy of field equipment for the measurement of temperature,DO,conductivity,salinity,and pH will be determined at a minimum of two points that span the expected range of values for these parameters.Instruments used and procedures for determining accuracy include the following: Accuracy of data entry into the project database will be controlled by double-checking all manual data entries. Representativeness Data representativeness is defined as the degree to which data accurately and precisely represents a characteristic of a population,parameter,and variations at a sampling point,a process condition,or an environmental condition.It therefore addresses the natural variability or the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of a population.The number of sampling points and their location within the study area were selected from a random draw to ensure that representative sample collection of each area of the watershed and each assessment characteristic occurs. Completeness Completeness is defined as the percentage of measurements made that are judged to be valid according to specific criteria and entered into the data management system.To achieve this objective,every effort is made to avoid accidental or inadvertent sample or data loss.Accidents during sample transport or lab activities that cause the loss of the original samples will result in irreparable loss of data.Lack of data entry into the database will reduce the ability to perform analyses,integrate results,and prepare reports. Samples will be stored and transported in unbreakable (plastic)containers wherever possible.All sample processing (subsampling,sorting,identification,and enumeration)will occur in a controlled environment within the laboratory.Field personnel will assign a set of continuous identifiers to a batch of samples. Percent completeness (%C)for measurement parameters can be defined as follows: MC ==«100% where V =the number of measurements judged valid and 7 =the total number of measurements planned. For this project,sampling will be considered complete when no less than 90 percent of the samples collected during a particular sampling event are judged valid. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 45 of 73 Comparability Two data sets are considered to be comparable when there is confidence that the two sets can be considered equivalent with respect to the measurement of a specific variable or group of variables. Comparability is dependent on the proper design of the sampling program and on adherence to accepted sampling techniques,and QA guidelines. B7.0 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING,INSPECTION,AND MAINTENANCE Periodic regular inspection of equipment and instruments is needed to ensure the satisfactory performance of the systems.Equipment to be used during the sampling event is listed in the appropriate SOPs.Before any piece of sampling or measurement equipment is taken into the field,it will be inspected to ensure that the equipment is appropriate for the task to be performed,all necessary parts of the equipment are intact, and the equipment is in working order.In addition,the equipment will be visually inspected before its use.Broken equipment will be labeled "DO NOT USE”and returned to the Tt office to receive necessary repairs,or it will be disposed of.Backup field equipment will be available during all field activities in the event of equipment failure. The objective of preventive maintenance is to ensure the availability and satisfactory performance of the measurement systems.All field measurement instruments will receive preventive maintenance in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. B8.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY Calibrated field instruments will be used for in-field,instantaneous measurement of temperature,DO, conductivity,salinity,and redox potential.Instruments will be calibrated in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and as described in the measurement SOPs.The SOPs include pre-and post-calibration verification on each sampling date.Verification of pH measurement accuracy will be checked against standard solutions in the field and adjustments made to the meter prior to the next measurement,if necessary. The calibration of temperature,DO,conductivity/salinity,and pH probes will be checked before and after each sampling event,or as deemed necessary by the multiprobe's manufacturer,using certified standard solutions.Field calibrations will be recorded in the field sampling log book.Individual sensors will be considered to be operating correctly if the instrument reading is within 15 percent of the calibration standard value.If the two values are not within 15 percent of each other,the probe will be cleaned and recalibrated.If these two values are still not within 15 percent of each other following cleaning and recalibration,the probe itself will be replaced. B9.0 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLES Supplies and consumables are those items necessary to support the sampling and analysis operation.They include bottleware,calibration solutions,hoses,decontamination supplies,preservatives,and various types of water (e.g.,potable,deionized,organic-free).Upon delivery of supplies,field crews will ensure that types and quantities of supplies received are consistent with what was ordered,and with what is indicated on the packing list and invoice for the material.If any discrepancies are found,the supplier will be contacted immediately. While preparing for specific sampling events,the field sampling Task Leaders will be responsible for acquiring and inspecting materials and solutions that will be used for obtaining the samples for field measurements.Other materials must also meet specific requirements as indicated by the appropriate Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 46 of 73 manufacturer;for example,only certified standard solutions will be used for the multiprobe calibration. Buffers and standards will be checked for expiration dates and appearance (correct color). B 10.0 NONDIRECT MEASUREMENTS Comparison of data collected during this field effort to historical data will be used for qualitative assessment only.Assessment of applicability for historical data is outside the scope of this document and is not addressed further in this data collection QAPP. B 11.0 DATA MANAGEMENT Samples will be documented and tracked on Field Data Record forms,Sample Identification labels,and Chain of Custody records.The Field Task Leaders (one for each team)will be responsible for ensuring that these forms are completed and reviewed for correctness and completeness by the designated field QC Officer.Tt will maintain copies of these forms in the project files.A sampling report will be prepared following each sampling event.Another person will manually check data entered into any spreadsheet or other format against the original source to ensure accurate data entry.If there is any indication that requirements for sample integrity or data quality have not been met (for samples or measurements collected by Tt),the Tt QAO will be notified immediately (with an accompanying explanation of the problems encountered). Hard copy data packages will be paginated,fully validated raw data packages that include an analytical narrative with a signed certification of compliance with this QAPP and all method requirements;copies of Chain of Custody forms;sample inspection records;laboratory sample and QC results;calibration summaries;example calculations by parameter;and copies of all sample preparation,analysis,and standards logs adequate to reconstruct the entire analysis.The CD-ROM data will include a full copy of the paginated report scanned and stored in portable document format (PDF)for potential future submission to the client,if requested,and for long-term storage in the project files.Initially,the full raw data package will be submitted to the Tt QAO for assessment of compliance with the program goals and guidance. All computer files associated with the project will be stored in a project subdirectory by Tt (subject to regular system backups)and will be copied to disk for archive for the 5 years subsequent to project completion.The data may eventually be stored using a data management system specified Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 47 of 73 C.ASSESSMENTS AND OVERSIGHT C1.0 ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE ACTIONS The QA program under which this task order will operate includes technical system audits,with independent checks of the data obtained from sampling,analysis,and data-gathering activities.Tt will review the QA programs that subcontractors follow to ensure similar levels of QA and QC are attained. The essential steps in the QA program are as follows: Identify and define the problem Assign responsibility for investigating the problem Investigate and determine the cause of the problem Assign and accept responsibility for implementing appropriate corrective action Establish the effectiveness of and implement the corrective action e Verify that the corrective action has eliminated the problem Many of the technical problems that might occur can be solved on the spot by the staff members involved; for example,by modifying the technical approach,repairing instrumentation that is not working properly, or correcting errors or deficiencies in documentation.Immediate corrective actions form part of normal operating procedures and are noted in records for the project.Problems not solved this way require more formalized,long-term corrective action.If quality problems that require attention are identified,Tt or the subcontractor will determine whether attaining acceptable quality requires short-or long-term actions.If a failure in an analytical system occurs (e.g.,performance requirements are not met),the appropriate QC Officer or subcontractor QA Manager will be responsible for corrective action and will immediately inform the Tt PM or QAO,as appropriate.Subsequent steps taken will depend on the nature and significance of the problem. The Tt Technical Lead has primary responsibility for monitoring the activities of this project and identifying or confirming any quality problems.These problems will also be brought to the attention of the Tt QAO,who will initiate the corrective action system described above,document the nature of the problem,and ensure that the recommended corrective action is carried out.The Tt QAO has the authority to stop work on the project if problems affecting data quality require extensive effort to resolve and are identified. The AEA PM and Tt Technical Lead will be notified of major corrective actions and stop work orders. Corrective actions might include the following: e Re-emphasizing to staff the project objectives,the limitations in scope,the need to adhere to the agreed-upon schedule and procedures,and the need to document QC and QA activities Securing additional commitment of staff time to devote to the project Retaining outside consultants to review problems in specialized technical areas Changing procedures The Tt Technical Lead may replace a staff member or subcontractor,as appropriate,if it is in the best interest of the project to do so. e The Tt QC Officers are responsible for overseeing work as it is performed and periodically conducting checks during the data entry and analysis phases of the project.As data entries, calculations,or other activities are checked,the person performing the check will sign and date a hard copy of the material or complete a review form,as appropriate,and provide this documentation to the Tt Technical Lead for inclusion in the project files.Field audits and technical system audits will not be conducted under this task order. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 48 of 73 C2.0 QA REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT A draft data report will be prepared and forwarded to the AEA for data analysis completed during winter 2013.The report will include the following: e Description of the project purpose,goals,and objectives. Map(s)of the study area and sampling sites. Descriptions of field methods. Discussion of data quality and the significance of any problems encountered in the analyses. Summary tables of field data. Observations regarding significant or potentially significant findings. Recommendations based on project goals. D.DATA VALIDATION AND USABILITY D1.0 DATA REVIEW,VERIFICATION,AND VALIDATION Data validation and review services provide a method for determining the usability and limitations of data and provide a standardized data quality assessment.All Field Data forms will be reviewed by the Tt Technical Lead and Field Task Manager (assisted by the QAO,as needed)for completeness and correctness.Tt will be responsible for reviewing data entries and transmissions for completeness and adherence to QA requirements.Data quality will be assessed by comparing entered data to original data or by comparing results to the measurement performance criteria summarized in Section 4.0 to determine whether to accept,reject,or qualify the data.Results of the review and validation processes will be reported to the Technical Leads. D2.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS The Tt Technical Leads or designee will review all Field Data Record forms.The Tt QAO will review a minimum of 5 percent of the Field Data Record forms and other records.Any discrepancies in the records will be reconciled with the appropriate associated field personnel and will be reported to the Tt Technical Leads.The AEA PM will be consulted with deficiencies,observations,and findings,as well as with corrective action and technical directive recommendations for consideration and approval. Data verification requires confirmation by examination or provision of objective evidence that the requirements of these specified QC acceptance criteria are met.Each step of the data collection and analysis process must be evaluated and its conformance to the protocols established in this QAPP verified,including: Sampling design Sample collection procedures Data analysis procedures Quality control Data format reduction and processing data Validation involves detailed examination of the complete data package using professional judgment to determine whether the established procedures were followed.Validation will be done by the Study Lead. Tetra Tech and URS managers for the project will review all results to verify that methods and protocols specified in this QAPP were followed;that all instrument calibrations,quality control checks,and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 49 of 73 intermediate calculations were performed appropriately;and that the final reported data are consistent, correct,and complete,with no omissions or errors. Evaluation criteria will include the acceptability of instrument calibrations and precision data and the appropriateness of assigned data qualifiers,ifany.The study lead will review the data packages and companion field notations to determine if the results met the MQOs for bias,precision,and accuracy for that sampling interval (monthly)and to ensure that all analyses specified on the "Chain of Custody"form were performed.Based on these assessments,the data will either be accepted,accepted with appropriate qualifications,or rejected. After the field data have been reviewed and verified by the project manager,they will be independently reviewed by QA officer for errors before closing out the study.The initial data review will consist of a 10 percent random sampling of the project data.If any errors are discovered during the initial data review,a full independent review will be undertaken QA officer. D3.0 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS As soon as possible following completion of the sample collection and analyses,Tt will assess the precision,accuracy,and completeness measures and compare them with the criteria discussed in Section A 4.0.This will be the final determination of whether the data collected are of the correct type,quantity, and quality to support their intended use for this project.Any problems encountered in meeting the performance criteria (or uncertainties and limitations in the use of the data)will be discussed with the project QA personnel and the Alaska Energy Authority PM,and will be reconciled if possible. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 50 of 73 REFERENCES Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2003.Alaska Water Quality Criteria Manual for Toxic and Other Deleterious Organic and Inorganic Substances.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water.Juneau,Alaska.51p. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2005.Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Program.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water. Juneau,Alaska.58p. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2012a.18 AAC 70-Water Quality Standards,Amended April 8,2012. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2012b.18 AAC 75-Oil and Other Hazardous Substances Pollution Control,Amended April 8,2012. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2012c.18 AAC 80-Drinking Water Standards,Amended August 20,2012. Alaska Energy Authority (AEA).2011.Pre-Application Document:Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241.December 2011.Prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (AEIDC).1983a.Examination of Susitna River Discharge and Temperature Changes Due to the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project -Final Report.Prepared by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Anchorage,AK.Submitted to Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Anchorage,AK.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage,AK. AEIDC.1983b.Stream Flow and Temperature Modeling in the Susitna Basin,Alaska.Prepared by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Anchorage,AK.Submitted to Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Anchorage,AK.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK. AEIDC.1984a.Effects of Project-Related Changes in Temperature,Turbidity and Stream Discharge on Upper Susitna Salmon Resources During June -Sept.January 1984.University of Alaska - Anchorage,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 454. AEIDC.1984b.Examination of Susitna River Discharge and Temperature Changes Due to the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.February 1984.University of Alaska -Anchorage,Anchorage, Alaska.APA Document Number 861. AEIDC.1984c.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed SHP on Instream Temperature and Fishery Resources in the Watana to Talkeetna Reach Vol.1 Main Text -Final.October 1984.University of Alaska -Anchorage,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 2330. AEIDC.1984d.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed SHP on Instream Temperature and Fishery Resources in the Watana to Talkeetna Reach Vol.2 Appendices A-H-Final.October 1984. University of Alaska -Anchorage,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 2331. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 51 of 73 AEIDC.1985.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed SHP on Instream Temperature and Fish Resources in the Watana to Talkeetna Reach.May 22,1985.University of Alaska -Anchorage, Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 2706. APHA (American Public Health Association).1998.Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,20th ed.American Public Health Association,Washington,DC. Banks,W.S.L.,Paylor,R.L.,and Hughes,W.B.,1996,Using thermal-infrared imagery to delineate ground-water discharge:Ground Water,v.34,no.3,p.434-443. Cole,T.M.and S.A.Wells.2000.CE-QUAL-W2:A two-dimensional,laterally averaged,Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model,Version 3.0,Instruction Report EL-2000.US Army Engineering and Research Development Center,Vicksburg,MS. EPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency).1998.EPA Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/G-5).Office of Research and Development,EPA/600/R-98/018.Washington,D.C.136p. EPA (U.S.Environmental Protection Agency).2000.Guidance for Assessing Chemical ContaminantDataforuseinFishAdvisories:Volume 1 Fish Sampling and Analysis,3 Edition.EPA-823-B-00- 007.United States Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Water.Washington,D.C.485p. EPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency).2001.EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/R-5,EPA/240/B-01/003,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),Quality Assurance Division,Washington,DC. EPA (U.S.Environmental Protection Agency).2002.EPA Contract Laboratory Program,National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review,OSWER 9240.1-35,EPA 540-R-01-008.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Environmental Information,Washington,DC. EPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency).2005.Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans:Evaluating,Assessing,and Documenting Environmental Data Collection and Use Programs.EPA-505-B-04-900A,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Department of Defense, and Department of Energy,Washington,D.C. Fischer,W.A.,Davis,D.A.,and Sousa,T.M.,1966,Fresh-water springs of Hawaii from infrared images: U.S.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas 218,1 map. Hamrick,J.M.1992.A Three-Dimensional Environmental Fluid Dynamics Computer Code:Theoretical and Computational Aspects,Special Report 317.The College of William and Mary,Virginia Institute of Marine Science.63 pp. Imberger,J.,and Patterson,J.C.(1981).A dynamic reservoir simulation model-DYRESM.In Transport Models for Inland and Coastal Waters (H.B.Fischer ed.),pp.310-361.Academic Press,New York.. LaBaugh,James W.,and Rosenberry,Donald O.2008.Field Techniques for Estimating Water Fluxes between Surface Water and Ground Water.Techniques and Methods Chapter 4-D2,U.S. Geological Survey,U.S.Department of the Interior. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 52 of 73 Patterson,John,J.Imberger,B.Hebbert,and J.Loh.1977.Users Guide to DYRESM -A Simulation Model for Reservoirs of Medium Size.University of Western Australia,Nedlands,Western Australia. Pluhowski,E.J.,1972,Hydrologic interpretations based on infrared imagery of Long Island,New York, Contributions to the hydrology of the United States:U.S.Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2009-B,20 p. Robinove,C.J.,1965,Infrared photography and imagery in water resources research:Journal of the American Water Works Association,v.57,pt.2,p.834-840. Robinove,C.J.,and Anderson,D.G.,1969,Some guidelines for remote sensing in hydrology:Water Resources Bulletin,v.5,no.2,p.10-19. Rundquist,D.,Murray,G.,and Queen,L.,1985,Airborne thermal mapping of a "flow-through”lake in the Nebraska Sandhills:Water Resources Research,v.21,no.6,p.989-994. Taylor,J.I.,and Stingelin,R.W.,1969,Infrared imaging for water resources studies:Journal of the Hydraulics Division,Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers,v.95,no.1,p.175- 189. Theurer,F.D.,K.A.Voos,and W.J.Miller.1984.Instream Water Temperature Model.Instream Flow Inf. Pap.16.U.S.Fish and Wildlife.Serv.FWS/OBS-84/15.v.p. URS.2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report.Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska.62p.+Appendixes. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 53 of 73 This page left intentionally blank Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0MercuryAssessmentandPotentialforBioaccumulationSAP/QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 54 of 73 :LOCATION MAPSAPPENDIXA 'tomtong Water QuattyBBsaroingSwe f : /¥ad(mm.itensr A! Dace Sones:See May Setenetoed Ph Rreer Mite Indes 1981 1M) eya> ot a . At Boss neSs cdatt 1teSusiiofs a MR UdyASTat iYU Eaeed tna above Alexander Creek at RM 15 <.@ Dae Sovces See bag Aeteences Figure A-2.Map of site Susitna Station at RM 25.8 Alaska Energy AuthorityAttachment5-1Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Page 55 of 73 Date:October 31,2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0MercuryAssessmentandPotentialforBioaccumulationSAP/QAPP i'soa oyin ite Susitna above Yentna at RM 29.5 Emating Wolter Quatty Sampung Site Proposed Water CuntryoSompingSse Map of site Yentna River at RM 28 forUteIndes 1907 RMI Map of s Figure A-3. Figure A-4 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Attachment 5-1Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP Page 56 of 73 mm itaALIH -_ Bae &0 Serene o_"OPE 31 wat eT / fmetng Viater Quanty Propesed Water Gusity© samping ne BB camping sae ==z3|&ghee=f+ Figure A-6.Map of site Susitna at RM 55 >Nae50°ain-_-30<aBs>22o®uaye]x7)Ass}<7WwWCcoi==oOxs<=Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 57 of 73 ProposedWaterQuasityOSaiplenySetesfRiwerMaeinden1987(RMD = a o Bk Poreon,ortpewi ve <='=fame bets Ais 4 Dats Souter.See Map Referees ®zoo OYoeeesFeet|Keepin Saree Grey ORS TERY eceeLewes325272egaatrorErieyHeer\Ont i emergeONad x PG A E re .de =7 ;. . Figure A-8.Map of site Susitna at Parks highway West a 83.9 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 58 of 73 Re HU Ay te ¥t= . "Aaah eae all yet a OK ey : te TEAMSwets ee he aiea, sy hee Be + . < a eo]: z s B 3= fas] oO oO eal 3 & © 3 = = 5 a zt 2 Oflg3 Z aae 3s Ho 5 2pesh§ ; Isie a < gegad 2 ot |motr A Ss 2 oD Cy om S ey Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Attachment 5-1 .Map of site Talkeetna at RM 103 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Figure A-10 FERC Project No.14241 Page 59 of 73 Date:October 31,2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0MercuryAssessmentandPotentialforBioaccumulationSAP/QAPP athdegatesa Cease*. om =: fom reer AL? Mm.beetAURat? / / A © ¥ Catster Ae gee coe et SS : Bo iW Roa i 2 . ; oe tetites ¥# ¥ Euntng Water QuastgSamplingSate Proposed Water Quality Sarnpieeg Sae0 sb RiverBadeinden 1961 My oe, PP EPR IOS Figure A-11.Map of site Talkeetna at RM 103.3 Figure A-12.Map of site LRX 18 at RM 113 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Attachment 5-1Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 QAPP xxx,Revision 0MercuryAssessmentandPotentialforBioaccumulationSAP/QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 60 of 73 Proposed Water Guainy Eomting Water Gunity 177 Sampung Sie BE sempung sie Rover Wee index 1981 (Rat) ime ; .7, 4 Pr ag . 4 " b Vere 7 Ae es thy Wan um,DetarAulyj= er ' A-13.Map of site Curry Fishwheel Camp at RM 120.7 A: Figure A-14.Map of Site Slough 8A at RM 126 Figure Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy AuthorityAttachment5-1 December 2012 Page 61 of 73 Date:October 31,2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0MercuryAssessmentandPotentialforBioaccumulationSAP/QAPP eA ayy!aya ee Rey ate = REme Re ” 5 Ter A. $ oe, See". ay Oe da fete ee 3 ; =x ¥,Poth 1MapofsiteLRX29atRM126.-15. Proposed Water CuimityOoSampingSate Exstrng Water Quakty|Sampiung Sie Proposed Water Quality Sempung Side A Evsteg Vater Quaity fever Mee Indes 1981 (RM B Sampiing Site So Rver Mee Index 19681 {fap Oo wtTagahl ¢ ire Seas 'Dens ineeit DLAs. Figure Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Attachment 5-1 Figure A-16.Map of site Slough 9 at RM 129.2 FERC Project No.14241 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 62 of 73 Legend Exstng Water Guakty Samping te Proposed Water Qualzy Sampling See Flyer Mae lndaz 1961 (RM Exatng Yeeter Ounbty Sampung Site Proposed Water Guarty Sampang Sie Rayer Map indea 188t (RM ae. »Pairser3* T oe ar Act ghtLe at RM 130.8 am $ti-138.72s 8 Sr'¥YrdemwMee aeSeraater F ee dswat,iAOriea Figure A-18.Map of site Susitna near Gold Cree '=i bimits Aa iresi¥ es AareerTeinTareFeeAsontengeneLM2mat Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 63 of 73 Legend Exishng Water GunlaySampergSte Preponeo Water GuabtySanginSune Paver Mue inden 1985 (RM Sy.-Cypiachngaiea RM 136.ieeeEnustng Water QualtySamepiergSete Proposed Water GuastySampangS08 a3™orRoverMeindex 1981 KM Be hy;wet+ogyTheiseasoon"its9.Figure A-20.Map of site Slough 16B at RM 138 als 'es fe +bsusion 7p oi «eseps el 2 P cn SCED)§'5 ranseaye taper Tele Lereeet $IETT jane OemeRarabesteESee Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 64 of 73 Legend fustng Water Quakty Sempding Se Proposed Water Guaity Sampiing Sie Rivet tae inden 1961 (Rady he "f f=om a AY Data Sournes.See Mag:Paferences 'tre Teer Le ET Figure A-21.Map of site Indian River at RM 13 oO6 etyRte'ie Nag!atpteee ar waremewereyt Af §fe Dass Sources.See Map References Ld to.meee Feet 'Srurper,Des Beez So THE * Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 65 of 73 Eusteg Water Guatty Sampling Saxe Propased Waiter QualitySampungSae Rewer Vee inges 1581 (RM) Sits uy Sloug ss ies Easing Water GuattyBwSamplingSas ProposedWaterCuaaty© SempiingSae+AneMéeIndes 1961 IRM)»"41easeda2ae"EVeryHy%*'aSusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP Page 66 of 73 Legend PropowedWisterQunltySamgungSee Aes 21 at aYASS Vaeeas Figure A-26.Map of site Susitna below Portage Creek at RM 148 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 67 of 73 Legend oastng Water Guasty||Senphng Sie ProposedWaterQualitySanpungSite i ee Sa Wty gSRearMaeinden1661(RM)POTS eh a Oe REL aan Peet rad Sieai xt Eustng Water Guanty Sarnphergy Site Propoaed Weter Quality Saenpuing Site River Nae inden t901 (RM) ae bs ' renee.Stran,ierSPclernan EDneiasaeSy Figure A-28.Map of site Portage Creek at RM 148.8 pera Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 68 of 73 a AOE Legend ProposedWaterGuakty©sempuing Soe + ae gh 3ifial Ra 4auy "ow WrFieeC_Som adagies Oat 3)wat Figure A-29.Map of site Susitna at Legend Sroposed Water Quanty© sampung Sie He Rrver Mie index 1961 (RMI 5opel2+:ceo ei ;pw edi,im, =ie Sagtt> Figure A-30.Map of site Susitna at Watana Dam at RM 184.5 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 69 of 73 wer Mie inden 1961 (RM we td otad we BA oo Bee we.Pes vet*Feeveeaed Figure A-31.Map ofsite Watana Creek at RM 194.r es Propased!Water Quality Sampang Saw :a ttlendpiaceFigureA-32.Map of site Kosina Creek at RM 206.8 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 70 of 73 Legend Propeped Water QualityoSampangSas River Mite inden 1961 RM} ntwell at RM 223. ee RM:235 + =smm Ly AY 8 200 1 a maint reais 'iene | Figure A-34.Map of site Oshetna Creek at RM 233.4 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2072 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 71 of 73 This page left intentionally blank. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 72 of 73 APPENDIX B:Temperature Probe Field Data Forms a.Temperature Logger Calibration Check Form b.Field Deployment Form Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 73 of 73 oOONOOmeWA©OsOO)tmbeA)osDate: Temperature Logger Calibration Check Form Technicians: Time NIST Thermistor |Red Liquid SN-#SN-SN-SN- Time NIST Thermistor |Red Liquid SN-#SN-SN-SN- Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 ATTACHMENT 5-2 WATER QUALITY MODELING STUDY SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP) Sampling and Analysis Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Modeling Study Susitna River,Southcentral Alaska FERC Project No.14241 Contract No.AEA-11-025 Preparedfor: Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Anchorage,AK 99503 Prepared by: URS/Tetra Tech,Inc. 700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage AK,99501 November 7,2012 QAPP 352,Revision 0 This quality assurance project plan (QAPP)has been prepared according to guidance from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/R-5,EPA/240/B- 01/003,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),Quality Assurance Division,Washington,DC,March 2001 [Reissued May 2006])to ensure that environmental and related data collected,compiled,and/or generated for this project are complete,accurate,and of the type,quantity,and quality required for their intended use.Tetra Tech will conduct work in conformance with the quality assurance program described in the quality management plan for Tetra Tech's Fairfax Group and with the procedures detailed in this QAPP. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Approvals: Betsy McGregor Assistant Director Alaska Energy Authority Date Robert Plotnikoff Technical Lead Tetra Tech,Inc. Date Harry Gibbons,Ph.D. Project Manager Tetra Tech,Inc. Date Gene Welch QA Officer Tetra Tech,Inc. Date Paul Dworian Date Principal Manager URS Corporation Andrew Parker Date TMDL Modeling Manager Tetra Tech,Inc. John Hamrick,Ph.D.Date Principal Modeler Tetra Tech,Inc. Susan Lanberg Date QA Officer Tetra Tech,Inc. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna --Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP 352,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page ii of iv Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ....u....cccccsseesccccessssceeccesscsscsscessssscesecceceesscneesecescnseeeeeseess ill DISTRIBUTION...cece eccesscccesessecceccceceesssaceecessssnsnseeceeesesnanseeeccsesssceeecesnsceesecseseesanaeseesesassananeceees iv A1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION ........cccccccsssssccesscreceesseeeessseeceseceecesseesessssesesesseeeesenes 1 A2.0 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND ...........ccccccccsssscesssscsesscccessnsescessecsessceeeseeses 3 A3.0 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION ........cccccccsscsssscsccceesesscceceessssseececsecssseeseceecesessceeceesessvecs 4 A4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA ......ccecceescceesessccseeccesesssseeecenseees 6 A4.1 State the Problem ...........sscsesesssssossnrencesccesceseeccecceeeseneesesnncnanseneceeseeeeeessetsncecevseseeeseaes 6 A4.2 Identify the Study Question...essssssceccesecsscscccssessnensceesesseneesecceessneeescesesssesesecees 6 A4.3 Identify Information Needs .........c.ccccscsscessereasecsecseccccnssessssensnconcerssensecececesesseeveseeeeseeeeecs 7 A4.4 -Specify the Characteristics that Define the Population of Interest...ee eeeeeeeeeees 7 A4.5 Develop the Strategy for Information Synthesis ...........ccccsccccssssnesecessssscsreceesessessneseeses 7 A4.6 Specify Performance and Acceptance Criteria...ccccsssccessncessnrscscsseecessseecesesseeesens 8 A4.7.Optimize the Design for Obtaining and Generating Adequate Data or Information....9 A5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS/CERTIFICATION ......cccccccsssssssecscssssssseees 10 A6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS1.0.0...cecssssseecccessscsecceessscncesecensscceseeseesnesserees 10 B1.0 MODELING DESIGNuu...cccessssnescceeesssceececcccessseececessnsescecessseaeeeeesesssceeceescenerseeeees 12 B2.0 MODEL CALIBRATIONSAMPLING METHOD ...........cccccsssscscesecccesssesseesseesesssersese 20 B3.0 NONDIRECT MEASUREMENT....L i ceeeeeeeees Error!Bookmark not defined. B4.0 DATA MANAGEMENT .uuu.....ccccccsssscsessnsccesscceessseesecssscsecssseesssssecssaeseeseseeessseeseessnseeeesns 21 C10 ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE ACTIONS .........ccccccccsccccssssececssesssseseeseesencssssscenseses 22 D1.0 MODEL VALIDATION...eceeccessscccessssccessseccessseecessesesesssecesseesecssaseesecenecessneeseeses 23 D2.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS .....iccccscecessescceececeesssessesseceeees 23 D3.0 COMPARING CALIBRATION/VALIDATION RESULTS TO DATA QUALITY INDICATORS ......ccccsessssscccesesssseescecsssscnsececessnnceseesssnsnseseseesnsueseesesseeesceesessneaseccessnsneeseess 24 D4.0 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTG............cccccsssseeccsessseesceseesenses 24 REFERENCES ou..cccccccccsccssssssscccssossssscesesscsseecescesssecececeseessncecscseeseressesesscaseeesecenseeeeesscusesaneccensensea 26 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP QAPP 352,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page iii of iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AEA Alaska Energy Authority °C degrees Celsius cm centimeters DO Dissolved oxygen DQI Data quality indicators DQO Data Quality Objectives EPA Environmental Protection Agency g grams m meter(s) pS/cem microSiemens per centimeter mg/L milligrams per liter NPS Nonpoint source PDF Portable Document Format PM Project Manager QA Quality assurance QAM Quality Assurance Manager QAO Quality Assurance Officer QAPP Quality assurance project plan QC Quality control QCO Quality Control Officer RPD Relative percent difference RSD Relative standard deviation SFPR South Fork Palouse River SOP Standard Operating Procedure TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load TL Technical Lead Tt Tetra Tech,Inc. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP QAPP 352,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page iv of iv DISTRIBUTION This document will be distributed to the following people who are involved in this project,as well as to all responsible subcontractors. Name Phone,Fax Title E-mail Mailing Address Alaska Energy Authority Betsy McGregor 907-771-3957 (phone)Alaska Energy Authority Assistant Director bmcgregor@aidea.org 411 W.4th Ave,Suite 1 Anchorage,AK 99501 URS Corporation Paul Dworian 907-261-6735 (phone)URS Corporation Principal Manager fax ./°A tL iworian@urs.com 700 G Street,Suite 500 Bill Loskutoff 907-26 1-xxxx (phone)Anchorage,AK 99501 QA Officer (fax) bill lozkutoff@urs.com Tetra Tech,Inc.(Tt) Harry Gibbons,Ph.D. Project Manager 206-728-9655 Ext.107 (phone) 206-728-9670 (fax) harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Tetra Tech,Inc. 1420 Fifth Avenue,Suite 550 Robert Plotnikoff 206-728-9655 Ext.124 (phone)Seattle,WA 98101 Technical Lead 206-728-9670 (fax) robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.com Andrew Parker 703-385-6000 (phone)Tetra Tech,Inc. Modeling Manager 703-385-6007 (fax)10306 Eaton Place,Suite 340 andrew.parker(@tetratech.com Fairfax,VA 22030 John Hamrick,Ph.D.703-385-6000 (phone)Tetra Tech,Inc. Principal Modeler 703-385-6007 (fax)10306 Eaton Place,Suite john.hamrick@tetratech.com (email)340Fairfax,VA 22030 Susan Lanberg QA Officer 703-385-6000 (phone) 703-385-6007 (fax) susan.lanberg@tetratech.com Tetra Tech,Inc. 10306 Eaton Place,Suite 340 Fairfax,VA 22030 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 1 of 27 A.PROJECT MANAGEMENT ELEMENTS A1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)is preparing a License Application that will be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (Project). The application will use the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP).The Project is located on the Susitna River,an approximately 300 mile long river in the South-central region of Alaska.The Project's dam site will be located at River Mile (RM)184.The results of this study and of other proposed studies will provide information needed to support the FERC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)analysis for the Project license. Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-Application Document (PAD,AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir.This study plan outlines the objectives and methods for developing a modeling framework that will adequately characterize water quality and stream temperatures in the Susitna River within and downstream of the proposed Project area. The purpose of this document is to present the quality assurance project plan (QAPP)for developing water quality model(s)based on calibration data collected in the Baseline Water Quality Study of the Susitna River (Section 5.5 of the Revised Study Plan).A modeling team comprised of scientists and engineers from Tetra Tech's (Tt)Fairfax,Virginia and Seattle,Washington offices will calibrate then conduct modeling of both the riverine and reservoir environments. This QAPP provides general descriptions of the work to be performed to develop and apply models and to ensure that objectives are met and that procedures will be used to ensure results are scientifically valid and defensible and that uncertainty in the model has been reduced to a known and practical minimum through a sensitivity analysis. The organizational aspects of a program provide the framework for conducting tasks.The organizational structure can also facilitate project performance and adherence to quality control (QC)procedures and quality assurance (QA)requirements.Key project roles are filled by those persons responsible for ensuring the precision and accuracy related to model development and application.The key personnel involved in the Water Quality Modeling Study of the Susitna River are listed in Table A1-1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 2 of 27 Table A1-1.Project/Task Organization and Responsibility Summary Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Betsy McGregor Responsible for project coordination with local, county,state,and federal government officials;and for reviewing drafts of the study plan,QAPP and summary data reports Alaska Energy Authority 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage,AK 99503 bmcegregor@aidea.org 907-771-3957 Paul Dworian Responsible for directing daily project activities and tracking product delivery. Communicates with AEA Environmental Manager on project schedule and timing URS Corporation 700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage,AK 99501 paul dworian@urs.com 907-261-6735 for product delivery. Robert Plotnikoff Responsible for preparing Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 the project QAPP and 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 providing input for Seattle,WA 98101 modeling and preparation of the draft and final data robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.c reports.om Andrew Parker Serves as the Modeling Tetra Tech,Inc.703-385-6000 Manager and is responsible |10306 Eaton Place,Suite 340 for providing input for the Fairfax,VA 22030 QAPP,coordinating modeling efforts and andrew.parker@tetratech.co secondary data collection,m and preparing the draft and final reports. John Hamrick,Ph.D.Serves as the Principal Tetra Tech,Inc.703-385-6000 Modeler and is responsible |10306 Eaton Place,Suite 340 for developing the Fairfax,VA 22030 hydrodynamic,temperature, and water quality model.john.hamrick@tetratech.com Harry Gibbons,Ph.D.Serves as the Project Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 Manager and is responsible for managing the project, overseeing preparation of the project QAPP, reviewing analysis of project data,and review of the draft and final data reports.Serves as the principal project team contact for the technical aspects of the study 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Susan Lanberg Serves as the Quality Assurance Officer and is responsible for providing support to the Tt Project Manager in preparing and Tetra Tech,Inc. 10306 Eaton Place,Suite 340 Fairfax,VA 22030 susan lanberg(@tetratech.com 703-385-6000 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 3 of 27 distributing the QAPP; reviewing and approving the QAPP;and monitoring QC activities to determine conformance Gene Welch Provides technical Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 assistance on QA/QC issues |1420 5th Ave.Suite 550 during the implementation |Seattle,WA 98101 and assessment of the project.Determines the gene.welch@tetratech.com applicability of model results in comparing against effects to aquatic life. Additional technical staff will be responsible for conducting specific tasks during the project (e.g., secondary data collection,model configuration,model calibration,model validation,model scenario analysis,and reporting)at the direction and discretion of the Modeling Manager.The Modeling Manager will supervise the technical staff participating in the project,including implementing the QC program, completing assigned work on schedule with strict adherence to procedures established in the approved QAPP,and completing required documentation.The Modeling Manager will direct the work of the modeling team including secondary data collection,model configuration,model calibration,model validation,model scenario analysis,and reporting.They must perform all work in adherence with the project work plan and QAPP. Additional oversight will be provided by the QC Officers (QCO),who are responsible for performing evaluations to ensure that QC is maintained throughout the sampling process,that the data collected will be of optimal validity and usability,and that limitations of the data set are minimized as much as is possible.The QCO is any senior technical staff assigned the responsibility of providing a second-level review of all documentation and records developed.The QC evaluations will include double-checking work as it is completed and providing written documentation of these reviews (minimally initialing and dating documents as they are reviewed)to ensure that the standards set forth in the QAPP are met or exceeded.Other QA/QC staff,such as technical reviewers and technical editors selected as needed,will provide peer review oversight on the content of work products and ensure that work products comply with the client's specifications. Technical staff involved with the program will be responsible for reading and understanding this QAPP and complying with and adhering to its requirements in executing their assigned tasks relative to this project. A2.0 PROBLEM DEFINITION/BACKGROUND Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-Application Document (PAD,AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir. The study area includes the Susitna River within the proposed Watana Reservoir and downstream of the proposed Watana Dam.Water quality studies will be conducted from river mile 15.1 (Susitna River above Alexander Creek)to river mile 233.4 (at Oshetna Creek,just above the upper extent of the proposed reservoir area)and within select tributaries.The proposed dam would be located at river mile 184.5.The Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 4 of 27 dam would create a reservoir 42.5 miles long and 1 to 2 miles wide,with a normal reservoir surface area of approximately 23,546 acres and a normal maximum pool elevation of 2,050 feet. The collective goal of the water quality studies is to assess the impacts of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin with particular reference to state water quality standards. Predicting the potential impacts of the dam and its proposed operations on water quality will require the development of a water quality model.The goal of the Water Quality Modeling Study will be to utilize the extensive information collected from the Baseline Water Quality Study to develop a model(s)in which to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed. There are a large number of water quality models available for use on the Susitna-Watana Project. Selection of the appropriate model is based on a variety of factors,including cost,data inputs,model availability,time,licensing participant familiarity,ease of use,and available documentation.Under the current study,a multi-dimensional model capable of representing reservoir flow circulation,temperature stratification,and dam operations among other parameters is necessary.The proposed model must account for water quality conditions in the proposed Susitna-Watana Reservoir,including temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO),suspended sediment and turbidity,chlorophyll a,nutrients,and metals;and water quality conditions in the Susitna River downstream of the proposed dam.The model must also simulate current Susitna River baseline conditions (in the absence of the dam)for comparison to conditions in the presence of the dam and reservoir. In the 1980s,hydrologic and temperature modeling was conducted in the Susitna River basin to predict the effects of one or more dams on downstream temperatures and flows.The modeling suite used was called HEOBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM.The modeling suite addressed temperature and had some limited hydrodynamic representation,but it lacked the ability to predict vertical stratification or local effects.In addition,the modeling suite lacked a water quality modeling component. A3.0 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION The collective goal of the water quality studies is to assess the impacts of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin with particular reference to state water quality standards.Predicting the potential impacts of the dam and its proposed operations on water quality will require the development of a water quality model.The goal of the Water Quality Modeling Study will be to utilize the extensive information collected from the Baseline Water Quality Study to develop a model(s)to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed. The Water Quality Modeling Study for the Susitna River will begin November 2012 and continue through December 2014.Table A3-1 gives the projected schedule of activities and deliverables. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 5 of 27 Table A3-1.Schedule for the Water Quality Modeling Study Elements and Production of Associated Deliverables Modeling Activity Timeline Coordination with water quality data collection and analysis 4Q 2012 -1Q 2014 Model Evaluation/Selection 3Q 2012 Model Calibration (Water Quality)3Q 2013 -4Q 2013 Initial Study Report 1Q 2014 Re-calibration adjustments 2Q 2014 -3Q 2014 Verification runs 3Q -2014 Generate Results for Operational Scenarios 2Q 2014-4Q 2014 Updated Study Report 1Q 2015 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 6 of 27 A4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA Data quality objectives (DQOs)are qualitative and quantitative statements that are used in the project planning and implementation to clarify the intended use of the data,define the type of data needed to support the decision,identify the conditions under which the data should be collected,and specify tolerable limits on the probability of making a decision error because of uncertainty in the data (if applicable).Data users develop DQOs to specify the data quality needed to support specific decisions. Project quality objectives and criteria for measurement data will be addressed in the context of the two tasks discussed above:(1)evaluating the quality of the data used,and (2)assessing the results of the model application. Sections 4.1 through 4.7 describe DQOs and criteria for model inputs and outputs for this project,written in accordance with the seven steps described in EPA's Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process (EPA QA/G-4)(USEPA 2006b). A4.1 State the Problem Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-Application Document (PAD, AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir. The study area includes the Susitna River within the proposed Watana Reservoir and downstream of the proposed Watana Dam.Water quality studies will be conducted from river mile 15.1 (Susitna River above Alexander Creek)to river mile 233.4 (at Oshetna Creek,just above the upper extent of the proposed reservoir area)and within select tributaries.The proposed dam would be located at river mile 184.The dam would create a reservoir 42.5 miles long and 1 to 2 miles wide,with a normal reservoir surface area of approximately 23,546 acres and a normal maximum pool elevation of 2,050 feet. The collective goal of the water quality studies is to assess the impacts of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin with particular reference to state water quality standards.Predicting the potential impacts of the dam and its proposed operations on water quality will require the development of a water quality model. A4.2 Identify the Study Question The goal of the Water Quality Modeling Study will be to utilize the extensive information collected from the Baseline Water Quality Study to develop a model(s)in which to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed. The objectives of the Water Quality Modeling Study are as follows: e With input from licensing participants,implement an appropriate reservoir and river water temperature model for use with past and current monitoring data. e Using the data developed in Section 5.5 (Baseline Water Quality Study)and 7.6 (Ice Processes Study)in the Revised Study Plan,model water quality conditions in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 7 of 27 proposed Watana Reservoir,including (but not necessarily limited to),temperature,DO, suspended sediment and turbidity,chlorophyll-a,nutrients,ice,and metals. e Model water quality conditions in the Susitna River from the proposed site of the Watana Dam downstream,including (but not necessarily limited to)temperature,suspended sediment and turbidity,and ice processes (in coordination with the Ice Processes Study). Concentrations of water quality parameters including metals in sediment immediately below the proposed Project are unknown.Metals in these sediments may become mobile once the Project begins operation.Monitoring information in the immediate vicinity of the reservoir and riverine habitat will be important for developing two models (reservoir and riverine)and coupled for predicting expected water quality conditions below the proposed dam. A4.3 Identify Information Needs Review of existing water quality and sediment transport data revealed several gaps that present challenges for calibrating a water quality model (URS 2011).Analysis of existing data was used to identify future studies needed to develop the riverine and reservoir water quality models and to eventually predict pre-Project water quality conditions throughout the drainage.Some general observations based on existing data are as follows: e Large amounts of data were collected during the 1980s.A comprehensive data set for the Susitna River and tributaries is not available. e The influence of major tributaries (Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers)on Susitna River water quality conditions is unknown.There are no monitoring stations in receiving water at these mainstem locations. e Continuous temperature data and seasonal water quality data are not available for the Susitna River mainstem and sloughs potentially used for spawning and rearing habitat. A4.4 Specify the Characteristics that Define the Population of Interest Tetra Tech will use extensive information collected from the Baseline Water Quality Study to develop a model(s)in which to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed .Specifically, Tetra Tech will use hydrodynamic models coupled to water quality models to simulate coupled physical,chemical,and biological processes. In most cases,the statistical criteria for loads and concentrations are detailed in the error discussion in Section 4.6. A4.5 Develop the Strategy for Information Synthesis Tetra Tech will use a systematic planning process to develop models for evaluating the potential impacts of the proposed Project and operations on various physical parameters within the Susitna River watershed.That process takes into account the accuracy and precision needed for the models to predict a given quantity at the application site of interest to satisfy regulatory objectives. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 8 of 27 Acceptance criteria that result from systematic planning address the following types of components for modeling projects.Criteria used in selecting the appropriate model will be documented in the modeling reports and typically include the following: e Technical criteria (concerning the requirements for the model's simulation of the physical system) e Regulatory criteria (concerning constraints imposed by regulations,such as WQSs) e User criteria (concerning operational or economic constraints,such as hardware/software compatibility) The Tetra Tech Modeling Manager compared available models to select the most ones to use for this study.In addition,existing model programming language can be converted into a different programming language to enhance software compatibility.The models that will be used are A4.6 Specify Performance and Acceptance Criteria Quantitative measures,sometimes referred to as calibration criteria,include the relative error between model predictions and observations.The relative error is the ratio of the absolute mean error to the mean of the observations and is expressed as a percent. Models will be deemed acceptable when they are able to simulate field data within predetermined statistical measures.A variety of performance targets have been documented in the literature,including Donigian (2000).Specific targets will be specified once the data have been reviewed and the model initially configured. Table 4.Statistical Measures for Model Comparisons (Donigian 2000) State Variable Percent Difference between Simulated and Observed Values Very Good Good Fair Salinity <15 15-25 25-40 Water Temperature <7 8-12 13-18 Water Quality /<15 15-25 25-35 Dissolved Oxygen Nutrients /Chlorophyll <30 30-45 45-60 a An overall assessment of the success of the calibration can be expressed using calibration levels. e Level 1:Simulated values fall within the target range (highest degree of calibration). e Level 2:Simulated values fall within two times the associated error of the calibration target. e Level 3:Simulated values fall within three times the associated error of the calibration target. e Level 4:Simulated values fall within n times the associated error of the calibration target (lowest degree of calibration). The model will be considered calibrated when it reproduces data within an acceptable level of accuracy determined in consultation with AEA and stakeholder agencies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 9 of 27 A4.7 Optimize the Design for Obtaining and Generating Adequate Data or Information The data requirements of this project encompass aspects of both laboratory analytical results obtained as secondary data and database management to reduce sources of errors and uncertainty in the use of the data.Data commonly required for populating a database to supply data for calibrating a model are listed in Table 6. Table 6.Secondary environmental data to be collected for the Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Water Quality Modeling Study Data type Example measurement endpoint(s)or units Geographic or location information (typically in Geographic Information System [GIS]format) Topography (stream networks,watershed Elevation in feet and meters (North American boundaries,contours,or digital elevation)Vertical Datum of 1988;NAVD88);percent slope Water quality and biological monitoring station Latitude and longitude,decimal degrees (North locations American Datum 1983;NAD83) Meteorological station locations Latitude and longitude,decimal degrees (NAD83) Permitted facility locations Latitude and longitude,decimal degrees (NAD83) Impaired waterbodies (georeferenced 2009 Latitude and longitude,decimal degrees (NAD83) 303(d)-listed AUs) Dam locations Latitude and longitude,decimal degrees (NAD83) Flow Historical record (daily,hourly,15-minute Cubic feet per second (cfs) interval) Dam release flow records Cfs Peak flows Cfs Meteorological data Rainfall Inches Temperature °C Wind speed Miles per hour Dew point °C Humidity Percent or grams per cubic meter Cloud cover Percent Solar radiation Watts per square meter Water quality (surface water,groundwater) Chemical monitoring data Milligrams per liter (mg/L) Discharge Monitoring Report Discharge characteristics including flow and chemical composition Permit Limits mg/L Regulatory or policy information Applicable state water quality standards |mg/L Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 10 of 27 Data type Example measurement endpoint(s)or units EPA water quality standards mg/L Secondary data will be downloaded electronically from various sources to reduce manual data entry whenever possible.Secondary data will be organized into a standard model application database.A screening process will be used to scan through the database and flag data that are outside typical ranges for a given parameter. Tetra Tech documents all data sources,including full reference citations in a bibliography and parenthetical references in report text.Tetra Tech also maintains paper and electronic copies of all references.Documentation for all data sources (i.e.,full bibliographical information and metadata where appropriate)will be collected and recorded. A5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS/CERTIFICATION This QAPP and supporting materials will be distributed to all participants.The Modeling Manager will conduct a procedural review before the modeling team begins work.The procedural review will include the requirements of the QAPP and Revised Study Plan.All relevant project personnel will have experience in water quality modeling. A 6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS The Tetra Tech Project Manager will distribute the QAPP to all participants.The Tetra Tech Project Manager and Modeling Manager will maintain files,as appropriate,as repositories for information and data used in preparing any reports and documents during the project and will supervise the use of materials in the project files.The following information will be included: Any reports and documents prepared Contract and Task Order information Project QAPP Results of technical reviews,data quality assessments,and audits Communications (memoranda;internal notes;telephone conversation records;letters; meeting minutes;and all written correspondence among the project team personnel, subcontractors,suppliers,or others) Maps,photographs,and drawings Studies,reports,documents,and newspaper articles pertaining to the project Special data compilations Spreadsheet data files:physical measurements,analytical chemistry data (hard copy and disk) The model application will include complete record keeping of each step of the modeling process.The documentation will consist of reports and files addressing the following items: e Assumptions e Parameter values and sources Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 11 of 27 e Nature of grid,network design,or subwatershed delineation e Changes and verification of changes made in code e Actual input used e Output of model runs and interpretation e Calibration and performance of the model(s) Modeling reports will be subject to technical and editorial review before submission to Alaska Energy Authority and will be maintained at Tt's Seattle,Washington office in the central file (disk and hard copy). If any change(s)in this QAPP are required during the study,a memo will be sent to each person on the distribution list describing the change(s),following approval by the appropriate persons. The memos will be attached to the QAPP.Unless other arrangements are made,records will be maintained for a minimum of 5 years following expiration of the contract. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 12 of 27 B.MODEL IMPLEMENTATION B1.0 MODELING DESIGN This QAPP is prepared as part of the implementation of the 2013-2014 Water Quality Modeling Study Plan.The QAPP is standard documentation prepared before any water model development begins.These documents follow guidelines for the State of Alaska and U.S.Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 Credible Data Policy (ADEC 2005).The following sections document how the model will be developed and post-Project water quality conditions within the Susitna River basin can be characterized. Model Selection This section assesses potential water quality models and identifies key considerations for the selection of the appropriate modeling platform.In coordination with licensing participants,a final modeling platform will be selected and implemented. For the current project,the model will need to be capable of simulating both river and reservoir environments.It must also be a multi-dimensional dynamic model that includes hydrodynamics,water temperature,water quality,and sediment transport modules and considers ice formation and breakup.Ice dynamics evaluated in the Ice Processes Study will be used to inform the water quality model.Ice formation and breakup will have a profound impact on hydrodynamics and water quality conditions in the reservoir and riverine sections of the basin.Ice cover affects transfer of oxygen to and from the atmosphere and this directly impacts the dissolved oxygen concentration at points along the water column.The output from the ice study (Section 7.5 Revised Study Plan)will provide boundary conditions for the water quality model. The model will be configured for the reservoir and internally coupled with the downstream river model. This will form a holistic modeling framework which can accurately simulate changes in the hydrodynamic,temperature,and water quality regime within the reservoir and downstream.A model for use in this study should feature an advanced turbulence closure scheme to represent vertical mixing in reservoirs,and be able to predict future conditions.Thus,it will be capable of representing the temperature regime within the reservoir without resorting to arbitrary assumptions about vertical mixing coefficients. The model will need to have the ability to simulate an entire suite of water quality parameters,and the capacity for internal coupling with the hydrodynamic and temperature modeling processes.The model will be configured to simulate the impact of the proposed Project on temperature as well as DO,nutrients, algae,turbidity,TSS,and other key water quality features both within the reservoir and for the downstream river.This avoids the added complexity associated with transferring information among multiple models and increases the efficiency of model application. Other important factors when selecting a water quality model include the following: e The model and code are easily accessible and are part of the public domain. e The model is commonly used and accepted by EPA and other public regulatory agencies. e The water quality model will be available for current and future use and remain available for the life of the project and beyond (including upgraded versions). e Model output can be compared to relevant ADEC water quality criteria (18 ACC 70.020(b)). The following sections summarize the capabilities of models considered for use on this project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 13 of 27 H20BAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM Model Review The existing H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM model of the Susitna River basin is perhaps the most obvious candidate model to implement when assessing the effects of the originally proposed Project.The existing model was expressly configured to represent the unique conditions in the Susitna River basin.However, the modeling suite is limited to flow and temperature predictions.Hydrodynamics are simplified,and water quality is not addressed. The Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (AEIDC)previously completed a study that examined the temperature and discharge effects if the proposed Project was completed and compared the effects to the natural stream conditions,without a dam and reservoir system (AEIDC 1983a).The study also assessed the downstream point at which post-project flows would be statistically the same as natural flows.Multiple models were used in the assessment:SNTEMP,a riverine temperature model,H2OBAL,a water balance program and DYRESM,a reservoir hydrodynamic model. The simulation period covered the years 1968 through 1982.Only the summer period was simulated, using historical meteorological and hydrological data to represent normal,maximum and minimum stream temperature conditions,represented by the years 1980,1977,and 1970,respectively (AEIDC 1983a).Post-project modifications were applied to these summer periods to compare natural conditions to post-project stream temperatures.Due to a lack of data,a monthly time-step was used in these summer condition simulations. Mainstem discharges from the Susitna-Watana Dam site were estimated from statistically-filled streamflow data and the H2OBAL program,which computes tributary inflow on a watershed area- weighted basis.Post-project flows were predicted for both a one-dam scenario and a two-dam scenario using release discharge estimates from a reservoir operation schedule scenario in the FERC license application.Flows derived from H2OBAL were input into SNTEMP. SNTEMP is a riverine temperature simulation model that can predict temperature on a daily basis and for longer time periods.This allows for the analysis of both critical river reaches at a fine scale and the full river system over a longer averaging period (AEIDC 1983b).SNTEMP was selected because it contains a regression model that can fill in data gaps in temperature records.This is useful because data records in the Susitna River watershed are sparse.SNTEMP can also be calibrated to adjust for low-confidence input parameters.SNTEMP outputs include average daily water temperatures and daily maximum and minimum temperatures. SNTEMP contains several sub-models,including a solar radiation model that predicts solar radiation based on stream latitude,time of year,topography,and meteorological conditions (AEIDC 1983b). SNTEMP was modified to include the extreme shading conditions that occur in the basin by developing a monthly topographic shading parameter.Modifications were also made to represent the winter air temperature inversions that occur in the basin.Sub-models are also included for heat flux,heat transport, and flow mixing. SNTEMP validation indicated that upper tributary temperatures were under-predicted (AEIDC 1983b). Most of the data for the tributaries were assumed or estimated,leading to uncertainty.Five key poorly defined variables were identified as possible contributors to the under-prediction of temperatures:stream flow,initial stream temperature,stream length,stream width and distributed flow temperatures. Distributed flow temperatures were highlighted as the most important of the five variables.During calibration,groundwater temperature parameters were adjusted to modify distributed flow and improve tributary temperature prediction. Water temperatures are derived from USGS gages,but when data was lacking,SNTEMP computed equilibrium temperatures and then estimated initial temperatures from a regression model.AEIDC noted Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 14 of 27 that the reliability of the regression models "restricts the accuracy of the physical process temperature simulations”(1983a).The level of confidence in the regression model varies by the amount of gage data available.Continuous data yielded higher confidence,while years with only grab sample data notably decreased the confidence in the predicted temperatures. The DYRESM model is a one-dimensional,hydrodynamic model designed specifically for medium size reservoirs (Patterson,et al.1977).The size limitation ensures that the assumptions of the model algorithm remain valid.DYRESM predicts daily temperature and salinity variations with depth and the temperature and salinity of off-take supply.The reservoir is modeled as horizontal layers with variable vertical location,volume,temperature and salinity.Mixing between layers is through amalgamation.Inflow and withdrawal are modeled by changes in the horizontal layer thickness and insertion or removal of layers,as appropriate.The model incorporates up to two submerged off-takes and one overflow outlet.Model output is on a daily time-step. The DYRESM model was run to simulate the reservoir scenario for 1981 conditions (AEIDC 1983a). Other reservoir release temperature estimates were not available.The AEIDC report cautions that the results from 1981 may not be representative of other years due to annual variations in meteorology, hydrology,reservoir storage,and power requirements.The lack of reservoir release temperature data limited the simulation of downstream temperatures under operational conditions to one year.AEIDC noted that the "effort to delineate river reaches where post-project flows differ significantly from natural flows has been unsuccessful”(AEIDC 1983a).This was attributed in large part to the lack of estimates for the reservoir release temperatures.Additional data was needed to increase the predictive ability of SNTEMP. Perhaps the biggest limitations of the existing H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM modeling suite are the lack of suitable data,simplified hydrology and the lack of a water quality component.Modeling is limited to discharge and temperature.Other issues that limit the suitability of the modeling suite for the Water Quality Modeling Study are the chronic under-prediction of upper tributary temperatures,and the inability to predict vertical stratification within the reservoir. Other Modeling Approaches Two other modeling approaches may provide better results than the previously used H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM model.These are discussed below. Two-Dimensional Approach (Ce-Qual-W2) The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers'CE-QUAL-W2 model is a two-dimensional,longitudinal/vertical (laterally averaged),hydrodynamic and water quality model (Cole,et al.2000).The model can be applied to streams,rivers,lakes,reservoirs,and estuaries with variable grid spacing,time-variable boundary conditions,and multiple inflows and outflows from point/nonpoint sources and precipitation. The two major components of the model include hydrodynamics and water quality kinetics.Both of these components are coupled (i.e.,the hydrodynamic output is used to drive the water quality output at every time-step).The hydrodynamic portion of the model predicts water surface elevations,velocities,and temperature.The water quality portion of the model can simulate 21 constituents including DO, suspended sediment,chlorophyll a,nutrients,and metals.A dynamic shading algorithm is incorporated to represent topographic and vegetative cover effects on solar radiation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna --Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 15 of 27 Three-Dimensional Approach (EFDC) The Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC)model was originally developed at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science and is considered public domain software (Hamrick 1992).This model is now being supported by EPA.EFDC is a dynamic,three-dimensional,coupled water quality and hydrodynamic model.In addition to hydrodynamic,salinity,and temperature transport simulation capabilities,EFDC is capable of simulating cohesive and non-cohesive sediment transport,near field and far field discharge dilution from multiple sources,eutrophication processes,the transport and fate of toxic contaminants in the water and sediment phases,and the transport and fate of various life stages of finfish and shellfish.The EFDC model has been extensively tested,documented,and applied to environmental studies world-wide by universities,governmental agencies,and environmental consulting firms. The structure of the EFDC model includes four major modules:(1)a hydrodynamic model,(2)a water quality model,(3)a sediment transport model,and (4)a toxics model.The water quality portion of the model simulates the spatial and temporal distributions of 22 water quality parameters including DO, suspended algae (3 groups),periphyton,various components of carbon,nitrogen,phosphorus and silica cycles,and fecal coliform bacteria.Salinity,water temperature,and total suspended solids are needed for computation of the 22 state variables,and they are provided by the hydrodynamic model.EFDC incorporates solar radiation using the algorithms from the CE-QUAL-W2 model. Qualitative Comparison of Models Table B1-1 presents an evaluation of the models'applicability to a range of important technical, regulatory,and management considerations.Technical criteria refer to the ability to simulate the physical system in question,including physical characteristics/processes and constituents of interest.Regulatory criteria make up the constraints imposed by regulations,such as water quality standards or procedural protocol.Management criteria comprise the operational or economic constraints imposed by the end-user and include factors such as financial and technical resources.The relative importance of each consideration,as it pertains to the Project,are presented alongside the models'applicability ratings. Although the evaluation is qualitative,it is useful in selecting a model based on the factors that are most critical to this project. Technical Considerations The following discussion highlights some of the key technical considerations for modeling associated with the Susitna-Watana Project and compares the ability of CE-QUAL-W2 and EFDC to address these considerations.For informational purposes,the HHOBAL/SYNTEMP/DYRESM modeling suite is also discussed in the technical considerations.Based on a review of the literature,some key factors that will likely be important in the modeling effort include: Predicting vertical stratification in the reservoir when the dam is present; Nutrient and algae representation; Sediment transport; Ability to represent metals concentrations; Integration between temperature and ice dynamics models;and Capability of representing local effects.AUPYNSPredicting Vertical Stratification Both EFDC and CE-QUAL-W2 are equipped with turbulence closure schemes which allow prediction of temporally/spatially variable vertical mixing strength based on time,weather condition,and reservoir operations.Therefore,both are capable of evaluating the impact of dam/reservoir operations/climate Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 16 of 27 change on reservoir stratification.In contrast,the existing HZOBAL/SYNTEMP/DYRESM model does not have the necessary predictive capability because vertical stratification is represented based on parameterization through calibration.Therefore,it cannot represent the response of vertical mixing features to the changes in external forces. Nutrient and Algae Representation Both EFDC and CE-QUAL-W2 are capable of simulating dynamic interactions between nutrients and algae in reservoirs and interactions between nutrients and periphyton in riverine sections.This is very important for addressing the potential impact of the proposed Project on water quality and ecology in the river.EFDC has better nutrient predictive capabilities due to its sediment diagenesis module,which simulates interactions between external nutrient loading and bed-water fluxes.EFDC is thus capable of predicting long-term effects of the proposed Project.CE-QUAL-W2 does not have such a predictive capability.The existing H2OBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM modeling suite is not capable of representing nutrient and algae interactions. Sediment Transport EFDC is fully capable of predicting sediment erosion,transport,and settling/deposition processes.CE- QUAL-W2 has limited sediment transport simulation capabilities.It handles water column transport and settling;however,it is not capable of fully predicting sediment bed re-suspension and deposition processes.HXOBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM is not capable of simulating sediment transport. Ability to Represent Metals Concentrations EFDC is fully capable of simulating fate and transport of metals in association with sediments in both rivers and reservoirs.CE-QUAL-W2 does not have a module to simulate metals;however,a simplified representation can be implemented using the phosphorus slot in the model and simple partitioning (to couple with its basic sediment transport representation).The HROBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM is not capable of addressing metals issues. Integration between Temperature and Ice Dynamics Models The CE-QUAL-W2 model has a coupled temperature-ice simulation module,which is of moderate complexity and predictive capability.EFDC has a slightly simpler ice representation which was previously applied to a number of Canadian rivers (e.g.,Lower Athabasca River and the North Saskatchewan River in Alberta,Canada).Both models,however,can be coupled to external ice models with a properly designed interface to communicate temperature results.Fully predictive simulation within either model would require code modification to handle the interaction between temperature simulation, ice formation and transport,hydrodynamics simulation,and water quality simulation. Capability of Representing Local Effects CE-QUAL-W2 is a longitudinal-vertical two-dimensional model;therefore,it is capable of resolving spatial variability in the longitudinal and vertical directions.It is not capable of representing high resolution local effects such as lateral discharge,areas impacted by secondary circulation,or certain habitat characteristic changes.EFDC is a three-dimensional model which can be configured at nearly any spatial resolution to represent local effects.HROBAL/SNTEMP/DYRESM is a one-dimensional modeling suite and therefore has limited capability representing local effects. Reservoir and River Downstream of Reservoir Modeling Approach Reservoir modeling will focus on the length of the river from above the expected area of reservoir inundation to the proposed dam location.It will involve first running the initial reservoir condition.This initial condition represents current baseline conditions in the absence of the dam.Subsequently,the model Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 17 of 27 will represent the proposed reservoir condition,when the dam is in place.The reservoir representation will be developed based on the local bathymetry and dimensions of the proposed dam.It is recommended that a three-dimensional model be developed for the proposed reservoir to represent the spatial variability in hydrodynamics and water quality in longitudinal,vertical and lateral directions.The model will be able to simulate flow circulation in the reservoir,turbulence mixing,temperature dynamics,nutrient fate and transport,interaction between nutrients and algae,sediment transport,and metals transport.The key feature that needs to be captured is water column stratification during the warm season and the de- stratification when air temperatures cool down.The capability of predictively representing the stratification/de-stratification period is of critical importance for evaluating the impact of the dam since this is the critical water quality process in the reservoir. With the dam in place,the original river will be converted into a slow flowing reservoir;therefore,any sediment previously mobilized will likely settle in the reservoir,disrupting the natural sediment transport processes.Before the construction of the dam,primary production is likely driven by periphyton.After construction of the dam,periphyton will be largely driven out of existence due to deep water conditions typical of a reservoir environment.In lieu of periphyton,phytoplankton will likely be the dominant source of primary production of the ecological system with the dam in place.Nutrients from upstream will have longer retention in the reservoir,providing nutrient sources to fuel phytoplankton growth.All processes would need to be predictively simulated by both the reservoir model and the pre-reservoir river model for the same river segment. Because the dam is not in place when the model is constructed,proper calibration of the model using actual reservoir data is not possible.To achieve reasonable predictions of water quality conditions in the proposed reservoir,a literature survey will be conducted to acquire parameterization schemes of the model.An uncertainty analysis approach will also be developed to account for the lack of data for calibration,therefore enhancing the reliability of reservoir model predictions. Downstream of the proposed dam location,a river model will also be developed to evaluate the effects of the proposed Project.It is anticipated that the same model platform used for the reservoir model will be implemented for the river model (at a minimum the two models will be tightly coupled).The river model will be capable of representing conditions in both the absence and presence of the dam.The downstream spatial extent of this model is yet to be determined,but it is likely it will extend to shortly downstream of the Susitna-Talkeetna-Chulitna confluence (e.g.,Sunshine USGS Gage).If water quality modeling indicates that water quality effects extend into the lower river downstream of the initial modeling effort, then,as appropriate,water quality modeling will extend farther downstream.This would require additional channel topography and flow data at select locations in order to develop a model for predicting water quality conditions under various Project operational scenarios. Flow,temperature,TSS,DO,nutrients,turbidity (continuous at USGS sites &bi-weekly at additional locations required for calibrating the model),and chlorophyll-a output from the reservoir model will be directly input into the downstream river model.This will enable downstream evaluation of potential impacts of the proposed Project on hydrodynamic,temperature,and water quality conditions. The river model will be calibrated and validated using available data concurrently with the initial reservoir condition model (representing absence of the dam).Output from the models will be used directly in other studies (e.g.,Ice Processes,Productivity,and Instream Flow studies). The model will be calibrated in order to simulate water quality conditions for load following analysis. Organic carbon content from inflow sources will be correlated with mercury concentrations determined from the Baseline Water Quality Study discussed below.Predicted water quality conditions established Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 18 of 27 by Project operations and that promote methylation of mercury in the bioaccumulative form will be identified by location and intensity in both riverine and reservoir habitats.Water temperature modeling and routing of fluctuating flows immediately prior to and during ice cover development may be conducted with a separate thermodynamics based ice process model (e.g.,CRISSP 1D). Table B1-1.Evaluation of models based on technical,regulatory,and management criteria @High Suitability ©Medium Suitability O Low Suitability ..Relative H2OBAL/SNTE |CE QUALConsiderationsImportance|MP/DYRESM_|W2 EFDC Technical Criteria Physical Processes: e advection,dispersion High ©e e e momentum High O @ @ °compatible with external High O e eicesimulationmodels e reservoir operations High ©e e e predictive temperature simulation (high latitude |High ©e @ shading) Water Quality: e total nutrient High 0 e econcentrations e dissolved/particulate Medium fe e epartitioning e predictive sediment Medium 0 0 ediagenesis e sediment transport High O ©e e algae High O @ @ e dissolved oxygen High O e @ e metals High O ©@ Temporal Scale and Representation: e long term trends and Medium ©©° averages e continuous -ability to predict small time-step |High O e @ variability Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 19 of 27 @High Suitability O Medium Suitability QO Low Suitability Relative H20BAL/SNTE |CE QUAL:tiConsiderations Importance |MP/DYRESM_|W2 EFDC Spatial Scale and Representation: e multi-dimensional High 0 ©e representation e grid complexity -allows predictions at numerous High 0 ©elocationsthroughout model domain e suitability for local scale analyses,including local |Medium O ©e discharge evaluation Regulatory Criteria Enables comparison to AK . criteria °High O °° Flexibility for analysis of scenarios,including climate High ©rT )@ change Technically defensible (previous lidation hl .tested results inpeerreviewed |H --[O °° literature,TMDL studies) Management Criteria Existing model availability High e tT )T ) Data needs High e e e Public domain (non-proprietary)|High @ e e Cost Medium )©r») Time needed for application Medium N/A ©© aie community Low °©© Level of expertise required Low e )e User interface Low ©©© Model documentation Medium ©e@ @ Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 20 of 27 B2.0 MODEL CALIBRATION FREQUENCY A model calibration is a measure of how well the model results represent field data.The use of a calibrated model,the scientific veracity of which is well defined,is of paramount importance. The Tetra Tech Modeling Manager will direct the model calibration efforts.Some model parameters will need to be estimated using site-specific field data for the model's application. Some example parameters follow: e Kinetic coefficients and parameters (e.g.,partition coefficients,decay coefficients) e Forcing terms (e.g.,sources and sinks for state variables) e Boundary conditions (specified concentrations,flows) Models are often calibrated through a subjective trial-and-error adjustment of model input data because a large number of interrelated factors influence model output.The model calibration goodness offit measure can be either qualitative or quantitative.Qualitative measures of calibration progress are commonly based on the following: e Graphical time-series plots of observed and predicted data e Graphical transect plots of observed and predicted data at a given time interval e Comparison between contour maps of observed and predicted data,providing information on the spatial distribution of the error e Scatter plots of observed versus predicted values in which the deviation of points from a 45-degree straight line gives a sense of fit e Tabulation of measured and predicted values and their deviations The EFDC model will be calibrated to the best available data,including literature values and interpolated or extrapolated existing field data.If multiple data sets are available,an appropriate period and corresponding data set will be chosen on the basis of factors characterizing the data set,such as corresponding weather conditions,amount of data,and temporal and spatial variability of data.The model will be considered calibrated when it reproduces data within an acceptable level of accuracy or approved by AEA. Quantitative calibration measures include time series error measures,and other statistic based dimensionless performance indices.Quantitative measures allow comparison of the level of calibration and performance between modeling studies of different water bodies and different modeling studies of a specific water body.Time series error measures,particularly root mean square errors,are typically used to evaluate model performance with respect to predicting water surface elevation,temperature and salinity.The limits used will be documented in the modeling report. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 21 of 27 As shown in the project schedule provided in Table A3-1,model calibration will be performed in the third and fourth quarters of 2013.This QAPP will be updated to include a description of modeling calibration before the third quarter of 2013. B3.0 NONDIRECT MEASUREMENT Nondirect measurements are data that were previously collected under many different efforts outside of this project.Secondary data for this project will be in the form of electronic data sets and reports provided by ADEC and those data generated from the 1980s studies.All numeric data will be downloaded or received in electronic format,which the project team will directly download and use.Tetra Tech will perform general quality checks of the transfer of data from any source databases to another database,spreadsheet,or document.Someone other than the person who originally transferred the data will perform these checks. B4.0 DATA MANAGEMENT The data management process and the computer hardware and software configuration requirements will be developed and submitted to the AEA technical team for review before model equations and related algorithms are coded into an integrated,efficient computer code. Modeling staff members will work closely with the Tetra Tech Modeling Manager and will consult with experts as necessary to ensure the theory is accurately represented in the code.The modeling code is continually checked by the developers and compared to bench test runs to ensure the accuracy of the mechanistic equations and solution techniques.A Modeling QC Officer will conduct internal reviews of the computer code. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 22 of 27 C.ASSESSMENTS AND OVERSIGHT C1.0 ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE ACTIONS The QA program under which this task order will operate includes technical system audits.The essential steps in the QA program are as follows: Identify and define the problem Assign responsibility for investigating the problem Investigate and determine the cause of the problem Assign and accept responsibility for implementing appropriate corrective action Establish the effectiveness of and implement the corrective action Verify that the corrective action has eliminated the problem Many of the technical problems that might occur can be solved on the spot by the staff members involved; for example,by modifying the technical approach or correcting errors or deficiencies.Immediate corrective actions form part of normal operating procedures and are noted in records for the project. Problems not solved this way require more formalized,long-term corrective action.If quality problems that require attention are identified,Tt or the subcontractor will determine whether attaining acceptable quality requires short-or long-term actions.If a failure in an analytical system occurs (e.g.,performance requirements are not met),the appropriate QC Officer or subcontractor QA Manager will be responsible for corrective action and will immediately inform the Tt PM or QAO,as appropriate.Subsequent steps taken will depend on the nature and significance of the problem. The Tt Modeling Manager has primary responsibility for monitoring the modeling activities of this project and identifying or confirming any quality problems.These problems will also be brought to the attention of the Tt QAO,who will initiate the corrective action system described above,document the nature of the problem,and ensure that the recommended corrective action is carried out.The Tt QAO has the authority to stop work on the project if problems affecting data quality require extensive effort to resolve and are identified. The AEA PM and Tt Modeling Manager will be notified of major corrective actions and stop work orders. Corrective actions might include the following: e Re-emphasizing to staff the project objectives,the limitations in scope,the need to adhere to the agreed-upon schedule and procedures,and the need to document QC and QA activities Securing additional commitment of staff time to devote to the project Retaining outside consultants to review problems in specialized technical areas Changing procedures The Tt Modeling Manager may replace a staff member or subcontractor,as appropriate,if it is in the best interest of the project to do so. e The Tt QC Officers are responsible for overseeing work as it is performed and periodically conducting checks during the data entry and analysis phases of the project.As data entries, calculations,or other activities are checked,the person performing the check will sign and date a hard copy of the material or complete a review form,as appropriate,and provide this documentation to the Tt Modeling Manager for inclusion in the project files.Field audits and technical system audits will not be conducted under this task order. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 23 of 27 C2.0 REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT The Tetra Tech Project Manager and Modeling Manager will provide the AEA Assistant Director with a report describing the status of the project and the results of any intermediate assessments.The results of the study will be provided to the AEA Assistant Director in the final modeling report summarizing the results of this study after all modeling analyses have been completed.In addition,Tetra Tech will deliver the project files that will contain copies of all records and documents,including soft copy versions of the data and model input data sets.Tetra Tech will deliver the files to AEA at the end of the project. The final modeling report will include results of technical reviews,model tests,data quality assessments of output data and audits,actual input and databases used,response actions to correct model development of implementation problems,and if applicable,pre-and post- software development. D.DATA VALIDATION AND USABILITY D1.0 MODEL VALIDATION Data review and validation services provide a method for determining the usability and limitations of data and provide a standardized data quality assessment.Verification of new model components or parameters (when applicable)improves the predictive capabilities of new models or modified existing models.Experienced professionals will be used in the data review, compilation,and evaluation phases of the study.Tetra Tech will be responsible for reviewing data entries,transmittals,and analyses for completeness and adherence to QA requirements.The data will be organized in a standard database on a microcomputer.A screening process that scans through the database and flags data that are outside typical ranges for a given parameter will be used.Values outside typical ranges will not be used to develop model calibration data sets or model kinetic parameters. D2.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS The Modeling QC Officer will review or oversee review of all data related to the project for completeness and correctness.Raw data received in hard copy format will be entered into the standard database.All entries will be compared to the original hard copy data sheets by the team personnel.Screening methods will be used to scan through the database and flag data that are outside typical ranges for a given parameter.Data will also be manipulated using specialized programs and Microsoft Excel 2007.Unless otherwise directed by the AEA Assistant Director, Tetra Tech anticipates that it will recalculate ten percent of the calculations to ensure that correct formula commands were entered into the program.If 5 percent of the data calculations are incorrect,all calculations will be rechecked after the correction is made to the database.Data quality will be assessed by comparing entered data to original data;performing the data and model evaluations;and comparing results with the measurement performance or acceptance Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 24 of 27 criteria summarized in the Revised Study Plan to determine whether to accept,reject,or qualify the data.Results of the review and performance processes will be reported to the AEA Assistant Director. General guidelines and procedures for model data performance and calibration are listed in Section 13.0.Verification will be performed by comparing new model parameters or components to theory.The model will be considered calibrated when it reproduces data within an acceptable level of accuracy determined in consultation with the AEA Assistant Director.The quantitative calibration measure calculations will be included in the final modeling report. Model performance evaluates the model's ability to appropriately simulate conditions under a data set or period that is independent from those used in the calibration.The calibration and performance process will be documented in the nutrients modeling report. Because the goal is to be able to predict when point and nonpoint source loads produce water quality impairment on the basis of the ambient water quality criteria,model calibration and performance should strive to reduce errors (deviations between model predictions and observed measurement data)to zero. D3.0 COMPARING CALIBRATION/VALIDATION RESULTS TO DATA QUALITY INDICATORS A set of parameters used in the calibrated model might not accurately represent field values,and the calibrated parameters might not represent the system under a different set of boundary conditions or hydrologic stresses.Therefore,a second model performance period helps establish greater confidence in the calibration and the predictive capabilities of the model.A site-specific model is considered validated if its accuracy and predictive capability have been proven to be within acceptable limits of error independently of the calibration data.In general,model performance is performed using a data set that differs from the calibration data set (i.e.,low-flow data set for calibration versus higher-flow data set for verification).If only a single time series is available,the series can be split into two sub-series,one for calibration and another for performance.If the model parameters are changed during the performance,the exercise becomes a second calibration,and the first calibration needs to be repeated to account for any changes. Acceptable limits are those defined by the combined process of quantitative and qualitative examination of the model versus the data.There are not quantifiable limits because the Tetra Tech modelers may decide for a particular station that the statistics (quantitative)are more or less important that the graphical plots (qualitative).The limits used will be documented in the modeling report. Model performance will be accomplished by calibration.A model calibration is the process of adjusting model inputs within acceptable limits until the resulting predictions give good correlation with observed data.Commonly,the calibration begins with the best estimates for model input on the basis of measurements and subsequent data analyses.Results from initial simulations are then used to improve the concepts of the system or to modify the values of the model input parameters.The success of a model calibration is largely dependent on the validity of the underlying model formulation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 25 of 27 D4.0 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS All data quality indicators will be calculated at the completion of the data analysis phase. Measurement quality requirements will be met and compared with the DQOs to confirm that the correct type,quality,and quantity of data are being used for model development in support of the Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project,Water Quality Modeling Study.The interpretation and presentation stage includes inspection of the form of the results,and the meaning and reasonableness of the computation results and post-simulation analysis. The Tetra Tech Modeling QC Officers will perform internal reviews to assess departures from assumptions established in the planning phase of the modeling process.Tetra Tech,in consultation with the AEA Assistant Director,will determine how anomalies will be resolved. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 26 of 27 REFERENCES Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC).2005.Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Program.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water.Juneau, Alaska.58p. Alaska Energy Authority (AEA).2011.Pre-Application Document:Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241.December 2011.Prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center (AEIDC).1983a.Examination of Susitna River Discharge and Temperature Changes Due to the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project -Final Report. Prepared by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Anchorage,AK.Submitted to Harza- Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Anchorage,AK.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK. AEIDC.1983b.Stream Flow and Temperature Modeling in the Susitna Basin,Alaska.Prepared by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center Anchorage,AK.Submitted to Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture Anchorage,AK.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK. AEIDC.1984a.Effects of Project-Related Changes in Temperature,Turbidity and Stream Discharge on Upper Susitna Salmon Resources During June -Sept.January 1984.University of Alaska -Anchorage, Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 454. AEIDC.1984b.Examination of Susitna River Discharge and Temperature Changes Due to the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project.February 1984.University of Alaska -Anchorage,Anchorage,Alaska. APA Document Number 861. AEIDC.1984c.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed SHP on Instream Temperature and Fishery Resources in the Watana to Talkeetna Reach Vol.1 Main Text -Final.October 1984.University of Alaska -Anchorage,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 2330. AEIDC.1984d.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed SHP on Instream Temperature and Fishery Resourcesin the Watana to Talkeetna Reach Vol.2 Appendices A-H-Final.October 1984."University ofAlaska-Anchorage,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 2331. AEIDC.1985.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed SHP on Instream Temperature and Fish Resources in the Watana to Talkeetna Reach.May 22,1985.University of Alaska -Anchorage, Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document Number 2706. APHA (American Public Health Association).1998.Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater,20th ed.American Public Health Association,Washington,DC. Banks,W.S.L.,Paylor,R.L.,and Hughes,W.B.,1996,Using thermal-infrared.imagery to delineate ground-water discharge:Ground Water,v.34,no.3,p.434-443. Cole,T.M.and S.A.Wells.2000.CE-QUAL-W2:A two-dimensional,laterally averaged,Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model,Version 3.0,Instruction Report EL-2000.US Army Engineering and ResearchDevelopmentCenter,Vicksburg,MS. EPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency).2001 (Reissued May 2006).EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/R-5,EPA/240/B-01/003).U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Environmental Information Washington,DC. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Water Quality Modeling Study QAPP Date:October 31,2012 Page 27 of 27 EPA (U.S.Environmental Protection Agency).2002.Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans for Modeling (EPA QA/G-SM,EPA/240/R-02/007).U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Environmental Information,Washington DC,December 2002). EPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency).2005.Uniform Federal Policy for Quality Assurance Project Plans:Evaluating,Assessing,and Documenting Environmental Data Collection and Use Programs.EPA-505-B-04-900A,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency,Department of Defense,and Department of Energy,Washington,D.C. Fischer,W.A.,Davis,D.A.,and Sousa,T.M.,1966,Fresh-water springs of Hawaii from infrared images: U.S.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas 218,1 map. Hamrick,J.M.1992.A Three-Dimensional Environmental Fluid Dynamics Computer Code:Theoretical and Computational Aspects,Special Report 317.The College of William and Mary,Virginia Institute of Marine Science.63 pp. Imberger,J.,and Patterson,J.C.(1981).A dynamic reservoir simulation model-DYRESM.In Transport Models for Inland and Coastal Waters (H.B.Fischer ed.),pp.310-361.Academic Press,New York. LaBaugh,James W.,and Rosenberry,Donald O.2008.Field Techniques for Estimating Water Fluxes between Surface Water and Ground Water.Techniques and Methods Chapter 4-D2,U.S.Geological Survey,U.S.Department of the Interior Patterson,John,J.Imberger,B.Hebbert,and I.Loh.1977.Users Guide to DYRESM -A Simulation Model for Reservoirs ofMedium Size.University of Western Australia,Nedlands,Western Australia. Pluhowski,E.J.,1972,Hydrologic interpretations based on infrared imagery of Long Island,New York, Contributions to the hydrology of the United States:U.S.Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2009-- B,20 p. Robinove,C.J.,1965,Infrared photography and imagery in water resources research:Journal of the American Water Works Association,v.57,pt.2,p.834-840. Robinove,C.J.,and Anderson,D.G.,1969,Some guidelines for remote sensing in hydrology:Water Resources Bulletin,v.5,no.2,p.10-19. Rundquist,D.,Murray,G.,and Queen,L.,1985,Airborne thermal mapping of a "flow-through”lake in the Nebraska Sandhills:Water Resources Research,v.21,no.6,p.989-994. Taylor,J.1.,and Stingelin,R.W.,1969,Infrared imaging for water resources studies:Journal of the Hydraulics Division,Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers,v.95,no.1,p.175-189. Theurer,F.D.,K.A.Voos,and W.J.Miller.1984.Instream Water Temperature Model.Instream Flow Inf. Pap.16.U.S.Fish and Wildlife.Serv.FWS/OBS-84/15.v.p. URS.2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report.Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska.62p.tAppendixes. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-2 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 5-3 MERCURY ASSESSMENT AND POTENTIAL FOR BIOACCUMULATION STUDY SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)/QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP) Sampling and Analysis Plan/Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Susitna -Watana Hydroelectric Project Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study Susitna River,Southcentral Alaska FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Contract No.AEA-11-025 Preparedfor: Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Anchorage,AK 99503 Prepared by: URS/Tetra Tech,Inc. 700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage AK,99501 November 7,2012 QAPP xxx,Revision 0 This quality assurance project plan (QAPP)has been prepared according to guidance provided in Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans (EPA QA/R-5,EPA/240/B- 01/003,U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),Quality Assurance Division,Washington,DC,March 2001 [Reissued May 2006)to ensure that environmental and related data collected,compiled,and/or generated for this project are complete,accurate,and of the type,quantity,and quality required for their intended use.Tetra Tech will conduct work in conformance with the quality assurance program described in the quality management plan for Tetra Tech's Fairfax Group and with the procedures detailed in this QAPP. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Approvals: Betsy McGregor Assistant Director Alaska Energy Authority Date Robert Plotnikoff Technical Lead Tetra Tech,Inc. Date Jerry Diamond Toxicologist Tetra Tech,Inc. Date William Loskutoff QA Manager URS Corporation Date Paul Dworian Date Principal Manager URS Corporation Harry Gibbons Date Project Manager Tetra Tech,Inc. Susan Lanberg Date QA Officer Tetra Tech,Inc. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page ii of iv Contents ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.....ee eeeeeesccesecescseeesceeessceceseeeesecessnseeneaeesseessaseteeneeseneeees ill DISTRIBUTION...eee eeeeecseeesceseeesseeecsecesseesessscesseeceseesessseessesesseesessaessseascscessseeesseessneasensessseess 1V AlQ PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION0.00.eesecesseeeseesecsecesscesesececseeesseeseseeseneeersneetes 1 A2.0 BACKGROUND...ceeeeecceseeceesneesseeeesceeeseceeesseessoeeeseeeceaseesaeeeseceesseeetaceensessereeeseses 4 A3.0 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION.....ee cssceeecsseesescescessesescesceesacsseseeesscessetsseneseess 5 A4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA uo...eee escesecesseeeceetseeseeteeeeneeeees 7 A5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS/CERTIFICATION .......cccsssecsstesssessnseseeees 8 A6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS...eeeeeessceceeseeeneessececseceseeeeseeeesesersrseeseeees 8 B10 SAMPLING DESIGN7.esesscesesesscesscrssescsesescesssssesevenscssessseessesesecssseseeseseeseeeeeees 9 B2.0 SAMPLING METHODS..0..ce cescsetscesseseesseessseeessessonsecesseecsseecsceserseesseesseeseseesensees 18 B3.0 SAMPLE DOCUMENTATION AND SHIPPING 1.00...cceecsesssseecseneeceeesereeseeeesseeseeners 24 B4.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY ooo.eee eeeseecseeeesseeesceeesceeesseeesenenteeeeenees 25 B5.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS..000.eee sceesceeseceeeseeeeseeeesesesseeenseseseecsceeeseeeeeeeeseetensees 26 B6.0 QUALITY CONTROL2.0...ieee eecceeecccesceeeseeeesceeessceessaeeeseesenseseseeseecesscessseeesssenseaees 27 B7.0 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING,INSPECTION,AND MAINTENANCE..29 B8.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY......cc ccsssscceesscesentceesseeeeees 29 B9.0 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLEG...........eee 30 B10.0 NONDIRECT MEASUREMENTS 0...ecceescceeseceseceeesseeeseeessceeseeeesseseseeseneeseseeeenaeeres 30 B11.0 DATA MANAGEMENT...eesccccssescsseesetecesseseesseeesseessseesssesssseecsseesseesereeseseeeeneeeens 30 C1.0 ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE ACTIONS woo.eeecseecsseecseeeseeeseeeesseteneeeesecenene 31 C2.0 QA REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT 000 eecceescseseeecsscceseeeeseeesseseseeeeeseeeseeereeeeenees 32 D1.0 DATA REVIEW,VERIFICATION,AND VALIDATION...eee eeeceeeereeeeeeeeeeseeees 32 D2.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS...00..ee eseeeeeeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeeseeseeees 32 D3.0 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS...eeeeeseseeeeeeeeeeeeesenseeees 33 REFERENCES .........cessssesssseessseceseseccceeessceeecsceeescscecessseeeecssceecsesscceesssseesesseeasesseeesesseeessaseseesnseetesses 34 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page iii of iv ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ADEC Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation AEA Alaska Energy Authority °C degrees Celsius cm centimeters DO Dissolved oxygen DQI Data quality indicators DQO Data Quality Objectives EPA Environmental Protection Agency g grams m meter(s) uS/cm microSiemens per centimeter mg/L milligrams per liter NPS Nonpoint source PDF Portable Document Format PM Project Manager QA Quality assurance QAM Quality Assurance Manager QAO Quality Assurance Officer QAPP Quality assurance project plan QC Quality control QCO Quality Control Officer RPD Relative percent difference RSD Relative standard deviation SOP Standard Operating Procedure TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load TL Technical Lead Tt Tetra Tech,Inc. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page iv of iv DISTRIBUTION This document will be distributed to the following Alaska Energy Authority,URS Corporation,and Tetra Tech,Inc.staff members who are involved in this project,as well as to all responsible subcontractors. Name Phone,Fax Title E-mail Mailing Address Alaska Energy Authority Betsy McGregor 907-771-3957 (phone)Alaska Energy Authority Assistant Director bmcgregor@aidea.org 411 W.4th Ave,Suite 1 Anchorage,AK 99501 URS Corporation Paul Dworian 907-261-6735 (phone)URS Corporation Principal Manager 907-562-1297 (fax)700 G Street,Suite 500 paul.dworian@urs.com Anchorage,AK 99501 Mark Vania,907-261-9755 (phone)URS Corporation URS Project Field Lead 907-562-1297 (fax)700 G Street,Suite 500 mark.vania@urs.com Anchorage,AK 99501 Tetra Tech,Inc.(Tt) Harry Gibbons Project Manager 206-728-9655 Ext.107 (phone) 206-728-9670 (fax) harry.cibbons/@tetratech.com Robert Plotnikoff Technical Lead 206-728-9655 Ext.124 (phone) 206-728-9670 (fax) robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.com Tetra Tech,Inc. 1420 Fifth Avenue,Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 Shannon Brattebo 509-232-4312 (phone)Tetra Tech,Inc. Tt Project Field Lead 509-744-928 1 (fax)316 W.Boone Avenue,Suite 363 shannon.brattebo@tetratech.com Spokane,WA 99201 Jerry Diamond 410-356-8993 (phone)Tetra Tech,Inc. jerry.diamond@tetratech.com 400 Red Brook Blvd. Ste.200 Owings Mills,MD 21117 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 1 of 36 A.PROJECT MANAGEMENT ELEMENTS A1.0 PROJECT/TASK ORGANIZATION The Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)is preparing a License Application that will be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (Project). The Project is located on the Susitna River in the South-central region of Alaska.The Project's dam site will be located at River Mile (RM)184.The results of this study and of other proposed studies will provide information needed to support the FERC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)analysis for the Project license. Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-Application Document (PAD,AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir.This SAP/QAPP outlines the objectives and methods for developing a monitoring program that will adequately characterize baseline methylmercury concentrations in the Susitna River within and downstream of the proposed Project area,as well as predict methylmercury impacts that may occur due to the dam's construction. This Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP)/Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP)is being prepared to document the quality assurance (QA)and quality control (QC)measures that will be observed to ensure the following objectives are met:data are consistent,correct,and complete,with no errors or omissions; QC sample results have been reviewed and are included;established criteria for QC results are met; measurement quality objectives have been met,or data qualifiers are properly assigned where necessary; and data specified in the sampling process design are obtained.Data collection methods will follow established state and federal (e.g.,Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;EPA)guidelines. The organizational aspects of a program provide the framework for conducting tasks.The organizational structure can also facilitate project performance and adherence to quality control (QC)procedures and quality assurance (QA)requirements.Key project roles are filled by those persons responsible for ensuring the collection of valid data and the routine assessment of the data for precision and accuracy,as well as the data users and the person(s)responsible for approving and accepting final products and deliverables.The key personnel involved in the Mercury Assessment Study of the Susitna River are listed in Table Al-1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 2 of 36 Table A1-1.Project/Task Organization and Responsibility Summary Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Betsy McGregor Responsible for project Alaska Energy Authority 907-771-3957 coordination with local,813 W Northern Lights Blvd. county,state,and federal Anchorage,AK 99503 government officials;and for reviewing drafts of the study plan,QAPP and summary data reports bmegregor@aidea.org Paul Dworian Responsible for directing daily project activities and tracking product delivery. Communicates with AEA Environmental Manager on project schedule and timing URS Corporation 700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage,AK 99501 paul _dworian@urs.com 907-261-6735 for product delivery. Mark Vania Responsible for field URS Corporation 907-261-9755 sampling assistance,quality |700 G Street,Suite 500 assurance and quality Anchorage,AK 99501 control of field protocols.Mark.vania@urs.com Robert Plotnikoff Responsible for preparing Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 the project QAPP,1420 5th Ave.Suite 550 coordinating and Seattle,WA 98101 completing sampling activities,analyzing project |robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.com data,and preparing the draft and final data reports. Serves as the principal project team contact for field staff for the duration of the study Harry Gibbons Responsible for managing Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 the project,overseeing preparation of the project QAPP,reviewing analysis of project data,and review of the draft and final data reports.Serves as the principal project team contact for the technical aspects of the study 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Shannon Brattebo,Responsible for field sampling assistance,quality assurance and quality control of field protocols. Tetra Tech,Inc. 316 W.Boone Avenue,Suite363 Spokane,WA 99201 shannon.brattebo@tetratech.com 509-232-4312 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 3 of 36 Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Jerry Diamond Reviews QAPP and all Tetra Tech,Inc.410-356-8993 Ecology quality assurance 400 Red Brook Blvd. programs.Provides Ste.200 technical assistance on Owings Mills,MD 21117 QA/QC issues during the implementation and jerry.diamond@tetratech.com assessment of the project. Additional technical staff will be responsible for conducting specific tasks during the project (e.g., performing field sampling and collecting surface water quality data)at the direction and discretion of the Project Manager (PM).The Project Manager will supervise the technical staff participating in the project, including implementing the QC program,completing assigned work on schedule with strict adherence to procedures established in the approved QAPP,and completing required documentation.The PM will direct the work of the field sampling team including collection,preparation,and shipment of samples and completion of field-sampling records.To perform the required work effectively and efficiently,the field- sampling team will include scientific staff with specialization and technical competence in field-sampling activities,as required to ensure the highest quality data are collected without incident.They must perform all work in adherence with the project work plan and QAPP,including maintenance of field sample documentation.Where applicable,custody procedures are required to ensure the integrity of the samples with respect to preventing contamination and maintaining proper sample identification during handling. Where field samples are collected the sampling team is responsible for the following: Receiving and inspecting the sample containers Receiving,inspecting,calibrating,and maintaining field instrumentation Completing,reviewing,and signing appropriate field records Assigning tracking numbers to each sample (sample identification numbers) Controlling and monitoring access to samples while in their custody Verifying the completeness and accuracy of chain-of-custody documentation Initiating shipment and verifying receipt of samples at their appropriate destinations Verifying the results of sample measurements collected for compliance with the requirements of the reference methods and this QAPP Additional oversight will be provided by the QC Officers (QCO),who are responsible for performing evaluations to ensure that QC is maintained throughout the sampling process,that the data collected will be of optimal validity and usability,and that limitations of the data set are minimized as much as is possible given the challenges of the routine field investigation.The QCO is any senior technical staff assigned the responsibility of providing a second-level review of all documentation and records developed during the sample and data collection process.The QC evaluations will include double- checking work as it is completed and providing written documentation of these reviews (minimally initialing and dating documents as they are reviewed)to ensure that the standards set forth in the QAPP are met or exceeded.QCOs may be assigned at the task or subtask level allowing teams to efficiently divide work processes or tasks required and exchanging project documentation for review prior to departure from a sampling station.In this regard,QCOs ensure that all required data and information are recorded for each sampling station prior to physically leaving the collection site.Other QA/QC staff,such as technical reviewers and technical editors selected as needed,will provide peer review oversight on the content of work products and ensure that work products comply with the client's specifications. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 4 of 36 Technical staff involved with the program will be responsible for reading and understanding this QAPP and complying with and adhering to its requirements in executing their assigned tasks relative to this project. A2.0 BACKGROUND Construction and operation of the Project as described in the Pre-application Document (PAD,AEA 2011)is expected to change some of the water quality characteristics of the resulting riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the dam site as well as the inundated area that will become the reservoir. Many studies have documented increased mercury concentrations in wildlife following the flooding of terrestrial areas to create hydroelectric reservoirs.The purpose of this study is to assess the potential for such an occurrence in the proposed Project area. The study area includes the Susitna River within the proposed Watana Reservoir and downstream of the proposed Watana Dam.The study area begins at river mile 15.1 (Susitna River above Alexander Creek) and extends past the proposed dam site to river mile 233.4 (at Oshetna Creek,just above the upper extent of the proposed reservoir area).Tributaries to the Susitna River will be sampled and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow such as the Talkeenta,Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna river.Also included are smaller tributaries such as Gold,Portage,Tsusena,and Watana creeks,and the Oshetna River. Soil and vegetation samples will be collected from the proposed inundation area.The proposed dam would be located at river mile 184.The dam would create a reservoir 42.5 miles long and 1 to 2 miles wide,with a normal reservoir surface area of approximately 23,546 acres and a normal maximum pool elevation of 2,050 feet.Piscivorous birds and mammals,and fish samples will be collected from a variety of drainages in the study area;however,the focus will be on the proposed inundation area for the dam to establish background concentrations of methylmercury in fish prior to site development. Based on several studies,mercury that is found in newly formed reservoirs originates predominantly from inundation of organic soils.Receptors are and will be present in the Project inundation area (macroinvertebrates,fish,birds,etc.).Mercury methylation in reservoirs is a fairly well understood process,and numerous models exist to predict the occurrence and magnitude of the phenomena. Given these known factors,key questions that need to be answered by this study include the following: 1)Whether conditions within the reservoir will cause mercury methylation from this source. 2)The concentrations of methylmercury that might occur. 3)Whether a mechanism exists (fish and small invertebrates living in the methylation zone)to transfer that methylmercury to wildlife,resulting in detrimental impacts. Based on these questions,specific objectives of this study are as follows: e Summarize available and historic water quality information for the Susitna River basin, including data collection from the 1980s Alaska Power Authority (APA)Susitna Hydroelectric Project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 5 of 36 e Characterize the baseline mercury concentrations of the Susitna River and tributaries.This will include collection and analyses of vegetation,soil,water,sediment pore water,sediment, avian,terrestrial furbearers,and fish tissue samples for mercury. e Utilize available geologic information to determine if a mineralogical source of mercury exists within the inundation area. e Map mercury concentrations of soils and vegetation within the proposed inundation area. This information will be used to develop maps of where mercury methylation may occur. e Use the water quality model to predict where in the reservoir conditions (pH,dissolved oxygen,turnover)are likely to be conducive to methylmercury formation. e Use modeling to estimate methylmercury concentrations in fish. e Assess potential pathways for methylmercury to migrate to the surrounding environment. e Coordinate study results with other study areas,including fish,instream flow,and other piscivorous bird and mammal studies. A 3.0 PROJECT/TASK DESCRIPTION This section provides an overview of the staffing organization and schedule.The key personnel involved in the Mercury Assessment Study of the Susitna River are listed in Table A3-1. Table A3-1.Project/Task Organization and Responsibility Summary Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Betsy McGregor, Alaska Energy Authority Responsible for project coordination with local, county,state,and federal government officials;and for reviewing drafts of the study plan,QAPP and summary data reports Alaska Energy Authority 813 W Northern Lights Blvd Anchorage,AK 99503 bmcgregor@aidea.org 907-771-3957 Paul Dworian,URS Responsible for directing URS Corporation 907-261-6735 daily project activities and 700 G Street,Suite 500 tracking product delivery.Anchorage,AK 99501 Communicates with AEA Environmental Manager on |paul.dworian@urs.com project schedule and timing for product delivery. Mark Vania,URS Responsible for field URS Corporation 907-261-9755 sampling assistance,quality assurance and quality control of field protocols. 700 G Street,Suite 500 Anchorage,AK 99501 mark.vania@urs.com Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority December.2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 6 of 36 Personnel Responsibility Address/E-Mail Phone Number Robert Plotnikoff,Tetra |Responsible for preparing Tetra Tech,Inc.206-728-9655 Tech,Inc.the project QAPP,1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 coordinating and completing sampling activities,analyzing project data,and preparing the draft and final data reports. Serves as the principal project team contact for field staff for the duration of the study Seattle,WA 98101 robert.plotnikoff@tetratech.c om Harry Gibbons Tetra Tech,Inc. Responsible for managing the project,overseeing preparation of the project QAPP,reviewing analysis of project data,and review of the draft and final data reports.Serves as the principal project team contact for the technical aspects of the study Tetra Tech,Inc. 1420 Sth Ave.Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 206-728-9655 harry.gibbons@tetratech.com Shannon Brattebo, Tetra Tech,Inc. Responsible for field sampling assistance,quality assurance and quality control of field protocols. Tetra Tech,Inc. 316 W.Boone Ave Suite 363 Spokane,WA 99201 509-232-4312 shannon.brattebo@tetratech.c om Gene Welch, Tetra Tech,Inc. Reviews QAPP and all Ecology quality assurance programs.Provides technical assistance on QA/QC issues during the implementation and assessment of the project. Tetra Tech,Inc. 1420 5th Ave.Suite 550 Seattle,WA 98101 206-728-9655 gene.welch@tetratech.com The Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study for the Susitna River will begin in 2013 and continue through the beginning of 2015.The exact scheduling of the monthly and seasonal sampling will be coordinated between AEA and URS/Tt staff.Table 4-2 gives the projected schedule of activities and deliverables. Table A3-2:Schedule for the Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation Study and Production of Associated Deliverables Monitoring Activity Timeline QAPP/SAP Preparation and Review January 2013 -March 2013 Water Quality Monitoring (monthly)June 2013 -October 2013 (one sampling event in each of December 2013 and March 2014) Soil and Vegetation Sampling (one survey)August -September 2013 (one survey) Sediment and Sediment Pore Water Sampling August -September 2013 Bird and Aquatic Furbearer Sampling July -September 2013 and July -September 2014 Fish Tissue Sampling (one survey)August -September 2012/2013 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 7 of 36 Monitoring Activity Timeline Data Analysis and Management November 2013 -March 2014 Initial Study Report February 2014 Updated Study Report February 2015 A4.0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA Measurement quality objectives (MQOs)are the performance or acceptance criteria for individual dataqualityindicators,including precision,bias,and sensitivity.The MQOs'for this project are presented in Table A4-1.Industry standard field methods will be used throughout this project to minimize measurement bias (systematic error)and to improve precision (to reduce random error).MQOs are listed for each of the parameters measured in water and from meteorological sites established in the upper river region of the Project area. Table A4-1:Measurement Quality Objectives Analyte Precision Bias Required (%RSD)(%deviation |Reporting Limit from true value) WATER/PORE WATER Dissolved Oxygen 20 20 NA Conductivity 20 20 NA pH 20 20 NA Temperature 20 20 NA Mercury,Total and 15 20 0.002 up/L Methyl SOIL/SEDIMENT/VEGETATION Mercury,Total 30 30 1 mg/kg Total Organic Carbon 20 20 NA (Sediment Only) Sediment Grain Size NA NA NA (Sediment Only) AVIAN/TERRESTRIAL FURBEARERS/FISH TISSUE Mercury,Total [10 |10 |0.03 mg/kg NA Not applicable Precision -Precision is defined as the degree to whicha set of observations or measurements of the same property,obtained under similar conditions,conform to subsequent (repeated)measurements.Precision is usually expressed as standard deviation,variance,or range,in either absolute or relative terms.Field sample replicates for assessment of precision will be analyzed at no less than a 5 percent frequency of the total number of samples.Laboratory replicates for assessment of precision will be analyzed at no less than a 5 percent frequency of the total number of samples submitted to the laboratory. For sample results that exceed the reporting detection limit (RDL),the relative percent difference (RPD) will be less than or equal to 20 percent.No criteria are presented for duplicates that are below the RDL,as Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 8 of 36 these data are provided for informational purposes only.When one or more of the results is below the RDL,professional judgment will be used in determining the compliance of the data to project requirements. Representativeness -Sample representativeness is the degree to which data accurately and precisely represent a characteristic of a population.Representativeness will be addressed at two distinct points in the data collection process.During sample collection,the use of generally accepted sampling procedures applied in a consistent manner throughout the project will help ensure that samples are representative of conditions at the point where the sample was taken.During subsampling (sample aliquot removal)in the laboratory,samples will be inverted several times to ensure that the analytical subsample is well mixed and therefore representative of the sample container's contents. Completeness -Completeness is a measure of the amount of valid data needed to meet the project's objectives.Completeness will be judged by the amount of valid data compared to the data expected.Valid data are those data in compliance with the data quality criteria as presented in this section,and in compliance within expected range of conditions and daily fluctuation patterns.While the goal for the criteria described above is 100 percent completeness,a level of 95 percent completeness will be considered acceptable.However,any time data are incomplete,decisions regarding re-sampling and/or re- analysis will be made.These decisions will take into account the project data quality objectives as presented above. Comparability -Comparability is a measure of the confidence with which one dataset can be compared to another.This is a qualitative assessment and is addressed primarily by sampling design through use of comparable sampling procedures or,for monitoring programs,through consistent sampling of stations over time.In the laboratory,comparability is assured through the use of comparable analytical procedures and ensuring that project staff are trained in the proper application of the procedures.Within-study comparability will be assessed through analytical performance (quality control samples). A5.0 SPECIAL TRAINING REQUIREMENTS/CERTIFICATION This QAPP and supporting materials will be distributed to all participants.The local Project Manager will conduct a procedural review before the field team is mobilized for sampling.The procedural review will include the requirements of the QAPP and referenced SOPs,as well as instrument manufacturers' operation and maintenance instructions.It will be performed concurrently with a check that all equipment and sampling gear are fully functional and ready for deployment.In addition,there will be discussions and demonstrations of sampling method(s)to be used and discussions regarding specific health and safety concerns.Each sampling team will consist of,at a minimum,one sample collector and a scientist familiar with QC requirements,which will ensure strict adherence to the project protocols,check all documentation for completeness and correctness,and verify that no transcription errors or omissions have been made in preparing sample custody records and other project documentation. A6.0 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS Thorough documentation of all field sample collection is necessary for proper processing of data and, ultimately,for interpreting study results.Field sample collection will be documented in writing,on forms as well as on the following forms and labels: A field log notebook for general observations and notes A Field Data Record Form that contains information about observations and measurements made and samples collected at the site e Checklists for each sampling event,sampling point,and sampling time. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 9 of 36 The Technical Leads,and the appropriate PMs within subcontractor organizations will maintain files,as appropriate,as repositories for information and data used in preparing any reports and documents during the project and will supervise the use of materials in the project files.The following information will be included: Any reports and documents prepared Contract and Task Order information Project QAPP Results of technical reviews,data quality assessments,and audits Communications (memoranda;internal notes;telephone conversation records;letters; meeting minutes;and all written correspondence among the project team personnel, subcontractors,suppliers,or others) Maps,photographs,and drawings Studies,reports,documents,and newspaper articles pertaining to the project Special data compilations Spreadsheet data files:physical measurements,analytical chemistry data (hard copy and disk) Copies of the field log books and physical characterization/water quality data sheets and sampling checklists will be supplied to the Field PMs at the close of each sampling event.These data will be used in conjunction with inspection checklists to compile the sampling event reports.Formal reports that are generated from the data will be subject to technical and editorial review before submission to Alaska Energy Authority and will be maintained at Tt's Seattle,Washington office in the central file (disk and hard copy).The data reports will include a summary of the types of data collected,sampling dates,and any problems or anomalies observed during sample collection. If any change(s)in this QAPP are required during the study,a memo will be sent to each person on the distribution list describing the change(s),following approval by the appropriate persons.The memos will be attached to the QAPP.All written records relevant to the sampling and processing of samples will be maintained at Tt's Seattle,Washington office in the central file.Unless other arrangements are made, records will be maintained for a minimum of 5 years following expiration of the contract. B.MEASUREMENT AND DATA ACQUISITION B1.0 SAMPLING DESIGN This QAPP/SAP includes specific detail describing study design,sampling procedures,and determining quality of data collected that satisfy the study objectives.This QAPP/SAP is a required document when generating environmental data intended for use in making regulatory decisions.This document ensures that defensible and high quality data is generated in this study by establishing performance goals and a process for evaluation of each of the study elements. This study consists of six study components as listed below: e Summarize available information for the Susitna River basin,including data collection from the 1980s APA Susitna Hydroelectric Project,and existing geologic information to determine if a mineralogical source of mercury exists within the inundation area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 10 of 36 e Collect and analyze background vegetation,soil,water,sediment,sediment pore water,and avian, terrestrial furbearer,and fish tissue samples for mercury.This will include mapping vegetation types and the lateral extent,thickness,and mercury concentrations of soils within the proposed inundation area.These data will be used to provide background concentrations for mercury,but will also help evaluate potential mitigation methods (soil and vegetation removal)should that become necessary. e Use the water quality model to predict where in the reservoir conditions (pH,dissolved oxygen, turnover)are likely to be conducive to methylmercury formation (see Section 5.6 of Revised Study Plan). e Utilize specialty models to predict potential fish methylmercury concentrations. e Assess potential pathways for mercury movement from different areas of methylmercury formation to the surrounding environment. e Prepare a technical report on analytical results,modeling,and mercury pathway assessment. Data will be collected from multiple aquatic media including surface water,sediment,vegetation, piscivorous birds and mammals,and fish tissue.The work will be done as a single,comprehensive survey to determine the baseline concentrations of mercury in the watershed.Table B1-1 summarizes the parameters to be analyzed for this study according to media type and the frequency of collection. Water quality and sediment samples will be collected at the sites identified in Table B1-2.The study area begins at RM 15.1 and extends past the proposed dam site to RM 233.4.Tributaries to the Susitna River will be sampled and include those contributing large portions of the lower river flow such as the Talkeetna,Chulitna,Deshka,and Yentna rivers.Also included are smaller tributaries such as Gold, Portage,Tsusena,and Watana creeks,and the Oshetna River.These sites were selected based on the following rationale: e Adequate representation of locations throughout the Susitna River and tributaries above and below the proposed dam site for the purpose of a baseline mercury characterization. e Location on tributaries where proposed access road crossing impacts might occur during and after construction (upstream/downstream sampling points on each crossing). e Consultation with licensing participants including co-location with other study sites (e.g., instream flow,ice processes). e Sites that are in the Susitna River mainstem,tributary,or slough locations,most of which were monitored in the 1980s. Additional sample sites will be added at the Focus Areas (see below for further detail and Figures B1-1 through B1-10. Soil and vegetation samples will be collected from the proposed inundation area.Avian,terrestrial furbearers,and fish samples will be collected from a variety of drainages in the study area;however,the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 11 of 36 focus will be on the proposed inundation area for the dam to establish background concentrations of methylmercury in fish prior to site development. Water Quality Data Collection:Focus Areas on the Susitna River A total of ten intensive study areas (Focus Areas)were presented and discussed with the TWG and are proposed for detailed study within the Middle Segment of the river.The proposed Focus Areas are intended to serve as specific geographic areas of the river that will be the subject of intensive investigation by multiple resource disciplines including water quality and mercury assessment.The Focus Areas were selected during an interdisciplinary resource meeting that involved a systematic review of aerial imagery within each of the Geomorphic Reaches (MR1 through MR8)for the entire Middle Segment of the river.Focus Areas were selected within MRI,MR2,MR5,MR6,MR7,and MR8.Focus Areas were not selected for MR3 or MR4 due to safety considerations related to Devils Canyon. The areas selected were those deemed representative of the major features in the Geomorphic Reach and included mainstem habitat types of known biological significance (i.e.,where fish have been observed based on previous and/or contemporary studies),as well as some locations (e.g,Slough 17)where previous sampling revealed few/no fish.The areas included representative side channels,side sloughs, upland sloughs,and tributary mouths. The Focus Area selections considered: o All major habitat types (main channel,side channel,side slough,upland slough,tributary delta). o At least one Focus Area per geomorphic reach (excepting reaches associated with Devils Canyon)will be included that are representative of other areas. o Areplicate sampling strategy will be used for measure habitat types within each Focus Area which many include random selection process. o Areas that are known (based on existing and contemporary data)to be biologically important for salmon spawning/rearing in mainstem and lateral habitats will be sampled (i.e.,critical habitats)and o Areas for which little or no fish use has been documented or for which information on fish use is lacking,will also be sampled. Maps of each FA with River Mile numbers included are shown below in Figures B1-1 through B1-10. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 12 of 36 que instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €Flow Arrow ©=Project River Mile Propecton Ateska Albers NAD 1983DataSources:See Map References ae acer Ra feces dabtomeyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuske-Susitna Borough LIDAR &imagery Project Fue Map_RSP_0F5_FocusAreas_MR mx. Figure B1-1.Map of Focus Area I LEE ASE See aL 2 A isng BS AS a #. ;.eee Y ss ob ce <heAe de mepehaige Tee eebrary Legend SS ALASKA fFGEBRERGYAUTHORITY mm instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) ©=Flow Arrow 0 1,000 °o Project River Mile aa Feet Data Sources:SeeMap References Oamcawe taraOnthophoteSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &imagery Project Me mee RS eS reuaceeMR mix Figure B1-2.Map of Focus Area 2 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 13 of 36 'um =instream Fiow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €Flow Arrow °o Project River Mie Date Created 11/27/2012DatsSources:See Map References Map Author R2-Joetta ZabioneySource:2011 Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fis,Map_RSP_#S_f ocusAreas_MA.mat Figure B1-3.Map of Focus Area 3 A Legend eum =nstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €=FlowArow oO Project River Mile Date Sources:See Map References Mp Autor R2 -soene ZabiomneyOrtSource:2014 Susiina Borough LIDAR &imagery Progect Fue.Map_RSP_FS_Focustress_MR mat Figure B1-4.Map of Focus Area 4 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 14 of 36 weitoy:ot4 eeeBrosrooe2h«ityee-it OTE NS he oy:Re te SN ee Cr ON 5aSS'é 4sWwedree!eae Dns rees ReiSeversSORPRASaaSaticandpeicedMESacoe e==ee instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €=FewAmow 0 1.000 ..-ee FeetOoProjectRiverMile Provection'Aleste Albers NAD 1963 Date Sours:See Map References Oe SameOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIOAR &Imagery Project Fue Mep_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR mad 5.M od:,ROR.PSsWeen. ume instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)ry €=FlowArow fv) °Project River Mile Pronection:AlasDateSources:See Map References SeaseemeyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fue Map RSP_WS FocusAreas MR mad Figure B1-6.Map of Focus Area 6 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 15 of 36 @ammm instream Fiow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) t 0€=Flow Arrow 1,000 O Project River Mile -Feet Projection Algsie Albers NAD 1983 Date Created.11:27-2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author R2 .Joetta ZabictneyOrtSource:2017 Susitna Borough LIDAR &tmagery Project Fie.Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAmes_MRmud F sry 2 eum instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)rv €=Flow Arrow ft)4,000 °Project River Mile Projection Aigske Alters NAD 1963DateCoweted.11/27:2012DataSources:See Map References.Map Autnor R2 -Joetta Z:Ont Source::2011 Mi Susitna Borough LIDAR &tmagery Project Fue MapRSP_iS_FoousAreas_MRmid Figure B1-8.Map of Focus Area 8 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 16 of 36 ES .rn .%-,is rsoathhyogeewe60:D ae?.4.LoaAear.tMeieatHQgs@.n"ANPakites5esieOe*%wal*ZéOnaaawy@umme =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €= Flow Arrow [')1,000 spe agi OO meen FeetOProjectRiverMile rm Alesna Albers NAD 1983DataSourves:See Map References Ne Created.yvar2oi2OrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project he ae ROPES Pecanrea MR md Figure 2 an ey rain'i +.>ta 9a fu .ae Set at eaday° nei Os ese le Legend meme instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €= Flow ArrowO_-Project River Mile .Proyection Alpsta Alpers NAD 1963 Data Sources:Sea Map References Dete Created 1127-2012 Map Author.RZ -Joetta ZantotnOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fue sap RSE_1S.FocusArens'MR mad Figure B1-10.Map of Focus Area 10 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 17 of 36 Table B1-1.List of parameters and frequency of collection Media Analyses Frequency of Collection Holding Time Total and methylmercury |Monthly 48 hours (EPA-7470A) Surface Water,Surface Water Only: Sediment Pore Water |Temperature,pH,DO, Conductivity,Redox Potential (Multi- parameter sonde) Total mercury (EPA One Survey-summer 28 days 245.2/7470A) ..Sediment Only:Soil,Sediment Total Organic Carbon (EPA 415.1/9060) Sediment Grain Size (ASTM D422) Avian and Terrestrial |Total mercury (EPA-One Survey-late summer 7 days Furbearers 1631) .:Total and methylmercury 7 daysFishTissue(EPA-1631)One Survey-late summer Table B1-2.Proposed Susitna River Basin mercury assessment sites Susitna River Description Susitna River Latitude Longitude Mile Slough ID (decimal degrees)(decimal degrees) 25.8 Susitna Station NA 61.5454 -150.516 28.0 Yentna River NA 61.589 -150.468 29.5 Susitna above Yentna NA 61.5752 -150.248 40.6 Deshka River NA 61.7098 -150.324 55.0 Susitna NA 61.8589 -150.18 83.8 Susitna at Parks Highway East NA 62.175 -150.174 97.2 Talkeetna River NA 62.3418 -150.106 98.5 Chulitna River NA 62.5574 -150.236 103.0 Talkeetna NA 62.3943 -150.134 120.7 Curry Fishwheel Camp NA 62.6178 -150.012 136.8 Gold Creek NA 62.7676 -149.691 138.6 Indian River NA 62.8009 149.664 138.7 Susitna above Indian River NA 62.7857 -149.651 148.8 Susitna above Portage Creek NA 62.8286 -149.379 148.8 Portage Creek NA 62.8317 -149.379 184.5 Susitna at Watana Dam site NA 62.8226 -148.533 223.7 Susitna near Cantwell NA 62.7052 147.538 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 18 of 36 B2.0 SAMPLING METHODS Below is a description of the sampling methods and techniques that will be used when collecting samples as part of the mercury assessment and potential for bioaccumulation study on the Susitna River.The sampling methods are broken out by media type. Vegetation The principal concern for the vegetation study is to determine the mass of organics and mercury concentrations in the reservoir area.Plant species differ in their ability to take up mercury.At the Red Devil and Cinnabar Creek mines,alders and willows concentrate mercury at levels as much as 20 times higher than those in the other species collected in this study (Baily and Gray 1997).The mechanism of mercury uptake and reason for variation in mercury uptake by species is unclear.Siegal et al.(1985, 1987)have suggested that some species are mercury accumulators,whereas other plant species release their absorbed mercury as mercury vapor and thus lower their total concentration of mercury.Overall, leaves and needles have been found to hold the greatest accumulations of mercury in Alaska plants (Baily and Gray 1997). The degradation rate for organic materials in water seems to be a primary source of the spike in methylmercury concentrations after filling of a reservoir (Hydro-Quebec 2003).Only the green part of the vegetation (leaves of trees and shrubs as well as forest ground cover)and the top centimeters of humus decompose quickly.Tree branches,trunks and roots,as well as deeper humus,remain almost intact decades after flooding (Morrison and Thérien 1991).Previous studies by Hydro-Quebec have shown that woody debris,even if it contains mercury,is not a problem for mercury methylation because the decay rate is slow in cold water (Hydro-Quebec 2003). Based on these studies,up to 50 samples of vegetation will be collected from various plants within the proposed inundation area.Studies are currently being completed on the distribution of types of species in the inundation zone,and this information is currently unavailable.The sampling will be biased toward total vegetative mass,that is to say species that are present in the inundation area at low frequency and size may not be sampled,because their contributions to mercury methylation will be low.Multiple samples (five to seven)will be collected at different locations for each species in the inundation area. Based on the available preliminary data,it is anticipated that a majority of the samples will consist of alder (Alnus crispa),willow (Salix sp.),white spruce (Picea glauca),cottonwood (Populus balsamifera), black spruce (Picea mariana),paper birch (Betula papyrifera),and dwarf birch(Betula nana).Leaves and needles will be collected and placed in appropriate sample containers.Vegetation samples will be shipped to the contract laboratory for total mercury analysis. To collect vegetation samples the following equipment is needed:latex gloves,large Ziploc bags,sharpie pens and waterproof paper labels.Samples will be collected as follows: e Samples of shrubs,and leaves or needles of trees should be collected by gathering the current year's growth (i.e.,tips of coniferous trees and leaves). All vegetation samples should be collected by hand using disposable latex gloves. Samples will be placed in a single large Ziploc bag.Samples will consist of at least 10 grams of organic matter. Samples may be a composite of several identical species from the same area. e Physical attributes such as species,location,exposed soil,herbaceous litter/mulch,woody litter, standing water,and rock type will be recorded in the field notes. e All plant species collected will be assigned a stratum category (tall tree,stunted tree,shrub, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 19 of 36 graminoid herbaceous,forb,etc.).The actual height for a representative species will be recorded. e Anestimation of percentage of cover will be made.Emergent and aquatic plants will be recorded at the immediate margin of water less than one foot deep. e The outside of the bag will be labeled with a sharpie pen and place a waterproof paper label inside the bag. Samples will be refrigerated prior to shipping. e The cooler will be sealed and transported to the laboratory with the appropriate chain-of custody (COC)forms which should accompany the shipment. e Samples will be analyzed for total mercury using EPA Method 1631E.It is unnecessary to analyze these samples for methylmercury,given that these materials are considered as a source for methylmercury generation,and total mercy analyses includes both methylated and inorganic forms of mercury. This sampling method is in accordance with USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) guidelines for vegetative sampling. Soil Studies have found that the primary source of mercury to new reservoirs was the inundated soils (Meister et al.1979),especially the upper organic soil horizon,which often has higher mercury levels than the lower inorganic soil layers (Bodaly et al.1984).Measuring the thickness and mercury content of these soils prior to inundation may allow predictions of possible mercury methylation,and assist with evaluating potential mitigation methods,if necessary. To the extent possible,soil samples will be coincident with vegetative samples.The primary concern is to document the thickness and extent of organic rich soils,because these soils will have the highest concentrations of mercury and will provide most of the organic material resulting in the generation of methylmercury. To collect soil the following general procedures should be followed: e Samples will be collected using a soil probe with a window slot in the cylinder of the probe for easy sample recovery.The probe will be pushed till refusal. e The soil layers encountered will be recorded using a tape measure and record depth (cm)in the field book. e Each recovered soil profile will be catalogued,measured and photographed,along with each soil sample location.Data recorded from each collection point will include coordinates,slope, elevation,depth to water table,and depth to refusal.Soil properties such as soil horizons,texture, rock fragments,are recorded in the horizon data field.The soil will be classified in accordance with the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities Alaska Field Guide for Soil Classification. e Soil samples will be collected from only the upper 5 to 7 inches of material.This is the zone of most active root development and is generally the primary zone of mercury accumulation in forest soils (Godbold,1994).In addition,it is anticipated that soils will be poorly developed below about 6 inches,and are unlikely to have significant organic matter below that depth. e Samples will consist of at least 10 grams of organic matter.Soil samples will be placed in 4 ounce plastic jars. e Any large stones will be separated and discarded. e Inorganic soils will be noted,but not sampled. e Each sample will be handled using latex or vinyl disposable gloves. e The field equipment will be cleaned with a mild soap solution and water between samples to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 20 of 36 avoid cross-contamination. Samples will be frozen until delivery to the analytical laboratory under standard COC procedures. The samples will be analyzed for total mercury using EPA Method 1631E.It is unnecessary to analyze these samples for methylmercury,given that these materials are considered as a source for methylmercury generation,total mercy analyses includes both methylated and inorganic forms of mercury. Water The purpose of the water sampling is to collect baseline water quality information to support an assessment of the effects of the proposed Project operations on water quality in the Susitna River basin. Mercury in water will be tested monthly during the summer because it has been shown to vary in concentrations throughout the year (Frenzel 2000).Two sampling events will also be performed during the winter. Water samples will be collected at the locations listed in Table B1-2.The proposed spacing of the sample locations follows accepted practice when segmenting large river systems for development of Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)water quality models.Water sampling during winter months will be focused on locations where flow data are currently collected,or were historically collected by USGS. Water samples will be analyzed for the parameters reported in Table B1-1. Grab samples will be collected along a transect of the stream channel/water body,using methods consistent with Alaska and EPA protocols for sampling ambient water and trace metal water quality criteria.Mainstem areas of the river not immediately influenced by a tributary will be characterized with a single transect.Areas of the mainstem with an upstream tributary that may influence the nearshore zone or that are well-mixed with the mainstem will be characterized by collecting samples at two transect locations:in the tributary and in the mainstem upstream of the tributary confluence.Samples will be collected at 3 equi-distant locations along each transect (i.e.25%from left bank,50%from left bank,and 75%from left bank).Samples will be collected from a depth of 0.5 meters below the surface as well as 0.5 meters above the bottom.This will ensure that variations in concentrations,especially metals,are captured and adequately characterized throughout the study area. These samples will be collected on approximately a monthly basis (four samples from June to September).The period for collecting surface water samples will begin at ice break-up and extend to beginning of ice formation on the river.Limited winter sampling (once in December,and again in March) will be conducted where existing or historic USGS sites are located. Review of existing data (URS 2011)indicates that few exceedances occur with metals concentrations during the winter months.If the 2013 data sets suggest that mercury concentrations exceed criteria or thresholds,then an expanded 2014 water quality monitoring program will be conducted to characterize conditions on a monthly basis throughout the winter months. Variation of water quality in a river cross-section is often significant and is most likely to occur because of incomplete mixing of upstream tributary inflows,point-source discharges,or variations in velocity and channel geometry.Water quality profiles at each location on each transect will be conducted for field water quality parameters (e.g.,temperature,pH,dissolved oxygen,and conductivity)to determine the extent of vertical and lateral mixing. Water quality samples will be collected using a davit/cable/winch system.A 50lb+weight will be attached to the end of the cable to ensure that both the cable and sampling equipment remain vertical throughout the water column.Water quality grab samples are anticipated to be collected via a Kemmerer Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 21 of 36 Sampler,made out of Teflon for low level metals analysis,which will be attached to the davit cable.The sampler will be lowered into the water column via the winch until the desired sampling depth is reached. At that point the rope/cable attached to the sampler will be pulled tight and messenger sent down to close the sampler.Water from the sampler will be then be poured into the appropriate sample containers.If troubles are encountered while using the Kemmerer sampler due to high velocities in the Susitna River,a second sample collection method could be utilized where Tygon tubing is attached to the davit cable and water is pulled from the desired depth via a peristaltic pump.It is unknown at this time which sampling technique is better suited for conditions on the Susitna River and tributaries. Sediment and Sediment Pore Water In general,all sediment samples will be taken from sheltered backwater areas,downstream of islands,and in similar riverine locations in which water currents are slowed,favoring accumulation of finer sediment along the channel bottom.Samples will be analyzed for mercury (Table B1-1).In addition,sediment size and total organic carbon (TOC)will be included to evaluate whether these parameters are predictors for elevated mercury concentrations.Samples will be collected just below and above the proposed dam site. Additional samples will be collected near the mouth of tributaries near the proposed dam site,including Fog,Deadman,Watana,Tsusena,Kosina,Jay,and Goose creeks,and the Oshetna River.The purpose of this sampling will be to determine where metals,if found in the water or sediment,originate in the drainage. Mercury occurrence is typically associated with fine sediments,rather than with coarse-grained sandy sediment or rocky substrates.Therefore,the goal of the sampling will be to obtain sediments with at least 5 percent fines (i.e.,particle size <63 um,or passing through a #230 sieve). Surficial sediment sampling will be conducted with a Van Veen sampler lowered from a boat by a power winch.This sampling device collects high-quality sediment samples from the top four to six inches of sediment.Three sediment samples will be collected at each of the sites sampled.These three samples will be collected and analyzed separately to characterize the presence of mercury and generate statistical summaries for site characterization.A photographic record of each sediment sample will be assembled from images of newly collected material. Care will be taken to ensure the following: The sampler will not be overfilled with sediment. The overlying water is present when the sampler is retrieved. At least two inches of sediment depth is collected. There is no evidence of incomplete closure of the sampling device. If a sediment sample does not meet all of the criteria listed above,it will be discarded and another sample will be collected. Sediment interstitial water,or pore water,is defined as the water occupying the space between sediment particles.Interstitial waters will be collected from sites listed above and separated from sediments in the field house laboratory using a pump apparatus to draw pore water from each of the replicate samples. Filtering of samples will utilize a 0.45-pm pore size filter in both the lab apparatus and field apparatus.In some cases,pore water may be drawn from sediment samples in the field by using 100-milliliter (mL) syringes immersed in the dredge sample once a sediment sample is collected in a sample jar.These would be cases where sediment samples have slightly coarser particle sizes and pore water extraction in the field is possible.In other instances,where sediment samples have finer particle sizes requiring more time to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential!for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 22 of 36 draw samples for laboratory analysis,these samples will be transferred to the field laboratory for pore water extraction. Birds and Aquatic Furbearers The potential impacts of methylmercury on upper trophic level species can be influenced by a variety of factors including animal behavior and physiology (e.g.,foraging behavior,diet composition)and physical/chemical properties of the receiving environment (e.g.,organic carbon content,anaerobic conditions,sulfides,etc.).Fish,in particular,absorb methylmercury efficiently from dietary sources and store this material in organs and tissues (U.S.EPA,1997).Because fish are the primary source of methylmercury migration into the terrestrial ecosystem,this evaluation focuses on the impact of methylmercury generated in the proposed reservoir on fish-eating (piscivorous)upper trophic species. There are two significant challenges to the proposed sampling program.The first is that the populations of most piscivorous birds and aquatic furbearers are relatively small in the proposed study area.For that reason,sampling efforts are likely to collect few samples,or may be entirely unsuccessful for some species.Froma statistical standpoint,low sample returns (<5 samples),coupled with high variability in methylmercury concentrations,can result in inaccurate results and conclusions for this study.In addition, damaging relatively small populations of these species as part of this study is undesirable,and therefore non-destructive sampling methods are preferred. The second challenge is that some species may be feeding in areas outside the area of project effects. Previous studies (Frenzel 2000,ADEC 2012)have shown that methylmercury concentrations may vary greatly between water bodies.Species that feed in more than one area may therefore be exposed to widely varying methylmercury dietary loads that are not specific to the inundation zone. To compensate for these problems,the proposed study will: 1.Utilize data obtained in other studies on background concentrations of methylmercury in natural northern environments. 2.While methylmercury concentrates in the muscle and liver of various species,studies have found that it is also found in the feathers and the fur,where it does not degrade quickly (Thompson, 1996;Strom 2008).These types of samples can be collected without harvesting or even harassing the species being sampled. For this study feathers will be collected from nests of raptors (principally bald eagles,given that ospreys are rare in the study area),loons,grebes,arctic terns,and kingfishers found during the wildlife surveys planned for 2013 and 2014.Feathers from raptors and water birds will only be collected after the nests have been vacated for the season,which typically occur in August.Kingfisher feathers will be collected from borrows during the planned survey of colonially nesting swallows.The feathers will be characterized by type,and species of bird sampled.To the extent possible the feathers will be segregated to those that came from adults or juveniles.It should be noted that samples may contain feathers from more than one individual.Samples will be placed in sealed plastic bags and labeled with the date,time, location,species sampled,and type of feather collected. Nearly 100%of the mercury in feathers is in the form of methylmercury (Thompson and Furness,1989) and represent body burdens at the time of feather growth (Scheuhammer,1987).For this reason,the feathers collected will only be analyzed for total mercury.Feather mercury concentrations are also positively correlated with mercury concentrations in other tissues (Ohlendorf and Harrison,1986, Spalding et al.,2000,Ackerman et al.,2007,Tsao et al.,2009). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 23 of 36 Fur samples from river otters and mink will be sought from animals harvested by trappers in the study area;river otter furs must be presented to ADF&G for sealing,at which time fur samples can be obtained from animals known to have been harvested in or near the study area.In view of the low level of trapping expected to occur in the area,however,it is possible that this approach will yield few samples.If this approach does not yield fur samples in 2013,fur will be collected by placing hair-snag "traps”at or near the mouths of tributaries near the proposed dam site,including Fog,Deadman,Watana,Tsusena,Kosina, Jay,and Goose creeks,and the Oshetna River.It is possible that fur collected from snags may represent a mix of individuals or a particular species.The fur will be characterized by species.To the extent possible the fur will be segregated to those that came from adults or juveniles. Samples will be placed in sealed plastic bags and labeled with the date,time,location,species sampled, and type of fur collected.Nearly 100%of the mercury in fur is in the form of methylmercury.For this reason,the fur collected will only be analyzed for total mercury. Feather and fur samples will be kept cold until shipment to the analytical lab.In the laboratory all fur samples will be weighed and cut into small pieces and homogenized.The samples will be analyzed using EPA Method 1631 (US EPA,2001). There is no minimum size for the feather or fur samples,but smaller size samples will result in higher detection limits.For 500 mg of mass,the MDL is 0.03 mg/kg (wet-weight).This will be the goal for all samples. Fish Tissue Methylmercury is ubiquitous in the environment,and can be found in fish throughout Alaska.The primary concern of this study is not to catalogue this source of mercury in the environment;rather,it is to evaluate the potential for increasing mercury concentrations above background due to filling of the reservoir. Methylmercury bioaccumulates,and the highest concentrations are typically in the muscle tissue of adult predatory fish.Targeting adult fish is a good way of monitoring methylmercury migration to the larger environment.While it may be possible for methylmercury generated by the reservoir to affect other species,there does not appear to be any pathway by which this could happen without also affecting fish. Target fish species in the vicinity of the Susitna-Watana Reservoir will be Dolly Varden,arctic grayling, stickleback,long nose sucker,lake trout,whitefish species,burbot,and resident rainbow trout.If possible, filets will be sampled from seven adult individuals from each species.The larger number of samples from existing fish species will allow for some statistical control over the results. Salmon will not be sampled.Preliminary data suggests that approximately 30 Chinook (king)salmon spawn in the Watana area.Collecting a sufficient number of samples from this resource would seriously deplete it.Instead,sampling data from ADEC will be used to evaluate mercury concentrations in this resource (ADEC 2012).It should be noted that most of the mercury in salmon is oceanic in origin. There is a well-known positive correlation between fish size (length and weight)and mercury concentration in muscle tissue (Bodaly et al.1984;Somers and Jackson 1993).Larger,older fish tend to have higher mercury concentrations.These fish will be the targets for sampling. Body size targeted for collection will represent the non-anadromous phase of each species life cycle.For stickleback,whole fish samples will need to be used.Collection times for fish samples will occur in late Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 24 of 36 August and early September.Samples will be analyzed for methyl and total mercury (Tables B1-1).As previously stated,the study is prejudiced toward finding fish with the highest mercury concentrations that are drainage-specific. Liver samples will also be collected from burbot and analyzed for mercury and methylmercury. Field procedures will be consistent with those outlined in applicable Alaska State and/or EPA sampling protocols (USEPA 2000).Clean nylon nets and polyethylene gloves will be used during fish tissue collection.Species identification,measurement of total length (mm),and weight (g)will be recorded, along with sex and sexual.If possible,efforts will be made to determine the age of the fish,including an examination of otoliths and scales. It is possible that adult fish of all species may not be present or available in the drainage.In this case, younger fish may be sampled.To eliminate the bias associated with differences in fish size,appropriate statistical procedures will be used to determine the mean mercury concentration for a specific fish size (Hydro Quebec 2003). Water Sample Processing Field equipment used for collection,measurement,and testing will be subject to a strict program of control,calibration,adjustment and maintenance.The Kemmerer sampler or tygon tubing/pump used to collect surface water samples will be routinely inspected to verify that it is working properly.The Van Veen grab sampler used to collected sediment sample will also be routinely inspected.Routine maintenance of all sample equipment will be conducted prior to each sampling event.Maintenance will include a visual inspection that all parts are present,attached correctly and devoid of any obvious contamination.The project manager will coordinate ordering replacement parts and repairing samplers. Spare sampling equipment will be available on-site in case of primary equipment failure. QA/QC and Blank Samples and Frequency Quality control activities in the field will consist of the following items: e Adherence to documented procedures in this SAP and the companion QAPP; e Cross-checking of field measurements and recording to ensure consistency and accuracy;and e Comprehensive documentation of field observations,sample collection and sample identification information. Multiple field quality control samples will be collected:one blind field duplicate sample will be collected for every ten sites sampled and sent to the laboratory to test for precision (e.g.,repeatability)of analytical procedures.A trip blank will be submitted to the lab to ensure that equipment handling and transport procedures do not introduce contamination to transported project samples.Rinsate blanks will be collected at different periods throughout the program to assure that cross-contamination between samples does not occur. B 3.0 SAMPLE DOCUMENTATION AND SHIPPING Field Logbook and Field Log Forms Thorough documentation of all field sample collection is necessary for proper processing of data and, ultimately,for interpreting study results.Field sample collection will be documented in writing,on forms, as well as on the following forms and labels: e A field log notebook for general observations and notes Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 25 of 36 e A Field Data Record Form that contains information about observations and measurements made and samples collected at the site e Checklists for each sampling event,sampling point,and sampling time. Copies of the field log books and physical characterization/water quality/sediment data sheets and sampling checklists will be supplied to the Field Project Managers at the close of each sampling event. These data will be used in conjunction with inspection checklists to compile the sampling event reports. Formal reports that are generated from the data will be subject to technical and editorial review before submission to AEA,and will be maintained at Tt's Seattle,WA,office in the central file (disk and hard copy).The data reports will include a summary of the types of data collected,sampling dates,and any problems or anomalies observed during sample collection. Samples will be documented and tracked on Field Data Record forms,Sample Identification labels,and Chain of Custody records.The Field Task Leaders (one for each team)will be responsible for ensuring that these forms are completed and reviewed for correctness and completeness by the designated field QC Officer.Tt will maintain copies of these forms in the project files.A sampling report will be prepared following each sampling event.Another person will manually check data entered into any spreadsheet or other format against the original source to ensure accurate data entry.If there is any indication that requirements for sample integrity or data quality have not been met (for samples or measurements collected by Tt),the Tt QAO will be notified immediately (with an accompanying explanation of the problems encountered). Photographic Records Recording of sampling locations will be documented with photographs using a conventional photo-point procedure.Photographs will be taken at each sampling location and the photograph number and the associated date,description of the photograph,site identification number and GPS coordinates will be recorded in the photographic log.The photos will be stored as digital images and maintained as files,as appropriate,in repositories for information and data used in preparing any reports and documents during the project.Digital photos will be submitted with an index for each set of photographs,identifying the project,site identification number and a description of the photograph. B4.0 SAMPLE HANDLING AND CUSTODY Field Data Recording In-situ field data measurements will be recorded immediately following collection,both,electronically (stored within Hydrolab Surveyor)and on a field data sheet for each station.Field data sheets will be printed on Rite in the Rain paper.Promptly following each sample event,scanned copies of field data sheets will be made and stored electronically. Each sample bottle will have a waterproof sample identification label,tag,or permanent marker identification.All sample bottles will be labeled with an indelible marker before the time of collection. Sample labels will include station designation,date,time,collector's initials,and sample/analysis type. Special analyses to be performed and any pertinent remarks will also be recorded on the label. Sample Packaging and Shipping Requirements Samples for laboratory analysis will be collected in containers appropriate for the analytes of interest, filtered if necessary and will be properly preserved until delivery to the analytical laboratory.All samples will be immediately placed in coolers and packed with gel ice after sampling and will remain chilled to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 26 of 36 4°C (42°C)during transportation to the contract laboratory.All samples will be accompanied with completed chain-of-custody forms when shipped,and coolers will be sealed with signed and dated fiber tape for shipment.Tetra Tech maintains specific SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures)for sample chain of custody,sample shipping,and supporting sample documentation. Chain of Custody Chain of custody (COC)can be defined as a systematic procedure for tracking a sample or datum from its origin to its final use.Chain of custody procedures is necessary to ensure thorough documentation of handling for each sample,from field collection to data analysis.The purpose of this procedure is to minimize errors,maintain sample integrity,and protect the quality of data collected. A data sample is considered to be under a person's custody if it is: In the individual's physical possession In the individual's sight Secured in a tamper-proof way by that person,or Secured by the person in an area that is restricted to authorized personnel. Elements of chain-of-custody include: Sample identification Security seals and locks Security procedures Chain-of-custody record The analytical laboratory will provide blank COCs with each bottle order and provide scanned copies of finished COCs with sample results. B5.0 ANALYTICAL METHODS This study will employ both field measurements and collection of samples to be analyzed in the laboratory.Field and laboratory analytical procedures will follow U.S.EPA (1983,1991)or APHA et al. (1998)methods.The expected detection or reporting limits for field parameters and laboratory analyses are listed in Table A4-1 along with the anticipated analytical method. Field Sampling Decisions Damage to equipment from wildlife,physical forces of the river,or equipment failure will be addressed using the following protocol.Field sampling decisions to deviate or modify field sampling locations or methods will only be made with the approval of the field crew chief.The field crew chief will document the decision on the field note sheets,and email a copy of the sheet or telephone the information to the study manager.If the field decision is large enough in scale to significantly affect the study's data,scope, schedule or budget,the field crew chief is authorized to stop work until further contact and coordination with the study manager can be performed. Laboratory Operations Documentation Laboratory data results will be recorded on laboratory data sheets,bench sheets and/or in laboratory logbooks for each sampling event.These records as well as control charts,logbook records of equipment maintenance records,calibration and quality control checks,such as preparation and use of standard Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 27 of 36 solutions,inventory of supplies and consumables,check-in of equipment,equipment parts and chemicals will be kept on file at the laboratory. Any procedural or equipment problems will be recorded in the field notebooks.Any deviation from this Sampling and Analysis Plan will also be noted in the field notebooks.Data results will include information on field and/or laboratory QA/QC problems and corrective actions. Standard turnaround time for the analytical samples taken to the contract laboratory will be seven to ten working days and will not exceed twenty-two working days for reporting of data. Chain-of-custody forms will be kept with the sample during transport and will accompany data results back to Tt and AEA.Training records and data review records will be kept on file at Tt and the contract laboratory and will be available on request.All sample analysis records and documents are kept at the contract laboratory and will be available to AEA for inspection at any time.In addition to any written report,data collected for the project will be provided electronically via a CD-ROM or e-mail ZIP file format. All records will be retained by the contract laboratory for five years.All project records at Tt are retained permanently. B6.0 QUALITY CONTROL Data quality is addressed,in part,by consistent performance of valid procedures in this SAP/QAPP.It is enhanced by the training and experience of project staff and documentation of project activities .This QAPP including its appendices will be distributed to all sampling personnel.A QC Officer (or equivalent) will ensure that samples are taken according to the established protocols and that all forms,checklists,and measurements are recorded and completed correctly during the sampling event. Measurement performance criteria for data to be collected during this project are discussed in the following sections. Precision Precision is a measure of internal method consistency.It is demonstrated by the degree of mutual agreement between individual measurements or enumerated values of the same property of a sample, usually under demonstrated similar conditions.The usability assessment will include consideration of this condition in evaluating field measures from the entire measurement system.Although precision evaluation within 20 percent relative percent difference (RPD)are generally considered acceptable for water quality studies and analyses,no data validation or usability action will be taken for results in excess of the 20 percent limit (unless RPD is specified as acceptable when >20%).Instead,the results will be noted and compared with the balance of the parameters analyzed for a more comprehensive assessment before any negative assessment,disqualification,or exclusion of data. This QC calculation also addresses uncertainty due to natural variation and sampling error.Precision is calculated from two duplicate samples by RPD as follows: p=!=O,199%pC, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 28 of 36 where C;=the first of the two values and C,=the second of the two if precision is to be calculated from three or more replicate samples (as is often the case in laboratory analytical work),the relative standard deviation (RSD)will be used and is calculated as RSD == x where ¥is the measured value of the replicate sample ands is the standard deviation and is determined by the following equation: where y,is the measured value of the replicate,Xv is the mean of the measured values,and n is the number of replicates. Accuracy Accuracy is defined as the degree of agreement between an observed value and an accepted reference or true value.Accuracy is determined by using a combination of random error (precision)and systematic error (bias)due to sampling and analytical operations.Bias is the systematic distortion of a measurement process that causes errors in one direction so that the expected sample measurement is always greater or lesser to the same degree than the sample's true value.EPA now recommends that the term accuracy not be used and that precision and bias be used instead. Because accuracy is the measurement of a parameter and comparison to a truth,and the true values of environmental physicochemical characteristics cannot be known,use of a surrogate is required.Accuracy of field measurements will be assumed to be determined through use of precision. Accuracy of data entry into the project database will be controlled by double-checking all manual data entries. Representativeness Data representativeness is defined as the degree to which data accurately and precisely represents a characteristic of a population,parameter,and variations at a sampling point,a process condition,or an environmental condition.It therefore addresses the natural variability or the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of a population.The number of sampling points and their location within the study area were selected from a random draw to ensure that representative sample collection of each area of the watershed and each assessment characteristic occurs. Completeness Completeness is defined as the percentage of measurements made that are judged to be valid according to specific criteria and entered into the data management system.To achieve this objective,every effort is made to avoid accidental or inadvertent sample or data loss.Accidents during sample transport or lab activities that cause the loss of the original samples will result in irreparable loss of data.Lack of data Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 29 of 36 entry into the database will reduce the ability to perform analyses,integrate results,and prepare reports. Samples will be stored and transported in unbreakable (plastic)containers wherever possible.All sample processing (subsampling,sorting,identification,and enumeration)will occur in a controlled environment within the laboratory.Field personnel will assign a set of continuous identifiers to a batch of samples. Percent completeness (%C)for measurement parameters can be defined as follows: %C =x 100% T where V =the number of measurements judged valid and 7 =the total number of measurements planned. For this project,sampling will be considered complete when no less than 90 percent of the samples collected during a particular sampling event are judged valid. Comparability Two data sets are considered to be comparable when there is confidence that the two sets can be considered equivalent with respect to the measurement of a specific variable or group of variables. Comparability is dependent on the proper design of the sampling program and on adherence to accepted sampling techniques,and QA guidelines. B7.0 INSTRUMENT/EQUIPMENT TESTING,INSPECTION,AND MAINTENANCE Periodic regular inspection of equipment and instruments is needed to ensure the satisfactory performance of the systems.Equipment to be used during the sampling event is listed in the appropriate SOPs.Before any piece of sampling or measurement equipment is taken into the field,it will be inspected to ensure that the equipment is appropriate for the task to be performed,all necessary parts of the equipment are intact, and the equipment is in working order.In addition,the equipment will be visually inspected before its use.Broken equipment will be labeled "DO NOT USE”and returned to the Tt office to receive necessary repairs,or it will be disposed of.Backup field equipment will be available during all field activities in the event of equipment failure. The objective of preventive maintenance is to ensure the availability and satisfactory performance of the measurement systems.All field measurement instruments will receive preventive maintenance in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. B8.0 INSTRUMENT CALIBRATION AND FREQUENCY Calibrated field instruments will be used for in-field,instantaneous measurement of temperature,DO, conductivity,salinity,pH,and redox potential.Instruments will be calibrated in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and as described in the measurement SOPs.The SOPs include pre-and post-calibration verification on each sampling date.Verification of pH measurement accuracy will be checked against standard solutions in the field and adjustments made to the meter prior to the next measurement,if necessary. The calibration of temperature,DO,conductivity/salinity,and pH probes will be checked before and after each sampling event,or as deemed necessary by the multiprobe's manufacturer,using certified standard solutions.Field calibrations will be recorded in the field sampling log book.Individual sensors will be considered to be operating correctly if the instrument reading is within 15 percent of the calibration standard value.If the two values are not within 15 percent of each other,the probe will be cleaned and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 30 of 36 recalibrated.If these two values are still not within 15 percent of each other following cleaning and recalibration,the probe itself will be replaced. B9.0 INSPECTION/ACCEPTANCE OF SUPPLIES AND CONSUMABLES Supplies and consumables are those items necessary to support the sampling and analysis operation.They include bottleware,calibration solutions,hoses,decontamination supplies,preservatives,and various types of water (e.g.,potable,deionized,organic-free).Upon delivery of supplies,field crews will ensure that types and quantities of supplies received are consistent with what was ordered,and with what is indicated on the packing list and invoice for the material.If any discrepancies are found,the supplier will be contacted immediately. While preparing for specific sampling events,the field sampling Task Leaders will be responsible for acquiring and inspecting materials and solutions that will be used for obtaining the samples for field measurements.Other materials must also meet specific requirements as indicated by the appropriate manufacturer;for example,only certified standard solutions will be used for the multiprobe calibration. Buffers and standards will be checked for expiration dates and appearance (correct color). B 10.0 NONDIRECT MEASUREMENTS Comparison of data collected during this field effort to historical data will be used for qualitative assessment only.Assessment of applicability for historical data is outside the scope of this document and is not addressed further in this data collection QAPP. B 11.0 DATA MANAGEMENT Samples will be documented and tracked on Field Data Record forms,Sample Identification labels,and Chain of Custody records.The Field Task Leaders (one for each team)will be responsible for ensuring that these forms are completed and reviewed for correctness and completeness by the designated field QC Officer.Tt will maintain copies of these forms in the project files.A sampling report will be prepared following each sampling event.Another person will manually check data entered into any spreadsheet or other format against the original source to ensure accurate data entry.If there is any indication that requirements for sample integrity or data quality have not been met (for samples or measurements collected by Tt),the Tt QAO will be notified immediately (with an accompanying explanation of the problems encountered). Hard copy data packages will be paginated,fully validated raw data packages that include an analytical narrative with a signed certification of compliance with this QAPP and all method requirements;copies of Chain of Custody forms;sample inspection records;laboratory sample and QC results;calibration summaries;example calculations by parameter;and copies of all sample preparation,analysis,and standards logs adequate to reconstruct the entire analysis.The CD-ROM data will include a full copy of the paginated report scanned and stored in portable document format (PDF)for potential future submission to the client,if requested,and for long-term storage in the project files.Initially,the full raw data package will be submitted to the Tt QAO for assessment of compliance with the program goals and guidance. All computer files associated with the project will be stored in a project subdirectory by Tt (subject to regular system backups)and will be copied to disk for archive for the 5 years subsequent to project completion.The data may eventually be stored using a State data management system specified Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 31 of 36 C.ASSESSMENTS AND OVERSIGHT C 1.0 ASSESSMENT AND RESPONSE ACTIONS The QA program under which this task order will operate includes technical system audits,with independent checks of the data obtained from sampling,analysis,and data-gathering activities.Tt will review the QA programs that subcontractors follow to ensure similar levels of QA and QC are attained. The essential steps in the QA program are as follows: Identify and define the problem Assign responsibility for investigating the problem Investigate and determine the cause of the problem Assign and accept responsibility for implementing appropriate corrective action Establish the effectiveness of and implement the corrective action e Verify that the corrective action has eliminated the problem Many of the technical problems that might occur can be solved on the spot by the staff members involved; for example,by modifying the technical approach,repairing instrumentation that is not working properly, or correcting errors or deficiencies in documentation.Immediate corrective actions form part of normal operating procedures and are noted in records for the project.Problems not solved this way require more formalized,long-term corrective action.If quality problems that require attention are identified,Tt or the subcontractor will determine whether attaining acceptable quality requires short-or long-term actions.Ifa failure in an analytical system occurs (e.g.,performance requirements are not met),the appropriate QC Officer or subcontractor QA Manager will be responsible for corrective action and will immediately inform the Tt PM or QAO,as appropriate.Subsequent steps taken will depend on the nature and significance of the problem. The Tt Technical Lead has primary responsibility for monitoring the activities of this project and identifying or confirming any quality problems.These problems will also be brought to the attention of the Tt QAO,who will initiate the corrective action system described above,document the nature of the problem,and ensure that the recommended corrective action is carried out.The Tt QAO has the authority to stop work on the project if problems affecting data quality require extensive effort to resolve and are identified. The AEA PM and Tt Technical Lead will be notified of major corrective actions and stop work orders. Corrective actions might include the following: e Re-emphasizing to staff the project objectives,the limitations in scope,the need to adhere to the agreed-upon schedule and procedures,and the need to document QC and QA activities Securing additional commitment of staff time to devote to the project Retaining outside consultants to review problems in specialized technical areas Changing procedures The Tt Technical Lead may replace a staff member or subcontractor,as appropriate,if it is in the best interest of the project to do so. e The Tt QC Officers are responsible for overseeing work as it is performed and periodically conducting checks during the data entry and analysis phases of the project.As data entries, calculations,or other activities are checked,the person performing the check will sign and date a hard copy of the material or complete a review form,as appropriate,and provide this documentation to the Tt Technical Lead for inclusion in the project files.Field audits and technical system audits will not be conducted under this task order. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 32 of 36 C2.0 QA REPORTS TO MANAGEMENT A draft data report will be prepared and forwarded to the AEA for data analysis completed during winter 2013. The report will include the following: Description of the project purpose,goals,and objectives. Map(s)of the study area and sampling sites. Descriptions of field methods. Discussion of data quality and the significance of any problems encountered in the analyses. Summary tables of field data. Observations regarding significant or potentially significant findings. Recommendations based on project goals. D.DATA VALIDATION AND USABILITY D1.0 DATA REVIEW,VERIFICATION,AND VALIDATION Data validation and review services provide a method for determining the usability and limitations of data and provide a standardized data quality assessment.All Field Data forms will be reviewed by the Tt Technical Lead and Field Task Manager (assisted by the QAO,as needed)for completeness and correctness.Tt will be responsible for reviewing data entries and transmissions for completeness and adherence to QA requirements.Data quality will be assessed by comparing entered data to original data or by comparing results to the measurement performance criteria summarized in Section 4.0 to determine whether to accept,reject,or qualify the data.Results of the review and validation processes will be reported to the Technical Leads. D2.0 VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION METHODS The Tt Technical Leads or designee will review all Field Data Record forms.The Tt QAO will review a minimum of 5 percent of the Field Data Record forms and other records.Any discrepancies in the records will be reconciled with the appropriate associated field personnel and will be reported to the Tt Technical Leads.The AEA PM will be consulted with deficiencies,observations,and findings,as well as with corrective action and technical directive recommendations for consideration and approval. Data verification requires confirmation by examination or provision of objective evidence that the requirements of these specified QC acceptance criteria are met.Each step of the data collection and analysis process must be evaluated and its conformance to the protocols established in this QAPP verified,including: Sampling design Sample collection procedures Data analysis procedures Quality control Data format reduction and processing data Validation involves detailed examination of the complete data package using professional judgment to determine whether the established procedures were followed.Validation will be done by the Study Lead. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 33 of 36 Tetra Tech and URS managers for the project will review all results to verify that methods and protocols specified in this QAPP were followed;that all instrument calibrations,quality control checks,and intermediate calculations were performed appropriately;and that the final reported data are consistent, correct,and complete,with no omissions or errors. Evaluation criteria will include the acceptability of instrument calibrations and precision data and the appropriateness of assigned data qualifiers,if any. The study lead will review the data packages and companion field notations to determine if the results met the MQOs for bias,precision,and accuracy for that sampling interval (monthly)and to ensure that all analyses specified on the "Chain of Custody"form were performed.Based on these assessments,the data will either be accepted,accepted with appropriate qualifications,or rejected. After the field data have been reviewed and verified by the project manager,they will be independently reviewed by QA officer for errors before closing out the study.The initial data review will consist of a 10 percent random sampling of the project data.If any errors are discovered during the initial data review,a full independent review will be undertaken QA officer. D3.0 RECONCILIATION WITH USER REQUIREMENTS As soon as possible following completion of the sample collection and analyses,Tt will assess the precision,accuracy,and completeness measures and compare them with the criteria discussed in Section A 4.0.This will be the final determination of whether the data collected are of the correct type,quantity, and quality to support their intended use for this project.Any problems encountered in meeting the performance criteria (or uncertainties and limitations in the use of the data)will be discussed with the project QA personnel and the AEA PM,and will be reconciled if possible. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 34 of 36 REFERENCES Ackerman J.T.,Eagles-Smith C.A.,Takekawa J.Y.,Demers S.A.,Adelsbach T.L.,Bluso J.D.,et al., 2007.Mercury concentrations and space use of pre-breeding American avocets and black-necked stilts in San Francisco Bay.Sci Total Environ 2007;384:452-66. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC),2005.Water Quality Assessment and Monitoring Program.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation:Division of Water.Juneau, Alaska.58p. ADEC,2012.Mercury concentration in fresh water fish Southcentral Susitna Watershed.Personal communication with Bob Gerlach,VMD,State Veterinarian.June 2012. American Public Health Association,American Water Works Association,and Water Pollution Federation (APHA,AWWA,WEF),1996.Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.Washington,D.C.:APHA. Bailey,E.A.,and Gray,J.E.,1997.Mercury in the terrestrial environment,Kuskokwim Mountains region, southwestern Alaska,in Dumoulin,J.A.and Gray J.E.,ed.,Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey,1995:U.S.Geological Survey,Professional Paper 1574,p.41-56. Bodaly R.A.,Hecky R.E.,Fudge R.J.P.,1984.Increases in fish mercury levels in lakes flooded by the Churchill River Diversion,Northern Manitoba.Can.J.Fish,Aquat.Sci.41:682-691. Frenzel,S.A.,2000.Selected Organic Compounds and Trace Elements in Streambed Sediments and Fish Tissues,Cook Inlet Basin,Alaska.USGS Water-Resources Investigations Report 00-4004.Prepared as part of the National Water-Quality Assessment Program. Hydro-Quebec,2003.Environmental Monitoring at the La Grande Complex Summary Report 1978- 2000:Evolution of Fish Mercury Levels.Joint Report:Direction Barrages et Environment Hydro-Quebec Production and Groupe Conseil,Genivar Inc.December 2003. Meister,J.F.,DiNunzio J.,Cox J.A.,1979.Source and level of mercury in a new impoundment.Journal of the American Water Works Association 71:574-576. Morrison,K.and Thérien,N.,1991.Influence of Environmental Factors on Mercury Release in Hydroelectric Reservoirs,Montréal,Quebec,Canadian Electrical Association,122 p. Ohlendorf,H.M.,Harrison,C.S.,1986.Mercury,selenium,cadmium,and organochlorines in eggs of three Hawaiian seabird species.Environ Pollut 46:263-95. Scheuhammer,A.M.,1987.The chronic toxicity of aluminum,cadmium,mercury,and lead in birds:a review.Environ Pollut 46:263-95. Siegal,S.M.,Siegal,B.Z.,Lipp,C.,Kruckeberg,A.,Towers,G.H.N.,and Warren,H.1985,Indicator plant-soil mercury patterns in a mercury-rich mining area of British Columbia:Water,Air,and Soil Pollution,v.25,p.73-85. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 35 of 36 Siegal,S.M.,Siegal,B.Z.,Barghigiani,C.,Aratani,K..Penny,P.,and Penny,D.,1987.A contribution to the environmental biology of mercury accumulation in plants:Water,Air,and Soil Pollution,v.33,p.65- 72. Somers,K.M.and D.A.Jackson,1993.Adjusting mercury concentration for fish-size covariation:a multivariate alternative to bivariate regression.Can.J.Fish.Aquat.Sci.50:2388-2396. Spalding M.G.,Frederick P.C.,McGill H.C.,Bouton S.N.,McDowell L.R.,2000.Mercury accumulation in tissues and its effects on growth and appetite in captive great egrets.J Wildl Dis 2000;36:411-22. Strom S.M.,2008.Total mercury and methylmercury residues in river otters (Lutra canadensis)from Wisconsin.Arch Environ Contam Toxicol.2008 Apr;54(3):546-54.Epub 2007 Oct 10. Thompson,D.R.,Furness R.W.,1989.The chemical form of mercury stored in south Atlantic seabirds. Environ Pollut 1989;60:305--17. Thompson,D.R.1996.Mercury in birds and terrestrial mammals.In Beyer,W.N.,G.H.Heinz,and A.W. Redman-Norwood (eds.).Environmental contaminants in wildlife:interpreting tissue concentrations. Lewis Publ.,Boca Raton,FL.341-356. Tsao D.C.,Miles A.K.,Takekawa J.Y.,Woo I.,2009.Potential effects of mercury on threatened California black rails.Arch Environ Contam.Toxicol.56:292-301. URS,2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report.Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska.62p.t+Appendixes. U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA),1997.Mercury Study Report to Congress Volume I: Executive Summary.December 1997.EPA-452/R-97-003. USEPA,2000.Guidance for Assessing Chemical Contaminant Data for use in Fish Advisories:Volume 1 Fish Sampling and Analysis,3:4 Edition.EPA-823-B-00-007.United States Environmental Protection Agency,Office of Water.Washington,D.C.485p. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 Mercury Assessment and Potential for Bioaccumulation SAP/QAPP QAPP xxx,Revision 0 Date:October 31,2012 Page 36 of 36 This page left intentionally blank Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-3 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 5-4 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS -WATER QUALITY Revised Study Plan Glossary of Terms and Acronyms ADEC: Advection: AEIDC: Anadromous fisheries: Anoxic: APA: Aquatic: AWQS: Benthic: Bioabsorption: Bioavailable: Bioaccumulation: Biomagnification: BW: Channel geometry: Chlorophyll-a: Coefficient: Cohesive sediment: Cross-section: CWA: D: Deciduous: Water Quality Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Advection is a transport mechanism of a substance by a fluid due to the fluid's bulk motion. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. Fish that migrate between the ocean and freshwater. Without oxygen. Alaska Power Authority. Relating to water;living in or near water,or taking place in water. Alaska Water Quality Standards (18 ACC 70.020(b)). Living and feeding in the sediment at the bottom of a water body. Uptake of nutrients or contaminants by organisms. The availability nutrients or contaminants for biological uptake. The accumulation of contaminants in organisms over time. The concentration of contaminants in higher trophic lives of the ecosystem over time. Body weight of an animal. Shape of a river or stream channel. A type of chlorophyll that is most common in photosynthetic organisms such as higher plants,red and green algae. Multiplicative factor in a mathematical equation. Sediment particles composed primarily of clay-sized materials which stick together due to their surface ionic charges.Many pollutants,such as heavy metals,pesticides,and nutrients preferentially adsorb to cohesive sediments.In addition the sediments themselves are sometimes a water quality concern due to turbidity. A section formed by a plane cutting through an object,usually at right angles to an axis. Clean Water Act,the federal law that protects water quality in the United States. Daily intake.This is the amount of a contaminant that an organism is exposed to per day on a body weight basis. Trees or shrubs that lose their leaves seasonally. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority Page 1 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Demethylation Dissolved/particulate Partitioning: Divalent mercury: Doc: Drawdown zone: Conversion of methylmercury to other forms of mercury. Water quality parameters can be associated with solid,inorganic particles or appear as a dissolved form in surface water.This reference is typical for nutrients where parameters like phosphorus are either measured as a dissolved form in water or are part of a larger "clump”of material suspended in the water column. Partitioning is accomplished by filtering (typically 45,pore size) to differentiate dissolved from particulate forms. Hg(I)and Hg(IJ)or Hg2+are mercury compounds commonly found in nature,including mercuric sulphide (HgS),mercuricoxide(HgO)and mercuric chloride (HgCI°).Some mercury salts, such as mercury chloride,form a vapor and can be transported in the air. Dissolved oxygen content. The area of the shoreline periodically submerged and exposed to air during operations of a reservoir. EFDC:Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code.A modeling program for water bodies. EPA:Environmental protection agency. EPC:Exposure point concentration.This is the amount of a contaminant per kilogram in a food source. Eutrophication:The ecosystem response to the addition of artificial or natural substances,such as nitrates and phosphates,to an aquatic system. Evapotranspiration:The sum of evaporation and plant transpiration from the Earth's land surface to atmosphere. EWI:Equal width increment method.A sampling device is lowered and raised at a uniform rate through equally-spaced vertical increments in a river cross-section.It is a flow-integrated sampling technique employed by USGS. Field duplicates:Field duplicates are identical field samples obtained from one location at the same time.They are treated as separate samples throughout the sample handling and analytical processes.These samples are used to assess total error (precision)associated with sample heterogeneity,sample methodology,and analytical procedures.This procedure is useful in determining total (sampling and analytical)error because it evaluates sample collection,sample preparation,and analytical procedures. FLIR:Forward Looking Infra-Red. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Flow mixing: F site? g: Grid spacing: Groundwater upwelling: Heat flux: Heat transport: Herbivores: Hgp: H&np: HSC curves: Humus: HQ: Hydrodynamics: Moving water exhibits different flow patterns (e.g.,isolated roughness,wake interference,and quasi-smooth)and these patterns influence predictability of water quality conditions within a model.This term refers to a rate of mixing that is included among other rates like heat flux and heat transport when calibrating a surface water temperature model. Fraction of the total food ingestion that is ingested from a particular site. Grams. The surface area of the waterbody is partitioned into "grids”and defined as various shapes.The EFDC model (Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code)can auto-generate shapes described as "curvilinear-orthogonol grids”that serve as cells within which a water quality prediction is made.The center of each grid is the point water quality is predicted by the EFDC model. Groundwater driven springs that occur within water bodies.These help to regulate temperature and create thermal refugia for fish. Heat flux or thermal flux is the rate of heat energy transfer through a given surface. Same definition as for "heat flux”. Organisms that eat only plants. Mercury concentration in piscivorous muscle tissue. Mercury concentration in non-piscivorous muscle tissue. Habitat suitability criteria (HSC)curves are a component of instream flow modeling that links to the hydraulic flow model to create a habitat-flow relationship.HSC curves consist of an X-Y graph,with the X axis representing a range of water velocity,water depth,and substrate characteristics,while the Y axis represents the probability of use for a given value.Separate HSC curves are typically developed for each species by life stage and for each parameter;i.e.separate curves are developed for velocity,depth, and substrate. An upper soil horizon rich in organic material. Hazard quotient.This is the ratio of the average anticipated concentration of a contaminant and the known concentration were adverse effects can occur. Turbulence in water accounted for by basic equations in a water quality model that predict motion and movement of dissolved and solid particles in a 3-dimensional matrix. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Ice Dynamics: IF: ILP: Indicator species: Inorganic mercury: Inundation area: Isokinetic: FERC: LAET: LCS0: Macroinvertebrates: Mainstem: Matrix spikes: Matrix spike duplicates: Mercury: MET: Processes involving formation and breakup of ice in riverine and reservoir settings and how these events influence surface water conditions. Intake factor.This is how much of a particular food source is consumed per kilogram of body weight by an organism each day. Integrated licensing process. A species that is particularly susceptible to a _potential contaminants,and is considered as a stand in for the impacts to larger groups of organisms. Metallic mercury and divalent mercury. Area that will be flooded in creating a reservoir. Refers to flow properties of water that moves through a sampling device that maintains consistency between surrounding riverine flow with that moving through the sampling device. Federal energy regulatory commission. Lowest Apparent Effects Threshold.This is the lowest concentration of a compound in that can be tolerated by the majority of benthic organisms. Lethal concentration 50.Also sometimes called the median lethal dose.This is the standard measure of the toxicity of a specific concentration of an element or compound.It will kill half the population of a specific test-animal in a specified period of time. The lower the number,the more toxic the material.LC50 values cannot be directly extrapolated from one species to another. Macroinvertebrates are organisms without backbones,which are visible to the eye without the aid of a microscope.Aquatic macroinvertebrates live in water of lakes,rivers,and streams. Examples of macroinvertebrates include fly larvae,beetles, dragonfly larvae,aquatic worms,snails,leeches etc. The main channel of a large river. Matrix spike are environmental samples that are spiked in the laboratory or in the field with a known concentration of a target analyte to verify percent recoveries.Matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate samples are primarily used to check matrix interferences. They can also be used to monitor laboratory performance. A duplicate of the matrix spike analyzed to check precision of the matrix spike analyses. Mercury (Hg)is an element that occurs naturally in the environment.It exists in several different chemical forms. Meteorological station.Used for recording weather conditions. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Metallic mercury: Methylmercury: NELAP: NMES: Omnivores: Organometals: Otoliths: P;: Peak increase factor: Periphyton: Phosphorus release model: Phosphorus cycle: Photodegradation: Piscivorous: Point/nonpoint sources: Also known as elemental mercury or Hg',it is mercury in its pure, un-combined form.It is a shiny,silver-white metal that is liquid at room temperature.At room temperature metallic mercury slowly evaporates,forming a vapor. Also known as organic mercury,MeHg,or CH3Hg+,it is mercury combined with a methyl group.It is formed when mercury is combined with carbon and other elements by natural anaerobic organisms that live lakes,rivers,wetlands,sediments,soils and the open ocean.Methylmercury is not readily eliminated from organisms,and is biomagnified in aquatic food chains. National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program. National Marine Fisheries Service. Organisms that east both plants and animals. Metals that easily bond with carbon.Common examples include mercury,iron,and copper. An otolith,also called statoconium or otoconium,is a structure in the saccule or utricle of the inner ear,specifically in the vestibular labyrinth of vertebrates.The layers on an otolith can be used to estimate the age of a fish. picograms per liter. Total phosphorous from inflows (mg/yr.). Portion of the food consumed by an animal each day that contains a contaminant of concern. Concentration of total phosphorous in the reservoir at time t. Peak increase factor in fish of methylmercury over background concentrations. Periphyton are algae,cyanobacteria,heterotrophic microbes,and detritus that are attached to submerged surfaces in most aquatic ecosystems.It serves as an important food source for invertebrates and some fish.It can also absorb contaminants;removing them from the water column. Decaying organic material releases phosphorous at a set rate. Movement of phosphorous through the environment. Breakdown of a compound by light,usually sunlight. Fish-eating. Point sources are sources of water or contaminants that originate from a definitive place,for example a stream entering a reservoir. Nonpoint sources are from diffuse sources,for example rainfall or atmospheric deposition of dust. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Pore water: Project: Q: QAPP: Radiant temperature: Regression calculations: Resident fisheries: Reservoir release temp.: Reservoir storage: Rinsate blanks: Riparian: Riverine: RM: RSP: SAP: Simax: Section 401: Sediment: Sediment diagenesis: Sediment transport: Silica cycle: Sloughs: SNTEMP: Water that exists within the spaces of sediment. The Susitna-Watana Dam project. Mean annual flow. Quality assurance project plan. Temperature of an object as measured using infrared radiation. This is just the surface temperature of an object. A statistical method used to predict the behavior of a dependent variable.The result is an equation representing the relation between selected values of one variable (x)and observed values of the other (y).It allows the prediction of the most probable values of x based on the measured values of y. Non migrating fish. Temperature of water released from a reservoir. Amount of water stored in a reservoir. Sample of water used to rinse field equipment to check if equipment was clean prior to sampling. Relating to or living or located on the bank of a natural water body. Located on or inhabiting the banks ofa river. River mile.Distance along the Susitna River,as measured from the mouth. Revised study plan. Sampling and analyses plan. Maximum surface area flooded by a reservoir. Water Quality Certification process under the CWA. Material deposited at the bottom of aquatic systems such as streams,rivers,and lakes. The sum of all the processes that bring about changes (e.g., composition and texture)in sediment.The processes may be physical,chemical,and/or biological in nature. Movement of sediment in a water body. Movement of silica through the environment. A side channel from a river.Commonly formed by migration of a river and its tributaries over time. Modeling program used in the 1980s for the Susitna project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Solar Degree Days: Speciated: SPM: SQuiRT: TDS: Temperature Regime: Thermal refugia: TIR: TMDL: TOC: TRV: TSS: Transect measurements: Trophic level: Turbidity: TWG: Leg/g: pm: USFWS: USGS: The number of degree hours (heating and cooling)with respect to a standard reference temperature and totaled for the period of one day. Determining the chemical form of various metals,for example chromium or mercury. Suspended particulate matter. Screening Quick Reference Tables.These are thresholds developed by NOAA that are used as screening values for evaluation of toxics and potential effect to aquatic life in several media. Total dissolved solids. Spatial and temporal temperature patterns in the aquatic environment.Often used to refer to temperature patterns on a seasonal basis. Water temperatures have critical impacts on fish physiology, distribution,and behavior.At the limits of their thermal tolerance, fish may move to localized patches of colder or warmer water, known as thermal refugia.In Alaska this typically are areas of water bodies that stay relatively warm throughout the winter. Thermal infra-red. Total maximum daily load. Total organic carbon. Toxicity reference value.This is the concentration ofa contaminants where adverse ecological effects occur. Total suspended solids. Measurements across a river,stream or other water body.Usually performed at right angles to flow. Relationship of different organisms in a food chain.For example, bacteria are grazed on by phytoplankton,which in are eaten by macroinvertebrates,which are fed on by fish.Each part of the food chain is considered to be a separate trophic level. The cloudiness or haziness of a fluid caused by individual particles (suspended solids)that are generally invisible to the naked eye. Technical Work Group. Micrograms per gram.Also known as parts per million (ppm). Micrometer. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S.Geological Survey. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority Page 7 December 2012 Revised Study Plan V:Reservoir volume in cubic meters. Vertical stratification:Vertical variations in a water body. Water Quality Kinetics:Transfer of water quality characteristics from one reach to another. Zooplankton:Heterotrophic organisms drifting in bodies of water. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 5-4 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.GEOMORPHOLOGY 6.1.Introduction The overall goal of the geomorphology studies below Watana Dam is to assess the potential effects of the proposed Project on the fluvial geomorphology of the Susitna River,with particular focus on providing information to assist in predicting Project impacts to aquatic and terrestrial habitat.In general,the geomorphology studies will focus on the likely trends and magnitudes of responses of a suite of geomorphic characteristics that make up and control the quantity,quality and distribution of riverine habitat downstream from the proposed dam. Natural river channels tend toward a state of dynamic equilibrium with the upstream water and sediment supply by adjusting their physical characteristics to the imposed conditions (Chorley et al.1984;Lane 1955).These physical characteristics,that include gradient,channel geometry, planform and boundary materials,form the habitat that is used by the aquatic and riparian organisms,and they occur and adjust at a variety of spatial and temporal scales.An understanding of whether and how they will change under Project conditions is critical to understanding potential Project impacts to the habitat.An understanding of the equilibrium status of the existing channel morphology provides a significant part of the basis for determining the distribution and characteristics of the existing habitat,and it also provides the baseline against which potential Project-induced impacts will be compared.A key question that must be answered in this regard is whether changes in morphology will occur in response to the Project that will influence the relative distribution or characteristics of the habitat over the term of the license (Bovee 1982).This key issue prompts four overall questions that must be addressed by the two geomorphology studies: e Is the system currently in a state of dynamic equilibrium? e If the system is not currently in a state of dynamic equilibrium,what is the expected evolution over the term of the license in the absence of the project? e Will and in what ways will the Project alter the equilibrium status of the downstream river (i.e.,what is the expected morphologic evolution over the term of the license under with-Project conditions)? e What will be the expected effect of the Project-induced changes on the quantity, distribution and quality of the habitat? A suite of key indicators have been identified by the instream flow and riparian habitat specialists for assessing potential Project effects.These indicators are part of the Instream Flow Study (IFS)analytical framework (Section 8.5.4.1)developed to identify Project effects on aquatic and riparian resources.The framework is provided in Figure 6.1-1.These indicators in the IFS analytical framework include the following: e Weighted-Useable-Area (WUA)versus flow relationships. e Magnitude and frequency of breaching flows that provide connectivity between the main channels,secondary channels,and side sloughs. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Hydraulic and geomorphic conditions that affect fish passage,particularly into tributaries along the study reach where changes in hydraulic energy in the mainstem associated with the Project could potentially impact the characteristics of tributary mouth bars. e Changes in the magnitude and timing of flows under Project conditions that could affect other yet-to-be identified,ecologically important attributes,as quantified using Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration-(IHA)or Ecosystem Flow Component (EFC)-type analyses. e Characteristics of spawning/incubation areas,particularly as they relate to mobilization and cleaning of fines from the spawning substrate,replenishment of suitably-sized spawning gravels,hydraulic conditions that provide aeration and prevent smothering of the redds due to fine sediment deposition during incubation,and the potential for dewatering due to lower stages during incubation. e Characteristics of winter rearing habitat,including groundwater upwelling that affects water temperature,changes in stage that could affect connectivity with off-channel habitat,and the potential for changes in aggradation/degradation patterns in key habitat areas. e Characteristics of the varial zone,including the frequency and duration of wetting and dewatering,the timing and rate of downramping,and the associated potential for stranding and trapping of fish and benthic macroinvertebrates. Construction and operation of the Project has the potential to alter a suite of geomorphologically significant factors that are directly related to the above habitat indicators,including river flow, sediment gradations,transport and delivery,bank erosion rates,rates of bar,island and floodplain formation and large woody debris (LWD)recruitment and transport in the Susitna River.Changes to these processes may affect channel and floodplain geomorphic units and their interactions and,therefore,aquatic and terrestrial habitat for an as yet undefined distance downstream of the Watana Dam site.Since in-channel and channel-margin habitats are formed and maintained by the interaction of a range of flows with the boundary materials,it is necessary to develop a full understanding of the dynamics of the existing system,including the equilibrium status to provide a supportable basis for predicting Project impacts on channel,island/bar and floodplain morphology and dependent habitats downstream of the Watana Dam.Specific conditions that must be understood include how hydraulic conditions,bed mobility,bank erosion,LWD recruitment and aquatic habitat change over the range of river flows,and the relative stability (i.e,rate of change)of the river with respect to lateral erosion, ageradation/degradation,and island and bar formation in the identified geomorphic reaches over recent decades.Operation of the reservoir also has the potential to change the morphology and dynamics of streams and hillsides around the reservoir,as deltas form at the stream/reservoir interface,and the sides of the reservoir are exposed to erosion and beach formation.An understanding of existing (i.e.,baseline)geomorphic conditions is needed for predicting the likely extent and nature of potential changes to river,hillside,and delta morphology that would occur due to Project operations. The geomorphology effort consists of two studies.The Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)will investigate historical and current geomorphology and geomorphic/geologic controls of the Susitna River by geomorphic reach using available information and additional information collected as part of the licensing effort.This study will identify existing morphology,historic Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN changes in morphology over time along the Susitna River,and key physical processes governing the behavior of the river.This study will also provide an initial identification of potential Project effects within identified subreaches.In-channel (e.g.,side channels,bars,islands)and channel margin (e.g.floodplain,side sloughs)geomorphic subunits are the foundations for the range of available habitats in the Susitna River,and thus,an analysis of river and floodplain morphology and morphologic change over time and space also provides a measure of the distribution and changes of habitats .The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6)will apply 1-D and 2-D hydraulic and bed evolution models to further quantify geomorphic processes in the existing river,equilibrium status of identified reaches and associated,potential Project effects on river geomorphology,and thus,habitats.An extensive data collection effort will be conducted as part of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling study.The understanding of the morphology and sedimentology of the system,and its governing physical processes gained from the integrated Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Studies will provide a rational basis for predicting and quantifying potential Project effects on habitat within the identified reaches of the Susitna River downstream of the Watana Dam site Studies in other resource areas,such as the instream flow studies (Section 8),will use this information to aid in quantifying Project effects for their resource areas.A key aspect of the integration between the various physical and biological studies will be the common use of the Focus Areas to jointly carry out integrated resource analysis. The majority of the on-the-ground field data collection effort supporting both studies is encompassed in the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study because the resulting data provides the information necessary to perform the 1-D and 2-D hydraulic and bed evolution modeling. The extensive field effort is described in the Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination and Calibration Study component (Section 6.6.4.2).The exceptions are field data collection efforts described for the Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection at Tsusena Creek,Gold Creek,and Sunshine Station on the Susitna River and the Chulitna River near Talkeetna (Section 6.5.4.2 to be performed by the USGS),Reservoir Geomorphology (Section 6.5.4.8),Large Woody Debris (Section 6.5.4.9),Geomorphology of Stream Crossings Along Transmission Line and Access Alignments (Section 6.5.4.10)study components of the Geomorphology Study.The coordination,integration,and interpretation of results between the Geomorphology Study and the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study are described in Integration of Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling with the Geomorphology Study (Section6.6.5.11)and Coordination and Interpretation of Model Results (Section 6.6.4.3).The collection of aerial photography supporting both studies is being conducted as part of the Geomorphology Study under the Riverine Habitat versus Flow Relationship Middle Susitna River Segment (Section 6.5.4.5)and Riverine Habitat versus Flow Relationship Lower Susitna River Segment (Section 6.5.4.7)study components. The geomorphology studies will be subject to revision and refinements in consultation with licensing participants as part of the continuing study program identified in the ILP.The impact assessments will inform development of any necessary protection,mitigation,and enhancement measures to be presented in the draft and final License Applications.A glossary of geomorphology terms is included in Attachment 6-1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied Construction and operation of the Project have the potential to alter river flow,sediment transport and delivery,and large woody debris (LWD)recruitment and transport in the Susitna River.Changes to these processes may affect channel morphology and aquatic habitat downstream of the Watana Dam site.Operation of the reservoir also has the potential to change the geomorphology of streams and hillsides around the reservoir as deltas form at the stream/reservoir interface and the sides of the reservoir are exposed to erosion and beach formation.Understanding existing,baseline geomorphic conditions,how geomorphic conditions and thus,aquatic habitat change over a range of stream flows,and how stable/unstable the geomorphic conditions have been over recent decades provides baseline information needed for predicting the likely extent and nature of potential changes to the fluvial geomorphology and associated habitats that would occur due to Project operations. Changes in the channel morphology may alter the presence,physical characteristics,and function of important riverine aquatic habitat types such as side channels and sloughs.For example, reduction in sediment supply has the potential to cause channel downcutting and coarsening of bed material.In contrast,reduction in peak flow magnitude and changes in timing can result in sediment deposition both in the mainstream and at tributary mouths.The regulated hydrology may affect the rates and timing of sediment transport that ultimately govern formation and maintenance of dynamic aquatic habitats,as well as access to these habitats.Analysis of the complex interactions of water and sediment with the channel and floodplain boundaries to evaluate existing conditions and potential Project effects requires development and application of a sediment transport model. AEA's Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report (URS 2011) indicated that further quantification of the sediment supply and transport capacity would help identify the sensitivity of the channel morphology (and associated aquatic habitats)to the effects of the proposed Project.The report indicated that information on sediment continuity could provide a basis for evaluating whether the Susitna River below the Chulitna River confluence is currently aggradational and/or would be at risk of becoming more strongly aggradational to a sufficient degree to alter aquatic habitats and hydraulic connectivity to these habitats.The report also pointed out that side channels and sloughs are of particular importance to fish habitat,and changes to the relationships between flow and stage at which the habitats are accessible could affect habitat.These relationships can be affected by not only distribution of flows,but also changes in the bed elevations due to sediment transport processes.Other impacts to the sediment transport regime could affect cleaning and maintenance of spawning gravels,hyporheic flows through redds,groundwater inflows,and hydraulic connectivity for out-migration to the main channel. 6.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives Several natural resources agencies have jurisdiction over aquatic species and their habitats in the Project area.These agencies will be using in part,the results of the Geomorphology Study, Instream Flow Study,and other fish and aquatic studies to satisfy their respective mandates.The following federal and state agencies and Alaska Native entities have identified their resource Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN management goals,or provided comments in the context of FERC licensing,related to geomorphology,instream flow,and riparian resource issues. 6.3.1.National Marine Fisheries Service The following text is an excerpt of the May 31,2012,National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) letter and Geomorphology Study Request: "NMFS is entrusted with federal jurisdiction over marine,estuarine,and anadromous fishery resources under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA)(16 U.S.C.§1801 et seg,the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act (16 U.S.C.757a-757g;Pub.L.89-304,as amended),and the Pacific Salmon Treaty Act (16.U.S.C.§3631,et seq.).Section 305(b)of the MSA requires federal agencies to consult with NMFS on all actions that adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH).Where,in the judgment of NMFS,the proposed action would adversely affect EFH,NMFS is required to make EFH Conservation Recommendations,Section 10(j)of the Federal Power Act (FPA) authorized NMFS to recommend license terms and conditions necessary to protect,mitigate damage to,and enhance fish and wildlife habitat affected by the project.Section 18 of the FPA provides NMFS authority to issue mandatory fishway prescriptions.In addition,NMFS has the responsibilities related to FERC proceedings derived from the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act,Endangered Species Act,and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. NMFS resource management objectives derivedfrom these authorities include: e Maintaining native and natural aquatic communities for their intrinsic and ecological value ant their benefits to people.This includes habitat protection and maintenance to ensure the health and survival of all species and natural communities. e Maintaining stream flow regimes sufficient to sustain native riparian and aquatic habitats in the project-affected stream reaches. e Maintaining the diversified use offish and wildlife including commercial, recreational,scientific and educational purposes. e Protecting,conserving and enhancing native fishes and their habitats by maintaining their access to suitable andfully functioning habitats. e Identifying and implementing measures to protect,mitigate,or minimize direct,indirect and cumulative impacts to native anadromous fish resources,including related spawning,rearing and migration habitats and adjoining riparian habitats. e Maintaining riparian resources,channel conditions,and aquatic habitats. Maintaining stream flow regimes sufficient to sustain desired conditions of native riparian,aquatic,and wetland habitats. e Protecting aquatic systems to which species are uniquely adapted.” Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.3.2.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service The following text is an excerpt of the May 31,2012,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Geomorphology Study Request: "The overarching resource management goal of the USFWS is described in our mission: to conserve,protect,and enhance fish,wildlife,plants,and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),is providing comments in accordance with provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)of 1969 (83 Stat.852;42 U.S.C.4321 et seq.),Endangered Species Act (ESA)of 1973 (87 Stat.884,as amended;16 U.S.C.1531 et seq.),Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)(54 Stat.250,as amended,16 U.S.C.668a-d),Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)(40 Stat.755,as amended;16 U.S.C.703 et seq.),Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat.401,as amended;16 U.S.C.661 et seq.), and Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.§791 et seq.)..). Under Section 18 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)and USFWS have authority to issue mandatory fishway prescriptions for safe,timely,and effective fish passage.Under Section 10(j)of the FPA,NMFS and USFWS are authorized to recommend license conditions necessary to adequately and equitably protect,mitigate damages to,and enhance,fish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat)affected by the development,operation,and management of hydropower projects.Section 10(a)(1)of the FPA requires the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to condition hydropower licenses to best improve or develop a waterway or waterways for the adequate protection,mitigation,and enhancement offish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat)based on NMFS and USFWS recommendations and plans for affected waterways.Specific management goals are the protection of anadromous,trust fish species and their habitats. Consistent with our mission and with the legal authorities described above,our resource goal in this matter is to conserve existing fish and wildlife resources and their habitats in the Susitna River basin.With regard to fish passage,we will recommend scientifically-based and coordinated studies,collaborate with others, and ensure development of the best information possible to inform potential development offishway prescriptions for this project pursuant to Section 18 of the Federal Power Act.” 6.3.3.Alaska Department of Fish and Game The following text is an excerpt of the May 30,2012,Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)letter and Instream Flow Study Request: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN "The Fish and Game Act requires the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to, among other responsibilities,"...manage,protect,maintain,improve,and extend the fish,game and aquatic plant resources of the state in the interest of the economy and general well-being of the state”(AS 16.05.020).” 6.3.4.Alaska Native Entities 6.3.4.1.Chickaloon Village Traditional Council The Chickaloon Native Village provided comments on Project licensing activities in a May 31, 2012,letter to the FERC.Chickaloon Native Village is a federally recognized Alaska Native tribe.Chickaloon Village is an Ahtna Athabascan Indian Tribe governed by the nine-member Chickaloon Village Traditional Council.The Chickaloon Village Traditional Council strives to increase traditional Ahtna Dene'practices for the betterment of all residents in the area. Preserving and restoring the region's natural resources is one way of supporting Ahtna culture and the regional ecosystem.Concerning the potential effects of the Project on the geomorphology of the Susitna River,the Chickaloon Native Village wrote: "The whole sediment transport system of the Susitna River will be changed by the proposed dam.Only the smaller sediment particles will pass downstream,as the dam will trap the larger particles.Since the substrate size for salmon redds varies by salmon species,studies must be conducted to ensure that the appropriate sediment particle sizes will be present for the salmon spawning habitats.” 6.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants The geomorphology study plans have been modified in response to comments from various agency reviewers,including NMFS,the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC),and USFWS.Consultation on the study plan occurred during licensing participant meetings on April 6,2012,and during the June 14,2012 Water Resources Technical Workgroup (TWG)meeting.At the June 2012 TWG meeting,study requests and comments from the various licensing participants were presented and discussed,and refinements were determined and agreed-upon to address modifications to the draft study plans.The ILP formal study plan presentation meeting was held for the Geomorphology Study on August 17,2012.On September 14,2012 a TWG meeting was held to present and discuss the preliminary selection of Focus Areas.On October 2,2012,a TWG meeting was held to discuss instream flow modeling and included a discussion of the integration with the geomorphology studies.This meeting was followed by a one-and-one-half day field reconnaissance conducted on October 3 and 4,2012 with agency representatives to tour three of the proposed Focus Areas and discuss riparian, groundwater,geomorphology,fish habitat sampling and modeling.The field reconnaissance was followed by a two hour informal debrief meeting on the afternoon of October 4,2012.On October 22,a TWG meeting was held to update the agencies on progress in the development of the Revised Study Plan (RSP).As part of this meeting,comments received since the July filing of the Preliminary Study Plan (PSP)and associated responses and modifications being incorporated in the RSP were discussed. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Summary tables of comments and responses from formal comment letters filed with FERC through November 14,2012,are provided in Appendix 1.Copies of the formal FERC-filed comment letters are included in Appendix 2.In addition,a single comprehensive summary table of comments and responses from consultation,dated from PSP filing (July 16,2012)through release of Interim Draft RSPs,is provided in Appendix 3.Copies of relevant informal consultation documentation are included in Appendix 4,grouped by resource area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.Geomorphology Study 6.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study 6.5.1.1.Study Goals and Objectives The overall goal of the Geomorphology Study is to characterize the geomorphology of the Susitna River,and to evaluate the effects of the Project on the geomorphology and dynamics of the river by predicting the trend and magnitude of geomorphic response.This will inform the analysis of potential Project-induced impacts to aquatic habitats.The results of this study,along with results of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Susitna-Watana Dam Study,will be used in combination with geomorphic principles and criteria/thresholds defining probable channel forms to predict the potential for alteration of channel morphology from Project operation.This information will be used to assist in determining whether protection,mitigation, or enhancement measures may be needed,and if so,what those measures may be.More specific goals of the Geomorphology Study are as follows: Determine how the river system functions under existing conditions. Determine how the current system forms and maintains a range of aquatic and channel margin habitats. Identify the magnitudes of changes in the controlling variables and how these will affect existing channel morphology in the identified reaches downstream of the dam and in the areas upstream of the dam affected by the reservoir. In an integrated effort with the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6) determine the likely changes to existing habitats through time and space. In order to achieve the study goals,the following objectives are required: Geomorphically characterize the Project-affected river channels and floodplain including: o Delineate the Susitna River into geomorphically similar reaches. o Characterize and map relic geomorphic forms from past glaciation and debris flow events. o Characterize and map the geology of the Susitna River,identifying controlling features to channel and floodplain geomorphology. o Identify and describe the primary geomorphic processes that create,influence,and maintain mapped geomorphic features. Collect sediment transport data to supplement historical data to support the characterization of Susitna River sediment supply and transport. Determine sediment supply and transport in Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. Assess geomorphic stability/change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. Characterize the surface area versus flow relationships for riverine macrohabitat types (1980s main channel,side channel,side sloughs,upland sloughs,tributaries and tributary mouths)over a range of flows in the Middle Susitna River Segment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-9 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Conduct a reconnaissance-level geomorphic assessment of potential Project effects on the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments considering Project-related changes to stream flow and sediment supply and a conceptual framework for geomorphic reach response. e Conduct a phased characterization of the surface area versus flow relationships for riverine macrohabitat types in the Lower Susitna River Segment including: ©Delineation of aquatic macrohabitat per 1980s definitions for selected sites. o Comparison of 1980s versus existing macrohabitat areas and selected sites. o Estimate potential change in macrohabitat areas base on initial estimates of change in stage from Project operations. o Optional -If Focus Areas are extended into the Lower Susitna River Segment, perform development of macrohabitat wetted area versus flow relationships for additional sites and flows. e Characterize the proposed Watana Reservoir geomorphology and changes resulting from conversion of the channel/valley to a reservoir. e Assess large woody debris transport and recruitment,their influence on geomorphic forms and,in conjunction with the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,effects related to the Project. e Characterize geomorphic conditions at stream crossings along access road/transmission line alignments. e Integration with the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study to develop estimates of Project effects on the creation and maintenance of the geomorphic features that comprise important aquatic and riparian macrohabitats and other key habitat indicators,with particular focus on side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs. 6.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information An analysis of the Middle Susitna River Segment geomorphology and how aquatic habitat conditions change over a range of stream flows was performed in the 1980s using aerial photographic analysis (Trihey &Associates 1985).The AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report (URS 2011)states that "if additional information is collected,the existing information could provide a reference for evaluating temporal and spatial changes within the various reaches of the Susitna River.”The gap analysis emphasizes that it is important to determine if the conditions represented by the data collected in the 1980s are still representative of current conditions and that at least a baseline comparison of current and 1980s-era morphological characteristics in each of the identified sub-reaches is required. An analysis of the lower Susitna River Segment and how riverine habitat conditions change over a range of stream flows was performed in the 1980s using aerial photographic analysis (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates 1985a).This study evaluated the response of riverine aquatic habitat to flows in the Lower Susitna River Segment between the Yentna River confluence (river mile [RM]28.5)and Talkeetna (RM 98)(measured at Sunshine gage near RM 84)ranging from 13,900 cfs to 75,200 cfs.The study also included an evaluation of the morphologic stability of islands and side channels by comparing aerial photography between Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-10 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 1951 and 1983.As with the Middle Susitna River Segment information,it is important to determine if the conditions represented by the 1980s data are representative of current conditions.Such a comparison should include not only an identification of change,but should consider if the relative proportions of the various mesohabitat types have remained constant within a reach.If the relative proportions of the various mesohabitat types have remained constant in the various reaches,it provides a reasonable basis for using the 1980s data. Considerable information is available from a variety of sources that will support the development and execution of the Geomorphology Study.Much of the available information is from the 1980s studies associated with the earlier efforts to develop the Susitna Hydroelectric Project (FERC No.7114).In some cases,the older information will need to be replaced or supplemented with newer information because the Susitna River is a dynamic system and historical data such as cross-sections and aerial images in many areas will likely have changed considerably since they were collected in the 1980s.However,when compared with current information,these data provide valuable tools to understand the behavior and physical processes driving the geomorphology of the Susitna River.Comparability of the two sets of data will indicate that the fundamental relationships between channel form and fluvial process have remained constant and thus provide a basis for using the historical data.Additional data and analyses are needed to determine if historical data can be used to reflect current conditions and to address some of the data gaps identified in the AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gaps Analysis Report (URS 2011).A more specific description of existing information and the need for additional information for each geomorphology study component are provided in the appropriate sections below. 6.5.3.Study Area The study area for the Geomorphology Study is the Susitna River from its confluence with the Maclaren River (RM 260)downstream to the mouth at Cook Inlet (RM 0).The study area has been divided into three large-scale river segments: e Upper Susitna River Segment:Maclaren River confluence (RM 260)downstream to the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184). e Middle Susitna River Segment:Proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184)downstream to the Three Rivers Confluence (RM 98). e Lower Susitna River Segment:Three Rivers Confluence (RM 98)downstream to Cook Inlet (RM 0). Each of the 11 study components that make up the Geomorphology Study has a component- specific study area often related to the three large-scale river segments identified above.The study area and river segments are shown on Figure 6.5-1.Identification of the study area that each study component addresses is provided in the discussion of each study component in Section 6.5.4,Study Methods. 6.5.4.Study Methods The methods for each of the 11 Geomorphology Study components are presented in this section. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-11 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.1.|Study Component:Delineate Geomorphically Similar (Homogeneous) Reaches and Characterize the Geomorphology of the Susitna River The goal of this study component is to geomorphically characterize the Project-affected river channels including determination of geomorphically similar reaches.Portions of this effort were performed in 2012 including development of the geomorphic classification system and initial delineation of geomorphic reaches.The study area is the length of the Susitna River from its mouth at Cook Inlet (RM 0),upstream to the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184),and upstream of the proposed Watana Dam site,including the reservoir inundation zone and on upstream to the Maclaren River confluence (RM 260).The tributary mouths along the Susitna River and in the reservoir inundation zone that may be affected by the Project are also included in the study area. One of the major factors that is relevant to the geomorphic characterization and subsequent classification of the Susitna River and the potential for the Project to affect geomorphology,and hence habitat,is changes in the volume of sediment in storage within discrete types of storage units,that can generally be separated into mid-channel and bank-attached units.Storage of sediment for varying durations within discreet types of storage zones is an integral part of any fluvial system (Schumm 1977;Montgomery and Buffington 1993).The types of sediment storage units and the rates of change within the storage zones provide a measure of the sediment flux within the system (Harvey et al.2003;Harvey and Trabant 2006).Order-of-magnitude changes in sediment storage within a given reach of the river,or for the river as a whole,as well as the rates of change in the various types of sediment storage zones can be assessed by GIS- based comparisons of time-sequential aerial photography.Suitable aerial photography appears to be available for the 1950s,1980s,and the present (2012). On the Susitna River,the end members of a continuum could include long-duration sediment storage in vegetated islands and floodplains that persist for multiple decades at one end and short-duration sediment storage in braid bars that change on an almost daily basis at the other end of the continuum.Sediment storage is directly incorporated into the preliminary geomorphic classification developed for the Susitna River (Section 6.5.4.1.2.2.1).Within single channel (SC)reaches,sediment storage zones include unvegetated mid-channel bars,vegetated islands, and discontinuous and continuous vegetated floodplain segments.Within multiple channel (MC) reaches,sediment storage zones include unvegetated braid bars,vegetated islands,and floodplains. 6.5.4.1.1._Existing Information and Need for Additional Information This effort will support the understanding of the conditions in the Susitna River by applying a geomorphic classification system based on form and process.It will also support efforts by other studies,including the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9),and Ice Processes (Section 7.6)studies by providing a basis to stratify the river into reaches based on current morphology and their potential sensitivity to the Project.A delineation of the Susitna River into reaches was performed in the 1980s for the Middle Susitna River Segment (Trihey &Associates 1985)and the Lower Susitna River Segment(R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates 1985a). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-12 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.1.2.|Methods This effort consists of identification of a geomorphic classification system,conducting the delineation of geomorphic reaches based on the identified classification system and characterization of the geomorphology of the Susitna River. 6.5.4.1.2.1.Identification and Development of Geomorphic Classification System The first step in the geomorphic reach delineation effort is the identification of the system to be used to classify and delineate the reaches.Classification of the river segments is required to provide a basis for communication among the various disciplines and to identify relatively homogeneous river segments that can then be used as a basis for extrapolation of results and findings from more spatially-limited studies.Numerous river classifications exist (Leopold and Wolman 1957;Schumm 1963,1968;Mollard 1973;Kellerhals et al.1976;Brice 1981;Mosley 1987;Rosgen 1994,1996;Thorne 1997;Montgomery and Buffington 1997;Vandenberghe 2001),but no single classification has been developed that meets the needs of all investigators. Several factors have prevented the achievement of an ideal geomorphic stream classification,and foremost among these has been the variability and complexity of rivers and streams (Mosley 1987;Juracek and Fitzpatrick 2003).Problems associated with the use of existing morphology as a basis for extrapolation (Schumm 1991)further complicates the ability to develop a robust classification (Juracek and Fitzpatrick 2003).For purposes of classifying the Susitna River, available classification systems are being reviewed,and a specific system is being developed that borrows elements from several classification systems.The classification scheme considers both form and process.Development of this system is being coordinated with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (FA-IFS)(Section 8.5,Riparian Instream Flow Study (R-IFS) (Section 8.56,Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Characterization and mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)so it is consistent with their needs.These studies may require further stratification to identify specific conditions of importance to their efforts,in which case these studies will further divide the river into subreaches.However,the overall reach delineations developed in the Geomorphology Study will be used consistently across all studies requiring geomorphic reach delineations. 6.5.4.1.2.2..Geomorphic Reach Delineation The Lower Susitna River Segment (RM 0 to RM 98),the Middle Susitna River Segment (RM 98 to RM 184),and the Upper Susitna River Segment to the Maclaren River confluence (RM 184 to RM 260)will be delineated into large-scale geomorphic reaches (a few to many miles)with relatively homogeneous characteristics,including channel width,entrenchment,ratio,sinuosity, slope,geology/bed material,single/multiple channel,braiding index,and hydrology (inflow from major tributaries)for the purpose of stratifying the river into study segments.Stratification of the river into relatively homogeneous reaches will permit extrapolation of the results of sampled data at representative sites within the individual reaches. Because there are several studies that required reach delineation for planning 2012 field activities,an initial delineation primarily based on readily available information (most recent high-quality aerials,bed profile from the 1980s,geomorphic descriptions from the 1980s,and geologic mapping)was developed in April 2012.As additional information is developed,such as current aerial photographs and transects,the delineation will be refined and the various Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN morphometric parameters will be included in the delineation.Coordination with the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3)Study is being conducted to obtain cross- section channel/floodplain data.Coordination with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (FA-IFS)(Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow Study (R-IFS)(Section 8.6),Fluvial Geomorphic Modeling Study,and Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study (Ice Processes Study)(Section 7.6)is being conducted to ensure that the river stratification is performed at a scale appropriate for those studies. A reconnaissance-level site visit of the Susitna River was conducted for a portion of the Susitna River in October,2012.A more complete reconnaissance will be conducted in early 2013 after break-up.The 2012 reconnaissance was coordinated with other studies to provide an opportunity for multidisciplinary interaction.Representatives from the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6),Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of Susitna-Watana Dam Study (Section 11.6)and Groundwater Study (Section 7.5) participated in the 2012 reconnaissance.The 2013 reconnaissance will take a similar multidisciplinary approach.For the 2013 reconnaissance it is anticipated that the Geomorphology Study team will be joined by representatives from the FA-IFS (Section 8.5),R- IFS (Section 8.6),Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9).The purpose of this site visit will be to provide key team members an overview of the river system.This will be extremely useful for all components of the geomorphology studies because it will permit team members to verify on the ground assessments that have been made from remotely sensed information. 6.5.4.1,2.2.1. 6.5.4.1.2.2.1 Initial Geomorphic Reach Classification System Classification of the identified Upper,Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments into reasonably homogeneous reaches is required to provide a basis for extrapolation of the results of process-based analyses of existing conditions and predictions of likely geomorphic changes in response to the Project at selected study locations to those reaches.To support development of study plans for a variety of resource areas,an initial reach classification was performed with the information available in 2012.This classification will be reviewed and updated in 2013 if necessary as new information from the Geomorphology Study and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,as well as several other studies,becomes available.The initial geomorphic reach classification scheme is described below. From a practical viewpoint,Schumm (2005)has suggested that rivers and streams can be divided into two principal types:regime and non-regime.Regime channels,which are defined as those that flow on and in sediments transported by the river during the present hydrologic regime,and whose morphology is controlled primarily by the interactions of the flow regime and the sediment supply (Leopold et al.1964;Schumm 1977),can be further subdivided on the basis of patterns (straight,meandering,wandering,braided,anastomosing).Non-regime channels can be further subdivided into constrained,where the form of the channel is forced by non-alluvial factors such as bedrock,colluvium,glacial deposits or extreme flood deposits (Montgomery and Buffington 1997;Tinker and Wohl 1998;O'Connor and Grant 2003),or unstable,which can include degrading (Schumm et al.1984;Darby and Simon 1999),aggrading (Schumm 1977)or avulsing (Schumm et al.2000)channels. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-14 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Based on Schumm's (2005)classification scheme,the factors used in the initial geomorphic classification of the individual reaches of the Susitna River include the following: 1.Channel planform (single channel:straight,meandering;multiple channels:braided, anastomosing)-identified from topographic mapping,aerial photography 2.Constraints (bedrock,colluvium,moraines,alluvial fans,glaciolacustrine and glaciofluvial sediments)-identified from geologic mapping 3.Confinement (width of the floodplain and modern alluvium in relation to the width of the active channel(s))-identified from geologic mapping,Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)based topography,hydraulic modeling 4.Gradient and bed materials -derived from various sources of survey data,1980s data Based on available information,the individual reaches within the three river segments were classified as follows: Single Channel (SC): SC1-Laterally confined with no sediment storage in bars,islands,or floodplain SC2 -Laterally confined with limited sediment storage in mid-channel bars and non-continuous bank-attached floodplain segments SC3 -Laterally confined with sediment storage in mid-channel bars,vegetated islands,and continuous floodplain segments Multiple Channels (MC): MC1 -Moderately wide floodplain with significant sediment storage in braid bars and vegetated islands MC2 -Wide floodplain with significant sediment storage in braid bars and vegetated islands MC3 -Wide floodplain width with vegetated floodplain segments separated by anastomosed channels with downstream base level controls MC4 -Delta distributary channels 6.5.4.1.2.2.2.6.5.4.1,2.2.2 Initial Geomorphic Delineation Application of the classification scheme described above to the three river segments of the study area resulted in the geomorphic reaches and reach types presented in Table 6.5-1.Maps showing the geomorphic reaches are presented on Figure 6.5-2,6.5-3,and 6.5-4 for the Upper,Middle, and Lower Susitna River segments,respectively.The Upper Susitna River Segment was divided into six reaches,with three reaches identified as SC1 reach type and three geomorphic reaches identified as SC2 reach type.The Middle Susitna River Segment was divided into eight reaches with one geomorphic reach classified as SC1 (Devils Canyon),five as SC2,one as SC3,and one as MC1/SC2 geomorphic reach types.The latter designation represents the fact that the downstream most geomorphic reach of the Middle Susitna River Segment,MR-8,is a transition reach from a single channel to multiple channel.The Lower Susitna River Segment was divided into six reaches with the upper two reaches classified as MC1,the next two reaches classified as MC3,the fifth reach classified as SC2,and the downstream-most reach classified as MC4. It should be kept in mind that as more information becomes available,the geomorphic reach delineations and classifications will be reevaluated and adjusted if necessary. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-15 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.1.2.3..Geomorphic Characterization of the Susitna River Based on information collected and developed in support of the reach delineation (Section 6.5.4.1.2.1),mapping of current and historical (1980s and 1950s)fluvial geomorphic features (Section 6.5.4.4)and as part of the field studies conducted in the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6.4.1.2.9),the geomorphology of the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments will be characterized.The characterization will be directed toward identifying processes and controls that create,influence and maintain the fluvial geomorphic features that comprise the river and floodplain and represent the important aquatic habitats that may be affected by the Project.The role of large woody debris,ice processes,floodplain vegetation and extreme events as well as the more typical hydrologic events and sediment loading will be considered in development of the understanding of the processes that create and influence the geomorphic features of the Susitna River.Of particular importance will be the features that represent both the within-channel (bars,islands,side channels)and the off-channel macrohabitats (side channels,side sloughs and upland sloughs)and the meso-and micro-scale habitats within these features. Using the available geologic mapping,topographic mapping,recent (2012)and historical (1980s and 1950s)aerial photographs and the 2011 Mat-Su LiDAR in conjunction with fieldwork conducted in 2013 during the Focus Area fieldwork the following will be mapped and characterized: e Geology of the Susitna River corridor with identification of controlling features such as locations where the river is laterally confined or vertically controlled e Relic geomorphic forms from past glaciation,paleofloods and debris flow events with particular attention paid to coarse grained deposits that can serve as lateral or vertical controls e Identify from aerials and aerial reconnaissance major locations of recent and historic mass wasting e Overlay the mapping of areas of frequent ice jam events from the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6) e Identification of coarse deposits at tributary confluences that may influence the profile of the Susitna River Using this information as well as thalweg profiles generated from the cross-section and bathymetric surveys performed in 2012 and 2013,aerial photo analysis of channel change from the 1950s to 2012,bed material sampling,floodplain soil profiles,LWD mapping and characterization,dating of floodplain surfaces,an understanding of the fluvial processes that govern the behavior of the Middle and Lower Susitna River will be developed.This understanding will be reviewed and updated as various study results are made available.This would include information such as determination of flows required for bed material mobilization, effective discharge,comparison of 1980s and current cross-section profiles,sediment balance, and 1-D bed evolution modeling,This will provide a basis for developing a thorough understanding of the current river system dynamics and thus the framework for interpreting potential Project effects which will be derived from the results of modeling and other analyses Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-16 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN that reflect the changes in the hydrologic and sediment supply regimes due to construction and operation of the Project. 6.5.4.1.2.4.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e Historical aerial photographs e Information on bed material size e Location and extent of lateral and vertical geologic controls e Drainage areas of major tributaries e Topographic mapping,including USGS survey quadrangle maps and LiDAR e Geologic mapping e 1980s cross-sections The following additional information will need to be obtained to conduct this study: e Current high resolution aerial photography e Field observations made during a site reconnaissance e Extended flow record for the Susitna River and tributaries being developed by USGS e Current cross-sections e Profile of the river (thalweg or water surface) e Field data collected in the Fluvial Modeling Geomorphology Study 6.5.4.1.3.Study Products The results of the Delineate Geomorphically Similar Reaches study component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following: e A geomorphic classification system developed specifically for the Susitna River that considers both form and physical processes. e A delineation of the Susitna River into reaches of similar geomorphic characteristics, which has been coordinated with other relevant studies (FA-IFS (Section 8.5),R-IFS (Section 8.6),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Habitat (Section 9.9)studies).The delineation will include broad large-scale reaches and further delineation into sub-reaches. e Tables of morphometric parameters describing the physical characteristics of each reach developed from the analysis of aerial photographs,LiDAR,bed profiles,bed material samples,geologic mapping,and transect surveys. In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e Mapping of the segments and reaches overlaid on recent aerial photography and topographic mapping. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-17 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.2.|Study Component:Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection at Tsusena Creek,Gold Creek,and Sunshine Gage Stations on the Susitna River,Chulitna River near Talkeetna and the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna The goal of this study component is to empirically characterize the Susitna River sediment supply and transport conditions.This effort is being performed by USGS.The effort described is for 2012 and 2013.The effort in 2013 may be modified in 2013 based on experience gained from the 2012 work.The study covers the Susitna River from RM 84 (Sunshine Station) upstream to RM 182 (Tsusena Gage)and the Chulitna River and Talkeetna Rivers near their confluences with the Susitna River.Figure 6.5-5 identifies the location of the study gages and other existing and historical USGS gages in the Susitna River basin.The collection of the sediment transport data was completed in 2012 per the 2012 study plan.The data will be available from the USGS in early 2013.The Talkeetna River near Talkeetna was added for 2013 after review of 1980s data and after comments from agency review of the PSP.Suspended sediment and flow were collected at the Talkeetna by the USGS as part of the USGS National monitoring network. 6.5.4.2.1..Existing Information and Need for Additional Information The collection of the data described in this study component will supplement sediment transport data collected in the 1980s.The additional data are needed to determine if historical data can be used to reflect current conditions or if there have been shifts in the rating curves that might be related to climate change,glacial surges,or other as yet unidentified causes and to address some of the data gaps identified in the Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gaps Analysis Report (URS 2011). The USGS published a summary report on sediment transport data collected in the 1980s (USGS 1987).The data collected includes suspended sediment measurements and _bedload measurements for the Susitna River near Talkeetna,Susitna River at Sunshine,Susitna River at Susitna Station,Chulitna River near Talkeetna,Talkeetna River near Talkeetna,and Yenta River near Susitna Station.The suspended load is divided into a silt/clay component and a sand component.The bedload transport is divided into two fractions:sand and gravel.The report also presents rating curves developed from data collected between 1981 through 1985.The USGS estimated the annual sediment load for Water Year 1985 for the various components of the sediment load by applying the rating curves to the mean daily flow record. Table 6.5-2 presents the sediment loads estimated by the USGS for Water Year 1985 (October 1984 through September 1985).This information suggests that the Chulitna River contributes the majority of the sediment load at the Three Rivers Confluence.The relative contributions are 61 percent for the Chulitna River,25 percent for the Susitna River,and 14 percent for the Talkeetna River.Of note is the relatively small amount of the gravel load contributed by the Susitna River to the Three Rivers Confluence (about 4 percent,compared to 83 percent from the Chulitna River and 13 percent from the Talkeetna River,based on the 1985 data). This study will provide information on current transport conditions and support assessment of Project effects on sediment supply.Sediment data derived from the gages will be used to provide sediment inputs at model boundaries.This information will be used by several study components in this study as well as the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-18 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.2.2.|Methods The following scope of work was provided by USGS: e Operate and maintain the stream gages. e Maintain datum at the site. e Record stage data every 15 minutes. e Make discharge measurements during visits to maintain the stage-discharge rating curve and to define the winter hydrograph. e Store the data in USGS databases. e Collect at least five suspended sediment samples at Susitna River above Tsusena Creek, at Gold Creek,and at Sunshine;the Chulitna River near Talkeetna and the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna during the year for concentration and size analysis (collect in 2012 and 2013). e Collect at least five bed material samples during the year at Susitna River above Tsusena Creek,at Gold Creek,and at Sunshine;and the Chulitna River near Talkeetna for bedload transport determination and size analysis (collect in 2012 and 2013,except Talkeetna River near Talkeetna will be collected in 2013 only). e Collect at least five bedload samples during the year at Susitna River at Gold Creek, Susitna River at Sunshine,Susitna River above Tsusena Creek,and the Chulitna River near Talkeetna for bedload transport determination and size analysis (collect in 2012 and 2013,except Talkeetna River near Talkeetna will be collected in 2013 only). e Operate and maintain the stream gages at the Susitna River near Denali and the Chulitna River near Talkeetna (2012 and 2013). e Operate a stage-only gage at a site upstream from Deadman Creek.Logistics at this site may preclude continuous operation or telemetry of the information (2012 and 2013). e Compile suspended and bedload data,including calculation of sediment transport ratings and daily loads,in a technical memorandum delivered to AEA during federal fiscal year (FFY)2013 for the 2012 data and FFY 2014 for the 2013 data,and as early as March of the following year,if possible.Provisional results from sampling will be available as soon as lab data are available.Provisional results from sediment load computations will be made available as soon as possible. The bedload and suspended sediment data will be combined with existing rating curves to identify the differences and similarities between the historical and current data sets.This information will be used to evaluate whether the historical data sets are representative of current conditions in the Susitna River at Gold Creek,the Susitna River at Sunshine,the Chulitna River near Talkeetna and the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna.If the historical data are not representative of current conditions,a decision will be made as to whether the 1980s data may be adjusted or shifted to represent current conditions or whether only the current data should be used in developing sediment transport relationships. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-19 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Based on review of the 1980s sediment transport data,including the information previously presented in Table 6.5-2,the Talkeetna River is a significant source of sediment to the Lower Susitna River Segment.Therefore,collection of sediment transport data for the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna will be conducted in 2013.This will allow for better understanding of the sediment transport balance in Geomorphic Reach LR-1 (the portion of the Susitna River between the Three Rivers Confluence and Sunshine Station). 6.5.4.2.3.|Study Products The results of the Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection at Tsusena Creek,Gold Creek, and Sunshine Gage Stations on the Susitna River,and Chulitna River near Talkeetna and the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna and Sunshine gage stations study component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following: e Calculation of discharge,suspended sediment discharge,and bedload discharge. e Tabulation of all discharge,suspended sediment,bedload,and bed material sampling results. e Data sheets reflecting field measurements. e Comparison of historical and 2012 sediment transport measurements to determine if historical sediment transport rating curves can be expected to accurately represent current conditions. e Narrative on data collection activities including description of methods,any difficulties encountered,and recommendations for data collection in 2013. e Posting of near real-time stage and discharge data on the USGS website: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/ak/nwis/. e Publication of the data in the USGS annual Water-Resources Data for the United States report (http://wdr.water.usgs.gov/). In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e Location of gage stations and measurement transects (if different from gage location). 6.5.4.3.|Study Component:Sediment Supply and Transport Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments The objective of this study component is to characterize the sediment supply and transport conditions in the Susitna River between the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184)and the Susitna Station gage (RM 28).This includes the mainstem Susitna River and its tributaries.The Three Rivers Confluence (RM 98)separates the Middle Susitna River Segment from the Lower Susitna River Segment.Initial estimates for the Lower Susitna River Segment Sediment Balance are being developed in 2012 as part of the Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on Lower and Middle Susitna River Segment (Section 6.5.4.6).The remaining efforts,which include refined estimates of the Middle Susitna River Segment sediment balance,bed material mobilization,and effective discharge,will be conducted in 2013.The 2013 effort will provide estimates of sediment supply that will be used in the bed evolution modeling efforts described in Section 6.6. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-20 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.3.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information The Project will reduce sediment supply to the reach of the Susitna River downstream from the dam,and will also alter the timing and magnitude of the flows that transport the sediment. Information provided in the Pre-Application Document (PAD)(AEA 2011)suggests that peak flows may be reduced in magnitude and occur later in the season,and the flows will tend to be higher during the non-peak flow season under Project conditions.Sediment transport data are available along the mainstem Susitna River and several of the major tributaries between the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184)and Susitna Station (RM 28)(URS 2011)that can be used to perform an initial evaluation of the sediment balance along the study reach under existing conditions.The results of this study component will provide the initial basis for assessing the potential for changes to the Middle and Lower Susitna River segments'sediment balance,and the associated changes to geomorphology,because it will permit quantification of the magnitude in the reduction of sediment supply below the dam.The studies will also support the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study through development of sediment supply information that will be required as input to the model. 6.5.4.3.2.Methods The methods section is divided into five subsections:(1)Initial Lower Susitna River Segment Sediment Balance,(2)Middle Susitna River Segment Sediment Balance,(3)Characterization of Bed Material Mobilization,(4)Effective Discharge,and (5)Information Required. Development of the sediment balance for both the Lower Susitna River Segment (RM 98 to RM 28)and Middle Susitna River Segment (RM 184 to RM 98)will consider various techniques to characterize the sediment supply to each reach,the sediment transport capacity through the reaches,and deposition/storage within the reaches.Sources of sediment supply are expected to include the mainstem Susitna River,contributing tributaries,and identified locations of mass wasting.Potential procedures to estimate sediment supply include the use of regional sediment supply relationships (e.g.,regression equations based on watershed area)and calculation of differences in sediment loads between gaging stations.While it is recognized that the gages are spatially separated,the comparison of the loads at the gages will permit an assessment of whether there is significant storage or loss of sediment between gages.If the data indicate that there is little difference between the gages,then it can be reasonably concluded that there is sufficient supply of sediment within the reach between gages to support an assumption of transport capacity limitation rather than supply limitation.The sediment transport measurements collected by USGS,both historical and current,will be used to develop bedload and suspended load rating curves to facilitate translation of the periodic instantaneous measurements into yields over longer durations (e.g.,monthly,seasonal,and annual).Since gradations of transported material will be available,the data will allow for differentiation of transport by size fraction. The sediment balance will be quantified by developing sediment load versus water discharge rating curves for each portion of the sediment load (i.e.,wash load,total bed material load, bedload)using the available data or transport capacity calculations based on the hydraulic modeling results,as appropriate.The rating curves will then be integrated over the relevant hydrographs to estimate the total sediment load,and the resulting total sediment loads will then be compared to determine if each segment of the reach between the locations represented by the rating curves is net aggradational (i.e.,more sediment is delivered to the reach than is carried Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-21 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN past the downstream boundary)or degradational (i.e.,more sediment is carried out of the reach than is delivered from upstream and lateral sources). Previous studies have documented the potential for bias in suspended load rating curves due to scatter in the relationship between sediment concentration or load and flow (Walling 1977a).Part of the scatter is often caused by hysteresis in the sediment load versus discharge relationship, where the loads on the rising limb are higher than on the falling limb due to availability of material and coarsening of the surface layer during the high-flow portion of the hydrograph (Topping et al.2010).Bias is also introduced in performing linear least-squares regressions using logarithmically-transformed data and then back-transforming the predicted sediment loads to their arithmetic values (Walling 1977b;Thomas 1985;Ferguson 1986,Koch and Smillie 1986).The hysteresis effect can be accounted for by applying separate (or perhaps,shifting) rating curves through rising and falling limbs of flood hydrographs (Guy 1964;Walling 1974; Wright et al.2010).Bias in the regression equations can be removed using the Minimum Variance Unbiased Estimator (MVUE)bias correction for normally distributed errors,or the Smearing Estimator (Duan 1983)when a non-normal error distribution is identified.These methods were recommended by Cohn and Gilroy (1991)and have been endorsed by the USGS Office of Surface Water (1992).Once the sediment measurements are available for review,the potential for bias in the sediment rating curves will be considered and addressed as appropriate. The rating curves for the mainstem Susitna stations,for gaged tributary stations,and those developed for contributing ungaged areas between stations will be used to develop the sediment balance for the pre-Project hydrology for representative wet,average,and dry years and warm and cold Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)phases.(The inclusion of the warm and cold PDO phases was requested by NOAA-NMFS and USFWS in the May 31,2012,study requests;the rationale for the request was discussed at the June 14,2012,Water Resources TWG meeting and it was agreed that the PDO phases would be included in the suite of representative annual hydrologic conditions.)The sediment balance will be calculated based on the assumption that the sediment load in the Susitna River is currently in a state of equilibrium.To develop the sediment balance for the post-Project condition,the historical (pre-Project)sediment rating curve developed for the river immediately below the Watana Dam site (Tsusena Creek)will be reduced by 100 percent for the bedload and 90 percent for the suspended load on a preliminary basis.If the reservoir trap efficiency analysis discussed below indicates that a substantially different amount of sediment will pass through the reservoir,the sediment load curves will be adjusted accordingly. 6.5.4.3.2.1.Initial Sediment Balance (Lower Susitna River Segment) The primary purpose of the Initial Sediment Balance evaluation for the Lower Susitna River Segment performed in 2012 is to help evaluate the potential for the Project to alter sediment transport conditions and channel response in the Lower Susitna River Segment.The results of this evaluation will provide the basis for assessing the need to perform additional 1-D and 2-D modeling and other studies related to potential channel change downstream from RM 75.The Lower Susitna River Segment Sediment Balance depends on the sediment supply from the Middle Susitna River Segment of the Susitna,the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers,and other local tributaries along the reach,and the transport capacity along the reach.The total sediment supply to the Lower Susitna River Segment under pre-Project conditions is being evaluated using the sediment rating curves developed from the historical data (and 2012 data,if available)for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-22 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Susitna River at Gold Creek and near Talkeetna gages on the mainstem,and the below canyon near Talkeetna and near Talkeetna gages on the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers,respectively.The historical rating curves for the Sunshine and Susitna Station gages,updated with any new sediment transport data collected by USGS under the Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection at Tsusena Creek,Gold Creek,and Sunshine Gage Stations on the Susitna River,the Chulitna River near Talkeetna and the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna (Section 6.5.4.2),are being used to estimate the sediment loads in the river in the vicinity of RM 84 and RM 26. 6.5.4.3.2.2.|Middle Susitna River Segment Sediment Balance A more detailed sediment balance will also be developed in 2013 for the Middle Susitna River Segment between the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184)and the Three Rivers Confluence (RM 98/98.5)using the available data,and when available,the hydraulic and sediment transport modeling results for this portion of the study reach.Estimates of the contributions to the sediment supply from the Upper Susitna River Segment identified mass wasting locations,bank erosion,and contributing tributaries downstream of the dam will be an important aspect of this analysis.An estimate of the volume of sediment from bank erosion will be made utilizing a comparison of the channel location and area developed in the Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments study component (see Section 6.5.4.4)and comparison of cross-sections surveyed in the 1980s and in 2012.The cross-sections may also be used to determine if there has been a loss or gain in sediment supply from aggradation or degradation of the bed in the Middle Susitna River Segment.Tributary sediment loading will be estimated as part of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (see Section 6.6.4.1.2.6). Potential procedures to estimate the Middle Susitna River Segment sediment supply include the use of watershed area and regional sediment supply relationships and the determination of the differences on a seasonal or annual basis between the sediment loads estimated for the Susitna River at the Tsusena Creek and Gold Creek gage locations.Past USGS sediment data may be available for Indian River and Portage Creek,which could also be used to assist in the estimation of the Middle Susitna River Segment sediment supply inputs.If data being collected by USGS for the Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection at Tsusena Creek,Gold Creek,and Sunshine Gage Stations on the Susitna River,the Chulitna River near Talkeetna,and the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna are available in time for this analysis,the 2012 data from Tsusena Creek will be compared to the 2012 Gold Creek data to estimate the sediment inflow between these two locations.This will allow development of a sediment rating curve from the 1985 data for the Susitna River at Tsusena Creek (representative of sediment transport at the Watana Dam site). 6.5.4.3.2.3.Characterization of Bed Material Mobilization Bedload transport,particularly for the gravel and cobble size-fractions,is the key process that determines the dynamic behavior of the river bed both in the mainstem and in the side channel that is important to fish habitat.In coarse-grained rivers such as the Susitna River,a coarse surface layer is present that is typically not mobile over the full range of flows;thus,significant bedload transport does not occur.An important part of the geomorphology study will involve quantification of the range of flows over which bed mobilization occurs,and the potential change in duration of those flows under Project conditions.The approximate discharge at which bedload mobilization begins in the Susitna River near the proposed dam and at selected locations Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-23 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments will be estimated using the USGS empirical sediment rating curves,incipient motion calculations (i.e.,estimates of the critical discharge at which bed material begins to mobilize),and field observations.The resulting estimates of the critical discharge will be used to assess the frequency and duration of bed mobilization under the pre-and post-Project condition hydrology.This will be performed on both a monthly and annual basis at the selected locations for a range of flow years. The concept of incipient motion as advanced by Shields (1936)relates the critical shear stress for particle motion (t,)to the dimensionless critical shear stress (t*,.)and the unit weight of sediment (y;),the unit weight of water (y),and the median particle size of the bed material (Ds). One key limitation of this relation is the specification of t*,(often referred to as the Shields parameter),which can range bya factor of three (Buffington and Montgomery 1997).The large range in published values for t*,is caused largely by the difficulty in defining and identifying when bed material motion actually begins.To work around this limitation,Parker (Parker et al. 1982)defined a reference Shields stress (t*,)that corresponds to a dimensionless transport rate W*=0.002,corresponding to a very low,but measurable transport rate.For this relationship,W* is a function of the unit bedload and the total boundary shear stress,both of which are relatively simple parameters to calculate from field data if bedload and discharge measurements are included.(In the NOAA-NMFS and USFWS Study Plan Requests,it was proposed that the bed material mobilization analysis be calibrated based on the use of tracers.This topic was discussed at the Water Resources TWG held on June 14,2012.AEA's consultants indicated that the use of tracers in a large river such as the Susitna would not be practical due to the difficulty in locating the tracers after mobilization.Therefore,the use of tracers is not included in the proposed study plan.) Another limitation of the original Shields equation is that is does not consider hiding effects in substrate with a broad range of particle sizes.Hiding effects result in mobilization of the larger particles at lower shear stresses than would occur in uniform-sized substrate.This is due to the larger substrate projecting farther into the flow than if they were surrounded by similarly sized particles.Conversely,the smaller particles are mobilized at higher-than-expected shear stresses because they are sheltered by the larger particles.Meyer-Peter,Muller,and Einstein recognized this effect in developing their original bedload transport equations,and numerous researchers have continued to evaluate and provide relationships that account for this effect (Parker et al, 1982;Andrews 1978;Neill 1969;and many others).In a general sense,these relationships indicate that the original Shields equation only applies directly to the median (Ds)substrate size, and the substrate mixture is effectively immobile at shear stresses less than that required to mobilize the median size.These relationships do,however,indicate varying degrees of selective transport in which at least some of the finer particles mobilize at shear stresses less than that required to mobilize the median size.The strength of this effect is marginally different among the different relationships,most likely due to difference in the specific characteristics of material used to develop them.For purposes of this study,the Parker et al.(1982)relationship will most likely be used because it applies to relatively clean (i.e.,low percentages of sand and finer material)gravel and cobble substrate.If it is found that the substrate in specific areas contains more than about 20 percent sand,the Wilcock and Crowe (2003)relationship will be used because it takes into account effects of large amounts of sand in increasing the mobility of the gravel/cobble fraction. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-24 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Because of the uncertainty in defining appropriate values of the Shields critical shear stress for the median particles size,bed material mobilization at various locations along the study reach will be characterized using the reference shear approach of Parker,following the methods of Mueller et al.(2005).Data collected by USGS,which will include the necessary series of coupled flow and bedload transport measurements,will be used to formulate a series of bedload rating curves.These curves will then provide a basis for estimating +'that corresponds to a dimensionless transport rate W*=0.002 for bed material mobilization. 6.5.4.3.2.4.Effective Discharge The concept of effective discharge,as advanced by Wolman and Miller (1960),relates the frequency and magnitude of various discharges to their ability to do geomorphic work by transporting sediment.They concluded that events of moderate magnitude and frequency transport the most sediment over the long-term,and these flows are the most effective in forming and maintaining the planform and geometry of the channel.Andrews (1980)defined the effective discharge as "the increment of discharge that transports the largest fraction of the annual sediment load over a period ofyears.” Estimates of the potential change in effective discharge between historic and post-Project conditions provides a basis for predicting whether the bankfull channel capacity will change due to the Project,and if so,the likely trajectory and magnitude of the changes.The concept of effective discharge,as advanced by Wolman and Miller (1960),relates the frequency and magnitude of various discharges to their ability to do geomorphic work by transporting sediment. They concluded that events of moderate magnitude and frequency transport the most sediment over the long-term,and these flows are the most effective in forming and maintaining the planform and geometry of the channel. Alluvial rivers adjust their shape in response to flows that transport sediment.Numerous authors have attempted to relate the effective discharge to the concepts of dominant discharge,channel- forming discharge,and bankfull discharge,and it is often assumed that these discharges are roughly equivalent and correspond to approximately the mean annual flood peak (Benson and Thomas 1966;Pickup 1976;Pickup and Warner 1976;Andrews 1980,1986;Nolan et al.1987; Andrews and Nankervis 1995).Quantification of the range of flows that transport the most sediment provides useful information to assess the current state of adjustment of the channel and to evaluate the potential effects of increased discharge and sediment delivery on channel behavior.Although various investigators have used only the suspended sediment load and the total sediment load to compute the effective discharge,the bed material load should generally be used when evaluating the linkage between sediment loads and channel morphology because it is the bed material load that has the most influence on the morphology of the channel (Schumm 1963;Biedenharn et al.2000). For purposes of this study,the effective discharge will be computed for the Susitna River below Tsusena Creek,at Gold Creek,and at Sunshine.This will be performed by dividing the full range of flows at each location into at least 30 logarithmic classes (Biedenharn et al.2000)and then computing the sediment transport capacity at the average discharge within each flow class using the previously described rating curves.The bed material transport in each flow class over the long-term will be determined by multiplying the individual transport rates by the corresponding flow duration,which is derived from mean daily flow duration curves.The Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-25 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN effective discharge is the flow,or range of flows,where the incremental bed material transport is greatest.Effective discharges will be determined for both the pre-and post-Project conditions.If the post-Project value is lower than the pre-Project value,it provides an indication that the morphology of the channel will change because there is a reasonably well identified relationship between the effective discharge and the size of the channel. 6.5.4.3.2.5.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e Current and historical aerial photographs. e Historical suspended sediment and bedload data for the Susitna River and contributing tributaries. e Flow records for the Susitna River and contributing tributaries. The following additional information will need to be obtained to conduct this study: e Suspended and bedload data for the Susitna River at Tsusena Creek and Gold Creek being performed by USGS. e Extended flow record for the Susitna River and gaged tributaries within the study area being developed by USGS. e Estimated flows for the ungaged tributaries within the study area. e Extended flow records for the Susitna River and tributaries being developed by USGS. e Collection of bed material samples throughout the Middle and Lower River Segments,as well as contributing tributaries. e Hydraulic conditions in the Susitna River from the Hydraulic Routing Model. e Surveys of channel geometry for contributing tributaries to simulate hydraulic conditions. 6.5.4.3.3.Study Products The results of the Sediment Supply and Transport Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments study component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following: e Tabular and graphical summary of available discharge and sediment transport data. e Description of procedures used to develop sediment transport rating curves from suspended load and bedload data,including development of curves for specific sediment size-classes. e Graphical and numerical relationships for sediment discharge rating curves. e Narrative describing procedures used to perform effective discharge and bed mobilization calculations. e Determination of total sediment load delivered to the Susitna River for pre-and post- Project conditions (the latter based on preliminary assumption that 100 percent bedload Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-26 December 2012 REviSED STUDY PLAN and 90 percent of suspended load will be trapped behind the Project dam;this estimate can be refined if the trap efficiency analysis indicates substantially different results). e Estimate of Middle Susitna River Segment sediment supply inputs from local tributaries and other sources. e Tabular and graphical representation and comparison of the duration and frequency of bed material mobilization in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments for pre-and post-Project conditions. e Estimates of the effective discharge for the pre-and post-Project conditions,and the likely effects on channel morphology. e Estimates of the overall sediment transport balance along the reach and the likely effects on channel morphology,particularly with respect to aggradation/degradation trends and changes in braiding potential.In reaches with net sediment deficit,results from the bed mobilization analysis will also be considered in assessing degradation tendencies. 6.5.4.4.|Study Component:Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments The goal of this study component is to compare existing,1980s and 1950s geomorphic feature data from aerial photo analysis to characterize channel stability and change and the distribution of geomorphic features under unregulated flow conditions.The effort will include use of the best available aerial photographs from the 1950s to provide a longer range assessment of channel change.The acquisition of the current aerials for the Middle Susitna River Segment was initiated in 2012 as part of the Aquatic Habitat and Geomorphic Mapping of the Middle Susitna River Segment Using Aerial Photography study (Section 6.5.4.5)and for the Lower Susitna River Segment as part of the Riverine Habitat Area versus Flow Lower Susitna River Segment (Section 6.5.4.7).Digitization of the geomorphic features from the 1980s and 2012 aerial,determination of geomorphic feature areas,and qualitative assessment of channel change were conducted in 2012 for the flows that aerials could be obtained.Due to a combination of weather and flows conditions,not all aerials originally planned for acquisition in 2012 were obtained.The acquisition of the aerials is discussed further in Sections 6.5.4.4.2.1 and 6.5.4.4.2.2.The remainder of the effort described will be conducted in 2013.The study area extends from the mouth of the Susitna River (RM 0)at Cook Inlet to the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184). 6.5.4.4.1._Existing Information and Need for Additional Information An analysis of the Middle Susitna River Reach geomorphology and how aquatic habitat conditions changed over a range of stream flows was performed in the 1980s using aerial photographic analysis (Trihey &Associates 1985).A similar analysis was performed for the Lower Susitna River Segment (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates 1985a). The1980s Lower Susitna River Segment study also included an evaluation of the morphologic stability of islands and side channels by comparing aerial photography between 1951 and 1983. An analysis of channel changes of the Middle River was presented in Geomorphic Change in the Middle Susitna River Since 1949 (Labelle et al.1985).In this document,aerial photographs and other data from the late 1940s through the early 1980s was evaluated to determine historical Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-27 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN change in the Middle Susitna River Segment including the important off-channel macrohabitats identified in the 1980s studies (side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs). The AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report (URS 2011) states that "if additional information is collected,the existing information could provide a reference for evaluating temporal and spatial changes within the various reaches of the Susitna River.”The gap analysis emphasizes that it is important to determine if the conditions represented by the data collected in the 1980s are still representative of current conditions and that at least a baseline comparison of current and 1980s-era morphological characteristics in each of the identified sub-reaches is required. Understanding existing geomorphic conditions and how laterally stable/unstable the channels have been over recent decades provides a baseline set of information needed to provide a context for predicting the likely extent and nature of potential changes that will occur due to the Project. Results of this study may also be used in the Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6)and Ice Processes (Section 7.6)studies to provide the surface areas of bars likely to become vegetated in the absence of ice-cover formation.This would be accomplished by evaluating the areas of exposed bars within river segments over a range of flows and developing exposed bar area discharge curves that could then be used to assess the impacts of the Project flows on bar inundation by both flows and ice.Increases in areas that would be both inundation-and ice-free are likely to permit vegetation establishment and persistence. Determination of the rate that area occupied by the channel is converted to floodplain and islands,and area occupied by floodplain and islands is converted to channel will provide information useful in identifying LWD recruitment rates and characterizing floodplain dynamics important to the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6).Therefore,a "turnover”analysis is included as part of this study component. 6.5.4.4.2.Methods This study component has been divided into the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments because the available information differs.The analysis of geomorphic change will be conducted for a single representative discharge. 6.5.4.4.2.1.Middle Susitna River Segment The orthorectified digital images of the historical 1983 black and white aerial photographs for the Middle River at a flow of 12,500 cfs were acquired for the area from RM 98 to RM 150 (RM 150 was the limit of the coverage from the 1980s effort).Additional historical aerials were acquired to allow delineation of the geomorphic features from RM 150 to 184.The September 6, 1983,aerials flown at a flow of 12,500 cfs,as measured at the Gold Creek Gage,were used for the historical condition.From RM 98 to RM 150,color aerials from July 19-20,1980,at flows ranging between 31,800 and 35,900 cfs (as measured at Gold Creek),not collected as part of the original Susitna Project effort,were used to digitize geomorphic features from RM 150 to RM 184.The 1980s orthorectified digital images of historical aerials were also acquired for the Upper River from RM 184 to RM 260.The aerials from RM 184 to RM 252 were from the same July19-20,1980 acquisition as the RM 150 to RM 184 aerials.From RM 252 to RM 260,color aerials from August 24,1981 were obtained.The flow at Gold Creek on this date was 35,000 cfs. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-28 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Acquisition of the 2012 aerials was targeted at a flow of 12,500 cfs;however,due to a combination of late season high flows and poor weather,the actual 2012 aerials were collected at flows of 13,300 cfs for RM 98 to RM 135 and 18,100 cfs for RM 136 to RM 184.Table 6.5-3 summarizes the 2012 aerial photo data collection effort for the Lower,Middle,and Upper Susitna River segments and indicates the RMs and discharges at which various sets of photos were obtained.The higher flow for the RM 136 to RM 184 should not create problems with digitizing geomorphic features,except that the areas of the gravel bars will require adjustment prior to comparison with 1980s information for use in 2013.Completion of aerial collection at the targeted flows will be performed in 2013,so the final information is expected to be based on flows closer to the target of 12,500 cfs. In 2012,for the both the 1983 and 2012 aerials,each feature was digitized as a polygon (without slivers)using ArcGIS software.Associated metadata were developed for both sets of digitized geomorphic features.The primary geomorphic features that are visible between the 1980s and current images,including the main channel,side channels,and sloughs were digitized from the aerial database just described.In addition,the presence and extent of mid-channel bars,vegetated bar areas,and changes at tributary deltas were digitized. The information developed from digitizing the aerials is being used to analyze and compare the geomorphology for 1980s and current conditions.From RM 98 to RM 184,Geographic Information System (GIS)software is being used to compare the 2012 versus 1980s total surface area associated with each geomorphic feature.Results will be compiled into tables and graphs,as appropriate,to show the difference in surface areas of the feature types between 2012 and the 1980s photography.The lead geomorphologist has trained the staff performing the digitization to ensure appropriate application of the geomorphic definitions.Since this 34-mile river segment below the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 150 to RM 184)was not analyzed in the 1980s,the historical aerials are at a higher discharge,30,000 cfs compared to 12,500 cfs,and the area of exposed gravel will not be comparable to the 2012 aerials at a lower flow without adjustment.It may be more appropriate to compare this 1980s RM 150 to RM 184 information with the results of the 2012 aerials collected at 23,200 cfs.A final decision on the 2012 aerials used from RM 150 to 184 for comparison with the 1980s will be made in 2013 after the 2013 supplemental aerial photo acquisition effort is conducted.(The 2013 supplemental aerial photo acquisition effort will be performed to fill in flow rates and areas that were scheduled for collection in 2012 but were not collected due to a combination of weather and flow conditions.) In 2013,orthorectified digital versions of historical 1950s aerials will be acquired and the geomorphic features digitized.Acquisition of these aerials and performing the effort is dependent on locating a set of historical aerials from the 1950s or early 1960s that are of sufficient quality to provide for meaningful comparison between the other two datasets (1980s and current). The change in channel planform over the length of the river (main channel location,side channel location,bars,channel and side channel width,channel and side channel location)will first be qualitatively assessed between the 1980s and 2012.This will be performed to assist in selection of the proposed Focus Areas.The geomorphic reach delineations will be reviewed in terms of the information on channel change and geomorphic reach limits adjusted if necessary to properly characterize channel stability.Reaches will be identified that are relatively stable versus those that are more dynamic.Reaches that would be most susceptible to channel change (e.g.,width or Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-29 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN planform change)with changes in the flow or sediment regime resulting from the Project or Project operations will be qualitatively identified because these are currently the most dynamic. In 2013,a quantitative evaluation of channel change in the Middle River will be performed by conducting a "turnover”analysis (Note:the turnover analysis was added to the RSP as a result of comments on the PSP from the EPA submitted November 14,2012).The digitized maps of the geomorphic features will be used to determine how much of the area covered by water in the 1950s and 1980s is land in 2012 versus still covered by water,taking into account river stage for the aerials not collected at 12,500 cfs,and how much of the area covered by water today was land versus covered by water in the 1980s and 1950s.This analysis will be performed on a geomorphic reach basis.This information will be used to calculate a "turnover rate”(water to land and land to water,in acres per year)for each reach,for the periods between the 1950s and the1980s,and between the 1980s and 2012 aerial imagery.The resulting reach-scale data will be used to define the reach-scale turnover rate values.The resulting quantitative data on turnover rate will be compared with hydrologic conditions,events at upstream glaciers,and other potential factors such as the occurrence of earthquakes to determine potential differences in the turnover rates from the two periods.Spatially,the turnover rates will be compared between reaches and channel types to determine if there is a difference in turnover between the various reaches and associated channel types. Depending upon the results of the riverine geomorphic analysis,additional historical photographic analysis may be requested as part of future geomorphic studies,but this additional analysis is not included at this time.Additional analysis of historical aerial photographs and the corresponding flows that occurred between 1950s and 2012 could be pertinent if substantial changes in the riverine habitat types (surface area,locations,etc.)are identified during comparison of the 2012,1980s,and 1950s photography.A decision on whether to acquire additional aerials will be made in Q4 2013.While the long-term changes in river morphology are the result of a range of flows,if significant changes are identified between pairs of aerial photographs,review of the hydrologic record frequently identifies events that are more than likely to have been morphogenetically significant.This type of additional aerial photo analysis could provide more specific information on the flow magnitude(s)and other conditions (for example,ice formation)that may cause substantial geomorphic channel adjustments. 6.5.4.4.2.2..Lower Susitna River Segment In 2012,orthorectified digital images of the 36,600-cfs (as measured at Sunshine Station) September 6,1983,set of Lower Susitna River Segment aerial photographs were obtained for the Lower Susitna River Segment from RM 0 to RM 98.Acquisition of 2012 aerials for the Lower Susitna River Segment at a targeted flow of approximately 36,600 cfs was planned.Due to a combination of weather and flows conditions,the Lower River aerials were acquired at several different times for flows ranging from 38,100 cfs to 46,900 cfs.For determining geomorphic features,these flows are considered to be within the target range. The extent of the side channels,main channel,anabranches and braid plain in the Lower Susitna River Segment,including the Three Rivers Confluence area,were digitized for both the 1980s and 2012 aerials.Planform shifts of the main channel and side channels are being identified between the 1983 and current aerial photography.This work was performed in 2012 to help in confirmation or adjustment of the downstream study limit for the Fluvial Modeling Geomorphology Study.Geomorphic features that are visible between the 1983 and 2012 images, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-30 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN including the presence and extent of individual side channels,side channel complexes,vegetated islands or bar complexes,and tributary deltas,were mapped and characterized.In areas where the mainstem channel consists of a dynamic braid plain mostly void of stabilizing vegetation,the effort was directed at defining the edges of the active channel rather than detailing the myriad of channels within the active area.Portions of the area within the braid plain were identified as bar island complexes and side channel complexes.Major sloughs and side channels along the Lower Susitna River Segment margins were included in the digitizing effort. In 2013,orthorectified digital versions of historical 1950s aerials will be acquired and the geomorphic features digitized.Acquisition of these aerials and performing the effort is dependent on locating a set of historical aerials from the 1950s or early 1960s that are of sufficient quality to provide for meaningful comparison between the other two datasets (1980s and current).The geomorphic change over the length of the river (main channel location,side channel location,bars,channel and side channel width,channel and side channel location)will be qualitatively assessed between the 1980s and current conditions.Reaches will be identified that are relatively stable versus those that are more dynamic.Reaches that would be most susceptible to channel change (e.g.,width or planform change)with changes in the flow or sediment regime resulting from the Project or Project operations will be qualitatively identified. In 2013,a quantitative evaluation of channel change in the Lower River will be performed by conducting a "turnover”analysis (Note:the turnover analysis was added to the RSP as a result of comments on the PSP from the EPA submitted November 14,2012).The digitized maps of the geomorphic features will be used to determine how much of the area covered by water in the 1950s and 1980s is land in 2012 versus still covered by water,taking into account river stage for the aerials not collected at 36,600 cfs,and how much of the area covered by water today was land versus covered by water in the 1980s and 1950s.This analysis will be performed on a geomorphic reach basis.This information will be used to calculate a "turnover rate”(water to land and land to water,in acres per year)for each reach for the periods between the 1950s and the1980s,and between the 1980s and 2012 aerial imagery.The resulting reach-scale data will be used to define the reach-scale turnover rate values.The resulting quantitative data on turnover rate will be compared with hydrologic conditions,events at upstream glaciers,and other potential factors such as the occurrence of earthquakes to determine potential differences in the turnover rates from the two periods.Spatially,the turnover rates will be compared between reaches and channel types to determine if there is a difference in turnover between the various reaches and associated channel types. Depending on the results of the riverine geomorphic analysis,additional historical photographic analysis may be requested as part of future geomorphic studies,but this additional analysis is not included at this time.Additional analysis of historical aerial photographs and the corresponding flows that occurred between the 1950s and 2012 could be pertinent if substantial changes in the riverine habitat types (surface area,locations,etc.)are identified during comparison of the 2012, 1980s and 1950s photography.While the long-term changes in river morphology are the result of a range of flows,if significant changes are identified between pairs of aerial photographs,review of the hydrologic record frequently identifies events that are more than likely to have been morphogenetically significant.This type of additional aerial photo analysis could provide more specific information on the flow magnitude(s)and other conditions (for example,ice formation) that may cause substantial geomorphic channel adjustments.A decision on whether to acquire additional aerials will be made in Q4 2013. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-31 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.4.2.3.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e Historical 1980s orthorectified aerial photographs for the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. e Historical 1950s orthorectified aerial photographs for the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. The following additional information will be needed to conduct this study: e Obtain recent or develop 2012 orthorectified aerial photos in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments at a flow similar to the historic aerials (12,500 cfs Middle Susitna River Segment and 36,600 cfs Lower Susitna River Segment)(acquired in 2012). e Supplemental aerials Middle River to be collected in 2013 for any areas with gaps in 2012 coverage at the 12,500 cfs target flow. 6.5.4.4.3.|Study Products The results of the Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segment component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following (Note:1950s products are dependent on suitable aerials being available from the 1950s): e Maps showing riverine geomorphic features outlined in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments for the 1950s,1980s,and 2012 for flows of approximately 12,500 cfs and 36,600 cfs,respectively. e Maps showing the distribution of all riverine geomorphic features for the three dates and for the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. e Overlay map of 1950s,1980s,and 2012 riverine geomorphic features to qualitatively assess the level of change in the channel morphology over the past three decades. e Tabular and graphical representation of the areas for each riverine geomorphic feature type by geomorphic reaches within the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. e Qualitative assessment of the level of geomorphic change within each geomorphic reach over the lengths of the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments including identification of stable versus non-stable areas. e Quantitative assessment of geomorphic change based on conducting a turnover rate analysis identifying the area of channel converted to land and land converted to channel for the periods of 1950s to 1980s and 1980s to 2012. In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e 1950s,1980s,and 2012 orthorectified aerial imagery on GIS layer for the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. e Digitized polygons for each riverine habitat feature type in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-32 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.5.|Study Component:Riverine Habitat versus Flow Relationship Middle Susitna River Segment The goal of this study component is to delineate existing and 1980s riverine macrohabitat types and develop wetted habitat area data over a range of flows to quantify riverine macrohabitat surface area versus flow relationships.The habitat areas will be determined for the riverine macrohabitats as defined in the 1980s (main channel,side channel,side slough,upland slough, tributary mouth and tributary). It is noted that the macrohabitats being delineated in this study component is one of five levels of nested and tiered habitat classification being applied to the Middle Susitna River Segment.The system is presented in Table 9.9-4 of the Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9).The classification levels include rivers segment,geomorphic reach,macrohabitats, mesohabitat,and edge habitat.The Geomorphology Study has defined the Susitna River segments and geomorphic reaches.The effort in this section will map approximately 50 percent of the macrohabitat in the Middle River.The results will be provided to the habitat characterization study (Section 9.9)to add macrohabitat subcategories not defined in the 1980s classification scheme.These include split main channel,multiple split main channel,backwater, and beaver complex.The habitat characterization study (Section 9.9)will also conduct the mapping for the fourth and fifth levels of the classification scheme. The study area extends from the Three Rivers Confluence area (RM 98)to the Watana Dam site (RM 184).Sixteen study sites representing approximately 50 percent of the river studied in the 1980s were studied in the 2012 study.Due to a combination of weather and flow conditions,not all aerials intended to be acquired in 2012 were flown (Table 6.4-3 summaries the 2012 aerial photo acquisition).Therefore,development of the riverine habitat area versus flow relationships for the current condition will continue into 2013.The 2012 effort does supply the information necessary for reach stratification and selection of proposed Focus Areas in the Middle River. Additionally,all or part of the remaining portion of the Middle Susitna River Segment may be studied in 2013-2014,depending on the outcome and recommendations from the 2012 study as well as the finalization of instream flow Focus Areas. 6.5.4.5.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information An analysis of the Middle Susitna River Segment and how riverine habitat conditions change over a range of stream flows was performed in the 1980s using aerial photographic analysis (Trihey &Associates 1985).This study evaluated the response of riverine aquatic habitat to flows in the Middle Susitna River Segment between the Three Rivers Confluence (RM 98)and Devils Canyon (RM 150)ranging from 5,100 cfs to 23,000 cfs (measured at Gold Creek gage [approximately RM 134)). Understanding existing geomorphic conditions,how aquatic macrohabitat changes over a range of stream flows,and how stable/unstable the geomorphic conditions have been over recent decades provides a baseline set of information needed to provide a context for predicting the likely extent and nature of potential changes that will occur due to the Project.Results of this study will also provide the basis for macrohabitat mapping to support the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)and will be used in the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)to provide the surface areas of bars likely to become vegetated in the absence of ice-cover formation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-33 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.5.2.Methods Aerial photography obtained in 2012 were combined with 1980s and other information to create a digital,spatial representation (i.e.,GIS database)of riverine habitat.The result was intended to be a quantification of the area of the riverine habitat types for three flow conditions for the historical 1980s condition and the current 2012 condition.Due to a combination of weather and flow conditions,only portions of two out of the three flows were collected (aerials for high and medium flows were collected,but no aerial low flows were collected).A supplemental data collection effort will be conducted in 2013 to complete the acquisition of aerials for all three flows for the entire Middle Susitna River Segment. The results for the information available in 2012 will be analyzed and presented in January 2013 as riverine habitat versus area relationships at three spatial levels:for the Middle Susitna River Segment,for the geomorphic reaches in the Middle Susitna River Segment,and for individual habitat study sites (This includes all ten proposed Focus Areas and seven additional sites studied in the 1980s that are not proposed Focus Areas).Comparison between the results from the 1980s and 2012 are being made.The historical information is only being developed for the reach from RM 98 to RM 150 because the delineation of habitat in the Devils Canyon section,RM 150 to RM 184,was not performed in the 1980s. The methods for this study component have been divided into three tasks:aerial photography, digitize riverine habitat types,and riverine habitat analysis. 6.5.4.5.2.1.Aerial Photography Portions of new color aerial photography of the Middle Susitna River Segment (RM 98 to RM 184)at stream flows corresponding to those analyzed in the Trihey &Associates study (1985) (stream flow at the Gold Creek gage [15292000])were obtained in 2012 to provide the foundation for the aquatic habitat and geomorphic mapping of the Middle Susitna River Segment,as well as to provide a resource for other studies.The aerials collected included RM 98 to RM 107 at 23,200 cfs,RM 98 to RM 135 at 13,300 cfs,and RM 136 to RM 184 at 18,100 cfs. It was the intent of the study plan to obtain three sets of aerial photography in 2012 at the following approximate discharges:23,000 cfs;12,500 cfs;and 5,100 cfs.(Note:seven sets of aerial photographs were flown and evaluated in the 1985 study at the stream flows of 5,100 cfs; 7,400 cfs;10,600 cfs;12,500 cfs;16,000 cfs;18,000 cfs;and 23,000 cfs).The combination of weather conditions and river flows only allowed the 23,000 cfs and a portion of the 12,500 cfs set of aerials to be collected in 2012.No aerials were obtained for the lowest flow of 5,100 cfs as ice and snow cover formed prior to the Susitna River dropping to this level.In order to provide a complete set of current aerial imagery,the 23,000 cfs aerials were collected for the entire study are from RM 0 to RM 260.The aerial photography was collected in 2012 at a scale of 1:12,000 and with a pixel resolution of 1 foot or better.Images to be collected in 2013 will be flown at the same scale and resolution.The flow levels intended to be collected in 2013 will be the remainder of the 12,500 cfs acquisition and all of the 5,100 cfs acquisition.If weather and discharge conditions have not occurred that allowed for collection of the aerials at the specified discharges by September 1 of 2013,a more opportunistic approach to obtaining the aerials will be instituted and alternate flows may be substituted for the 12,500 cfs and 5,100 cfs discharges to insure that a medium and low flow set of images are collected by the end of 2013. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-34 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Digital orthorectified images of the 1980s 12,500 cfs aerial photos will be obtained to serve as the base map for overlaying the digitized riverine habitat types from the1980s map book (Trihey and Associates 1985). 6.5.4.5.2.2.Digitize Riverine Habitat Types For the 2012 effort,17 study sites totaling 26.3 river miles were selected from the 1980s effort The 17 sites represent over 50 percent of the 49 miles (RM 100 to RM 149)of the Middle Susitna River Segment with aquatic habitat delineated in the 1980s.The selected sites are listed in Table 6.5-4.Selection of the sites was based on consideration of habitat and geomorphic characteristics of the reach and a visual qualitative side-by-side comparison of the aerials to ensure that the selected reaches were also representative of the level of change that has occurred over the period of comparison.The sites include the seven proposed Focus Areas,as identified in Section 6.6.1.2.4,in this portion of the Middle Susitna River Segment.Aerial photography for both 1980s and present condition was obtained for the entire reach so that additional areas may be digitized in the future if warranted. The Middle Susitna River Segment upstream of RM 150 was not studied in the 1980s;however, the current habitat features are to be delineated on 50 percent of the portion of the Segment encompassing Geomorphic Reaches MR-1 and MR-2.Six sites were selected,representing a variety of conditions and totaling 9.0 miles of the total 17.5 miles of combined Geomorphic Reaches MR-1 and MR-2.These sites include three proposed Focus Areas identified in Section 6.6.4.1.2.4.and represent approximately 50 percent of Geomorphic Reaches MR-1 and MR-2. Coordination has occurred and will continue to occur with AEA's Spatial Data Contractor to digitize (within the aerial photography analysis study reaches)the riverine habitat types from RM 98 to RM 150 defined in the 1980s from hard copy maps found in the Middle Susitna River Segment Assessment Report (Trihey &Associates 1985).Each habitat type has been digitized as a polygon (without slivers).The digitized habitat types are overlaid on a digital orthorectified image of the 1980s 12,500 cfs black and white aerial.The habitat types were classified into the following categories:main channel,side channel,side sloughs,upland sloughs,and tributary mouths. In 2012,riverine habitat types for the identified study sites were delineated and digitized from the 2012 aerials at the selected 23,000 cfs and for portions sites of the 12,500 cfs.Sites included the 17 sites identified for the 1980s digitization effort as well as six additional sites between RM 166.5 and RM 184,identified in coordination with the FA-IFS (Section 8.5),the R-IFS (Section 8.6),Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),and other pertinent studies.The habitat types were digitized from the orthorectified photography using ArcGIS software (each habitat type must be a polygon without slivers).Riverine habitat was classified using the same classification categories used in the Trihey &Associates study (1985)main channel,side channel,side sloughs,upland sloughs,and tributary mouths. In 2013,the digitization of the riverine habitat types and determination of the areas will be completed.This will include acquisition of the remaining portions of the 12,500 cfs and all of the 5,100 cfs orthorectified aerial photos. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-35 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.5.2.3.Riverine Habitat Analysis The information developed in the previous task are being used to develop relationships for riverine habitat versus flow for the specified reaches and habitat study sites.The relationships will be developed for both 1980s and 2012 and 2013 aerials.The riverine habitat type surface area versus flow relationships between the 1980s and current conditions are being compared at both a site and reach scale to determine if changes in the relationships have occurred.The comparison can only be performed for a portion of the reach,since the 1980s study did not cover the entire Middle Susitna River Segment.This effort will be completed in December 2012 and reported on in January 2012 for the 23,000 cfs and the portion of the 12,500 cfs aerials collected in 2012. From RM 98 to RM 150,GIS software was used to compare the 2012/2013 versus 1980s total surface area associated with each delineated riverine habitat type at each measured flow.Results are being compiled into tables and graphs,as appropriate,to show the difference in surfaces area of the feature types between 2012/2013 and the 1980s photography and to show the change in riverine habitat types versus flow.To ensure accurate comparison to the 1980s data set,not only are the same approximate flows be compared,but the same definitions are being used for each of the riverine habitat features that are delineated (see above).The Lead Geomorphologist has provided training to the staff performing the delineation to ensure appropriate application of the habitat definitions. Since the 34-mile river segment below the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 150 to RM 184)was not analyzed in the 1980s,this portion of the river is a new assessment (2012/2013 photography only)that will not be compared to past studies.However,the methods for analyzing riverine habitat types over the range of flows remain the same as for the downstream reach (23,000 cfs; 12,500 cfs;and 5,100 cfs).For Geomorphic Reaches MR-3 and MR-4,which include Devils Canyon and the river immediately upstream,no habitat sites have been selected for study.This reach has a high level of lateral and vertical control,the areas associated with riverine habitat types have likely experienced little change.Results of the study component Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.4)will determine whether there has been change in geomorphic features in this portion of the Middle Susitna River Segment. Habitat features are being compared and contrasted quantitatively and a qualitative assessment will be made of the similarity of the sites in 2012/2013 compared to the 1980s in order to assess the stability of the study sites.The results for the sites with 2012 aerials will be reported on in January 2013.A decision will also be made as to whether the remaining portions of the Middle Susitna River Segment,beyond the original selected study sites analyzed in 2012,will be digitized and analyzed in 2013-2014. 6.5.4.5.2.4.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e Historical 1980s orthorectified aerial photographs for the Middle Susitna River Segment. e USGS flow records for the past 10 years for the Susitna River at Gold Creek. The following additional information will be needed to conduct this study: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-36 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Obtain (fly)2012/2013 orthorectified aerial photos in the Middle Susitna River Segment at 5,100;12,500;and 23,000 cfs (corresponds to 1980s flow)(partially completed in 2012). e Obtain orthorectified digital images of 1980s black and white aerial photos in the Middle Susitna River Segment at 12,500 cfs base map aerial (completed in 2012). 6.5.4.5.3.|Study Products The results of the Riverine Habitat Versus Flow Relationship Middle Susitna River Segment component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following: e Tabulation of the riverine habitat types versus flow on a reach and individual site basis for the 1980s and 2012/2013 conditions. e Graphical representation of the riverine habitat type area versus flow relationships by reaches for both the 1980s and 2012/2013 data. e Assessment of the change and similarity in riverine habitat types between the 1980s and 2012 and conclusions on site stability to aid the Instream Flow Study in site selection and determination of the applicability of the 1980s data to represent current conditions. In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e Orthorectified 2012/2013 aerial imagery of the Middle Susitna River Segment at 5,100 cfs;12,500 cfs;and 23,000 cfs. e Orthorectified 1983 aerial imagery of the Middle Susitna River Segment from RM 98 to RM 150 at 12,500 cfs. e Digitized polygons representing the 1980s riverine habitat types for the Middle Susitna River Segment at 5,100 cfs;12,600 cfs;and 23,000 cfs from RM 98 to RM 150 (Middle Susitna River Segment below Devils Canyon). e Digitized polygons representing the current (2012/2013)riverine habitat types for the Middle Susitna River Segment at 5,100 cfs;12,500 cfs;and 23,000 cfs from RM 98 to RM 150 (Middle Susitna River Segment below Devils Canyon)and RM 150 to 184 (Middle Susitna River Segment in Devils Canyon and above Devils Canyon). 6.5.4.6.|Study Component:Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments The goal of the Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments study component is to utilize comparison of pre-and post-Project flows and sediment transport conditions to estimate the likelihood for potential post-Project channel change in the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments.The study area for this effort is the Lower Susitna River Segment from RM 98 to RM 0 and the Middle Susitna River Segment from RM 184 to RM 98.The initial effort involves the Lower River and was started in 2012 and will be completed in early 2013.The results of this effort will help determine what additional analysis of Project effects may be warranted in the Lower Susitna River Segment for the 2013-2014 studies.The initial Middle River assessment will be performed in Q3 2013.Continued Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-37 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN application of the framework to both the Lower and Middle Susitna River segments as additional information on with-Project hydrology,sediment transport,and the geomorphology of the system are developed by the various studies will provide additional context for identification of Project effects including interpretation of and integration with the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study results. 6.5.4.6.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information An analysis of the Lower Susitna River Segment and how riverine habitat conditions change over a range of stream flows was performed in the 1980s using aerial photographic analysis (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey and Associates 1985a).This study evaluated the response of riverine aquatic habitat to flows in the Lower Susitna River Segment reach between the Yentna River confluence (RM 28.5)and Talkeetna (RM 98)(measured at Sunshine gage [approximately RM 84])ranging from 13,900 cfs to 75,200 cfs.The study also included an evaluation of the morphologic stability of islands and side channels by comparing aerial photography between 1951 and 1983. In another study,13 tributaries to the lower Susitna River were evaluated for access by spawning salmon under existing and with proposed stream flows for the original hydroelectric project (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey and Associates 1985b).The study contains information regarding fish run timing,mainstem and tributary hydrology,and morphology.Based on the results of this study,it was concluded that passage for adult salmon was not restricted under natural flow conditions nor was it expected to become restricted under the proposed Project operations. An analysis of channel changes of the Middle River was presented in Geomorphic Change in the Middle Susitna River Since 1949 (Labelle et al.1985).In this document,aerial photographs and other data from the late 1940s through the early 1980s was evaluated to determine historical change in the Middle Susitna River Segment including the important off-channel macrohabitats identified in the 1980s studies (side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs). The AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report (URS 2011) states that "if additional information is collected,the existing information could provide a reference for evaluating temporal and spatial changes within the various reaches of the Susitna River.”The gap analysis emphasizes that it is important to determine if the conditions represented by the data collected in the 1980s are still representative of current conditions,and that at least a baseline comparison of current and 1980s morphological characteristics in each of the identified subreaches is required. Results of this study in QI of 2013 will provide the initial basis for assessing the potential for changes to the Lower Susitna River Segment reach morphology due to the Project in order to help inform the evaluation of the downstream limit for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study.Additional studies will be planned for 2013-2014 to continue further downstream in the Lower River if the results of this study identify a potential for important aquatic habitat and channel adjustments in response to the Project below RM 84.In addition to providing the initial assessment for informing the evaluation of the downstream limit for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,the assessments presented in this study component will also assist in the overall evaluation of Project effects.This is why the effort was extended upstream to include the Middle Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-38 December 2012 REviISED STUDY PLAN Susitna River Segment in response to comments filed November 14,2012 by NMFS and USFWS on the PSP (NMFS and USFWS). The Stream Flow Assessment portion of this study component includes a concurrent flow and stage analysis for the Susitna River in the area of the Talkeetna and Chulitna confluences.This analysis was added in response to a comment filed November 14,2012 on the PSP concerning the potential for Project to affect erosion in the area of the Town of Talkeetna (Teich,Cathy). Issues associated with geomorphic resources in the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments for which information appears to be insufficient were identified in the PAD (AEA 2011), including the following: e Gl16:Potential effects of reduced sediment load and changes to sediment transport as a result of Project operations within the Lower Susitna River Segment. e F19:The degree to which Project operations affect flow regimes,sediment transport, temperature,and water quality that result in changes to seasonal availability and quality of aquatic habitats,including primary and secondary productivity. 6.5.4.6.2.Methods 6.5.4.6.2.1.Stream Flow Assessment Pre-Project and available post-Project hydrologic data are being compared in 2012 and the results will be reported on in January 2013.This includes a comparison of the monthly and annual flow duration curves (exceedance plots)and plots/tables of flows by month (maximum, average,median,minimum)for the Susitna River at Gold Creek,Susitna River at the Sunshine and Susitna Station gaging stations.These analyses are being conducted for the major tributaries provided in the extended record including the Chulitna River near Talkeetna,the Talkeetna River near Talkeetna,and the Yentna River near Susitna Station.In 2013,additional hydrologic indicators may be used to further illustrate and quantify the comparison between pre-and post- Project stream flows.The pre-Project data analysis includes the 61-year extended record prepared by USGS.The post-Project condition is based on initial runs of the Operations Model and the Initial Flow Routing Model developed by the engineering studies.The Operations Model provides Project releases and the routing model provides estimates of hourly flow and stage from the base of the dam at RM 184 to the downstream limit of the model near RM 84. Using the extended record currently prepared by USGS,a flood-frequency and flood-duration analysis for pre-and post-Project annual peak flows is being performed.The flood-frequency analysis is being performed using standard hydrologic practices and guidelines as recommended by USGS (1982).The pre-Project analysis was completed in November 2012 and the post- Project analysis will be completed by the end of December 2012.The results of both analyses were be compared and reported on in January 2013. A concurrent flow and stage analysis will be conducted in Q4 of 2013 to determine the potential for Project-induced changes in flows and stage on the Susitna River that may have the potential to alter the erosion patterns in the area of the town of Talkeetna.A technical memorandum will be prepared identifying the analysis procedures and results.If this initial analysis indicates that the changes in flows and stage on the Susitna River may be sufficient to alter the flow patterns during peak flows on the Talkeetna and Chulitna rivers,then a plan will be developed to further Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-39 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN study this potential Project effect in 2014.It is expected that if implemented,this additional effort would include extending a branch of the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model up the Talkeetna River and possibly the Chulitna River.As part of this effort,2012 aerial photos acquired prior to the September 2012 high flows and after the high flows will be evaluated to determine the extent of erosion from the September 2012 high flow event.This aerial photo comparison will provide an indication of current erosion that is typical of a high flow event for pre-Project conditions. 6.5.4.6.2.2..Sediment Transport Assessment The sediment transport data collected by USGS (See Section 6.5.4.2)are used to develop bedload,total bed material,and wash load rating curves to facilitate translation of the periodic instantaneous measurements into yields over longer durations (e.g.,monthly,seasonal,and annual).This information is being used to perform an overall sediment balance for each component of the sediment load.This information will be developed as part of the Sediment Supply and Transport Middle and Lower Susitna River Segment study (see Section 6.5.4.3).The initial sediment balance will be completed in December 2012 and reported on in January 2013 to inform the review of the downstream study limit (See Section 6.6.3.2)with more detailed work effort conducted throughout 2013 and 2014 to support the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6). 6.5.4.6.2.3.Integrate Sediment Transport and Flow Results into Conceptual Framework for Identification of Geomorphic Reach Response Prediction of Project-induced changes to river morphology in an alluvial river is fundamentally based on the magnitudes and directions of change in the driving variables,hydrology,and sediment supply.Initial,qualitative assessment of change can be based on Lane's (1955) equality: Qw.S Qs.Ds0, where Qy is the flow,S is the slope,Q,is the sediment transport and Dso is the median size of the bed material.A change in any one of the variables will require a change in the others to maintain the balance. Use of the expansion of Lane's relation by Schumm (1977)allows the response to the changes in driving variables to be expressed in terms of channel morphometric parameters such as channel width (b),depth (d),slope (S),meander wavelength (A),width-depth ratio (F)and sinuosity (P). For example,a potential range of changes in response to the Project in the vicinity of the Three Rivers Confluence where flows will be reduced and sediment supply could be effectively increased could be expressed as follows: -++-sgt ot p-ptQwsQs b,d,a°,S »PF where +represents an increase,-represents a decrease and +represents indeterminacy. Application of these qualitative relations assumes that the river is alluvial and that the form and characteristics of the channel are the result only of the interaction of the flows and the sediment load.Where non-fluvial factors such as bedrock outcrop or coarse-grained paleo-flood deposits limit the adjustability of the channel,the ability to predict the direction and magnitude of channel Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-40 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN change in response to changes in the water and sediment load below dams is reduced (Miller 1995;Grant and Swanson 1995;Grant et al.2003). Using the data developed for the pre-and post-Project flood frequency,flood duration,and sediment load,the geomorphic response of the Susitna River in a conceptual framework along the longitudinal profile of the river system from the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments will be predicted.The work will be initially performed for the Lower River Segment and completed in January of 2013 in order to support evaluation of the downstream study limit for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6.3.2).The initial effort on the Middle River will be performed in Q3 of 2013.The conceptual framework developed by Grant et al. (2003)that relies on the dimensionless variables of the ratio of sediment supply below the dam to that above the dam and the fractional change in frequency of sediment transporting flows is being used to predict the nature and magnitude of the response of the geomorphic reaches in the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments.Other analytical approaches are also being considered to evaluate potential for geomorphic adjustments of the reaches in the river segments due to the Project.These include an evaluation of morphologic changes based on changes to the degree and intensity of braiding using Germanoski's (1989)modified braiding index (MBI)that has been used to predict channel responses to anthropomorphically-induced changes in Alaskan, glacial-fed rivers including the Toklat,Robertson,and Gerstle Rivers (Germanoski 2001).As demonstrated by Germanoski and Schumm (1993),Germanoski and Harvey (1993),and Harvey and Trabant (2006),the following are the expected directions of responses in the MBI values to significant changes in bed material gradation and sediment supply: e Ifthe DSO increases and there is a supply of sediment,then MBI increases. e If the DSO increases and there is a significant decrease in the supply of sediment,then MBI decreases. e Ifthe bed aggrades,then MBI increases. e Ifthe bed degrades,then MBI decreases. Specific MBI values for braided reaches of the Susitna River under existing conditions are being developed from aerial photography,and the likely changes in values in response to the Project will be assessed.Prediction of the direction,if not the magnitude of changes,provide useful information for assessing likely Project effects on geomorphic features that form instream habitats.It also provides context to assist in interpreting and assessing the validity of results from the bed evolution models and other analytical tools. 6.5.4.6.2.4.Literature Review on Downstream Effects of Dams To assist in the assessment of potential Project effects on the geomorphology of the Susitna River,a search and review of literature on the downstream effects of dams will be conducted. There is considerable literature on this topic for dams within the United States as well as around the world.Grant et al.(2003)identified in the previous section in one such reference,with others including,but not limited to Sabo et al.(2012),Clipperton et al.(2003),Schmidt and Wilcock (2000),Shields et al.(2000),Freidman et al.(1998),Collier et al.(1996),and Williams and Wolman (1984).Efforts will be made to locate information on specific dams within the region and in other similar cold region environments around the world.Information could be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-41 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN used to extend or complement field studies as well as reduce the uncertainty associated with study results and conclusions. 6.5.4.6.2.5.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e Historical suspended sediment and bedload data for the Susitna River. e Flowrecords for the Susitna River. e Characterization of bed material from previous studies. The following additional information will need to be obtained to conduct this study: e Suspended and bedload data for the Susitna River at Tsusena Creek and Gold Creek being performed by USGS. e Extended flow record for the Susitna River and gaged tributaries within the study area being developed by USGS. e Channel morphologic data for existing conditions including,width,depth,width/depth ratios,and MBIs. 6.5.4.6.3.|Study Products The results of the Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on Lower Susitna River Segment Channel Sediment component will be included in the Geomorphology Report. Information provided will include the following: e Pre-and post-Project comparison of hydrologic parameters for the Susitna River at Sunshine and at Susitna Station,including: o Monthly and annual flow duration curves o Annual peak flow frequency o Monthly flow statistics (maximum,average,median,minimum) e Summary of changes in sediment transport for pre-and post-Project conditions in the Lower Susitna River Segment. e Results of the assessment of anticipated Project effects on the Lower Susitna River Segment based on the analytical framework in Grant et al.(2003)and other indicators of potential channel change such as the MBI by Germanoski (1989). 6.5.4.7.|Study Component:Riverine Habitat Area versus Flow Lower Susitna River Segment The goal of this study component is to conduct an initial assessment of the potential for Project effects associated with changes in stage to alter Lower Susitna River Segment riverine habitat. This effort was conducted in 2012.If the decision is made to continue detailed studies of Project effects into the Lower Susitna River,then this effort will be expanded to include mapping of the 1980s aquatic macrohabitat type in the Lower Susitna River Segment and the development of the wetted macrohabitat versus flow relationships. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-42 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.7.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information An analysis of the Lower Susitna River Segment and how riverine habitat conditions change over a range of stream flows was performed in the 1980s using aerial photographic analysis (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey and Associates 1985a).This study evaluated the response of riverine aquatic habitat to flows in the Lower Susitna River Segment reach between the Yentna River confluence (RM 28.5)and Talkeetna (RM 98)(measured at Sunshine gage at approximately RM 84)ranging from 13,900 cfs to 75,200 cfs.Results of this study will provide the initial basis for assessing the potential for changes to the Lower Susitna River Segment reach morphology due to the Project.Additional studies will be planned for 2013-2014 if the results of this study and other studies identify a potential for important aquatic habitat and channel adjustments in response to the Project. 6.5.4.7.2.Methods This study component is divided into three tasks:Riverine Habitat-Flow Relationship Assessment,Synthesis of the 1980s Aquatic Habitat Information,and Contingency Analysis to Compare Wetted Channel Area.The third task is optional and dependent on a determination if comparison of riverine habitat in the Lower Susitna River Segment under pre-and post-Project flows is warranted for additional flow conditions and determination of whether aquatic resource studies need to be continued further downstream in the Lower Susitna River Segment. 6.5.4.7.2.1.Change in River Stage Assessment A tabular and graphical comparison of the change in water surface elevations associated with the results of the pre-and post-Project stream flow assessment (Section 6.5.6.2.1)was developed using the stage-discharge relationships (rating curves)for the Sunshine and Susitna Station gaging stations.This comparison included monthly and annual stage duration curves (exceedance plots)and plots/tables of stage by month (maximum,average,median,minimum). Additional parameters to describe and compare the pre-and post-Project water surface elevations may be performed in 2013.A graphical plot of a representative cross-section at each gaging station was developed with a summary of the changes in stage (water surface elevation)for the two flow regimes.If possible,the location of the active channel and the floodplain will also be identified on the cross-section.Changes in stage will be related to exposure of bars through the previously developed bar area discharge curves,thereby providing the link between both vegetation and ice impact assessments.The stage change information was also used to estimate and compare the areas of the various riverine habitat types for the existing and with-Project conditions over a range of flow frequencies. The availability of USGS winter gage data with respect to discharge and ice elevation/thickness was investigated.Coordination with the Ice Processes (Section 7.6)occurred to obtain information on ice elevation/thickness.This information was summarized and will be analyzed in QI 2013 to make an initial assessment of discharge effects on ice elevation. 6.5.4.7.2.2.Synthesis of the 1980s Aquatic Habitat Information A synthesis/summary of the 1980s Response of Aquatic Habitat Surface Area to Mainstem Discharge Relationships in the Yentna to Talkeetna Reach of the Susitna River (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates 1985a)was performed and will be provided with the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-43 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN January 2013 technical memorandum.A synthesis/summary of the Assessment of Access by Spawning Salmon into Tributaries of the Lower Susitna River (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates,1985b)was also performed and will be included in the January 2103 technical memorandum.Data have been summarized with respect to the anticipated pre-and post-Project flow changes,where applicable. 6.5.4.7.2.3.Site Selection and Stability Assessment Five sites in the Lower Susitna River Segment were selected from the Yentna to Talkeetna reach map book (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey and Associates 1985a)at the approximately 36,600 cfs flow at Sunshine Gage to study in 2012.These sites were selected in coordination with the FA-IFS and the R-IFS.A side-by-side comparison of the sites using the 1983 36,600- cfs aerials and the 2011 aerials from the Mat-Su Borough LiDAR project were used to qualitatively assess site stability.Only sites that had been relatively stable during the period from the 1980s to present were selected.The five sites selected were:Side Channel IV-4 (SC IV-4), Willow Creek (SC III-1),Goose Creek (SC II-4),Montana Creek (SC II-1)and Sunshine Slough (SC I-5). 6.5.4.7.2.4.Aerial Photography Analysis,Riverine Habitat Study Sites (RM 28 to RM 98) Using GIS and the September 6,1983 aerials for the 36,600-cfs flow,mainstem and side channel riverine habitat was digitized from the 1985 map book (R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey & Associates 1985a)for the selected sites.Each area associated with a habitat type was digitized as a polygon (without slivers).To provide a comparison with current conditions,aerials flown at approximately 36,600 cfs were obtained (actual flows ranged from 38,100 cfs to 46,900 cfs). The current wetted areas of the riverine habitat types,as defined in the 1980s analysis,were delineated for the selected sites. In January 2013,the difference in wetted surface area of the main channel and side channel riverine habitats (as defined in R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates 1985a )will be compared between the 1983 and current conditions.The areas of the riverine habitat types, along with the initial 2012 results of the Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments study component (Section 6.5.4.4),will be compared and contrasted quantitatively,and a qualitative assessment will be made of the similarity of the 1980s sites compared to the 2012 sites.The assessment of site stability will help determine the applicability of Lower Susitna River Segment riverine habitat information developed in the 1980s to supplement information being developed in the current Project studies. 6.5.4.7.2.5.Additional Aerial Photography Analysis,Riverine Habitat Study Sites (RM 28 to RM 98) Based on the results of the comparison of riverine habitat areas at the selected study sites for the Lower Susitna River Segment and results of the Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments study component (Section 6.5.4.4),a determination of whether to perform a similar effort and comparison for up to two additional discharges will be made (discharges corresponding to the analysis of wetted habitat areas in the Lower Susitna River Segment include 75,200 cfs;59,100 cfs;36,600 cfs;21,100 cfs;and 13,900 cfs).This decision Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-44 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN will be made in coordination with the FA-IFS (Section 8.5),R-IFS (Section 8.6),Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9),and licensing participants. If the decision is made to analyze riverine habitat at two additional discharges,the flows will be selected and the associated habitat areas digitized from the 1985 map book.New aerial photographs will be obtained at the selected discharges.If a decision is made to extend studies further downstream in the Lower Susitna River Segment,additional sites for delineation may be selected.The process,schedule,and criteria for extending the studies further in the Lower Susitna River Segment is described in Section 6.6.3.2 based on geomorphic criteria and in Section 8.5.3 based on results of the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model.The geomorphic criteria will be evaluated in Q1 2013 and again in QI 2014.The Mainstem Flow Routing Model trigger will be evaluated in Q1 2013. The riverine habitat types at the selected sites will be delineated and digitized on these images to represent the current condition.The difference in wetted surface area of the main channel and side channel riverine habitats will be compared between the 1983 and current conditions for the two additional discharges.Additional sites for delineation of existing aquatic macrohabitat beyond those identified in the 1980s may be included in the optional effort if results of the interim flow and fish and aquatics studies require this information.(The USFWS Study Plan Request included digitizing the riverine habitat types for three flows in the Lower Susitna River Segment.This topic was discussed at the Water Resources TWG meeting held on June 14,2012. It was explained that the current proposal by AEA is to digitize riverine habitat for a single flow in 2012,then based on decisions on whether to continue Focus Area studies into the Lower Susitna River Segment and how far those studies would be carried downstream,the optional aerial photo analysis identified in this task would be performed in 2013.USFWS agreed at the meeting that this approach was appropriate.) 6.5.4.7.2.6.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e Historical 1980s orthorectified aerial photographs for the Lower Susitna River Segment. e USGS flow record for the Sunshine and Susitna Station gages including measurement notes,rating curves,stage shifts,cross-sections,and information on ice thickness. The following additional information will need to be obtained to conduct this study: e Results of Study Component,Assess Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.4). 6.5.4.7.3.Study Products The results of the Riverine Habitat Area versus Flow Lower Susitna River Segment component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following: e Comparison of pre-and post-Project stage at the Susitna River at Sunshine and the Susitna Station gages associated with the flow duration curves (monthly and annual)and monthly statistics. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-45 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Summary of available USGS measurements of ice elevation/thickness to identify the need to perform analysis of the discharge effect on ice elevation. e Narrative describing the synthesis of the 1980s aquatic habitat versus flow relationships and the anticipated post-Project flow changes. e Results for the selected flow of the comparison of the riverine habitat areas,by type,for the selected sites for 1980s and current aerial imagery. In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e Digitized polygons of the 1980s and current riverine habitat surface areas at the selected sites. 6.5.4.8.|Study Component:Reservoir Geomorphology The goal of this study component is to characterize changes resulting from conversion of the channel and portions of the river valley to a reservoir.For the majority of this study component (Sections 6.5.4.8.2.1,6.5.4.8.2.2 and 6.5.8.4.3)the study area extends from the proposed Watana Dam site (RM 184)upstream to include the reservoir inundation zone and the portion of the river potentially affected by backwater and delta formation in the river,which is currently assumed to correspond to approximately five miles above the reservoir maximum pool (at approximately RM 238).This portion of the proposed study area is shown in Figure 6.5-6.For the Bank and Boat Wave Erosion downstream of Watana Dam (Section 6.5.4.8.2.4)portion of the study component,the study area extends from the proposed Watana Dam (RM 184)downstream to the Three Rivers Confluence (RM 98).This study area corresponds to the entire Middle Susitna River Segment.Specific objectives of the Reservoir Geomorphology study component include the following: e Estimate reservoir sediment trap efficiency and reservoir longevity. e Estimate the Susitna River and inflow tributary delta formation with respect to potential effects on upstream fish passage. e Estimate erosion and beach formation in the Watana Reservoir drawdown zone and shoreline area. e Evaluate the resistance of the Susitna River banks to boat wave erosion under Project operations and if the assessment indicates the lower portion of the bank is not sufficiently armored and/or boat activity may cause an increase in erosion of the upper part of the bank,the magnitude of the potential effects will be estimated. 6.5.4.8.1..|Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Construction and operation of the proposed Project will impound a reservoir for approximately 41.5 miles upstream from the dam.The reservoir will likely trap essentially all of the coarse sediment load and much of the fine sediment load that enters the impoundment from the upstream Susitna River.The coarse sediment load will form a delta at the head of the reservoir that will be re-worked by seasonal fluctuations of the reservoir elevation. Similar to the mainstem Susitna River delta at the head of the reservoir,deltas of varying size will likely form where tributaries enter the reservoir.The amount and distribution of sediment deposits may affect the connectivity of the surface flows between the reservoir and the tributary Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-46 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN channels,which may,in turn,block fish passage into the tributaries.The available information does not contain data describing the magnitude and size distribution of the annual sediment loads from the tributaries that enter the reservoir,a potentially significant data gap. Operation of the Project would result in seasonal and daily water-level fluctuations in Watana Reservoir,which will result in beach formation and erosion and/or mass wasting of soils within the impoundment.The results of the erosion potential portion of this study will provide information on the extent of these processes and the potential for alterations to Project operations or erosion control measures to reduce erosion and mass wasting. 6.5.4.8.2.Methods The methods are divided into three areas:reservoir trap efficiency and sediment accumulation rates,delta formation,and reservoir erosion.(In the Study Plan comments,NOAA-NMEFS and USFWS requested that a description of reservoir sediment removal procedures be included in the Geomorphology effort.At the Water Resources TWG meeting held June 14,2012,AEA's consultants indicated that there are no plans for removal of sediment deposited in the reservoir because no feasible procedures for accomplishing this on a large reservoir with a substantial permanent pool currently exist.The reservoir will have a finite life as a result of sedimentation and this will be estimated as part of the Reservoir Geomorphology study component. 6.5.4.8.2.1.Reservoir Trap Efficiency and Sediment Accumulation Rates Inflowing sediment loads from the mainstem Susitna River will be determined by integrating the bedload and suspended load equations developed for the Susitna River at Tsusena Creek over the extended hydrologic record for the Susitna River.Due to the short record at this station,the information collected at Vee Canyon and the bedload and suspended load data collected at Gold Creek will be used to further refine Tsusena sediment rating curves.The methods described in the Empirically Characterize Susitna River Sediment Supply and Transport study component will be used to develop the incoming sediment load. Sediment loading from the significant tributaries within the reservoir may also affect reservoir life.The reservoir tributary loading will be accounted for in the sediment load data collected for the Susitna River at Tsusena Creek.Similarly,if the sediment loading from the reservoir perimeter is substantial,it will be incorporated into the analysis.Potential additional sediment loading resulting from glacial surge will be investigated in the Glacier and Runoff Changes Study (Section 7.7.4.4,Analyze Potential Changes in Sediment Delivery to Watana Reservoir). If this investigation indicates that the increased sediment load can actually be delivered in substantial quantities to Watana Reservoir,more detailed analyses of the increased loading will be performed and a sediment loading scenario accounting for glacial surge will be added to the reservoir trap efficiency and sediment accumulation analysis.This would include an estimate of the reduction in reservoir life that could result from sediment loading associated with periodic glacial surges. Due to the relatively large storage capacity of the proposed reservoir,it is reasonable to assume that all sand and coarser sediment size fractions delivered to the reservoir will be trapped,while a substantial amount of the fine-grained,colloidal sediments associated primarily with glacial outwash will pass through the reservoir into the downstream river.When applied over a long- term horizon,the amount of trapped sediment can be used to evaluate the impacts of Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-47 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN sedimentation on reservoir storage capacity.If the analysis indicates that a substantial amount of fine sediment will deposit in the reservoir,consolidation of the deposits will also be considered in the analysis.(Note that consolidation of sands and gravels is minimal.)Potential methods for estimating the trap efficiency of the fine sediment include the relationships from Einstein (1965) and Li and Shen (1975).The latter method may be the most appropriate because it accounts for the tendency of suspended particles to be carried upward in the water column due to turbulence. Estimates of the trap efficiency for the fine sediment will be made using the Brune (1953) method.The Brune (1953)method that was recommended by Strand and Pemberton (1987)for use in large or normally-ponded reservoirs (Morris et al.2007)can be used to check the reasonableness of results obtained from the other methods,although this method does not provide a means of separating the behavior of different particle sizes in the inflowing load.Chen (1975)may also be another method to check the reasonableness of the trap efficiency determination.The Churchill (1948)method is also commonly used to estimate reservoir trap efficiency;however,this method is more applicable for settling basins,small reservoirs,and flood-retarding structures and should probably not be used for this study.The proposed methods will provide a basis for estimating the quantity of the various size fractions that either pass through or are trapped in the reservoir.If the initial analyses indicate that a more sophisticated approach is necessary to obtain reasonable trap efficiencies,consideration will be given to using a numerical model such as Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code (EFDC)(Hamrick 1992)model to refine the estimates. 6.5.4.8.2.2.Delta Formation Estimation of the formation of deltas on the mainstem Susitna River and its tributaries as they enter the proposed Watana Reservoir will require estimation of sediment load.Although the USGS measurements in the Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection at Tsusena Creek, Gold Creek,and Sunshine Gage Stations study component target three locations along the Susitna River,sediment transport estimates will be needed at additional locations,including ungaged tributaries.Because of the potential impacts on fish movement into the tributaries, ungaged tributaries that require study will be identified in coordination with the Fish studies.In these locations,reconnaissance will be performed to characterize the sediment transport regime and to identify appropriate methods of calculating yields.In cases where bed material delivery to the proposed reservoir could produce deltas with the potential to affect upstream fish migration,surveys of tributary channel geometry and bed material gradations based on samples collected during the reconnaissance will be coupled with selected bed material transport functions to calculate sediment yield rating curves.Long-term flow hydrographs synthesized for the ungaged tributaries will be needed from other studies for each of the selected tributaries to calculate sediment yields.Alternate approaches to quantifying sediment yield,such as previous studies of regional sediment yields (Guymon 1974)may also be considered. To estimate the development of the deltas,the sediment yield results can be coupled with the physical constraints imposed by Project operations (i.e.,variation in lake levels)on the topset and foreset slopes of the deltas to simulate growth and development of deltas throughout the period of the license (USBR 1987;Morris and Fan 1998).The volume of sediments deposited will be distributed within the topographic constraints of the reservoir fluctuation zone identified for the period when mainstem and tributaries are delivering significant sediment load. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-48 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Consideration will be given to which portion of the sediment load would form the delta deposits based on settling characteristics. 6.5.4.8.2.3.Reservoir Erosion Erosion and mass wasting potential will be assessed within the reservoir fluctuation zone and along the shoreline for 100 vertical feet above the proposed full pool elevation.The following potential erosion processes will be evaluated: e Mass wasting. e Surface erosion from sheetwash. e Wave erosion (wind and boat wakes if motorized boat recreation is permitted). e Solifluction,freeze-thaw,and thawing of permafrost. e Beach/bank development at full pool. e Erosion by ice movement on the reservoir surface. The following existing spatial data will be collected: e Topography (LiDAR as available). e Geo-rectified aerial photography and recent stereo pairs to evaluate existing mass wasting sites. e Geologic and soil mapping,including work done for the Susitna Hydroelectric Project (Acres 1982)and subsequent mapping by USGS and the Alaska Division of Geologic and Geophysical Surveys.This task will be coordinated with the Geology and Soils Study. e Vegetation mapping;this task will be coordinated with the Botanical Resources Study. In addition,the following information will be obtained from other resource study leads: e Expected reservoir surface elevation fluctuations (seasonal,daily,maximum hourly lowering rate)from the Project Operation Study. e Expected motorized watercraft recreational use data (if any,from the Recreation and Aesthetic Resources Study). e Daily air temperature (maximum/minimum)and wind (speed,direction)data from the Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6). e Expected ice development and movement within the reservoir from the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6). The existing spatial data will be evaluated to determine if sufficient geologic and soil data are available to evaluate erosion and mass wasting potential.The mass wasting work will be coordinated with the Geology and Soils Study and geotechnical investigations of the dam site and reservoir area that are planned under the geotechnical exploration and testing program.The geotechnical investigations for the dam site and reservoir will cover large,deep rotational and block failures;the Reservoir Erosion Study will cover shallow translational slides (added in response to the FERC comment letter dated May 31,2012).The initial investigation will be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-49 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN completed by spring 2013.If additional soil/geologic mapping or data on soil characteristics are needed,field mapping and sample collection will occur during summer 2013 in coordination with the Geology and Soils,and Geotechnical studies.This work could include mapping or collection of soil properties of interest in representative areas,including soil texture,depth, permafrost presence/absence,infiltration capacity,and cohesion. The spatial data (topography,geology,soils,vegetation)will be used to prepare an erosion and mass wasting hazard map of the reservoir shoreline and inundation area.Areas with similar slope,soil,aspect,and potential wave fetch will be delineated.Areas above and below the full pool elevation will be mapped separately. The erosion potential for representative erosion/mass wasting hazard polygons will be evaluated as follows: e Mass wasting -evaluate potential for mass wasting based on slope gradient,soil properties,and anticipated pore pressures/fluctuations.This work will be carried out in coordination with the geotechnical investigation of the dam site and reservoir area.A GIS-based model such as SHALSTAB may be used to analyze shallow translational slides if sufficient data exist. e Surface erosion from sheetwash -estimate surface erosion potential using WEPP and/or RUSLE. e Wind (aeolian)erosion from exposed reservoir and delta surfaces and the floodplain downstream of Watana Dam -evaluate using the USDA-NRCS WEQ (Wind Erosion Equation)or WEPS (Wind Erosion Production System)to provide information on dust production for the recreation and aesthetics studies (in response to request by USDOI- NPS in a letter dated May 24,2012). e Wave erosion (wind and boat wakes if motorized boat recreation is permitted)-estimate erosive energy of waves based on methods in Finlayson (2006)and Sherwood (2006). e Solifluction,freeze-thaw,and thawing of permafrost -evaluate potential based on soil properties,seasonal reservoir water elevations,and daily maximum/minimum temperatures. e Beach/bank development at full pool -use the beach development model in Penner (Penner 1993;Penner and Boals 2000). e Erosion by ice movement on the reservoir surface -evaluate potential for ice erosion based on reservoir elevation and coordination with the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6). 6.5.4.8.2.4..Bank and Boat Wave Erosion downstream of Watana Dam It has been suggested that Project operations may cause increased bank erosion,i.e.,cumulative to ongoing erosion associated with boat waves,particularly during load-following operations. (This effort was added based on requests from the agencies at the Water Resources TWG meeting on June 14,2012.)Load-following will primarily occur during the winter months when flows are relatively low (in the range of 5,000 cfs to 14,500 cfs).Boat activity is relatively infrequent (or not present due to ice conditions)during this period;thus,cumulative impacts of these two processes are very unlikely.Based on preliminary information,it appears that the lower portion of the bank that would be affected by the load-following operations is well Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-50 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN armored with cobble-sized material;thus,additional erosion due to the load-following alone is unlikely.The Project may reduce flows and the associated river stage during the runoff period in late spring and summer.During the initial phases of the study,data will be collected to assess the amount of armoring of the portion of the banks that will be affected by load-following to assess whether or not bank erosion in this zone is likely.In addition,the bank material characteristics in the range of stages during the periods of frequent boat activity will be assessed under existing conditions and Project operations to determine if changes associated with the Project could cause an increase in bank erosion.If the information indicates the lower portion of the bank is not sufficiently armored and/or boat activity may cause an increase in erosion of the upper part of the bank,the magnitude of the potential effects will be investigated.Factors that may be considered include the following: e The potential effects of rapid changes in stage,and the associated pore-water pressures on bank stability during the load-following period. e The typical wave climate and frequency of use of the types of boats that operate in the reach (it is assumed that the boat types and frequency of use will be available from the Recreation studies). e The change in erosion potential associated with the boat waves due to the change in stage under Project operations during the period of primary boat activity. 6.5.4.8.3.Study Products The results of the Reservoir Geomorphology component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.Information provided will include the following: e Determination of average annual trap efficiencies for sediment by general size characterization (clays,silts,sands,and gravels). e Estimate of average annual sediment loading to the reservoir from the potential primary sources including the upstream Susitna River,reservoir tributaries,and shoreline erosion. e Estimate of reservoir life based on extrapolation of the sedimentation rate. e Sediment outflow rating curves to serve as downstream supply for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. e Discussion of the tributary delta formation processes and characterization of the estimated size,vertical extent,and morphology (topset and foreset slopes)of the deltas at the selected tributary mouths. e Discussion of potential erosion areas within the proposed reservoir,including erosion type,relative erosion potential,Project-related factors affecting erosion,and potential mitigation measures. e Map showing reservoir erosion hazard areas (completed in coordination with the Geology and Soils and Geotechnical studies). In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e Identification of all tributaries studied for potential tributary delta formation. e Estimated footprint of delta formation for the selected tributaries. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-51 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Reservoir erosion hazard map units. 6.5.4.9.|Study Component:Large Woody Debris The goal of this study component is to assess the potential for Project construction and operations to affect the input,transport,and storage of large woody debris in the Susitna River. Specific objectives include the following: e Evaluation of large woody debris recruitment in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments'channels (including upstream of Watana Reservoir). e Characterization of the presence,extent,and function of large woody debris downstream of the Watana Dam site. e Estimation of the amount of large woody debris that will be captured in the reservoir and potential downstream effects of Project operation. e Work in conjunction with the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study to estimate potential Project effects on large woody debris recruitment and associated changes in the processes that create and influence the geomorphic features linked to important aquatic habitats of the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. The study area for the Large Woody Debris study component includes the Susitna River from the mouth (RM 0)upstream to the confluence with the Maclaren River (RM 260). 6.5.4.9.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information The role of large woody debris in the development of channel morphology and aquatic habitat has been widely studied in meandering and anastomosing channels.Large wood and wood jams can create pool habitat,affect mid-channel island and bar development,and create and maintain anastomosing channel patterns and side channels (Abbe and Montgomery 1996,2003;Fetherston et al.1995;Montgomery et al.2003;Dudley et al.1998;Collins et al.2012).In addition,large wood can provide cover and holding habitat for fish and help create habitat and hydraulic diversity (summary in Durst and Ferguson 2000).Despite the wealth of large woody debris research,little is known of the role of large woody debris in the morphology and aquatic biology of braided,glacial rivers.Large woody debris may play a role in island formation and stabilization,as well as side channel and slough avulsion and bank erosion,although the role of large woody debris in altering hydraulics in the lower Susitna River may be limited due to the size of the river (J.Mouw,ADF&G,personal communication,May 14,2012). Construction and operation of the Project has the potential to change the input,transport, stability,and storage of large woody debris downstream of the Watana Dam site by changes to the flow regime,ice processes,and riparian stand development,and interruption of wood transport through the reservoir.An assessment of the source,transport,and storage of large woody debris in the Susitna River and the role of large woody debris in channel form and aquatic habitat is needed to evaluate the magnitude of these effects.Construction and operation of the Project will likely alter large woody debris input and transport downstream of the Watana Dam site.An assessment of the source,transport,and storage of large woody debris in the Susitna River and the role of large woody debris in channel form and aquatic habitat would provide data on the current status of large wood in the river which,in conjunction with data from the studies Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-52 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN of hydrology,geomorphology,riparian and aquatic habitat,and ice processes,would be used to determine the potential effects of Project operations on large wood resources.The information can also be used to determine whether protection,mitigation and enhancement (PM&E) measures are necessary,such as a large woody debris management plan and handling of wood that accumulates in the reservoir. 6.5.4.9.2.Methods Available recent and historic high-resolution aerial photography will be used to assess large woody debris characteristics in the Susitna River between the mouth and the Maclaren River.It is anticipated that large woody debris input,transport,and storage characteristics will vary along the length of the river.Four reaches have been initially delineated with distinct characteristics: downstream of the Three Rivers Confluence;between the Three Rivers Confluence and Devils Canyon;Devils Canyon;and upstream of Devils Canyon.However,the Geomorphic Reaches delineated in the Delineate Geomorphically Similar (Homogenous)Reaches (Section 6.5.4.1) study component will be used as a basis for final reach determination. Large woody debris will be inventoried to the extent practical on the aerial photographs. Information regarding the sources of large woody debris,locations of large woody debris in the river channel,and the relationship of large woody debris to channel or slough habitat and geomorphic features will be collected and correlated with bank erosion and riparian vegetation mapping from the geomorphology mapping and riparian habitat mapping studies to identify potential recruitment methods (Mouw 2011;Ott et al.2001).If adequate historic aerial photographs are available,the stability of large wood pieces and jams between photo years will be assessed in representative areas of the river. It is likely not possible to identify all wood on the aerial photographs.As a supplement to large woody debris information obtained from aerial photographs,a reconnaissance assessment of large woody debris in the Susitna River between the proposed Watana Dam Site and Willow was made in coordination with aquatic/riparian habitat mapping June 2012.This assessment suggested that the primary large woody debris input mechanisms in the Middle Susitna River are wind throw,wind snap,ice snap,and bank erosion.Wood was observed in association with scour pool,islands heads,side channels,and channel margins.The Chulitna River appears to provide a large amount of woody debris to the Susitna River downstream from Three Rivers, where the Susitna becomes braided with both stable,racked log jams and single non-stable piece of wood. Field studies of large woody debris will take place during 2013-2014 to (1)verify the large wood data collected from the aerial photographs at 4-5 representative sites in each of the four reaches discussed above,and (2)provide more detailed field information on large wood input, stable/key piece size,large wood/aquatic habitat function,and large wood stability in the river within each of the Focus Areas.It is anticipated that the following types of large woody debris data will be collected as part of a field inventory of large wood in 2013-2014: e GPS location (to correlate with geomorphology,aquatic,and riparian habitat mapping from other studies). e Wood size class (diameter,length,volume). e Root wad status of attachment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project 'Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-53 December 2012 REviseD STUDY PLAN e Single piece,accumulation,or log jam. e Decay class. e Species if known. e Input mechanism if known (windthrow,bank erosion,ice processes,etc.). e Channel location (side;mid channel;side channel inlet,middle,outlet;associated with island or bar -and where on island or bar,etc.). e Wood orientation in channel. e In wetted or bankfull channel or potential input (leaning over bankfull channel). e Function (scour pool,bar forming,island forming,side channel inlet protection,bank protection,aquatic cover,etc.)and associated geomorphic features. e For log accumulations and jams:key piece size. e Area/grain size of any associated sediment deposits. The aerial photograph and field inventories of large wood will be used to determine large wood input processes,large wood transport and storage,and how large wood is functioning in the Susitna River to influence geomorphic,riparian,and aquatic habitat processes.Based on estimated large wood input and transport upstream of the Watana Dam site,the potential effects of reservoir operation on trapping upstream large wood will be assessed.In addition,the potential for operation of the Project to alter large wood input and transport downstream of the dam site will be analyzed.Modeling of the interaction between large woody debris and bedload transport/geomorphic processes will take place at selected Focus Areas utilizing the 2-D models described in Section 6.6.The analysis will require coordination with other geomorphology component studies,and the sediment transport,ice processes,riparian habitat,aquatic habitat, and instream flow studies. 6.5.4.9.3.Study Products The results of the large woody debris component will be included in the Geomorphology Report. Information provided will include the following: e Existing large woody debris input mechanisms and source areas. e Existing large woody debris loading by geomorphic zone. e Observations and discussion of how large woody debris is currently functioning in the Susitna River,including a discussion of interactions with riparian and aquatic/fish habitat,geomorphic processes (sediment transport/channel forming processes),ice processes,and flows. e Discussion of potential for Project construction and operation to affect large woody debris input and transport in the Susitna River. e Map showing current large woody debris loading. In addition,an ArcGIS shapefile will be provided with the following information: e Location of large woody debris mapped from aerial photographs and during field visits. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-54 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.10.Study Component:Geomorphology of Stream Crossings along Transmission Lines and Access Alignments The goals of this study component are to characterize the existing geomorphic conditions at stream crossings along access road/transmission line alignments and to determine potential geomorphic changes resulting from construction,operation,and maintenance of the roads and stream crossing structures. 6.5.4.10.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Development of the Watana Dam will require road transportation from either the Denali Highway or the railroad near Gold Creek or Chulitna to the dam site as well as a transmission line from the powerhouse to an existing transmission line intertie.Construction,use,and maintenance of the roads and transmission lines have the potential to affect stream geomorphology if stream crossing structures constrict flow or alter transport of sediment or large wood,or if sediment is delivered to the streams from erosion of the road prism. Three different access/transmission alignments are currently being considered (Figure 6.5-7). Work currently underway may refine or change the number of alignments that are finally considered for the project,and may include upgrades to existing road systems (e.g.,Denali Highway).The Geomorphology of Stream Crossings along Transmission Lines and Access Alignments study area will include the corridors that are under consideration at the beginning of the study work in 2013. The three alignments currently under consideration are designated as Denali,Chulitna,and Gold Creek.The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF)evaluated potential access corridors,including the Denali and Chulitna options (HDR 2011).The analysis considered the number of stream crossings as one criterion,among many others,during the screening process,but a detailed analysis of the geomorphic effects of the stream crossings on bedload transport,large woody debris,and channel functions was not conducted. A road in the Denali alignment would cross Seattle Creek and Brushkana Creek,two major drainages within the Nenana River watershed,and Deadman Creek within the Susitna River watershed.A road in this alignment would require a total of 15 stream crossings.A Gold Creek access alignment would require 23 stream crossings.The major streams that would be crossed by the Gold Creek access alignment include Gold Creek,Fog Creek,and Cheechako Creek. Smaller streams crossed include tributaries to Prairee and Jack Long creeks,and a number of unnamed tributaries to the Susitna River.A road in the Chulitna alignment would require about 30 stream crossings including the Indian River,and Thoroughfare,Portage,Devils,Tsusena,and Deadman creeks.The Chulitna alignment would also cross 10 small,unnamed tributaries of Portage Creek,three small tributaries of Devils Creek,seven smaller tributaries to the Upper Susitna River Segment,and two tributaries of Tsusena Creek.Construction of Project access roads and transmission lines would require stream crossing structures.Stream crossing structures have the potential to affect stream geomorphology in the following ways: e Altering hydraulics upstream and downstream of the crossing if flow is constricted.This can lead to sediment deposition upstream of the crossing or bank erosion/channel incision downstream. e Altering migration of streams across a floodplain. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-55 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Inhibiting movement of large woody debris. e Increasing sediment delivered to a stream if road erosion is occurring near stream crossings. Data collected during this study will help determine the potential for proposed stream crossings to affect stream hydraulics,morphology,sediment transport,and large woody debris transport. This analysis will also provide data needed for design of appropriate stream crossing structures and PM&E measures to minimize effects. 6.5.4.10.2.Methods The following data would be obtained from existing sources: e Topography at stream crossings. e Aerial photography of stream crossings. e Crossing design -information on the culvert or bridge characteristics planned at each crossing will be obtained from Project engineering designs (HDR 2011 and subsequent reports). e Road design -information on the proposed road prism in the vicinity of stream crossings will be obtained from Project engineering designs,including surfacing,gradient, expected traffic levels,and road prism width. A field assessment of each stream crossing along routes being considered will be made during the summer of 2013.Fieldwork will be carried out in conjunction with the Aquatic Resources Study (Access Alignment,Transmission Alignment and Construction Area component),if possible.The following geomorphic information will be collected for each stream crossing: e Stream characteristics -gradient,wetted and bankfull width,and depth. e Substrate characteristics -existing substrate size and description of relative sediment loading (based on field evidence of fresh deposits,large gravel bars,etc.). e Existing large woody debris size and loading. e Geomorphic channel type (Rosgen classification is recommended by USFS in its study request dated May 31,2012)and confinement. e Existing and potential for bank erosion will be measured or evaluated for a minimum of 100 feet upstream and downstream of each proposed crossing. e Potential for channel migration will be evaluated from aerial photographs if available, supplemented by field/aerial observations. The potential effects of stream crossings on geomorphology will be analyzed based on stream characteristics and the proposed design of crossing structures.The evaluation will include the following: e Channel morphology,sediment dynamics -the hydraulic characteristics and bedload transport capacity of existing channel and of proposed crossing structures will be estimated and compared.Guidelines in the existing stream crossing design Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)will be considered (ADOT&PF 2001). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-56 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Channel migration zone -the existing channel migration zone will be mapped for alluvial channels that show evidence of migration across the floodplain.Effects of proposed crossing structures on channel migration will be analyzed. e Large woody debris transport -potential effects on large woody debris transport will be evaluated based on channel crossing type and width.The potential for culvert plugging will be ranked based on observed large woody debris size in the stream and proposed culvert size. e Erosion and delivery of road sediment to stream -erosion from any unpaved roads will be estimated using the WEPP or SEDMODL algorithms.Wind (aeolian)erosion from unsurfaced areas (roads,parking areas,airstrip,etc.)will be evaluated using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)methodology (AP-42)to provide information on dust production for the recreation and aesthetics studies.(This effort was added in response to a request by USDOI-NPS in a letter dated May 24,2012.) 6.5.4.10.3.Study Products The results of the Geomorphology of Stream Crossings along Transmission Lines and Access Alignments component will be included in the Geomorphology Report.This will include a discussion of the potential effects of road/transmission alignments on the following: e Channel migration zones (potential effects of crossings on stream and vice versa) Channel aggradation/erosion upstream and downstream of crossing Blocking large woody debris transport Increased turbidity/sediment input to streams 6.5.4.11.Study Component:Integration of Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling with the Geomorphology Study The Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling studies are inextricably linked,and in reality,should be viewed as a single,integrated study.The efforts of the Geomorphology Study identify the specific geomorphic (and habitat-related)processes that require further quantification,identify a significant portion of the data needs,and provides the basic information and context for performing the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study.During the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,results from the Geomorphology Study will be used in conjunction with knowledge of the specific needs of the other resource teams to ensure that the models are developed in an appropriate manner to address the key issues and to provide a reality check on the model results.After completion of the modeling,the study team will use the results from both studies in an integrated manner to provide interpretations with respect to the issues that must be addressed,including predictions of potential changes to key geomorphic features that comprise the aquatic and riparian habitat.This information will be provided to the other resource teams for use in their evaluation of potential Project effects. 6.5.4.11.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information The existing information required for this study component was previously described above under the other ten components of the Geomorphology Study,and includes the results from those study components. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-57 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.4.11.2.Methods Results from the previously described Geomorphology Study components will be compiled and used by the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study team to guide development of the models and interpretation of the model results.During the modeling phase,close coordination will occur between the two teams,and with the other resource teams,to insure that the relevant information is being used in an appropriate manner and that the results being obtained from the baseline models are consistent with the observed behavior of the river.Since there will be considerable overlap between the Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology teams,this coordination between these two teams will be seamless and ongoing throughout the study. Specific aspects of the Geomorphology Study that will be used to guide development of the models and interpretation of the model results for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study, particularly as they relate to the habitat indicators,include the following: e The reach delineations under Section 6.5.4.1 will define and provide descriptions of the geomorphically-and ecologically-significant macro-scale characteristics of each segment of the study reach.As described in Section 6.6,the 1-D bed evolution model will be used to quantify the reach-scale hydraulic and sediment transport conditions in the study reach over the range of flows for both existing and Project conditions to expand and refine these descriptions.The initial descriptions will guide development of the model, specifically by defining geomorphically similar reaches where model input parameters such as bed material gradations and hydraulic roughness coefficients are similar.The descriptions will also guide interpretation of the model results by defining reaches where the responses to Project actions are expected to be similar,providing a framework for evaluating and summarizing reach-scale processes that affect geomorphic features and associated habitat. e The bedload and suspended sediment load data being collected by the USGS under Section 6.5.4.2 will be used to calibrate and verify the predicted transport rates in the bed evolution model,and to assess the natural variability in transport rates on a seasonal and annual basis under existing and historic conditions. e Data from the Sediment Supply and Transport Study Component (Section 6.5.4.3)will provide tributary sediment input boundary conditions for both the existing and project conditions the bed evolution models. e Results from the Assess Geomorphic Change Study Component (Section 6.5.4.4)will be used to provide a macro-scale understanding of the changes in geomorphic and habitat features over the past several decades.In particular,the Turnover Rate analysis that is part of this study component will provide a measure of the lateral sediment input to the mainstem due to bank and bar erosion. e The stream flow analysis under the Reconnaissance-level Assessment of Project Effects study component (Section 6.5.4.6)will provide a basis for assessing seasonal and annual hydrologic variability under existing and Project conditions to guide both development of the hydrologic input data for the bed evolution model,and interpretation of the temporal variability in model results,particularly for the long-term model runs.The sediment transport analysis portion of this study component will be used to ensure that baseline Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-58 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN model results accurately reflect the historic and existing sediment balance along the study reach. Information from the Large Woody Debris study component (Section 6.5.4.7)will be considered in establishing channel roughness parameters for the hydraulic model,and if appropriate,significant LWD clusters will be considered in establishing the local erodibility of banklines along the project reach. Sediment trap efficiency results from the Reservoir Geomorphology Study Component (Section 6.5.4.8)will provide the upstream sediment input boundary conditions for the Project-conditions bed evolution model. 6.5.4.11.3.Study Products The following specific items will be provided from this study to assist the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study and other resources teams with their analysis.A detailed description of how the results from the Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Studies will be integrated,and specifically,how the modeling results will be used to update and refine the Geomorphology Study results is presented in Section 6.6.4.3. Reach delineations,description of key geomorphic attributes and characterization of the geomorphology of the Susitna River. Identification of processes that create and influence the geomorphic features that help comprise the aquatic and riparian habitat. Bedload and suspended sediment load rating curves at key gages (Gold Creek/above Talkeetna,Tsusena Creek (if available),Chulitna River above Talkeetna,Talkeetna River near Talkeetna,Sunshine,Susitna Station)based on USGS field data.Separate curves will be developed for each of the following sediment size ranges: o Gravel/cobble bedload o Sand bedload o Suspended sand load o Wash load. Estimates of annual load of each of the above sediment size ranges passing each gage for the extended flow record under existing and Project conditions. Summary of key changes in geomorphic features/units (i.e.,island/bar evolution,main . channel width and form,bank erosion,changes in side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs)based on historical aerial photography. Estimates of historic LWD loading rates from upstream and lateral sources. Estimates of trap efficiency of the proposed reservoir. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-59 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice The methods described for geomorphology are similar to those used for other recent hydroelectric project licensing procedures and follow current scientific literature (see Literature Cited,Section 6.5.8). e The Geomorphic Classification component will use a combination of the numerous river classifications that currently exist (Leopold and Wolman 1957;Schumm 1963,1968; Mollard 1973;Kellerhals et al.1976;Brice 1981;Mosley 1987;Rosgen 1994,1996; Thorne 1997;Montgomery and Buffington 1997;Vandenberghe 2001). e The Bedload and Suspended Load Data Collection component will be conducted by USGS using its currently accepted field methods. e The Sediment Supply and Transport in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments component will use published USGS sediment and flow data and USGS-endorsed correction factors to develop rating curves (Cohn and Gilroy 1991;Duan 1983).Bed mobilization and effective discharge will be computed using currently recognized methods (Mueller et al.2005;Biedenharn et al.2000). e The Geomorphic Change Analysis and Habitat versus Flow components will use geo- rectified aerial and satellite images to compare the river between years and flows.These methods are widely used to compare changes in river systems. e The Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Geomorphic Change in the Lower Susitna River Segment will utilize published USGS flow and sediment data and the analytical framework developed by Grant et al.(2003). e The Reservoir Geomorphology Study will use several widely-accepted methods to calculate sediment trap efficiency (Churchill 1948;Brune 1953;Einstein 1965;Miller 1953;Lara and Pemberton 1965;Chen 1975).The delta formation study will use methods developed and applied at similar projects (e.g.,Boundary Hydroelectric Project, FERC 2144)to analyze delta formation.Reservoir erosion will use models and analysis methods developed and widely used for either general erosion (e.g.,SHALSTAB, WEPP/RUSLE)or for reservoir-based beach development (Penner 1993;Penner and Boals 2000). e The Large Woody Debris Study component and large wood inventory will be based on widely used methods (Schuett-Hames et al.1999). e The Geomorphology of Stream Crossings along Transmission and Access Alignments component will use guidelines from the existing stream crossing design MOU (ADOT&PF 2001)along with site-specific analyses of channel dynamics. 6.5.6.Schedule The schedule for conducting the Geomorphology Study is presented in Table 6.5-5.The Geomorphology Study includes several efforts that were conducted in 2012.This included both analysis and field efforts.One of the two field efforts in the Geomorphology Study is the USGS data collection effort (Section 6.5.4.2).It was conducted in the late spring and summer of 2012. A total of five sets of sediment transport data were collected at the Susitna River above Tsusena Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-60 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Creek,Susitna River near Talkeetna (substituted for Gold Creek),and the Susitna River at Sunshine and four sets on the Chulitna River below canyon.Provisional results of the data collection effort will be delivered to the other studies as soon as they are available from the lab during fall 2012.Suspended and bedload data,including calculation of sediment transport ratings and daily loads,will be compiled in a technical memorandum delivered early in 2013. The other primary 2012 field effort in the Geomorphology Study is the collection of aerial photographs (Sections 6.5.4.4 for Lower Susitna River Segment and 6.5.4.5 for Middle Susitna River Segment).Collection of aerial photographs was included in the 2012 effort to support the digitization of aquatic habitat types,geomorphic features and to access channel change.This information in turn helps support the site selection process for other studies.Due to the combination of weather and flow conditions during 2012,only the 23,00cfs aerial photography was acquired in 2012.Performing the digitization of the 2012 aerial photography was dependent on the AEA SDC being able to fly the aerials at the appropriate discharge.The remainder of the effort-12,500 cfs and 5,100 cfs aerial photography-will be collected in 2013.Consequently, only the digitization of the aquatic habitat features associated with the 23,000 cfs flow was performed in 2012.Therefore,2012 study products only include the 23,000 cfs condition.The acquisition,digitization and analysis work associated with the 12,500 and 5,100 cfs flows will be performed in 2013. The other study components in the Geomorphology Study that include 2012 efforts are Delineation of Geomorphically Similar River Segments (Section 6.5.4.1),Sediment Supply and Transport Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.3),Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of the Project Effects on the Lower River Channel (Section 6.5.4.6)and Riverine Habitat Versus Flow Lower River Segment.The 2012 portion of the geomorphic reach delineation has been completed and is summarized in this document (Section 6.5.4.1). Continued refinement and determination of morphometric parameters for the reaches will be ongoing in 2013 as additional information becomes available.The remaining three efforts require information from the operations modeling (Engineering Study)consisting of downstream flows and stages associated with Project operations.This information was available the end of November 2012.Therefore,completion of the identified 2012 efforts has been delayed until January and early February of 2013.The delivery of these 2012 study results in this timeframe will allow their use in the collaborative process that will occur in Q1 and early Q2 of 2013 associated with vetting the selection of the proposed Focus Areas and in evaluating the need to extend detailed ISF and Geomorphology Study limits further downstream in the Lower Susitna River Segment. Table 6.5-3 shows the schedule for the performance and completion of the Geomorphology Study.This schedule shows components of the Geomorphology Study that have early component performed in 2012 or early 2013 (in the case of studies that have been delayed per the discussion in the previous paragraph)and then a second effort that is performed in late 2013 and 2014.This is due to the 2012 efforts being conducted with best available information to provide primarily results to inform the development and execution of other studies.The 2013 effort also includes optional aerial photograph acquisition in the Lower River and assisted mapping of macrohabitat types if studies are extended into the Lower River.The subsequent 2013 and 2014 efforts are performed to incorporate additional information collected in 2013 and to assess the effects of altered sediment supply and flow regimes for the alterative operational scenarios. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-61 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The Initial Study Report (ISR)and the Updated Study Report (USR)explaining the actions taken and data collected to date will be due within one and two years,respectively,of FERC's Study Plan Determination. 6.5.7.Relationship with Other Studies A flow chart (Figure 6.5-8)describes study interdependencies and outlines the information and products required from other studies and the timing of delivery to successfully complete the Geomorphology Study on schedule.In the study interdependencies chart,the studies providing input are listed in the five sided boxes at the top of the chart.The corresponding Sections are provided in parentheses.The rectangular boxes below the five sided boxes list the major information and products that the other studies will provide to the Geomorphology Study.The primary studies that the Geomorphology Study will require information from and the associated information are listed below and in Table 6.5-6. e Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Study (Section 8.5.4.3) o Current and historical cross-sections o Thalweg Profile o Results of flow routing to Sunshine Station e Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6) o Bed material sizes o Geomorphic field assessment and observations o Geomorphic feature mapping at Focus Areas e Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6) o Ice effects on banks,side channels,bed scouring and river stage e Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) o Riparian/floodplain sedimentation rates o Dating of surfaces o Floodplain soil profiles and depth e Reservoir Operations Modeling (Engineering) o Results of operations modeling e Water Modeling Quality Study (Section 5.6) o Reservoir sediment trap efficiency for alternative scenarios Studies that are considered secondary sources of to the Geomorphology Study information include the Geology and Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5),and Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Proposed Susitna-Watana Dam (Section 11.6).The USGS will provide the extended hydrologic record for 11 gage locations for a period of 61 years.This information will be used as the hydrologic record for analysis of existing stream flow characteristics and will also provide the flows to be used by the Reservoir Operations Study Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-62 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN (Engineering)and the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Study (Section 8.5.4.3)to generate flow conditions in the Middle and Lower River Segments for the with-Project conditions. In the chart,the timing of delivery of each type of information or study product to the Geomorphology study is provided in parentheses by quarter and year.For example,"(Q4-12)” indicates the information will be provided in the fourth quarter of 2012.Table 6.5-6 provides these interdependencies in tabular form including the study providing the information or product and which area of the Geomorphology Study requires the information or product and the timing. The chart indicates which areas of the Geomorphology Study require the information.The Geomorphology Study areas are identified in the blue ellipses.To simplify the chart,study components have been lumped into areas.The study components associated with each area identified in the blue ellipses are listed below. Geomorphic reach classification and delineation: e Delineate geomorphically similar (homogeneous)reaches (Section 6.5.4.1) Aerial photo analysis of geomorphic features and riverine habitat: e Riverine habitat versus flow relationship Middle Susitna River Segment (Section 6.5.4.5) e Riverine habitat area versus flow Lower Susitna River Segment (Section 6.5.4.7) Geomorphic assessment: e Bedload and suspended load data collection (Section 6.5.4.2) e Sediment supply and transport Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments (Section6.5.4.3) e Assess geomorphic change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.4) e Reconnaissance-level assessment of project effects on Lower and Middle Susitna River Segment channel (Section 6.5.4.6) e Reservoir geomorphology (Section 6.5.4.8) e Large woody debris (Section 6.5.4.9) e Geomorphology of stream crossings along transmission lines and access alignments (Section 6.5.4.10) The chart also shows products and information the Geomorphology Study will provide to other studies and the timing of their delivery.Table 6.5-7 provides these study interdependencies in tabular form including the area of the Geomorphology Study providing the information and which study requires the information or study product.In the flow chart the products and information the Geomorphology Study will provide are identified in the rectangles below the study area ellipses.The quarter and year that the products and information will be provided to other studies is indicated in the parentheses adjacent to each item.At the bottom of the chart,the studies that require the information from the Geomorphology Study are listed in the five sided boxes.Included in parentheses adjacent to each study is the section of the RSP that the product or information will support.The primary studies requiring information from the Geomorphology Study and the associated information they will require are listed below.The information they will require is identified in Table 6.5-7 (Note:Tables 6.6-6 and 6.6-7 provide a detailed list of 1- Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-63 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN D and 2-D model output and other information the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling and Geomorphology Studies will provide to other studies): e Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study Fish (Section 8.5) e Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) e Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6) e Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9) e Aesthetic Resources Study (Section 12.6) e River Recreation Flow and Access Study (Section 12.7) In addition to these studies,other studies may utilize input from the Geomorphology Study to help identify their downstream study limits. 6.5.8.2012 Study Efforts The Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)has several study components that include 2012 study efforts to help prepare or refine various aspects of the Study Plans.Table 6.5-8 lists these study components,the portions of the studies that support development of the study plan,and the aspect of the study plan they support.These 2012 efforts were intended to be completed by November 2012 to provide support for the Study Plan development;however,several circumstances have resulted in portions of the efforts not being completed in November 2012. Table 6.5-8 also identifies efforts completed in time to fully support development of the study plan and which were partially completed.Efforts not fully completed prior to filing of the study plan,will be completed in December 2012 and reported on in January 2013.The results of the 2012 Geomorphology Study will support Water Resources Technical Workgroup (TWG) meetings to be held in February and March 2013 involving review and finalization of the proposed Focus Areas and the downstream study limit. 6.5.9.Level of Effort and Cost Initial planning level estimates of the costs to perform the components of the Geomorphology Study are provided in Table 6.5-9.The total effort for the Geomorphology Study,including Component 2,Sediment Data Collection,to be performed by the USGS,is estimated to cost between approximately $1.6 and $2.1 million. 6.5.10.Literature Cited Acres.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Reservoir Slope Stability.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska.March 1982. Abbe,T.B.,Montgomery,D.R.1996.Large woody debris jams,channel hydraulics and habitat formation in large rivers.Regulated Rivers:Research &Management 12,201-221. Abbe,T.B.,Montgomery,D.R.2003.Patterns and processes of wood debris accumulation in the Queets River basin,Washington.Geomorphology 51,81-107. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-64 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN ADF&G/ADOT&PF.2001.Memorandum of agreement between Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities for the design, permitting,and construction of culverts for fish passage.Signed 8/7/2001. Alaska Energy Authority (AEA).2011.Pre-Application Document:Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241.December 2011.Prepared for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission by the Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. Andrews,E.D.,1980.Effective and Bankfull Discharges of Streams in the Yampa River Basin, Colorado and Wyoming.Journal of Hydrology,46(1980),pp.311-330. Andrews,E.D.,1986.Downstream Effects of Flaming Gorge Reservoir on the Green River, Colorado and Utah.Geological Society of American Bulletin,v.97,August,pp.1012- 1023. Andrews,E.D.and Nankervis,J.M.,1995.Effective discharge and the design of channel maintenance flows for gravel-bed rivers.American Geophysical Union,v.89,pp.151- 164. Benson,M.A.and Thomas,D.M.,1966.A definition of dominant discharge.Bulletin of the International Association of Scientific Hydrology 11,pp.76-80. Biedenharn,D.S.,Copeland,R.R.,Thorne,C.R.,Soar,P.J.,Hey,R.D.,and Watson,C.C.,2000. Effective Discharge Calculation:A Practical Guide.Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory, U.S.Army Engineer Research and Development Center,Vicksburg,Mississippi, ERDC/CHL TR-00-15,August. Brice,J.C.,1981.Stability of relocated stream channels.Federal Highway Commission Report FHWA/RD-80/158,177 p. Brune,G.M.1953.Trap efficiency of reservoirs.Transactions of the American Geophysical Union,Vol.34(3).407 -418. Buffington,J.M.,and D.R.Montgomery.1997.A systematic analysis of eight decades of incipient motion studies,with special reference to gravel-bedded rivers,Water Resour. Res.,33,1993-2029. Chen,C.N.1975.Design of sediment retention basins,Proceedings,National Symposium on Urban Hydrology and Sediment Control,University of Kentucky,pp.58 -68. Churchill,M.A.1948.Discussion of "Analysis and Use of Reservoir Sedimentation Data”by L.C.Gottschalk.Proceedings of the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference, Denver Colorado.139 -140. Clipperton,G.K.,C.W.Koning,A.G.H.Locke,J.M.Mahoney,and B.Quazi.2003.Instream Flow Needs Determinations for the South Saskatchewan River Basin,Alberta,Canada. Alberta Environment,Publication No.T/719. Collier,M.C.,R.H.Webb,and J.C.Schmidt,1996.A primer on the Downstream Effects of Dams.U.S.Geological Survey,Circular 1126.108 pp. Cohn,T.A.,and E.J.Gilroy.1991.Estimating Loads from Periodic Records.U.S. GeologicalSurvey Branch of Systems Analysis Technical Report 91.01.81 pp. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-65 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Collins,B.D.,D.R.Montgomery,K.L.Fetherston,and T.B.Abbe.2012.The floodplain large- wood cycle hypothesis:A mechanism for the physical and biotic structuring of temperate forested alluvial valleys in the North Pacific coastal ecoregion.Geomorphology 139- 140:460-470. Darby,S.E.and Simon,A.(eds),1999.Incised River Channels.Wiley,Chichester,442 p. Duan,N.1983.Smearing Estimate:A Nonparametric Retransformation Method.Journal of the American Statistical Association,Vol.78(383):605-610. Dudley,S.J.,J.C.Fischenich,and S.R.Abt.1998.Effect of woody debris entrapment on flow resistance.Journal of the American Water Resources Association 34:1189-1198. Durst,J.D.and J.Ferguson.2000.Large woody debris,an annotated bibliography,Compiled for the Region III Forest Practices Riparian Management Committee.Compiled for Alaska Dept.of Fish &Game,Habitat &Restoration Division. Einstein,H.A.1965.Final Report Spawning Grounds.University of California Hydrologic Engineering Laboratory.16 pages,2 tables,10 figures. Ferguson,R.I.1986.River Loads Underestimated by Rating Curves.Water Resources Research, Vol.22(1):74-76. Fetherston,K.L.,Naiman,R.J.,Bilby,R.E.1995.Large woody debris,physical process,and riparian forest development in montane river networks of the Pacific Northwest. Geomorphology 13,133-144. Finlayson,D.P.,2006.The Geomorphology of Puget Sound Beaches.Ph.D.Dissertation, University of Washington,Seattle,WA.216pp.Available at http://david.p.finlayson.googlepages.com/pugetsoundbeaches. Friedman,J.M.,W.R.Osterkamp,M.L.Scott,and G.T.Auble,1998.Downstream Effects of Dams on Channel Geometry and Bottomland Vegetation:Regional Patterns in the Great Plains.Wetlands,v.18,no.4,December,pp.619 -631. Grant,G.E.and F.J.Swanson.1995.Morphology and processes of valley floors in mountain streams,Western Cascades,Oregon.In Natural and Anthropogenic Influences in Fluvial Geomorphology,AGU Geophysical Monograph 89,83-102. Grant,G.E.,J.C.Schmidt,and S.L.Lewis.2003.A geological framework for interpreting downstream effects of dams on rivers.AGU,Geology and Geomorphology of the Deschutes River,Oregon,Water Science and Application 7. Germanoski,D.,1989.The effects of sediment load and gradient on braided river morphology.Unpublished Ph.D.dissertation,Colorado State University,Fort Collins, CO,407 p. Germanoski,D.and Harvey,M.D.,1993.Asynchronous terrace development in degrading braided channels.Physical Geography,v.14(4),pp.16-38. Germanoski,D.and Schumm,S.A.,1993.Changes in braided river morphology resulting from aggradation and degradation.The Journal of Geology,v.101,pp.451-466. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-66 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Germanoski,D.,2001.Bar Forming Processes in Gravel-bed Braided Rivers,with Implications for Small-scale Gravel Mining.In Anthony,D.J.,Harvey,M.D.,Laronne,J.B.,and Mosley,M.P.(eds),Applying Geomorphology to Environmental Management,pp.3-32. Guy,H.P.1964.An Analysis of Some Storm-Period Variables Affecting Stream Sediment Transport.U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper No.462E. Guymon,G.L.1974.Regional Sediment Yield Analysis of Alaska Streams.ASCE Journal of the Hydraulics Division,Vol.100(1).41 -51. Hamrick,J.M.1992.A Three-Dimensional Environmental Fluid Dynamics Computer Code: Theoretical and Computational Aspects,Special Report 317.The College of William and Mary,Virginia Institute of Marine Science.63 pp. Harvey,M.D.,Mussetter,R.A.,Anthony,D.J.,2003.Island Aging and Dynamics in the Snake River,Western Idaho,USA.Abstract:Proceedings of Hydrology Days 2003,American Geophysical Union,Fort Collins,Colorado. Harvey,M.D.and Trabant,S.C.,2006.Evaluation of Bar Morphology,Distribution,and Dynamics as Indices of Fluvial Processes in the Middle Rio Grande.Abstract for Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program,First Annual Symposium, Albuquerque,New Mexico,April. HDR.2011.Watana transportation access study,Project No.82002.Draft report prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.November 29,2011. Juracek,K.E.and Fitzpatrick,F.A.,2003.Limitation and implications of stream classification. Jour.of American Water Res.Assn,v.83,no.3,June,pp.659-670. Kellerhals,R.,Church,M.,and Bray,D.I.,1976.Classification and analysis of river processes. Jour.of Hydraulic Div.Proc.102,pp.813-829. Koch,R.W.and G.M.Smillie.1986.Bias in Hydrologic Prediction Using Log-Transformed Regression Models.Journal of the American Water Resources Association,Vol.22:717- 723. Labelle,J.C.,M.Arend,L.Leslie,W.Wilson,1985.Geomorphic Change in the Middle Susitna River since 1949.Report by Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority. Lane,E.W.1955.The importance of fluvial morphology in hydraulic engineering.Proc.ASCE, Vol.81,Paper 745,pp.1-17. Lara,J.M.,and E.L.Pemberton.1965.Initial Unit Weight of Deposited Sediments. Proceedings of the Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference,1963.Miscellaneous Publication No.970.USDA,Agriculture Research Service.Washington,D.C.818 - 845. Leopold,L.B.and Wolman,M.G.,1957.River channel patterns:Braided meandering and straight.U.S.Geol.Survey Prof.Paper 282-B,47 p. Leopold,L.B.,Wolman,M.G.,and Miller,J.P.,1964.Fluvial Processes in Geomorphology. Freeman Co.,San Francisco,California and London,522 p. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-67 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Li,R.M.and H.W.Shen,1975.Solid Particle Settlement in Open-Channel Flow,ASCE J Hyd Div,V 101,NY7,pp 917-931. Miller,A.J.,1995.Valley morphology and boundary conditions influencing spatial patterns of flood flow.In Natural and Anthropogenic Influences in Fluvial Geomorphology,AGU Geophysical Monograph 89,57-82. Miller,C.R.1953.Determination of the Unit Weight of Sediment for Use in Sediment Volume Computations.U.S.Bureau of Reclamation.Denver,Colorado. Mollard,J.D.,1973.Airphoto interpretation of fluvial features:Fluvial processes and sedimentation.Edmonton,Proceedings of Hydrology Symposium,Univ.Alberta,pp. 341-380. Montgomery,D.R.and Buffington,J.M.,1997.Channel-reach morphology in mountain drainage basins.Geological Survey America,Bulletin,v.109,pp.596-611. Montgomery,D.R.,Collins,B.D.,Buffington,J.M.,Abbe,T.B.2003.Geomorphic effects of wood in rivers.In:Gregory,S.V.,Boyer,K.L.,Gurnell,A.M.(Eds.),The Ecology and Management of Wood in World Rivers.American Fisheries Society,Bethesda,MD,pp. 21-47. Morris,G.L.,G.Annandale,and R.Hotchkiss,2007.Reservoir Sedimentation,in Sedimentation Engineering,Processes,Measurements,Modeling and Practice,ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No 110,pp 579-612. Morris,G.L.and J.Fan.1998.Reservoir Sedimentation Handbook.McGraw-Hill Book Co. New York. Mosley,M.P.,1987.The classification and characterization of rivers.In Richards,K.(ed), River Channels,Oxford,Blackwell,pp.295-320. Mouw,J.2011.Hydrologic controls on the recruitment of riparian plants and the maintenance of floodplain wildlife habitat.Retrieved from Alaska Section of the American Water Resources Association 2011 Conference Proceedings Website: http://www.awra.org/state/alaska/proceedings/201 labstracts/ Mueller,E.R.,J.Pitlick,and J.M.Nelson.2005.Variation in the reference Shields stress for bedload transport in gravelbed streams and rivers,Water Resources Research,Vol 41, W04006,doi:10.1029/2004WR003692. Nolan,K.M.,Lisle,T.E.,and Kelsey,H.M.,1987.Bankfull discharge and sediment transport in northwestern California.A paper delivered at Erosion and Sedimentation in the Pacific Rim,IAHS Publication No.165,International Association of Hydrological Sciences, Washington,D.C. O'Connor,J.E.and Grant,G.E.(eds),2003.A Peculiar River:Geology,Geomorphology,and Hydrology of the Deschutes River,Oregon.Amer.Geophysical Union,Water Science and Application 7,Washington,D.C.,219 p. Ott,R.A.M.A.Lee,W.E.Putman,O.,K.Mason,G.T.Worum,and D.N.Burns.2001.Bank erosion and large woody debris recruitment along the Tanana River,interior Alaska Report to:Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Air and Water Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-68 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Quality Prepared by:Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Tanana Chiefs Conference,Inc.Forestry Program Project No.NP-01-R9.July 2001. Parker,G.,P.C.Klingeman,and D.G.McLean.1982.Bedload and size distribution in paved gravel-bed streams,J.Hyd.Div.Am.Soc.Civ.Eng.,108(HY4),544-571. Penner,L.A.,R.G.Boals,2000.A Numerical Model for Predicting Shore Erosion Impacts Around Lakes and Reservoirs,Canadian Dam Association,pp 75 -84. Penner,L.A.,1993.Shore Erosion and Slumping on Western Canadian Lakes and Reservoirs,A Methodology for Estimating Future Bank Recession Rates,Environment Canada, Monitoring Operations Division. Pickup,G.and Warner,R.F.,1976.Effects of hydrologic regime on magnitude and frequency of dominant discharge.Journal of Hydrology,v.29,pp.51-75. Pickup,G.,1976.Adjustment of stream channel shape to hydrologic regime.Journal of Hydrology,v.30,pp.365-373. R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates.1985a.Response of Aquatic Habitat Surface Areas to Mainstem Discharge in the Yentna to Talkeetna Reach of the Susitna River. Prepared under contract to Harza-Ebasco,for Alaska Power Authority,document No. 2774,June. R&M Consultants,Inc.and Trihey &Associates.1985b.Assessment of access by spawning salmon into tributaries of the Lower Susitna River.Prepared under contract to Harza- Ebasco,for Alaska Power Authority,document No.2775,June. Rosgen,D.L.,1994.A classification of natural rivers.Catena.22,pp.169-199. Rosgen,D.L.,1996.Applied river morphology.Wildland Hydrology books.Pagosa Springs, CO. Sabo,J.L.,K.Bestgen,W.Graf,T.Sinha,E.E.Wohl,2012.Dams in the Cadillac Desert: downstream effects in a geomorphic context.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences,1249:227-246. Schmidt,J.C.,and P.R.Wilcock,2008.Metrics for assessing the downstream effects of dams, Water Resour.Res.,44,W04404,doi:10.1029/2006WR005092. Schuett-Hames,D.A.E.Pleus,J.Ward,M.Fox,J.Light.1999.TFW monitoring program method manual for the large woody debris survey.Timber Fish &Wildlife TFW-AM9- 99-004.June 1999. Schumm,S.A.,1963.A tentative classification of alluvial river channels.U.S.Geol.Survey Circ.477,10 p. Schumm,S.A.,1968.River adjustment to altered hydrologic regimen,Murrumbidgee River and paleochannels,Australia.U.S.Geol.Survey Prof.Paper 598,65 p. Schumm,8.A.,1977.The Fluvial System.John Wiley &Sons,New York,338 p. Schumm,S.A.,1991.To Interpret the Earth.Cambridge Univ.Press,Cambridge,U.K.,133 p. Schumm,S.A.,2005.River Variability and Complexity.Cambridge Univ.Press,Cambridge, U.K.,220 p. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-69 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN Schumm,S.A.,Dumont,J.F.,and Holbrook,J.M.,2000.Active Tectonics and Alluvial Rivers. Cambridge Univ.Press,Cambridge,U.K.,275 p. Schumm,S.A.,Harvey,M.D.,and Watson,C.C.,1984.Incised Channels.Initiation,Evolution, Dynamics,and Control.Water Res.Publ.,Littleton,Colorado,200 p. Sherwood,C.,2006.Demonstration Sediment-Transport Applets.Available at: http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/staffpages/csherwood/sedx_equations/sedxinfo.html. Shields,A.,1936.Application of similarity principles and turbulence research to bedload movement.California Institute of Technology,Pasadena;Translation from German Original;Report 167. Shields,F.D.,Jr,A.Simon,and L.J.Steffen.2000.Reservoir effects on downstream river channel migration.Environmental Conservation 27(1):54-66. Strand,R.I.and E.L.Pemberton,1987.Reservoir Sedimentation,U.S.Bureau of Reclamation, Design of Small Dams,Third Edition,Appendix A,pp 529-564. Thomas,R.B.1985.Estimating Total Suspended Sediment Yield with Probability Sampling. Water Resources Research,Vol.21(9):1381-1388. Thorne,C.R.,1997.Channel types and morphological classification.In Thorne,C.R.,Hey, R.D.,and Newson,M.D.(eds),Applied Fluvial Geomorphology for River Engineering and Management.Chichester,Wiley,pp.175-222. Tinker,K.J.and Wohl,E.E.(eds),1998.Rivers Over Rock:Fluvial Processes in Bedrock Channels.Amer.Geophysical Union,Geophysical Monograph 17,Washington,D.C., 323 p. Topping,D.J.,D M.Rubin,P.E.Grams,R.E.Griffiths,T.A.Sabol,N.Voichick,R.B.Tusso, K.M.Vanaman,and R.R.McDonald.2010.Sediment Transport During Three Controlled-Flood Experiments on the Colorado River Downstream from Glen Canyon Dam,with Implications for Eddy-Sandbar Deposition in Grand Canyon National Park, U.S.Geological Survey,Open-File Report 2010-1128,123 pp. Trihey &Associates.1985.Response of Aquatic Habitat Surface Areas to Mainstem Discharge in the Talkeetna-To Devil Canyon Segment of the Susitna River,Alaska.Prepared under contract to Harza-Ebasco,for Alaska Power Authority,document No.2945. United States Bureau of Reclamation (USBR).1987.Design of Small Dams.A Water Resources Technical Publication.U.S.Government Printing Office.Washington,D.C. URS.2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska.62 p.t+Appendixes. U.S.Geological Survey (USGS).1982.Guidelines for determining flood flow frequency. Bulletin 17B,Hydrology Subcommittee,Interagency advisory committee on water data. USGS,1987.Sediment Transport Characteristics of the Selected Streams in the Susitna River Basin,Alaska:Data for Water Year 1985 and Trends in Bedload Transport 1981-85. Open-File Report 87-229.Prepared in cooperation with the Alaska Power Authority,50 Pp. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-70 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN USGS.1992.Recommendations for Use of Retransformation Methods in Regression Models Used to Estimated Sediment Loads ["The Bias Correction Problem”].Office of Surface Water Technical Memorandum No.93.08.December 31. Vandenberghe,J.,2001.A typology of Pleistocene cold-based rivers.Quatern.Internl.79,pp. 111-121. Walling,D.E.1974.Suspended Sediment and Solute Yields from a Small Catchment Prior to Urbanization.Institute of British Geographers Special Publication No.6:169-192. Walling,D.E.1977a.Limitations of the Rating Curve technique for Estimating Suspended Sediment Loads,with Particular Reference to British Rivers.In:Erosion and Solid Matter Transport in Inland Waters,Proceedings of Paris Symposium,July 1977.IAHS Publication No.122:34-48. Walling,D.E.1977b.Assessing the Accuracy of Suspended Sediment Rating Curves for a Small Basin.Water Resources Research,Vol.13(3):531-538. Williams,G.P.,and Wolman,M.G.,1984.Downstream Effects of Dams on Alluvial Rivers.U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper No.1286.88 pp. Wolman,M.G.and Miller,J.P.,1960.Magnitude and frequency of forces in geomorphic processes,Journal of Geology,vol.68,no.1,pp.54-74. Wright,S.A.,D.J.Topping,D.M.Rubin,and T.S.Melis.2010.An approach for modeling sediment budgets in supply-limited rivers,Water Resour.Res.,46,W10538, doi:10.1029/2009WR008600. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-71 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.11.Tables Table 6.5-1.Initial geomorphic reach classifications. Reach Upstream Down-stream {Reach Slope Lateral Constraints Designation |Limit RM)Limit (RM)Classifi-(ft/mi) cation Upper Susitna River Segment (UR) UR-1 260 248 $C2 NA Quaternary Basin Fill UR-2 248 233 SC1 NA Quaternary Basin Fill UR-3 233 223 SC1 NA Quaternary Basin Fill UR-4 223 206 SC2 NA Granodiorite UR-5 206 201 SC1 NA Quaternary Basin Fill UR-6 201 184 $C2 NA Quaternary Basin Fill Middle Susitna River Segment (MR) MR-1 184 182 $C2 9 Gneiss MR-2 182 166.5 $C2 10 Quaternary Basin Fill MR-3 166.5 163 $C2 17 Granites MR-4 163 150 SC1 30 Granites MR-5 150 145 $C2 12 Moraine and Turbidites MR-6 145 119 SC3 10 Moraines MR-7 119 104 $C2 8 Moraines MR-8 104 98.5 MC1/SC2 [8 Holocene Lacustrine and Alluvial Terrace deposits (Reach is a transition from SC2 to MC1 as the Three Rivers Confluence is approached) Lower Susitna River Segment (LR) LR-1 98.5 84 MC1 5 Upper Pleistocene Outwash,Moraine and Lacustrine deposits LR-2 84 61 MC1 5 Upper Pleistocene Outwash,Moraine and Lacustrine deposits LR-3 61 40.5 MC3 4 Glaciolacustrine and Moraine deposits LR-4 40.5 28 MC3 2 Glaciolacustrine and Moraine deposits LR-5 28 20 SC2 2 Glaciolacustrine and Moraine deposits LR-6 20 0 MC4 1.4 Glaciolacustrine and Holocene Estuarine deposits Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-72 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-2.Estimated Water Year 1985 annual sediment loads for the Susitna River and major tributaries (based on USGS 1987). Gage Station Drainage Annual Estimated Annual Sediment Load (million tons) Area (sq.Water -[Silt and Clay}Sand Gravel Totalmi.)Yield (ac.ft.) Susitna River near Talkeetna 6,320 6,720,000 1.79 1.48 0.019 3.29 Chulitna River near Talkeetna 2,580 6,122,000 4.46 2.99 0.355 7.81 Talkeetna River near Talkeetna 2,006 3,083,000 0.81 0.90 0.054 1.76 Total of the three stations near 10,906 15,925,000 7.06 5.37 0.430 12.9 Talkeetna Susitna River at Sunshine 11,100 17,600,000 8.94 6.03 0.155 15.1 Difference (Sunshine minus near 194 1,675,000 1.88 0.66 -0.275 2.20 Talkeetna stations) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-73 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-3.Summary of 2012 aerial photo acquisition for the Upper,Middle,and Lower Susitna River segments. Aerial Coverage (RM)Date Discharge Target (cfs)Actual Discharge (cfs) From To Gold Creek Sunshine Station Gold Creek Sunshine Station Upper River 241 184 09/30/2012 NA'_18,100 - 264 224 10/20/2012 NA'-5,000 _ Middle River 107 98.5 07/27/2012 23,000 _23,200 - 135 98.5 09/10/2012 12,500 _13,300 _ 136 184 9/30/2012 12,500 _18,100 _ Lower River 98.5 54 07/27/2012 _59,100 -54,000 98.5 74 09/10/2012 -36,600 _38,100 74 0 09/30 -10/01/20122 _36,600 _41,700 to 46,900 18 1 10/10/2012 -59,100 -53,700 68 30 10/10/2012 -59,100 _53,700 Notes: I Aerials are only being used for delineation of geomorphic features and channel change in the Upper River,target flow not required 2 Due to cloud cover,this set of aerials is a combination of photos from 9/30/2012 and 10/01/2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authgrity Decenbe REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-4.Middle Susitna River Segment aquatic habitat sites from 1980s to be digitized. Site Name River Mile (RM)Length Downstream |Upstream (Miles) RM RM Whiskers Slough!100.7 102.0 1.3 Slough 4 105.0 106.5 1.5 Slough 5 107.0 108.5 1.5 Slough 6A'112.0 113.0 1.0 Slough 8 113.4 115.4 2.0 Oxbow Il 118.5 120.5 2.0 Slough 8A'124.3 126.6 2.3 Slough 9 128.0 129.5 1.5 Side Channel 10A 131.0 132.8 1.8 Side Channel 10 133.0 134.3 1.3 Slough 111 134.3 136.8 2.5 Gold Creek 136.8 138.3 1.5 Indian River 138.5 139.5 1.0 Slough 21!140.0 142.6 2.6 Slough 22 144.0 145.0 1.0 Fat Canoe Island 146.5 147.5 1.0 Portage Creek'148.3 148.8 0.5 MR-2 Narrow'168.5 170.0 1.5 MR-2 Widet2 170.7 172.5 1.8 MR-2 Straight?173.2 174.9 1.7 MR-2 Tributary?176.0 176.8 0.8 MR-2 Island Bend2 178.1 180.3 2.2 Below Dam'2 182.0 183.0 1.0 TOTAL LENGTH --35.3 Notes: 1 Proposed Focus Area (see Section6.6.4.1.2.4 and Table 6.6-5) 2 -Site not studied in the 1980s Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-75 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-5.Schedule for implementation of the Geomorphology Study. Activity 2013 2014 2015 1Q 4Q}1Q|2Q]/3Q)4Q)1Q/2Q)3Q |4Q}1Q |2Q Develop Geomorphic Classification System /Finalize Classification System Initial Geomorphic Reach Delineation /Finalize Delineation Identify and Map Paleo Geomorphic Features and Geology /Field Verify Determine Morphometric Parameters (sinuosity,slope,topwidth,etc...)@Identify Key Governing Geomorphic Processes Acquire Aerial Photo /Complete Aerial Acquisition (not Completed in 2012) Digitize 1980s Habitat and Geomorphic Features Digitize 2012 Habitat and Geomorphic Features /Complete Habitat Effort Assess Habitat Area Change 1980s to 2012 Assess Channel Change 1980s to 2012 Initial Flow Assessment/Final Flow Assessment Determine Effective Discharge and Characterization of Bed Mobilization Initial Sediment Balance /Detailed Sediment Balance for Modeling >eRecon.Level Assess.of Potential L.and M.Susitna River Segment Change Optional 2013 aerial photo and macrohabitat mapping -Lower River Large Woody Debris Reservoir Geomorphology Geomorphology of Stream X-ings along Access &Transmission Line Corridor LJIntegration with &Support of Interpreting Fluv.Geomorph.Modeling Results Initial Study Report /Updated Study Report Legend:-Planned Activity e Technical Memorandum or Interim Product A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 76 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe 2 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-6.Information and products required by the Geomorphology Study from other studies. Source of Product or Information |Information or Product to be Provided |Timing Information or Products Required for:Geomorphic Reach Classification and Delineation Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section |Current and historical cross-sections Q4-12 8.5.4.3)Thalweg profile Q4-12 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section Bed material sizes Q3-13 6.6.4.1.2.8) External:GINA/Mat-Su Borough LIDAR Q4-12 Internal:Geomorphology Study (Sections 6.5.4.5 &.Q4-12 & 65.47)1980s and 2012 aerials 04-13 Information or Products Required for:Aerial Photo Analysis of Geomorphic Features and Riverine Habitat Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section |Current cross-sections Q4-12 8.5.4.3) Internal:Geomorphology Study (Sections 6.5.4.5 &.Q4-12 & 6.5.4.7)1980s and 2012 aerials 04-13 Trihey &Associates 1985 1980s habitat mapping Middle Susitna River Segment |Q4-12 889)Inc.,and Trihey and Associates 1980s habitat mapping Lower Susitna River Segment |Q4-12 Information or Products Required for:Geomorphic Assessment USGS extended flow record Q3-12External:USGS USGS sediment transport data 1980s and 2012 Q4-12 Results of operations modeling -preliminary Q4-12 Results of operations modeling -alternative scenarios |Q4-14 Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing (Section 8.5.4.3)Results Of flow routing to Sunshine Station -QH12 Preliminary Results of flow routing to Sunshine Station -Q4-14 Alternative Scenarios Internal:Geomorphology Study Mode!(Section Initial estimates of reservoir sediment trap efficiency Q3-13 6.5.4.8..2.1) Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6)Reservoir sediment trap efficiency for alt.scenarios Q2-14 Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)al on:banks,side channels,scouring and Q1-14 Geology &Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5)Soils and mass wasting in reservoir area Q1-14 Riparian Vegetation Study Downstream of the Vegetation mapping in the reservoir area Q1-14 Proposed Susitna-Watana Dam Study (Section 11.6) Recreation Resources Study (Section 12.5)Expected boat use in the reservoir and river Q2-14 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-77 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-7.Information and products the Geomorphology Study will provide to other studies. Study the Product or Information is Providedto -_|Information or Product to be Provided |Timing Information or Products Provided by:Geomorphic Reach Classification and Delineation Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)Initial geomorphic reach delineation Q4-12 Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)Final geomorphic reach delineation Q4-13 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Collaboration on Focus Area selection 04-13 (Section 9.9)Morphometric parameters Q1-13 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6) Information or Products Provided by:Aerial Photo Analysis of Geomorphic Features and Riverine Habitat Digitized 2012 riverine habitat areas -Middle River Digitized 2013 riverine habitats -Middle River Optional 2013 riverine habitat areas -Lower River Digitized 1980s habitat areas Habitat stability 1980s to 2012 Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9) Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6) Q4-12 & Q4-13 Chanel Change 1980s to 2012 /geomorphic features |Q1-13 Information or Products Provided by:Geomorphic Assessment Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)|Reconnaissance level assessment of potential channelRiparianInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.6)change in the Lower Susitna River Segment Qt-13 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9) Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 8.6)|LWD Study Q3-14 River Recreation Flow &Access Study (Section 12.7) Flow assessment (flood frequency and flow duration)O1-13 8 ...Q-14FluvialGeomorphologyModelingStudy(Section 6.6)Characterization of bed mobilization O38FishandAquaticsInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.5)--- oo .Effective discharge determination Q4-14RiparianInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.6) .Q4-12 &Sediment transport assessment and balance 04-13 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6) Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)Reservoir geomorphology and tributary deltas Q3-14 Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9) Aesthetic Resources Study (Section 12.6)Aeolian transport of dust Q3-14 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6)ee .Q2-13 &f key phRiparianInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.6)Identifications of key physical processes Q4-13 Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study (Section 6.6)_|integration with Fluvial Geomorphology ModelingFishandAquaticsInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.5)__|study (see Tables 6.6-6 and 6.6-7 for detailed list of |Q4-14RiparianInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.6)information)River Recreation Flow &Access Study (Section 12.7) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-78 December 2012 RL vic STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-8.Summary of 2012 Geomorphology Study efforts to support preparation and refinement of the Study Plan. Portion of Study Component of Aspect of Study Plan Preparation or the Susitna River (Section 6.5.4.1)selection efforts Study Component Interest Refinement Supported Status Delineate Geomorphically Similar (Homogencus)Part of classification system used to Reaches and Characterize the Geomorphology of |Initial geomorphic reach delineation stratify study area for various study site Yes Sediment Supply and Transport Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.3) Initial sediment balance for the Lower River for pre-and post-Project Part of criteria to identify downstream limit of studies in the Lower Susitna Completed pre-Project condition Developing with-Project conditions River Segment 1/13) Site stability in the Middle Susitna River }Site selection in the Middle River Products in review Assess Geomorphic Change in the Middle and Segment Segment,applicability of 1980s data 1/13" Lower Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.4)|Channel change in the Lower River Downstream study limit in the Lower Products in review Susitna River Segment River,applicability of 1980s data 1/13! Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments (Section 6.5.4.6) Initial assessment of potential Project effects on the geomorphology of the Lower Susitna River Segment Downstream study limit in the Lower River Awaiting with-Project hydrology and sediment transport assessments 1/131 Riverine Habitat Area versus Flow Lower Susitna Initial assessment of potential Project effects on habitat area vs.flow Downstream study limit in the Lower Finalizing analysis River Segment (Section 6.5.4.7)relationships River 1/13! Notes: 1 Technical work will be completed by end of December 2012 and reported on in January 2013 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-79 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.5-9.Geomorphology Study costs. Study Component Estimated Cost Range 1 Geomorphic River Segment Delineation $60,000 to $80,000 2 Sediment Data Collection $450,000 to $600,000 3 Sediment Supply and Transport Assessment $80,000 to $110,000 4 Geomorphic Change Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments $180,000 to $240,000' 5 Riverine Habitat Middle Susitna River Segment $200,000 to $300,0001 6 Recon Assessment Lower Susitna River Segment Project Effects $80,000 to $100,000 7 Riverine Habitat Lower Susitna River Segment $100,000 to $150,0001 8 Reservoir Geomorphology $140,000 to $180,000 9 Large Woody Debris $100,000 to $130,000 10 Geomorphology of Stream Crossings $80,000 to $140,000 11 Integration Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling with the Geomorphology Study $50,000 to $60,000 "Includes acquisition of orthorectified aerial imagery Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-80 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.5.12.Figures |Habitat Specific Models (8.5.4.6) I Fish and Aquatic Indicators l=Habitat (WUA)vs.Flow (2-D/1-D) I=Breaching flows (connectivity) >*Fish Passage (9.12) I.Winter rearing l,StrandingiTrapping ®Effective Spawning/Incubation I,Varial Zone Analyses (12-hr,7-day,30-day) Inputs ®Flows at Dam Site (RSP 7.7) ®Accretion (RSP 8.5) *Mainstem Physical/Hydraulics (RSP 7.5,8.5) ®Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing (RSP 8.5) ®Mainstem Ice Process Flow Routing (RSP 7.6) ®Reach-Scale Habitat Distribution (RSP 9.9) =Reach-Scale Fish Distribution (RSP 9.6) ®Fish Distribution by Habitat Type (RSP 9.6) ®Sediment (RSP 6.5} ®Large Woody Debris (RSP 6.5) ®Focus Area Physical/Hydraulics(RSP 8.5)ein ne Unregulated Flows (Representative Water Years) Alternative Operational Scenarios (8.5.4.3.2) (Representative Water Years)(8.5.4.4.1.1.2 ¢Aggradation *Channel Change *Degradation *Turbidity Geomorphology Modeling (Reach Scale)(6.0) ¢Habitat Unit Distribution and Abundance *Degradation *ice Dam Formation ¢Channel Change *Turbidity *Habitat Unit Change ®Focus Area *Scourand Fill *Large Woody Debris ®Focus Area *Breaching Flows ¢ice Dam Formation ¢Winter Flow Routing ¢Habitat Unit Water Level ¢Habitat Unit Change *Geohydrologic Processes *Regional Aquifers ®Focus Area *Upwelling *Downwelling *intergravel Water Quality | ||l Existing Time Step 1 Time Step 2 Channel Conditions Channel Conditions Channel Conditions l || ||{i Geomorphology (6.0)Ice Processes (7.6)Groundwater/Surface Water Quality (5.0) *Reach Scale =Reach Scale Water Interactions (7.5)|[=Reach Scale *Aggradation *Ice Cover ®Reach Scale ¢Surface Water Temp *Dissolved Oxygen °Metals *Nutrients ="Focus Area *Surface Water Temp *Intergravel Water Quality Figure 6.1-1.Conceptual framework for the Susitna-Watana Instream Flow Study depicting integration of habitat specific models and riverine processes to support integrated resource analyses;and integration of riverine processes to develop fish and aquatic habitat specific models. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-81 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN SS Chelatna oes Lake - |Deshka RiversearWillow :wv"77.2.Yentna Riverpear Sustna Statiod Ay Fy 3 SusinalRiverat Susitna Station gy 4 a " rea Rivernear PaxsonineineRivernearDenalieae- EMS ;2 Watana DamSite «sage ye 1804tdSustnaRweratGoldGreek,Oy 40)150 1600S Oe101 keg ;Susine River above Tsusene Creek 90 7gmsinaRiveratSunshineiene 80 70 Be ge ae4s4,LE er po? A aeeoronitiing50.a7aCreekneg ecépton£reek near Witow 40 0 Legend ye Watana Dam Site A.Gaging Stations @ Susitna River Mile (10 mile interval) c Basin Boundary Data Sources:See Map References ===.River Segment Boundaries: ome {ower River (RM 0 to RM 98) ema Middle River (RM 98 to RM 184) exe Upper River (RM 184 to RM 260) Fairbanks Juneau 0 10 20 30 40 50 -"e i mi 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Seeekm ENERGY AUTHORITY Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983DateCreated:10/19/2012 Map Author:Tetra Tech -Whitney Kirkendall/Miguel Guerrero File:Susitna_Reaches_overview.mxd Figure 6.5-1,Susitna River Geomorphology study area and large-scale river segments. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-82 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 148°30'W 148°20W 148°10W 147°50;W 147°40W 147°30W 147°20W 146°50'W 146°40'W 146°30'W 146°20W 146°10'W 63°SNz opeQbie ; te an Bs fe . < peo z a Cad ita 'ani a 4 new * Zz Z '=\ g pn oer€2°40N€2°45N€2°35NaRee= tts iymeaerTS,TSS wwe Legend >4 ASK A.|wet -= _™=qa ENERGY AUTHORITYy%Proposed Watana Dam Site e =6 River Miles wee Reach Boundary ,-1 mi -MR-2 (SC2/10)=Reach Designation (Reach Type/Slope in feet per mile)Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 1416 Date Created:10/17/2012 k Map Author:Tetra Tech -Whitney Kirkendall/Miguel GuerreroREKMFile:Sustina_U pper_River_Overview_labeled_440000.mxdDataSources:See Map References Figure 6.5-2.Upper Susitna River Segment geomorphic reaches. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-83 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 151°30'W 151°20W .151°10W ;151°W 150°50'W 150°40W 150°30'W :150°20'W 150°1L0'W 149°50W 149°40W 149°30W 149920W 149°10W 149°;W 148°50 Pon DP?Dever Sgre eee CCTcay 148°40W 148°30'W Mame+tow:regAo!8]%as5Pronaay234tpdtaayp'airAE6gHet5oFSe.ofpeSeaya.ateMAAS&eeeTte-49espteseT«OeyeSPied.E;iLPSS.Sydee,7"77As.ve).§'ajune:i.>ene7hogae"aanahweil''aad7,asN\@e.Ttyesa2aesie ee5%..eye4martaJia)FyFtaceiesf7%ZzLegend >Aegi=ALASKA- .LASK AW.3x Proposed Watana Dam Site ===Reach Boundary E>ENERGY AUTHORITY e River Miles A Gaging Stations 0 2 4 6 8 10. LR-1 (MC2/5)=Reach Designation (Reach Type/Slope in feet per mile)--mi Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 0 2 4 6 8 10121416 Date Created:10/24/2012 Data Sources:See Map References a es ce ces ees Map Author:Tetra Tech -Whitney Kirkendall/Miguel GuerreroFile:Sustina_Middle_River_Overview_labeled.mxd Figure 6.5-3.Middle Susitna River Segment geomorphic reaches. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-84 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 61°10N 61°25'N 61°30N 61°35N 61°40'N 61°45'N 61°S0'N 61°S5'N 51°W150°30W150°40'W150°S0'W150°20W150°10W0 at SN os yt os acomeNTHon' PR ae et hs fod LTS2hmA&. ¥7ede?aro aief°Trap 'er.ae Pret 149°S0WLegend +Proposed Watana Dam Site ===Reach Boundary °River Miles A Gaging Stations LR-6 (MC4/1.4)=Reach Designation (Reach Type/Stope in feet per mile) Data Sources:See Map References -t i mi 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 a nscseeA "3 4?ov 7s a>ALASKA.@@aE>ENERGY AUTHORITY Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983DateCreated:10/24/2012 Map Author:Tetra Tech -Whitney Kirkendall/Miquel Guerrero File:Sustina_Lower_River_Overview_label_440000.mxd Figure 6.5-4.Lower Susitna River Segment geomorphic reaches. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-85 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 144° W145°W146°W147°W148°W149°W1s0°w152°w153°W154°wW155°W156°w Sx 151°w n aw Pa alfeatr aye -e DOR INE ate Chulitna_iver near Talkeetnagb.a) 7SusitnaRiver near Talkeetna, 15292100 Susitna River at Sunshine vaAre*4iALio'\ji \ ABre" ina River near SkwentnaLmeyany: AA Little Susitna Fi SatSree5Pni ytAG Oy,Na dat,Deception Creek near Willow woo nrrrmywetAeeAWilretey SON ATLEN6amAMEKtbA tlk A €jetity F 4UlLake7)¢,ma, hl, v w owSusitnaRiveratSusitnaStatio aa¢OK ENERGY AUTHORITY a7tepe s_collected_2012.mxd A station Map Author:Tetra Tech -Whitney Kirkendall/Miguel Guerrero Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 File:Gaging Date Created:10/17/2012 / a mi 5040i - =<e"0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 eekm Juneau Fairbanks *Watana Dam Site A Gaging Stations A 2012 Measurement Locations Data Sources:See Map References Legend ions and 2012 measurement locations.i tatingagingsUSGSSusitnaRiverbasiFigure6.5-5 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012©aoOote)oOou oS&2oa2213)2.@zONovart3czSOoo<0otEOOo3WwOW REVISED STUDY PLAN 147°20/W147°30°'W147°40W148°20W NSbo. ra) 147°50'W148°w148°10'W148°30W148°40W aaywey [=ALASKA...@@EI>ENERGY AUTHORITYi-<o™”River Mile Legend -posed Study AreaIProL Cc Proposed Watana Reservoir Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983DateCreated:12/5/2012c|Proposed Watana Dam and Powerhouse 8 Whitney KirkendallMapAuthor:Tetra Tech,Inc.- File:Susitna_reservoir.mxdakmDataSources:See Map References NSbocd Figure 6.5-6.Susitna-Watana Geomorphology Study reservoir geomorphology study area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012Page6-87 REVISED STUDY PLAN 150°40°W 150°30W 150°W 149°40'W150°20°W 150°10W 149°50'W 149°30W 149°20°W 149°10W 149°=W 148°S0'W 148°40W i63°25N63°20NDenali Corridor 63°1SN63°10Nia 218 |s Denpga Propos ' {\Proposed Dam and Powerhouse ed Camp - and Airstrip ; Proposed Reservoir Study Area Boundary oe Moun 63°20N150°50'W 148°30'W 148°20/W 148°10W 148°W 147°50/W 147°40W 147°30'W 147°20;W 147°10W =yet,2 eee ran awit can -.vod whe "YTS .J a JA T T --tT 7 T T "ne:eae 178-8 Cantwell A A777 a Ky 18S ] @SAEN PWS OO Fe ene a 48 18S ;FE ot PS ®.18S INeaeke{ro ; -63°10N63°15N63°SN'y ;22S 4% "2? 33N g ” 32N Jzg eo TS €2°45N,a'30N \z -_-Proposed Watana a 6 30N 30N Reservoir oa " gy sa enna eH 30N UL l L l +L Legend ez ™az” ;@@ ENERGY ORITY3%Proposed Watana Dam Site Federal BLM AUTH LS Proposed Reservoir Private Land {}Transmission Cormidor State Lands 02 4 6 8 1 4 eee i c :Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983-Road Comet 0 2 46 8 10121416 ate ere ated ee vhitney KirkendalDataSources:See Map References a km Phe Condor?O12A28d Figure 6.5-7.Susitna-Watana access corridors. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-88 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 RL wi STUDY PLAN Flow Routing (8.5.4.3) (6.6)Geology and Soils (4.5) Rec.Resources (12.5) Botanical (11.6) .7 ReservoirOps (Eng.)USGS Extended Flow Record (Q3-12) Ice Processes (7.6)USGS Sed.Transport Data (19805/2012)(Q4-12)row ee B54)Flow Routing IFS Riparian (8.6)Resutts of Operations Modeling SyneietialFluvialGeo.Modeling (8.5.4.3)WQ Modeling (5.6)ResultsofFlow Routing (Q4-12/04-14} Reservoir Sediment Trap Efficiency (Q2-14) =4 Ice Effects-Banks,Side Channel,Scouring,Stage (Q1-14) Timing and Duration of Reservoir Ice (Q1-14) Soils mapping and mass wasting inreservoir area (Q1-14) Rip.-FloodplainSed.Rate,Age Surfaces,Soils(Q1-14) .2012 Cross Sections (Q4-12}Vegetation Mapping (Q1-14)Cross Sections (Q4-12)1980s Aerials(internat)(03-12)Boat Use (Q2-14)Thalweg Profile (04-12)2012 Aerials (int.)(Q4-12/Q4-13)Bed Material Sizes(Q3-13)1980s Map Books (int.)(Q4-12)LiDAR (Mat-Su)(4-12)1980s Cross Sections (Int.}(Q4-12) Aerial Photos (Q4-12/04-13}) Recon.Level Assess of Potentiaf Change (Q1-13) Flow Assessnent (Frequency and Duration)(Q1-13/4-14) Characterizationof Bed Mobilization (Q4-13/Q4-14) Effective Discharge Determination (Q4-13/04-14) Sediment Transport Assessment/Balance (Q4-12/04-14)d AY.LWD Study (Q3-14)i- InitialReach Dein eation (Q4-12)2012 Riverine Habitat Areas (Q4-12/04-13)Reservoir Geomorphology /Trib.Dettas(Q3-14) Final Reach Delineation (Q4-13)Digitized 1980s Habitat Areas (04-12/04-13)streamc Aeolian Transport of Os (3-4)4MorphometricParameters(04-13)Habitat Stability 19805-2012 (Q1-13/04-13)tream Crossing &Transmission Line Corridor (Q3-24)Focus Area Selection (Q1-13)Channel Charge 1980s-2012 (Q1-13/Q4-13)Identificationof Key Physical Processes (Q2-13/Q4-13)Integrationw/Fluvial Geomorphology Modeting (Q4-14) é aly Wy de ; NW SeveralOtherStudies May Fiuvial Aesthetic Use Results of the Recon. .IFS -Riparian Habitat Level Assess.of PotentiaIFS--Fish(8.5ish{8.5}(8.6)Mapping (9.9)Geomorphology Resources Changeto Help Set TherModeting(6.6)(12.6) Figure 6.5-8.Study interdependencies for the Geomorphology Study. Downstream Limit Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-89 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study 6.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study The overall goal of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study is to model the effects of the proposed Project on the fluvial geomorphology of the Susitna River to assist in predicting the trend and magnitude of geomorphic response.More specifically,the purpose of the modeling study,along with the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5),is to assess the potential impact of the Project on the behavior of the river downstream of the proposed dam,with particular focus on potential changes in instream and riparian habitat.Whether the existing channel morphology will remain the same or at least be in "dynamic equilibrium”under post- Project conditions is a significant question in any instream flow study (i.e.,Is the channel morphology in a state of dynamic equilibrium such that the distribution of habitat conditions will be reflected by existing channel morphology,or will changes in morphology occur that will influence the relative distribution or characteristics of aquatic habitat over the term of the license?[Bovee 1982]).This key issue prompts four overall questions that must be addressed by the two geomorphology studies: e Is the system currently in a state of dynamic equilibrium? e If the system is not currently in a state of dynamic equilibrium,what is the expected evolution over the term of the license in the absence of the project? e Will and in what ways will the Project alter the equilibrium status of the downstream river (i.e.,what is the expected morphologic evolution over the term of the license under with-Project conditions)? e What will be the expected effect of the Project-induced changes on the geomorphic features that form the aquatic habitat and therefore are directly related to the quantity, distribution and quality of the habitat? The methods and results from the Geomorphology Study and the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will address these questions. Specific objectives of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study are as follows: e Develop calibrated models to predict the magnitude and trend of geomorphic response to the Project. e Apply the developed models to estimate the potential for channel change for with-Project operations compared to existing conditions. e Coordinate with the Geomorphology Study to integrate model results with the understating of geomorphic processes and controls to identify potential Project effects that require interpretation of model results. e Support the evaluation of Project effects by other studies in their resource areas providing channel output data and assessment of potential changes in the geomorphic features that help comprise the aquatic and riparian habitats of the Susitna River. 6.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Sediment transport issues downstream of Watana Dam are expected to stem from the influences of the regulated outflows and the deficit of sediment supply due to trapping of sediments in the reservoir.These issues are particularly important because fish resources have the greatest Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-90 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN potential to be affected by the Project,and most of the potential impacts would occur downstream of the Project (AEA 2010).The effect of altered flows on anadromous and resident fish habitats and their associated populations was the major focus of studies conducted in the 1980s (APA 1984).The major fish habitats are located in the Susitna River,side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs,and tributary mouths (APA 1984). Modeling of the hydraulics of the Susitna River below the previously proposed project,a necessary step in developing a sediment transport model,was performed in the 1980s.This work included development and application of one-dimensional HEC-2 hydraulic models to support the calculation of water-surface profiles and channel hydraulics (Acres 1983).The models represented the reach between Devils Canyon (Susitna RM 186.8)and Talkeetna (RM 99), excluding Devils Canyon (Susitna RM 162.1 to RM 150.2).The Aquatic Resources Data Gap Analysis (HDR 2011)indicates that sediment transport modeling of a portion of the Susitna River was also undertaken.Realizing the complexity of the sediment transport problem at the Chulitna River confluence,APA commissioned the Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research to develop a quasi-steady,one-dimensional numerical model of sediment transport for the 14-mile reach of the Susitna River from the Chulitna confluence downstream to Sunshine Station (Holly et al.1985).The model was based on sediment transport data from 1981 and 1982,as the following years of data collection had not yet been completed.The topography was derived from 28 cross-sections (approximately 1 every %mile)measured by R&M Consultants and aerial photography (Ashton and R&M 1985).The model was still in development as of the writing of the 1985 report;however,the companion report,referenced in Holly et al.(1985),was not found in the Susitna documentation. The Aquatic Resources Data Gap Analysis (HDR 2011)indicates that channel equilibrium,an important macrohabitat variable,was not addressed in the APA Project instream flow study.The question of whether the existing channel morphology will remain the same,or at least be in "dynamic equilibrium”once the proposed action is implemented is a significant question in an instream flow study.Instream flow versus habitat relationships developed for today's river assume that similar relationships will persist for the duration of the project,within a reasonably defined range of variability.In the case of the proposed Project's instream flow study,the question is whether the river is currently in a state of equilibrium or disequilibrium.If it is in a state of disequilibrium,will the state be exacerbated or reversed as a result of the Project?If it is exacerbated or reversed,the impact of the Project cannot be assessed without estimating a post- Project channel configuration (Bovee et al.1998).The same holds true if the river is currently in a state of equilibrium and shifts to disequilibrium for a significant period of time with the Project in place. The AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report (URS 2011) concluded:"Numerical modeling of the sediment transport dynamics would provide a basis for comparing the changes in channel morphology and aquatic habitat associated with the proposed Project and the proposed operations.”The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam Study addresses the need to develop a sediment transport model of the Susitna River.It was also indicated in the Data Gap Analysis Report (URS 2011)that further quantification of the sediment supply and transport capacity would help identify the sensitivity of the channel morphology (and associated aquatic habitats)to the effects of the proposed Project.The report indicated that information on sediment continuity could provide a basis for evaluating whether the Susitna River below the Chulitna confluence would be at risk of aggradation,and if so, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-91 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN whether the magnitude would alter aquatic habitats and hydraulic connectivity to these habitats. URS (2011)also pointed out that side channels and sloughs are of particular importance to fisheries,and changes to the relationships between flow and stage at which the habitats are accessible could affect the fisheries.These relationships can be affected by not only flow distribution,but also changes in the bed elevations due to sediment transport processes.Other impacts to the sediment transport regime could affect the cleaning of spawning gravels, hyporheic flows through redds,groundwater inflows,and hydraulic connectivity for out- migration to the main channel. 6.6.3.Study Area The study area for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam is the portion of the Susitna River from Watana Dam (RM 184)downstream to RM 75.This downstream limit has been set to extend the Study into the upper portion of the Lower Susitna River Segment.This limit extends this study nine miles downstream of the lower limit of Geomorphic Reach LR-1. Evaluation of information from the 1980s studies as well as current information indicates that it is unlikely that Project effects on the geomorphology of the Susitna River will extend downstream of Geomorphic Reach LR-1.This is initial assessment is based on the large introduction of sediment and water at the Three Rivers Confluence where both the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers approximately double the flow in the Susitna River and increases the sediment supply by approximately a factor of five.In response to the increase in sediment supply as well as a reduction in gradient,the form of the Susitna River changes at the Three Rivers Confluence from a single channel to a braided channel.The 15 miles of braided channel is expected to buffer the downstream remaining portion of the Susitna River from the changes in flow regime and sediment supply caused by the Project. Further review of information developed during the 1980s studies and study efforts initiated in 2012,such as sediment transport analyses,hydrologic analysis,assessment of channel change and comparison of habitat mapping from the 1980s with current 2012 conditions in the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5),and additional 2012 habitat mapping (Section 9.9) operations modeling and the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3)will be used to determine the extent to which Project operations influence habitats in the Lower River Segment.An initial assessment of the downstream extent of Project effects will be developed in Q2 2013 in collaboration with the TWG.This assessment will guide the need to extend studies into the Lower River and which geomorphic reaches will subject to Reach and Focus Area level modeling of the fluvial geomorphology of the Susitna River in 2013.Results of the 2013 studies will be used to determine the extent to which Lower Susitna River Segment studies will be adjusted in 2014.Further discussion of the process and schedule for further assessing the downstream limit for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,additional information becomes available,is provided in section 6.6.3.2. The study area includes the entire Middle Susitna River Segment from the Watana Dam site (RM 184)downstream to the Three Rivers Confluence area (RM 98).(Note:Modeling of Devils Canyon will not be performed because this reach is considered too dangerous to perform cross- section and other surveys needed to develop the model.Devils Canyon will be assumed to be a stable,pass-through reach in terms of sediment transport due to the high level of bedrock control and steep gradient present in this reach.) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-92 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.3.7.Focus Areas The bed evolution modeling approach calls for the application of a 1-D bed evolution model to predict the geomorphic response of the Susitna River to the Project for the entire study area (excluding Devils Canyon).To provide a higher level of detail and to model physical processes not adequately represented in a 1-D bed evolution model,a 2-D bed evolution model will be applied in to some or all of the "Focus Areas”(in some instances,it may be appropriate to apply a more detailed 1-D bed evolution model or series of 1-D models than a 2-D bed evolution model).Focus Areas will involve portions of the Susitna River and its floodplain where detailed study efforts will be jointly conducted by several study teams including the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Geomorphology (Section 6.5),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),Groundwater (Section 7.5),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)studies.The Focus Areas will allow for a highly integrated, multidisciplinary effort to be conducted,evaluating potential Project effects for key resource areas across a range of representative sites. The 2-D models will be used to evaluate the detailed hydraulic and sediment transport characteristics on smaller,more local scales where it is necessary to consider the more complex flow patterns to understand and quantify the issue(s).The 2-D models may be applied to specific Focus Areas,within the selected 1-D modeling study area,that are representative of important habitat conditions and the various geomorphic reach types.If site conditions at a particular Focus Area do not warrant 2-D bed evolution and associated hydraulic modeling,1-D modeling will be applied at that focus site.The decision on what type of modeling to apply to each Focus Area will be made as part of the site selection process conducted in collaboration with the licensing participants.In addition,the Focus Areas will be chosen jointly by the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Geomorphology (Section 8.5),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9)studies to facilitate maximum integration of available information among the studies.Sites will be chosen such that there is at least one Focus Area for each geomorphic reach (except reaches MR-3 and MR-4 where there are safety concerns associated with Devils Canyon due to the extreme whitewater conditions)and the sites will cover the range of riverine aquatic habitat types.At least one unstable site,likely representative of a braided channel reach,will be included in the Focus Areas.If focus sites involve primary tributary deltas,2-D modeling will also be considered based on screening that considers the importance to the existing fishery and the potential for adverse project effects.The 2-D hydraulic modeling could include the Three Rivers Confluence area,though application of a 2-D bed evolution model would likely be infeasible.(The distribution of the 2-D sites is based on the study requests submitted by NOAA- NMFS and USFWS on May 31,2012,and discussions during the June 14,2012 Water Resources TWG meeting.) 6.6.3.2.|Determination of Downstream Study Limit The downstream extent of the Lower Susitna River Segment modeling effort has been identified as RM 75.The 1-D modeling will be continued downstream to this limit which is approximately nine miles downstream of Sunshine Station (RM 84)(NOAA-NMFS and USFWS requested the 1-D modeling extend to Sunshine Station [study requests dated May 31,2012]).The downstream extent of the impacts of a dam on the geomorphic and physical habitat characteristics of a river is fundamentally dependent on the rate of downstream tributary Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-93 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN mitigation of the reduced flows and sediment loads below the dam (Williams and Wolman 1984; Grant et al.2003).Under existing conditions,it is clear based on the change in morphology of the Susitna River from a relatively confined single channel to extensively braided (Smith and Smith 1984)that the Chulitna and Talkeetna Rivers,in combination,significantly increase both the volumes of flow and sediment supply to the Susitna River,and thus potentially mitigate the proposed Project impacts on the geomorphology of the river below the confluence.Because of the geologically-controlled valley floor constriction at RM 84,there is extensive sediment storage within the reach between the Susitna-Chulitna-Talkeetna Rivers confluence at RM 97 and RM 84 that is likely to mitigate any sediment impacts below the dam and thus make it unlikely that Project geomorphic and related physical habitat impacts will extend below RM 84 (LR1).Sediment loads estimated by the USGS for Water Year 1985 (October 1984 through September 1985)are presented in Table 6.5-2.This information suggests that the Chulitna River contributes the majority of the sediment load at the Three Rivers Confluence.The relative contributions are 61 percent for the Chulitna River,25 percent for the Susitna River,and 14 percent for the Talkeetna River.Of note is the relatively small amount of the gravel load contributed by the Susitna River to the Three Rivers Confluence (about 4 percent,compared to 83 percent from the Chulitna River and 13 percent from the Talkeetna River,based on the 1985 data).The bedload component of the total sediment load typically has the most influence on the form and behavior of the river channel.Based on the relatively small contribution of the Susitna River to the bedload downstream from the Three Rivers Confluence and the indication from the 1985 data that the portion of the study reach between the Three Rivers Confluence and Sunshine is a net sediment accumulation zone,it appears that changes in bedload associated with the Project may not have a significant impact on channel form and process in the Lower River. The hypothesis suggested by the above preliminary conclusion that changes in bedload due to the Project will not affect channel form and process in the Lower River will be carefully tested with an initial assessment of potential Project effects on channel morphology that will be completed in early Q1 of 2013 as part of the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5.4.6,Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on the Lower and Middle Susitna River Segments).The technical memorandum detailing the results of the Reconnaissance-Level Assessment of Project Effects on the Lower Susitna River Segment will be presented to and reviewed by the agencies and licensing participants as part of the first check-in on the downstream study limit of RM 75. Discussions of the results and conclusions regarding the extent of Project effects on the geomorphology of the Lower Susitna River Segment and the decision on adjusting the downstream study limit for the 2013 efforts will occur at Technical Workgroup Meetings to be held in February and/or March 2013.These discussions will include establishing the criteria for identifying whether Project effects potentially extend downstream of RM 75.It is an objective of the process to finalize the decision on the downstream study limit by the early Q2 of 2013 to allow for planning of the 2013 field season. The second check-in on the downstream study limit to be provided by the geomorphology studies will be based on the results of the 1-D bed evolution model.If the results of the 1-D modeling effort show differences between the modeled existing and the modeled with-Project conditions that are beyond the range of natural variability below Geomorphic Reach LR-1 (RM 98 to RM 84),the 1-D modeling will be continued farther downstream in the Lower Susitna River Segment in 2014.The criteria for determining what constitutes natural variability will be made in collaboration with the licensing participants.As part of the process,a technical memorandum documenting the 1-D modeling effort and its results will be prepared and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-94 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN distributed for review by the licensing participants in January 2014.A Technical Workgroup meeting(s)will be held in February and/or March 2014.If it is determined that the results of the 1-D modeling warrant extending the study limits farther downstream,the need for adding Focus Areas in the Lower Susitna River Segment will also be determined through consultation with the licensing participants and pertinent study leads at the February and March 2014 Technical Workgroup meetings.Table 6.6-1 provides a summary of the steps and dates involved in the process that will be used to assess and if necessary,adjust the downstream study limit for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. The results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model (see Section 8.5.4.3),which is scheduled to be completed in Q1 2013,as well as results of the operations model (Section 8.5.4.3.2),are an important part of the determination of the downstream study extent for a variety of resource areas.The results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model completed in Q1 2013 will be used to determine whether,and the extent to which,Project operations related to load-following as well as seasonal flow changes occur within a section of the Lower Susitna River Segment that includes all of Geomorphic Reach L-1 and a portion of L-2 (down to RM 75).Thus,an initial assessment of the downstream extent of Project effects will be developed in Q1 2013 with review and input of the TWG.This assessment will include a review of information developed during the 1980s studies and study efforts initiated in 2012,such as sediment transport (Section 6.5),habitat mapping (Sections 6.5 and 9.9),operations modeling (Section 8.5.4.3.2),and the Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3).The assessment and the following six criteria will be used to evaluate the need to extend studies into the Lower River Segment,and if studies are needed,will identify which geomorphic reaches require instream flow analysis in 2013.The criteria include (1)Magnitude of daily stage change due to load-following operations relative to the range of variability for a given location and time under existing conditions (i.e., unregulated flows);(2)Magnitude of monthly and seasonal stage change under Project operations relative to the range of variability under unregulated flow conditions;(3)Changes in surface area (as estimated from relationships derived from LiDAR and comparative evaluations of habitat unit area depicted in aerial digital imagery under different flow conditions)due to Project operations;(4)Anticipated changes in flow and stage to Lower River off-channel habitats;(5)Anticipated Project effects resulting from changes in flow,stage and surface area on habitat use and function,and fish distribution (based on historical and current information concerning fish distribution and use)by geomorphic reaches in the Lower River Segment;and (6)Initial assessment of potential changes in channel morphology of the Lower River (Section 6.5.4.6)based on Project-related changes to hydrology and sediment supply in the Lower River. Results of the 2013 studies will then be used to determine the extent to which Lower River Segment studies should be adjusted in 2014. It is noted that a variety of resource areas require determination of their downstream study limits. Although both Middle and Lower Susitna River segments are under consideration as part of the IFS,the majority of detailed study elements for the IFS described in the RSP (Sections 8.5 and 8.6)are concentrated within the Middle River Segment.This is because Project operations related to load-following and variable flow regulation will likely have the greatest potential effects on this segment of the river.These effects tend to attenuate in a downstream direction as channel morphologies change,and flows change due to tributary inflow and flow accretion.The diversity of habitat types and the information from previous and current studies that indicate substantial fish use of a number of slough and side channel complexes within this segment also support the need to develop a strong understanding of habitat-flow response relationships in the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-95 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Middle Susitna River Segment.The determination for downstream study limits may also depend on the outcome of 2013 efforts being conducted for the Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6),Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3),and the winter flow routing model (Section 7.6).Whether there is need to integrate Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study results with certain studies also depends on the final downstream limit for the modeling effort. Specifically,the Eulachon Study (Section 9.16)is limited to the downstream-most portions of the Lower Susitna River Segment and will not require detailed sediment transport modeling input from the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study if the modeling effort is not extended downstream of RM 75. 6.6.4.Study Methods The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling below Watana Dam is divided into three study components: e Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration e Model Existing and with-Project Conditions e Coordination on Model Output Each of these components is explained further in the following subsections. 6.6.4.1.Study Component:Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration The overall goal of the Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration study component is to develop a model that can simulate channel formation processes in the Susitna River downstream of Watana Dam. 6.6.4.1.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Modeling of hydraulics of the Susitna River below the proposed Project,a necessary step in developing a sediment transport model,was performed in the 1980s.One-dimensional HEC-2 hydraulic models were developed in the 1980s to support the calculation of water-surface profiles and channel hydraulics (Acres 1983).However,the 1980s effort did not include sediment transport modeling.Both 1-D and 2-D sediment transport models are required to characterize the bed evolution for both the existing and with-Project conditions in the Susitna River.This study component involves selection and development of the sediment transport models. 6.6.4.1.2.Methods The Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration study component is divided into three tasks: e Development of Bed Evolution Modeling Approach and Model e Coordination with other Studies on Processes Modeled e Calibration/Validation of the Model Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-96 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.4.1.2.1.|Development of Bed Evolution Model Approach and Model Selection Development of the bed evolution model for a dynamic system such as the Susitna River is a complex undertaking that requires considerable investigation and coordination.The work in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments contained in the Geomorphology Study provides a considerable part of the required investigation.Based on the study results and input from the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3),Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9)studies,models will be developed that represent the physical processes that control the dynamic nature of the Susitna River,and that will provide other studies with the required information on the potential changes in the channel and floodplain for their analyses. Some of the important steps in the development of the modeling approach and model are as follows: e Review and understand available data. e Develop an understanding of the dominant physical processes and governing physical conditions in the study reach. e Coordinate with other studies to understand their perspective on system dynamics,and the physical features and processes that are important to their studies. e Identify an overall modeling approach that is consistent with the study goals,the constraints on information that is currently available or can practically be obtained,and the needs of the other studies. e Identify a modeling approach that is consistent with the spatial and temporal scale of the area to be investigated. e Determine the spatial limits of the modeling effort. ®Determine the time scales for the various models. e Review potential models and select a model(s)that meets the previously-determined needs and conditions. e Identify data needs and data gaps for the specific model and study area being investigated. e Collect the required data to fill data gaps. e Develop the model input. e Identify information to be used to calibrate and validate the model. e Perform initial runs and check basic information such as continuity for water and sediment,hydraulic conditions,magnitude of sediment transport,and flow distributions. e Collaborate with other studies on initial model results. e Refine model inputs. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-97 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Perform calibration and validation efforts,to include comparison of modeled water- surface elevations,in-channel hydraulic conditions (e.g.,velocity and depth),sediment transport rates,and aggradation/degradation rates with available measured data. e Perform model runs for existing conditions to provide a baseline for comparison of with- Project scenarios. e Work with other studies to develop scenarios to evaluate the potential Project effects,and apply the model to those scenarios. e Coordinate with other studies to evaluate and define the appropriate format for presentation of the model results. e Develop and run additional scenarios,as necessary,based on results from the initial scenarios and identified Project needs. The following subsections outline the identified issues to be considered and summarize the development of the modeling approach,the model selection,and the model development. Issues to be Considered:To develop the modeling approach,specific issues that need to be addressed have been identified.These specific issues have been further differentiated into reach- scale and local-scale issues because the scale influences the proposed approach. Reach-Scale Issues:Reach-scale issues refer to aspects of the system that involve the overall behavior and general characteristics of the Susitna River over many miles.Each reach represents a spatial extent of the Susitna River that has a consistent set of fluvial geomorphic characteristics.Reach-scale issues include the following: e Historical changes in the system and the existing status with respect to dynamic equilibrium. e Changes in both the bed material (sand and coarser sizes)and wash (fine sediment)load sediment supply to the system due to trapping in Watana Reservoir. e Long-term balance between sediment supply and transport capacity and the resulting aggradation/degradation response of the system for pre-and post-Project conditions. e Changes in bed material mobility in terms of size and frequency of substrate mobilized due to alteration of the magnitude and duration of peak flows by the Project. e Project-induced changes in supply and transport of finer sediments that influence turbidity. e Potential for changes in channel dimensions (i.e.,width and depth)and channel pattern (i.e.,braiding versus single-thread or multiple-thread with static islands)due to the Project and the magnitude of the potential change. e Project-induced changes in river stage due to reach-scale changes in bed profile,channel dimensions,and potentially hydraulic roughness. Local-Scale Issues:Local-scale issues refer to aspects of the system that involve the specific behavior and characteristics of the Susitna River at a scale associated with specific geomorphic and habitat features.Local-scale issues are addressed using a more detailed assessment over a finer Focus Area scale;however,these analyses must draw from and build upon the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-98 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN understanding and characterization of the system behavior as determined at the reach scale. Local-scale issues include the following: e Processes responsible for formation and maintenance of the individual geomorphic features and associated habitat types. e Potential changes in geomorphic features and associated aquatic habitat types that may result from effects of Project operation on riparian vegetation and ice processes. e Effects of changes in flow regime and sediment supply on substrate characteristics in off- channel habitat units. e Changes in upstream connectivity (breaching)of off-channel habitats due to alteration of flow regime and possibly channel aggradation/degradation.These changes may induce further changes in the morphology of off-channel habitats,including the following: o Potential for accumulation of sediments at the mouth. o Potential for accumulation of fines supplied during backwater connection with the mainstem. ©Potential for changes in riparian vegetation that could alter the width of off-channel habitat units. e Project effects at representative sites on the magnitude,frequency,and spatial distribution of hydraulic conditions that control bed mobilization,sediment transport,sediment deposition,and bank erosion. e Potential for change in patterns of bedload deposits at tributary mouths that may alter tributary access or tributary confluence habitat,as discussed below. Tributary confluences are areas of interest for determining the potential Project effects on sediment transport and morphology.Modeling of tributary deltas is discussed as a topic separate from the mainstem. Synthesis of Reach-Scale and Local-Scale Analyses:The final step in the effort will be the synthesis of the reach-scale and local-scale analyses to identify potential Project-induced changes in the relative occurrence of aquatic habitat types and associated surface area versus flow relationships.In addition to the results of the hydraulic and sediment transport modeling, this synthesis will require application of fluvial geomorphic relationships to develop a comprehensive and defensible assessment of potential Project effects.This type of integrated analysis has been performed in the past by the study team on several projects including:instream flow,habitat,and recreation flow assessments to support relicensing of Slab Creek Dam in California;a broad range of integrated geomorphic assessments and modeling to assist the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program in Central Nebraska;and ongoing work to support the California Department of Water Resources and Bureau of Reclamation to design restoration measures for the San Joaquin River in the Central Valley of California downstream of Friant Dam. Development of Modeling Approach:The proposed modeling approach considers the need to address both reach-scale and local-scale assessments and the practicality of developing and applying various models based on data collection needs,computational time,analysis effort,and model limitations.Based on these considerations,an approach that uses 1-D models to address Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-99 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN reach-scale issues and 2-D models to address local-scale issues is proposed.Considering the broad physical expanse of the Susitna River system,the general hydraulic and sediment transport characteristics of the various sub-reaches that make up the overall study area will be evaluated using 1-D computer models and/or established hydraulic relationships.The 2-D models will be used to evaluate the detailed hydraulic and sediment transport characteristics on smaller,more local scales where it is necessary to consider the more complex flow patterns to understand and quantify the issues.The 2-D models will be applied to specific Focus Areas that are representative of important habitat conditions-the various channel classification types and selected primary tributaries.These sites will be chosen in coordination with the licensing participants and the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)studies to facilitate maximum integration of available information between the studies. The proposed approach to integrating 1-D modeling at the reach-scale and 2-D modeling at the local-scale will provide the following advantages: e 1-D modeling will allow for efficient assessment of the hydraulic conditions and sediment transport balance over the length of the study reach downstream of Watana Dam. e The 1-D model uses cross-sectional data that are being obtained as part of the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3).(Note that some supplemental cross-sections may be required for the 1-D sediment transport model.) e The 1-D model will provide the boundary conditions for the 2-D model,including starting water-surface elevations and upstream sediment supply. e 2-D modeling applied at the Focus Areas that are also chosen for the Ice Processes (Section 7.6)and Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6)studies will allow for the fullest level of integration of these efforts,particularly as they relate to assessments of potential changes in channel width and pattern for this study. e 2-D modeling at the Focus Area will provide an understanding of the hydraulic conditions and sediment transport processes that contribute to formation of individual habitat types. e 2-D modeling provides a much more detailed and accurate representation of the complex hydraulic interaction between the main channel and the off-channel habitats than is possible with a 1-D model. Model Selection:Many computer programs are available for performing movable boundary sediment-transport simulations.The choice of an appropriate model for this study depends on a number of factors,including (1)the level of detail required to meet the overall project objective(s);(2)the class,type,and regime of flows that are expected to be modeled;and (3)the availability of necessary data for model development and calibration.While 2-D modeling would provide the most comprehensive assessment of hydraulic and sediment transport conditions in the study reach,the extent of required data,effort required for model development,and computational time required for execution to model the entire system make this impractical. Considering the very broad physical expanse of the overall Susitna River system,a one- dimensional (1-D)computer model and/or engineering relationships that can be applied in a Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-100 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN spreadsheet application is the most practical approach to modeling overall system behavior at the scale of the study reach.2-D modeling will then be used for evaluating the detailed hydraulic and sediment-transport characteristics that control the complex geomorphic features and habitat at the local scale.A variety of candidate models will be evaluated for application on the Susitna River.Potential candidate models for the 1-D and 2-D portions of the study are discussed below. General Discussion of 1-D Models:Most 1-D movable boundary sediment-transport models are designed to simulate changes in the cross-sectional geometry and river profile due to scour and deposition over relatively long periods of time.In general,the flow record of interest is discretized into a quasi-unsteady sequence of steady flows of variable discharge and duration. For each model time-step and corresponding discharge,the water-surface profile is calculated using the step-backwater method to compute the energy slope,velocity,depth,and other hydraulic variables at each cross-section in the network.The sediment-transport capacity is then calculated at each cross-section based on input bed material information and the computed hydraulics,and the aggradation or degradation volume is computed by comparing the transport capacity with the upstream sediment supply (i.e.,the supply from the next upstream cross-section for locations not identified as an upstream boundary condition).The resulting ageradation/degradation volume is then applied over the cross-section control volume (i.e.,the sub-channel concept),and the shape of the cross-section is adjusted accordingly.Because the sediment-transport calculations are performed by size fraction,the models are capable of simulating bed material sorting and armoring.The computations proceed from time-step to time- step,using the updated cross-sectional and bed material gradations from the previous time-step. 1-D sediment-transport models should not be applied to situations where 2-and 3-dimensional flow conditions control the sediment-transport characteristics because they do not consider secondary currents,transverse movement and variation,turbulence,and lateral diffusion;thus, the models cannot simulate such phenomena as point bar formation,pool-riffle formation,and planform changes such as river meandering or local bank erosion.1-D models typically distribute the volume of aggradation or degradation across the entire wetted portion of the channel cross-section after each time-step;thus,the effects of channel braiding are also not directly considered.1-D models are,however,useful in evaluating the general sediment- transport characteristics and overall sediment balance of a given reach,and they are also useful in providing boundary conditions for localized 2-D models. Potential 1-D Models:One-dimensional models that are being considered for this study include the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS (version 4.1;USACE 2010a),the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation's SRH-1D (version 2.8;Huang and Greimann 2011),DHI's MIKE 11 (version 2011;DHI 2011a),and Mobile Boundary Hydraulics'HEC-6T (version 5.13.22 08;MBH 2008).Each of these models,including potential benefits and limitations,is summarized in the following sections. e HEC-RAS:HEC-RAS,version 4.1.0 (USACE 2010a)is a publicly available software package developed by the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)to perform steady flow water surface profile computations,unsteady flow simulations,movable boundary sediment transport computations,and water quality analysis.HEC-RAS includes a Windows-based graphical user interface that provides functionality for file management, data entry and editing,river analyses,tabulation and graphical displays of input/output data,and reporting facilities.The sediment-transport module is capable of performing sediment-transport and movable boundary calculations resulting from scour and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-101 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN deposition over moderate time periods,and uses the same general computational procedures that were the basis of HEC-6 and HEC-6T (USACE 1993;MBH 2010).In HEC-RAS,the sediment transport potential is estimated by grain size fraction,which allows for simulation of hydraulic sorting and armoring.This model is designed to simulate long-term trends of scour and deposition in streams and river channels that could result from modifying the frequency and duration of the water discharge and stage, sediment supply,or direct modifications to channel geometry.Benefits of the HEC-RAS software include widespread industry acceptance,public availability,and ease of use. Potential limitations of the program include excessive computer run-times,file size output limitations,and the inherent problems associated with 1-D modeling of aggradation and degradation by equal adjustment of the wetted portion of the bed that can result in unrealistic channel geometries. e SRH-1D:SRH-1D (Huang and Greimann 2011)is a publicly-available,mobile boundary hydraulic and sediment transport computer model for open channels that is capable of simulating steady or unsteady flow conditions,internal boundary conditions,looped river networks,cohesive and non-cohesive sediment transport (Ruark et al.2011),and lateral inflows.The hydraulic and sediment transport algorithms in SRH-1D are similar to those in HEC-RAS 4.1 and HEC-6T except that it also includes the capability to perform fully- unsteady sediment transport simulations.Advantages of SRH-1D include robust algorithms for hydraulic conditions and sediment routing,including sediment sorting. Potential disadvantages include limited testing under a broad range of conditions outside the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation and the lack of graphical user interface that complicates data input and manipulation and display of output. e MIKE 11:Danish Hydraulic Institute's (DHI)MIKE 11 is a proprietary software package developed for 1-D dynamic modeling of rivers,watersheds,morphology,and water quality.The model has the ability to solve the complete non-linear St.Venant equations (in only the streamwise direction)for open channel flow,so the model can be applied to any flow regime.MIKE 11 provides the choice of diffusive and kinematic wave approximation and performs simplified channel routing using either the Muskingum or Muskingum-Cunge methods.The program includes a module for simulating erosion and deposition of non-cohesive sediments.Advantages of MIKE 11 include its robust hydrodynamic capabilities (though not necessarily better than HEC- RAS),the user-friendly graphical interface,and the reporting and presentation capabilities.Disadvantages primarily stem from the proprietary nature of this model and high cost of the software license. e HEC-6T:HEC-6T was written by William A.Thomas,former Chief of the Research Branch at the USACE Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC).Mr.Thomas planned, designed,wrote,and applied the publically available version of HEC-6;HEC-6T is a proprietary enhancement of the original version.HEC-6T is a DOS-based program that includes a Windows-based graphical user interface for input data manipulation and post- processing of simulation results.Limitations of this program include reduced capabilities for modeling numerous ineffective flow areas as compared to HEC-RAS 4.1 and limited capabilities of the graphical user interface.This software is relatively inexpensive;the fact that it is proprietary is not a significant limitation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-102 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN One-Dimensional Model Selection Process and Initial Evaluation:Based on the information provided above and experience with these models,the Geomorphology Study team tentatively proposes to use HEC-6T for the reach-scale sediment transport analysis.This proposal is based on confidence gained that HEC-6T is capable of effectively and efficiently modeling the processes that are important for this scale of geomorphic analysis.The selection of the 1-D (as well as the 2-D)model will be coordinated with the other pertinent studies and the licensing participants.As part of the coordination process,a technical memorandum titled Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling (Tetra Tech 2012)was posted on the AEA website in May 2012. Specific model-selection criteria are identified in Table 6.6-2 along with an evaluation of each candidate model relative to the criteria. Potential 2-D Models:Potential 2-D models that are being considered for this study include the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation's SRH2-D version 3 (Lai 2008;Greimann and Lai 2008),USACE's Adaptive Hydraulics ADH version 3.3 (USACE 2010b),the U.S.Geological Survey's (USGS) MD_SWMS suite (McDonald et al.2005;Nelson et al.2010),DHI's MIKE 21 version 2011 (DHI 2011b),and the River2D modeling suite (University of Alberta 2002;University of British Columbia 2009). e SRH-2D:The U.S.Bureau of Reclamation's SRH-2D (Lai 2008)is a finite-volume, hydrodynamic model that computes water-surface elevations and horizontal velocity components by solving the depth-averaged St.Venant equations for free-surface flows in 2-D flow fields.SRH-2D is a well-tested 2-D model that can effectively simulate steady or unsteady flows and is capable of modeling subcritical,transcritical,and supercritical flow conditions.The model uses an unstructured arbitrarily-shaped mesh composed of a combination of triangular and quadrilateral elements.SRH-2D incorporates very robust and stable numerical schemes with a seamless wetting-drying algorithm that results in minimal requirements by the user to adjust input parameters during the solution process. A potential limitation of this software is that the mobile bed sediment transport module is currently not publically available;however,Tetra Tech has gained permission to use the sediment transport module on a number of other projects.Preliminary contact with the model developers indicates that permission would be granted for use in this study.This version of the model (Greimann and Lai 2008)includes a "Morphology”module that calculates bedload transport capacities at each model node based on user-defined bed material sediment gradations,but does not simulate routing of that sediment and related adjustments to the channel bed.SRH-2D also includes a second module that uses the capacities from the Morphology module to perform sediment-routing calculations and associated bed adjustments.Based on guidance from the model developers and confirmed by Tetra Tech's use of the model for other studies,the maximum practical model size is about 16,000 elements,which could be a potential limitation in applying the model to larger-scale areas. e ADH:The USACE ADH program was developed by the Coastal and Hydraulics Laboratory (Engineer Research Development Center)to model saturated and unsaturated groundwater,overland flow,3D Navier-Stokes flow,and 2-D or 3-D shallow-water, open-channel flow conditions.ADH is a depth-averaged,finite-element hydrodynamic model that has the ability to compute water-surface elevations,horizontal velocity components,and sediment transport characteristics (including simulations to predict aggradation and degradation)for subcritical and supercritical free-surface flows in 2-D Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-103 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN flow fields.The ADH mesh is composed of triangular elements with corner nodes that represent the geometry of the modeled reach with the channel topography represented by bed elevations assigned to each node in the mesh.A particular advantage of the ADH mesh is the ability to increase the resolution of the mesh-and thereby the model accuracy-by decreasing the size of the elements during a simulation in order to better predict the hydraulic conditions in areas of high hydraulic variability.However,use of the adaptive mesh option often results in excessively long simulation run times (several days per run)that could be impractical for this study.Additionally,the wetting and drying algorithm in this model has significant numerical stability limitations when applied to shallow,near-shore flows that occur in rivers like the Susitna River.The model is publically available. e MD_SWMS Modeling Suite (FaSTMECH/SToRM):The USGS Multi-Dimensional Surface-Water Modeling System (MD_SWMS;McDonald et al.2005)is a pre-and post- processing application for computational models of surface-water hydraulics.This system has recently been incorporated into iRIC,a public-domain software interface for river modeling distributed by the International River Interface Cooperative (iRIC) (Nelson et al.2010).iRIC is an informal organization made up of academic faculty and government scientists whose goal is to develop,distribute,and provide education for the software.iRIC consists of a graphical user interface (GUI)that allows the modeler to build and edit data sets,and provides a framework that links the GUI with a range of modeling applications.The GUI is an interactive 1-D,2-D,and 3-D tool that can be used to build and visualize all aspects of computational surface-water applications,including grid building,development of boundary conditions,simulation execution,and post- processing of the simulation results.The models that are currently included in iRIC include FaSTMECH (Flow and Sediment Transport with Morphologic Evolution of Channels)and SToRM (System for Transport and River Modeling)that were part of the MD-SWMS package,as well as NAYS,MORPHO2D,and a Habitat Calculator for assessing fish habitat under 2-D conditions.Of these models,STORM appears to be the most relevant for modeling the Susitna River for purposes of this Project,primarily because it uses an unstructured triangular mesh (in contrast to the structured,curvilinear mesh required for FaSTMECH)and provides both steady-flow and unsteady-flow capability.NAYS is a fully unsteady,2-D model designed for a general,non-orthogonal coordinate system with sophisticated turbulence methods that can evaluate the unsteady aspects of the turbulence,and MORPHO2D is 2-D model capable of analyzing the interactions between sediment transport and vegetation and between surface water and groundwater.Both NAYS and MORPHO2D were developed in Japan,and have not been widely used or tested in the U.S.The STORM model blends some of the features of finite volumes and finite elements,and uses multi-dimensional streamline upwinding methods and a dynamic wetting and drying algorithm that allows for the computation of flooding.Subcritical,supercritical,and transcritical flow regimes (including hydraulic jumps)can be simulated.The program includes advanced turbulence models and an automatic mesh refinement tool to better predict the hydraulic conditions in areas of high hydraulic variability.The most recent version of the STORM model does not include the capability to model sediment-transport,but the program authors are currently working on implementing sediment-transport algorithms that may be available for use in this study (pers.Comm.,Jonathon Nelson,USGS,June 18,2012).MD _SWMS has been Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-104 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN successfully applied to a number of rivers in Alaska,including the Tanana River near Tok (Conaway and Moran 2004)and the Copper River near Cordova (Brabets 1997); some of the modules are currently being validated using high-resolution scour data from the Knik River near Palmer. e MIKE 21:Developed by DHI,MIKE 21 is a proprietary modeling system for 2-D free- surface flows that can be applied in rivers,lakes,coastal,and ocean environments.It has the ability to simulate sediment transport and associated erosion and deposition patterns. The software includes a Windows-based GUI as well as pre-and post-processing modules for use in data preparation and analysis of simulation results,and reporting modules that have graphical presentation capabilities.MIKE 21 has the ability to model a range of 2-D mesh types that include Single Grid,Multiple Grid,Flexible Mesh,and Curvilinear Grid.The primary limitation to MIKE-21 is that it is proprietary software and is relatively expensive compared to other available software. e River2D Modeling Suite:River2D is a two-dimensional,depth-averaged finite-element hydrodynamic model developed at the University of Alberta and is publically available from the university.The River2D suite consists of four programs:R2D_Mesh,R2D_Bed, River2D,and R2D_Ice,each of which contains a GUI.The R2D_Mesh program is a pre- processor that is used to develop the unstructured triangular mesh.R2D_Bed is used for editing the bed topography data and R2D_Ice is used to develop the ice thickness topography at each node for simulating ice-covered rivers.Following mesh development, the hydrodynamic simulations are run using the River2D program,which also includes a post-processor for visualizing the model output.River2D is a very robust model capable of simulating complex,transcritical flow conditions using algorithms originally developed in the aerospace industry to analyze the transitions between subsonic and supersonic conditions (transonic flow).Many 2-D models become numerically unstable due to wetting and drying of elements;however,River2D uniquely handles these conditions by changing the surface flow equations to groundwater flow equations in these areas.The model computes a continuous free surface with positive (above ground)and negative (below ground)water depths,which allows the simulation to continue without changing or updating the boundary conditions,increasing model stability.River2D also has the capability to assess fish habitat using the PHABSIM weighted-usable area approach (Bovee 1982).Habitat suitability indices are input to the model and integrated with the hydraulic output to compute a weighted useable area at each node in the model domain.River2D Morphology (R2DM)is a depth-averaged,two-dimensional hydrodynamic-morphological and gravel transport model developed at the University of British Columbia.The model was developed based on the River2D program,and is capable of simulating flow hydraulics and computing sediment transport for uni-size and mixed-size sediment using the Wilcock-Crowe (2003)equation over the duration of a hydrograph.R2DM can be used to evaluate the changes in grain size distributions, including fractions of sand in sediment deposits and on the bed surface.The sediment- transport module has been verified using experimental data,and was successfully applied to the Seymour River in North Vancouver,British Columbia (Smiarowski 2010). River2D is available in the most recent version of iRIC (Version 2.0). Two-Dimensional Model Selection Process and Initial Evaluation:The selection of the 2-D model will be coordinated with the other pertinent studies and the licensing participants.Specific Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-105 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN model selection criteria are identified in Table 6.6-3,along with an evaluation of each candidate model relative to the criteria. Model Development:The manner in which the models are developed will depend on the model software programs that are ultimately selected for use.Regardless of the selected modeling software,the models will be developed in accordance with the software developers'guidance and recommendations. 6.6.4.1.2.2.Coordination with other Studies As previously discussed,it is envisioned that a combination of 1-D and 2-D sediment transport models will be used to assess potential changes in the aggradation/degradation behavior and related processes in the Susitna River downstream from Watana Dam due to the potential size and complexity of the system to be modeled.As a result,the current vision for the modeling approach is to use a reach-scale 1-D model to evaluate the potential effects of the Project on the overall aggradation/degradation behavior of the study reach,and then use a series of representative,local-scale 2-D models at key locations where the dynamic behavior of the channel and habitat cannot be adequately assessed using the 1-D modeling approach.The 1-D model will provide boundary conditions for the individual 2-D models.Because of this modeling approach,it will be very important to coordinate with other studies because results from the detailed 2-D model will only be available at specified locations that will be selected from the key locations (e.g.Focus Areas)identified by the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)study teams and in consultation with the licensing participants.Ten proposed Focus Areas have been identified,with each representing a length of river on the order of one to several miles that includes a representation of each geomorphic reach (excluding Devils Canyon)and one unstable reach (likely a braided reach).The 2-D modeling will be applied at the vast majority if not all of the Focus Areas (selection of modeling approach at each Focus Area will be determined during the Q1 2013 TWG meetings concerning the confirmation or adjustment of the proposed Focus Areas).The Focus Areas also include selected primary tributary confluences.Coordination among the studies will also be necessary to ensure efficient collection of field data,because it is likely that a considerable amount of the data necessary for development and calibration of the 1-D and 2-D models will either be required for the other studies,or will be easily obtained along with data that will be required for those studies.For example,the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)will obtain velocity magnitude and direction,flow depth,and discharge measurements,the data from which would be very useful for calibration of the 2-D models.It may also be possible to obtain subaqueous bed material data for the modeling by lowering a laser/video through the ice thickness transect holes that will be bored as part of the Ice Study when turbidity levels are expected to be low. The temporal resolution for model execution will be selected to ensure model stability and proper representation of important variability in flow conditions (e.g.,daily fluctuations associated with load-following).The overall time-scale for model execution will also be an important factor.Because a key purpose of the 1-D model will be to assess the long-term sediment balance in the study reach,this model will likely be executed for a continuous period of 50 years to represent the length of a FERC license.On the other hand,due to the computational requirements of the 2-D model,much shorter time-periods will be evaluated. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-106 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Close coordination between the study leads and key study team members will be required throughout the model development process.It is important that all the study teams have an understanding of the capabilities and limitations of the models,the information that will be provided by the model,and the selection of the Focus Areas.This will be accomplished through frequent informal communication and more formal Technical Workgroup meetings.The study leads and other key participants will spend time together in the field to develop a practical understanding of each study's needs. An important aspect of coordination between other studies is to establish which models will be the source for what type of information.There are a number of hydraulic models being applied to various aspects of this study.In order to avoid inconsistencies in reported information such as flows and stage,the model that will take precedence for reporting of information has been established.Table 6.6-4 provides the model precedence as it has currently been established.This table will be distributed to all study leads.In the event that the precedence established in the table changes,a revised table will be provided to all study leads. Due to application of several hydraulic models,there will be opportunities to perform cross- checking between models.For instance,water surface elevations and stage can be checked between the mainstem open-water flow routing model,1-D bed evolution model,and the water quality model.If there are significant discrepancies,then parameters within the models will be checked and adjusted if necessary.In some case,the discrepancies may be explained by the formulation of the models or the resolution of the data used by each model. 6.6.4.1.2.3.Model Resolution and Mesh Size Considerations Selection of the appropriate mesh size for the 2-D bed evolution model is dictated by several factors including the following: 1.The size and complexity of the site features of primary interest. 2.The overall area of the site. 3.The desired resolution of output information such as velocity,depth,and bed material gradation. Factors that can also influence mesh resolution,subject to meeting the needs indicated by the above critical factors include: 4.Limitations on the maximum number of elements that the model can simulate. 5.Model execution time. In general,the mesh resolution in any particular portion of the model should be consistent with the dimension of the scale of the processes that are being analyzed (Pasternack,2011;Horritt,et al,2006).For example,bed evolution modeling to predict aggradation/degradation in the mainstem can typically be performed using a relatively coarse mesh because the topographic andhydraulicvariabilityislesspronouncedthatinsmallerhabitatfeatureswherearelativelyhigh resolution mesh is necessary to describe the hydraulic variability that is important to habitat quality and processes.The need to provide a high level of spatial resolution to satisfy items 1,2, and 3 to develop and accurate model can push the limitations imposed by items 4 and 5.One approach to avoid trade-offs between model complexity and physical limitations of the model is to use a variable mesh (also referred to as flexible mesh)that allows a finer mesh to be applied in Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-107 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN areas where either the information desired or the condition being modeled requires higher spatial resolution (i.e.,a finer mesh).The 2-D models being considered for this study allow the use of a variable mesh.Figure 6.6-1 and Figure 6.6-2 provide examples of a relatively coarse and relatively fine mesh applied to the potential Focus Area at Whiskers Slough in the Middle Susitna River Segment Geomorphic Reach MR-8. Areas that will require finer mesh sizes include the following: e Side sloughs e Upland sloughs e Smaller side channels e Spawning areas e Tributary mouths e Locations where circulation is of interest such as eddies between the main channel and backwater areas e Other specific habitat features of interest Areas where lower spatial resolution may be appropriate include the following: e Main channel e Floodplains e Large side channels In the areas of higher resolution such as side sloughs,spawning areas,and critical eddies,the mesh size will be on the order of several feet to 25 feet.In areas where lower spatial resolution is acceptable,the mesh size may be in the range of 25 to 100 feet. At some Focus Areas,two model meshes may need to be developed.In these cases,a higher- resolution mesh will be used to evaluate detailed hydraulic conditions for use in assessing factors such as mobilization of spawning gravels in the side sloughs and side channels where channel widths and depths are small relative to the main channel and connections between side channels and side sloughs and at the tributary mouths where circulation plays a key role.Where necessary due to model size limitations,the coarser mesh will be used for the bed evolution model because issues related to bed evolution associated with sediment transport processes can be adequately addressed at a coarser scale. 6.6.4.1.2.4.Focus Area Selection The use of "Focus Areas”to conduct concentrated interdisciplinary studies at selected areas within the study area was introduced in Section 6.6.3.1.Such areas represent specific sections of the river that will be investigated across resource disciplines and will provide for an overall understanding of interrelationships of river flow dynamics on the physical,chemical,and biological factors that influence fish habitat.Focus Areas will involve portions of the Susitna River and its floodplain where detailed study efforts will be jointly conducted by the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Geomorphology (Section 6.5),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),Groundwater (Section 7.5),and Characterization and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-108 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)studies.The Focus Areas will allow for a highly integrated,multidisciplinary effort to be conducted evaluating potential Project effects on key resource areas across a range of representative sites. The entire process for identifying candidate Focus Areas and selecting the specific portions of the study area to conduct the Focus Area studies is detailed in Section 8.5.4.2 of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study.This section describes the involvement of the geomorphology studies in the selection of the proposed Focus Areas. The Geomorphology Study has provided input on the selection of proposed Focus Areas.The geomorphic reach classification system and resulting reach delineation were utilized in the selection process.A total of 10 proposed Focus Areas were selected.A primary criterion was to select at least one Focus Area for each geomorphic reach (except reaches MR-3 and MR-4 where there are safety concerns associated with Devils Canyon due to the extreme whitewater conditions).Since several of the geomorphic reach types are represented by multiple reaches in the study area,there is duplication of reach types within the candidate sites.Table 6.6-5 lists the proposed Focus Areas,the upstream and downstream limits,the associated geomorphic reach, and the geomorphic reach type.The proposed Focus Areas represent five areas within the SC2 reach type,four within the SC3 reach type,and one within the transitional MC1/SC2 reach type. The locations of the Middle Susitna River Segment proposed Focus Areas are shown on Figure 6.6-3.More detailed maps that show individual proposed Focus Areas on recent (2011)color aerial photographs are provided in the FA-IFS (Section 8.5.4.2).The areas selected were those deemed representative of the major features in the geomorphic reach and included mainstem habitat types of known biological significance (i.e.,where fish have been observed based on previous and/or contemporary studies),as well as some locations (e.g.,Slough 17)where previous sampling revealed few/no fish.The proposed Focus Areas include representative side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs,and tributary mouths. The Geomorphology Study also helped establish the upstream and downstream limits of the focus study areas.The upstream and downstream boundaries as well as the lateral extents of the Focus Areas have been chosen so that appropriate boundary conditions,upstream inflow and downstream water surface elevation on the main channel,as well as the off-channel features,can be established for the hydraulic and bed evolution modeling.Considerations included encompassing potential inflow and outflow points to preserve the mass balance and minimize difficulties and assumptions associated with inflow points.Potential upstream connections for side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs were also identified and included in the modeling domain.The upstream and downstream limits on the main channel were identified to either provide relatively uniform flow conditions or sufficient distance upstream and downstream from areas of interest so that flow conditions in the area of interest are not significantly affected by the flow directions at the boundary. The Geomorphology Study is also collaborating on the selection of the modeling approach for each Focus Area.In some instances,it may be appropriate to utilize a 1-D model rather than a 2- D model.The 1-D model could be appropriate when there are not numerous flow splits and junctions,flow paths are primarily linear,and specific habitat features do not have the streamwise and lateral resolution of the 2-D model.The determination of modeling approach will be made in Q1 2013 as part of the TWG meetings involving confirmation or adjustment of the Focus Areas selected. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-109 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.4.1.2.5.Model Calibration and Validation Calibration and validation of the models will be a stepwise process.First,the hydraulic components of the models will be calibrated by adjusting roughness and loss coefficients to achieve reasonable agreement between measured and modeled water-surface elevations,and to measured and modeled velocities.Discharges along the study reach will be obtained from the three USGS gages.These gages will also provide a continuous record of stages and water- surface elevations at the gage locations.These data will be supplemented with stage data from at least 10 pressure-transducer type water-level loggers that have been or will be installed as part of various studies being conducted in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments.Water-levels measured during the cross-section and bathymetric surveys will also be used to calibrate the models.In addition to water-surface elevations,the depths and velocities predicted by the 2-D model should be compared with measured data from ADCP measurements at the Focus Areas. Depending on the range of conditions and spatial coverage of the depth and velocity data from the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study,additional data may be needed for calibration specifically for this study.Specific calibration criteria will be established for both the 1-D and 2- D models during the model selection phase.The 2-D water surface elevations will also be compared against water surface elevations generated by the 1-D model and the Mainstem (Open- water)Flow Routing Model to ensure that the models are producing consistent results. Calibration of the velocities and depth are critical to the FA-IFS.Calibration of the flow depths is achieved directly through calibration of the water surface elevations.Calibration of the local flow velocities will be achieved by comparing predicted velocities from the 2-D models with measured velocities at the key locations from the field data collection,including ADCP and current meter data.PHABSIM studies have typically required measurements at at least three flows levels (low,medium,and high discharges).Calibration activities for this study will include all available flow data.Pasternack (2011)provides guidelines for evaluating 2-D model performance with respect to the velocity magnitude.These guidelines suggest that the calibration is reasonable when the following criteria are met: e Variance (r')between the predicted and corresponding measured values is in the range of0.4 to 0.8. e Median and mean error of individual points is in the range of 15 to 30 percent. Pasternak (2011)also notes that the relative error for low velocity conditions is typically much greater than for normal to high velocity conditions. The sediment transport portions of both the 1-D and 2-D model will be first calibrated based on the available measured sediment transport data and the associated sediment rating curves for both bedload and suspended load.For coarse-grained rivers such as the Susitna River,the bed material load transport is dominant with respect to channel forming processes;however,the fine- grained suspended load (i.e.,wash load)may be important in evaluating the changes to other features including turbidity,instream habitat,side channels,sloughs and floodplains.The sediment transport model will also be validated,to the extent that available information allows, by comparing modeled and measured (or if necessary,qualitatively observed)changes in bed elevations and bed material gradations from the Geomorphology Study,by making model runs for specific time-periods.This effort will include comparison of 1980s and current 2012 transect data if sufficient data are available. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-110 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.4.1.2.6.Tributary Delta Modeling Tributary confluences are areas of interest for determining the potential Project effects on sediment transport and morphology.Alteration of the mainstem flow regime has the potential to change the elevation at which tributary sediments are initially deposited because the mainstem may be at a different stage when the tributaries are at peak flow.Additionally,the ability to mobilize and transport bedload delivered by tributaries may also be altered.Changes in the configuration of sediments deposited at the tributary confluences can affect the ability of fish to access the tributaries and the extent of clear water habitat associated with some tributary confluences.Modeling sediment transport and deposition processes at select tributary mouths will therefore be necessary. The tributaries to be modeled will be determined in conjunction with the instream flow and fish and aquatic resources studies and the licensing participants based on fish use and the potential for Project effects.The Geomorphology Study will model a subset of tributary confluences with the Susitna River that represent the range of conditions among all the tributaries.The selection of primary tributary deltas for 2-D modeling will be based on screening that considers the importance of the existing fishery and potential adverse Project effects.Based on the discussion at the June 14,2012 Water Resources TWG meeting,it is possible that the effort will include the Three Rivers Confluence area (Susitna,Talkeetna,and Chulitna confluence),though bed evolution modeling in this area may not be feasible.The selection of the tributary delta sites for 2-D modeling will be coordinated with the other pertinent studies and in consultation with the licensing participants. It is currently proposed that a model will be created for the tributary deltas that uses estimated bedload transport from the tributary,the topography and the bathymetry of the confluence, measurements of the characteristics of the tributary deposits,and the ability of the mainstem in the area of the confluence to mobilize and transport those deposits.The approach will include field observations to characterize the sediment transport regime that will be used to identify appropriate methods of estimating bedload transport.Surveys of tributary channel geometry and sampling of bed material gradations will be coupled with an appropriate bed material transport function to calculate sediment yield rating curves.Hydrology synthesized for ungaged tributaries will be needed from other studies for each of the selected tributaries for this purpose as well as for the purpose of the flow routing models (summer ice-free model and winter ice- covered model).The yield and topography in the area of the expected delta,along with the ability of the mainstem to mobilize and transport the bed material,will provide a basis for characterizing how Project operations would affect the formation of tributary deposits.At this time,it is envisioned that a relatively detailed 1-D hydraulic model of the mainstem in the vicinity of each tributary will provide sufficient hydraulic information to evaluate the potential for,and likely extent of,additional growth of the tributary deposits into the mainstem.For complex tributary confluences that are of particular interest to the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study,local-scale 2-D models can be developed and applied to support the analysis. 6.6.4.1.2.7..Large Woody Debris Modeling The assessment of the Project effects on the large woody debris processes within the Middle Susitna River will be assisted by the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,recognizing that bank erosion is a key process in large woody debris recruitment.Both the 1-D hydraulic and 2-D Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-111 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN model results will be used to estimate changes in bank erosion rates by using the model output, along with the long-term pre-and post-Project flow records and measurements of the channel planform,to estimate pre-and post-Project Bank Energy Indices (BEI)(Mussetter et al.1995; Mussetter and Harvey 1996).The BEI values for relevant periods will be correlated with historic bank erosion rates determined from the available aerial photography.Anticipated changes in the erosion rates,and thus,this aspect of large woody debris recruitment,under Project conditions will then be estimated based on the correlation results and the Project-conditions BEI values.A similar approach will be used to evaluate large woody debris recruitment at the local scale at the Focus Areas using output from the 2-D model where various levels of large woody debris are present based on the localized hydraulic and scour conditions.This information will be provided to the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study for quantification of the change in habitat resulting from Project-induced changes in large woody debris.Review of the overall role of large woody debris in formation and maintenance of the geomorphic features and the potential impacts of changes in the large woody debris supply on these features will be identified using model results and the analysis described in Section 6.5.4.9. In developing the change in large woody debris supply under the post-Project condition,the primary questions are the sources of the large woody debris,the current rate of large woody debris loading to the river,and the impact of the Project on the large woody debris loading rate. The existing supply of large woody debris from recruitment within the Middle Susitna River Segment and from upstream of the Watana Dam site (RM 184)will be estimated in the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5.4.9).The Project will change the upstream supply of large woody debris by retention in the reservoir.Project operations may also change large woody debris recruitment from bank erosion.Changes in bank erosion can be addressed by an assessment of the pre-and post-Project rates of erosion of vegetated geomorphic surfaces (vegetated islands and floodplain segments)that deliver large woody debris to the river.The rates of bank erosion and thus large woody debris loading can be ascertained by comparison of time sequential aerial photography,the turnover analysis in the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5.4.4)in conjunction with an estimate of the density of the vegetation (volume and sizes of the trees)growing on the geomorphic surfaces from the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) and the Riparian Botanical Resources Study (Section1 1.6). The impacts of the Project on the rates of bank erosion and large woody debris recruitment can be semi-quantitatively addressed with a comparison of pre-and post-Project Bank Erosion Index (BEI)(Mussetter et al.1995;Mussetter and Harvey 1996)values at specific sites along the river where the output from both 1-D and 2-D models can be used to compute the pre-and post- Project BEI values.The BEI is an index of the total energy applied to the banks at specific locations,and is computed based on the hydraulic characteristics of the channel,the channel planform,and the magnitude and duration of flows (Mussetter and Harvey 1996).The BEI values will be calibrated with site-specific bank erosion rates determined from the aerial photography-based turnover analysis.The pre-Project rate of large woody debris recruitment from bank erosion along the mainstem Susitna River will be scaled using the ratio of the pre-and Post-Project BEI based erosion rate estimates to develop the post-Project rate of large woody debris recruitment.These data will be incorporated into the analysis of pre-and post-Project large woody debris loading from all mechanisms as described in Section 6.5.4.9. A detailed survey of large woody debris within the Focus Areas will be also performed as part of the fieldwork in 2013 as described in Section 6.5.4.9.This information will be used to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-112 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN incorporate large woody debris within the 2-D bed evolution model mesh.This will permit determination of the influence on flow patterns,local hydraulics,and scour that accumulations of large woody debris have.At selected Focus Areas,adjustment of the amount of large woody debris at the site will be performed and the 2-D bed evolution model executed again for a range of hydrologic conditions.The resulting comparison of flow patterns,local hydraulics,and scour between the various large woody debris densities will assist in determining the potential influences the change in density of large woody debris at the site may have on the geomorphic features associated with the aquatic habitats.These results will be provided to the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)to develop estimated changes in the aquatic habitat indicators. 6.6.4.1.2.8.|Wintertime Modeling and Load-Following Operations It is currently not proposed to execute the sediment transport models-either 1-D or 2-D- during the winter period when flows are low and the bed material is not mobilized.However,if the Characterization of Bed Material Mobility component of the Geomorphology Study indicates that the bed material is mobilized during winter-time flows,including higher than existing flows due to load-following,the sediment transport modeling will be extended to include the winter flow period.One winter operational issue of potential importance is the resuspension of fine sediments during load-following that could result in increased turbidity during the early portion of the otherwise clear water conditions during the winter months.To address this,an effort to model the resuspension of fines can be undertaken for the 1-D model and the 2-D model for the early portion of the winter period.This effort would include investigation of a controlled release to flush the fines from the system prior to commencement of winter load-following operations. Decisions on continuing the 1-D and 2-D modeling into the winter period will be made in consultation with the licensing participants and in coordination with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Instream Riparian Flow (Section 8.6),Ice Processes (Section 7.6), and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)studies.(This section on Wintertime Modeling and Load-Following Operations was added based on a study comment supplied by NOAA-NMFS in its May 31,2012,study request;the Natural Resources Defense Council May 30,2012,study request;and discussions on load-following and turbidity during the June 14,2012 Water Resources TWG meeting. 6.6.4.1.2.9.Field Data Collection Efforts The field data collection effort to support both the Geomorphology Study and the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study are presented in this section.The majority of this effort will be conducted in the 2013 field season.If the subsequent need for additional data is identified during the model development process,more Focus Areas are added,or the downstream limit of the 1-D model is extended,additional data will be collected during the 2014 field season. Much of the data collection performed in this task will be shared with and used by other studies including Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6), Groundwater (Section 7.5),and Ice Processes (Section 7.6)studies.The exchange of data between these studies will be highest at the Focus Areas. At the start of the summer 2013 field season,a reconnaissance of the entire Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling study area (RM 184 to RM 75)as well as the remainder of the Lower Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-113 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Susitna River Segment (RM 75 to RM 0)will be conducted.This site reconnaissance will be carried out to observe and characterize the following: e Hydraulic and geomorphic controls (natural and man-made)that will influence sediment- transport conditions. e Verification of mapping of geologic and geomorphic features performed in the Geomorphology Study. e Hydraulic roughness conditions along the main channel and in the overbanks. e Variations in bed material size. e The sediment-transport regime,and areas that appear to be in equilibrium,or are aggradational or degradational. e In areas that are not in equilibrium,qualitative assessment of the degree of erosion or deposition. To support the site reconnaissance as well as all other field data collection activities,maps of the study area will be developed to assist crews during field activities.The mapping will include topography (from available LiDAR),aerial photo base layer,geologic units and controls, geomorphic features,aquatic habitat types,geomorphic reach boundaries,existing cross-section locations,proposed supplemental cross-section locations,survey control points,focus site locations,location of installed instrumentation,and safety related information. Beyond the general site reconnaissance,detailed information will be collected to support the development of the 1-D model for the entire study area and the Focus Areas where 2-D and possibly 1-D modeling will be applied.Additional data will also be collected for the tributary confluences that are identified for modeling.The field data to be collected for each of these study components are provided below. 6.6.4.1.2.9.1, 1-D Bed Evolution Model The primary field data to be collected in support of the 1-D bed evolution model include the following: 1.Supplemental cross-sections 2.Bed material samples a.Surface pebble count (Wolman count)or photo grid b.Subsurface bulk or photo grid samples 3.Bank material samples 4.Spot elevations to verify LiDAR in the area of the supplemental cross-sections (LIDAR will be used to provide the floodplain portion of the cross-sections) 5.Estimation of n-values at supplemental cross-sections 6.Observations on depositional or erosional features at the supplemental cross-sections Supplemental cross-sections will be required to provide the level of detail in the hydraulic model necessary to properly model sediment transport conditions.The cross-sections collected in 2012 for the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model will be used in development of the 1-D model;however,their spacing is such that additional cross-sections will need to be collected in 2013 to complete the 1-D sediment transport model.There were 88 cross-sections collected between RM 75 and 184 (excluding the 12-mile length of river in the Devils Canyon area)with an average spacing of just over 1 mile.The minimum and maximum spacing between the cross- Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-114 December 2012 REviseED STUDY PLAN sections was 0.1 and 3 miles,respectively.It is estimated that on the order of 80 to 100 supplemental cross-sections will need to be surveyed to complete the cross-sectional database for the 1-D sediment transport model.The transects and bathymetric data to be collected at the focus sites will meet a portion of this requirement,likely reducing the number of supplemental sections to be surveyed by 20 to 25 percent.Supplemental cross-sections collected for the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study may also fulfill part of the 1-D model supplemental cross- section needs. Bed material samples will be collected using pebble count,photographic grid,or bulk sampling procedures.Approximately 50 bed material samples will be collected to support the 1-D model development.A similar number of subsurface and bank material samples will be obtained. These samples will be supplemented by similar samples collected at the Focus Areas.The sampling will be performed at low flow to allow as much of the bed to be sampled as possible.In addition,the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)will work with the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)in the winter of 2013 to determine whether video bed material samples can be collected using a camera equipped with two lasers to provide scale.The winter period is when the Susitna River is sufficiently clear to support this type of effort. 6.6.4.1.2.9,2.Focus Areas The primary field data to be collected at the Focus Areas by the Geomorphology Study include the following: 1.A combination of bathymetry (single and multi-beam),cross-section data,and spot elevations necessary to develop a digital terrain model for the portion of the site for which LiDAR is not available.(These will be the main channel,side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs,tributaries,and open water areas that were inundated at the time the LIDAR was acquired.) 2.All obstructions in the off-channel habitats such as beaver dams and debris jams will be surveyed. 3.Large woody debris survey and characterization of its influence on the geomorphology of the channels,side channels and sloughs. 4.Bed material samples in the main channel,sloughs,and side channels a.Surface pebble count (Wolman count)or photo grid b.Subsurface bulk or photo grid samples c.Possible winter sampling in conjunction with the Ice Processes Study (Section7.6) (see 1-D Bed Evolution Model field data section and description of geomorphic mapping below) Bank material samples. 6.Spot elevations to verify LiDAR in the Focus Area (LIDAR will be used to provide the floodplain portion of the cross-sections). Estimation of n-values in the channels,side channels,sloughs,and tributaries. Observations on depositional or erosional features at the supplemental cross-sections. 9.Field verification,and correction and/or mapping if necessary,of the geomorphic features,geologic controls,and terraces previously identified from available information for the Focus Area. 10.ADCP measurements to calibrate and determine the accuracy of the 2-D hydraulic model velocities.NaoNSusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-115 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 11.Installation of level loggers and associated readings to support calibration of water surface elevations produced by the 2-D model. 12.Current meter measurements of velocity for areas where the ADCP cannot be used. 13.Mapping of depositional and erosional features. 14.Identification and mapping of evidence of ice processes at the site along with observations of their potential influence on the geomorphology of the Focus Area. 15.Any evidence of past extreme events. 16.Overall narrative description and assessment of the geomorphology of the Focus Area including identification of key physical processes and controls. If it is determined that 1-D modeling is appropriate for a Focus Area,rather than collecting bathymetric,cross-sectional and topographic information required to build a digital terrain model (DTM)to support 2-D mesh development,cross-sectional data will be collected on the hydraulic features to be modeled. Geomorphic mapping of the Focus Area sites will be prepared during the field data collection at an appropriate level of resolution to delineate the key geomorphic features that control the dynamics and the availability of habitat at the site.This mapping will identify features at the scale of the individual habitat units that include riffles,pools,runs,meso-scale bars (i.e., dimensions on the order of the channel width in side channels and sloughs),banklines,large LWD clusters,and similar features.Characteristics of the substrate making up these features will be measured using techniques appropriate to the size range of the material in each unit.In coarse-grained areas (i.e.,gravel and cobbles),surface samples will be taken using the pebble count method (Wolman 1954).In areas where the material is sufficiently fine (i.e.,sand and fine-to medium-gravel),bulk samples will be collected for laboratory grain size analysis.Considering the generally coarse-grained nature of the substrate in the Focus Areas, subsurface sampling that will be conducted on the bars will most likely be done using a combination of the two techniques.After completion the surface sampling in each area,the surface layer over an appropriately-sized area will be removed and a sufficient quantity of material will be exhumed and placed on a tarp.The sample will then be weighed in increments with a field scale to determine the total bulk weight and the relative weights of the fine and coarse fractions.The coarse fraction will then be segregated into size classes and individual classes weighed to determine the gradation.A suitably-sized bulk sample of fine fraction will then be collected for laboratory sieve analysis.The overall gradation will then be determined by recombining the field-measured coarse fraction and laboratory-analyzed fine fraction into a single gradation based on the relative weights of each in the original field sample.The minimum size of the bulk samples will be determined based on the maximum particle size in the sample using guidelines in ASTM D75-71. Surveys to develop the topography and bathymetry will be conducted at each Focus Area to provide the level of feature definition required for accurate 2-D modeling and to provide data at sufficient resolution to meet the needs to the FA-IFS.Surveys will be tied to the control network established along the Susitna River during the 2012 cross-section surveys performed to collect data for the Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing model.A single beam fathometer linked to survey grade RTK-GPS will be used to collect cross-sections at sufficient intervals to properly define the grids and define geomorphic features.In addition to the cross-sections,longitudinal stream-wise profiles will be run with the fathometer to define the channel thalweg and the transition from the channel bed to banks.These profiles will serve as break-lines when Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-116 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN developing the digital terrain model (DTM).In areas where the river is shallow or dry,then the cross-sections will be completed with RTK-GPS or by total station. In side channels and other off-channel features where the width and depth is sufficient for the use of the fathometer,these areas will be surveyed similar to the mainstem In areas where the channels are too small to utilize the boat-mounted survey equipment,the survey will be performed using RTK GPS or total station (in areas where vegetation may preclude the use of GPS).Since these areas will require fine mesh for both the 2-D modeling and for development of hydraulic conditions for the FA-IFS,care will be taken to survey the longitudinal break lines, in addition to the cross-sections,that will be needed to develop the detailed DTM.This survey will be combined with the geomorphic mapping. It is anticipated that the upper portions of channels and the overbank or floodplain areas will be represented in the DTM by the Mat-Su LIDAR.However,points will be taken in these areas with the RTK-GPS to verify the accuracy of the LIDAR.In some cases,this information may be used to adjust the LiDAR data. 6.6.4.1.2.9.3.Tributary Deltas A site reconnaissance and data collection effort will also be necessary for each of the key tributaries that have the potential to deliver significant quantities of sediment to the reach and/or are important to other study teams.The reconnaissance to these sites will be relatively detailed, because specific data will need to be collected,in addition to the general observations,to facilitate the modeling at the tributary mouths.Cross-sectional surveys of approximately six transects over a representative reach above the confluence will be necessary,with a spacing of about three-to five-times the active channel width.Surface and sub-surface bed material samples will be collected to characterize the gradation of the sediments along the reach,and will include at least two representative samples of the surface material on the fan.Observations and photographs of erosional and depositional features will be taken. 6.6.4.1.2.9.4.Field Data from Other Studies In addition to the above field data collected as part of the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5), the following data collected by the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Ice Processes (Section 7.6),and Groundwater (Section 7.5)studies will need to be obtained to support the Geomorphology Study: e Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model cross-sections collected in 2012. Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study supplemental transects collected in 2013. e Hydraulic calibration information used in the development of the Mainstem (Open-water) Flow Routing Model (water surface elevations and associated discharges). e Information describing the influence of ice processes on channel and floodplain morphology. e Information describing the influence of riparian vegetation on channel and floodplain morphology. e Soil classification and gradation from Riparian Instream Flow Study test pits in the floodplain and on island. e Thickness and aging of floodplain and island deposits from the Riparian Instream Flow Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-117 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Mapping of vegetation and associated age classes from the Riparian Instream Flow Study. Information developed in the Geomorphology Study on channel changes that have occurred since the 1980s. Information developed in the Geomorphology Study on the physical processes most important to accurately modeling the study reach. The velocity and depth measurements collected by the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study to characterize habitat for calibrating the hydraulic model(s). Data collected on the distribution of flow between the main channel and off-channel habitat to help calibrate the hydraulic portion of the 2-D model. 6.6.4.1.2.10.Information Required In addition to the field data collection effort described in the previous section,the following existing information will be needed to conduct this study: Historical and current aerial photographs. Historical channel cross-sections. LiDAR to develop sub-aerial topography and extend surveyed transects across the floodplain. Extended flow records from USGS mainstem and tributary gages. Estimated flows from key ungaged tributaries that will be accounted for in the water and sediment inflows,and where potential development of tributary fans is to be evaluated. Historical bed material sample data. List of key indicators from the other studies (FA-IFS,R-IFS,Ice Process,Groundwater) to ensure that the models are structured to either directly quantify the indicators or provide quantitative data from which the indicators can be quantified using other relationships outside the context of the model. 6.6.4.1.3.|Study Products The products of this component of the modeling study will include the following: 1-D hydraulic models that will be used to estimate sediment loading from each of the tributaries that supply significant volumes of bedload along the modeled reach. A single,calibrated,1-D bed evolution sediment-transport model,or a series of models, that extend from the proposed dam to a yet-to-be determined downstream limit. A number of calibrated 2-D sediment-transport models for proposed Focus Areas. Model calibration data and documentation. A report describing model calibration and application to existing conditions. 6.6.4.2.Study Component:Model Existing and with-Project Conditions The goal of the Model Existing and with-Project Conditions study component is to provide a baseline and series of with-Project scenarios of future channel conditions for assessing channel change.The extent of the study area is the Susitna River downstream of Watana Dam,the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-118 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN specific downstream boundary of which will be determined in study component Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration. 6.6.4.2.1.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Once the 1-D and 2-D bed evolution models are developed in the previous study component,the model will be run for the existing condition (the Susitna River without Watana Dam in place)in order to establish a baseline for comparison with Project model runs.The model will also be run for various Project scenarios to determine the potential effects of the Project on the fluvial geomorphology of the Susitna River. 6.6.4.2.2.|Methods 6.6.4.2.2.1.Existing Conditions -Base Case Modeling The RSP includes four operation scenarios.The first is the existing conditions or without- Project scenarios.This scenario provides the baseline against which all other with-Project scenarios are compared against to identify Project effects. The time period and representative hydrologic conditions to be assessed with the bed evolution model will be determined through coordination with the Technical Workgroup,based on the availability of data,study objectives,and model limitations.The hydrologic inputs for the various with-Project scenarios will be obtained from the Reservoir Operations (Engineering)and Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3)and the model run for flows representative of each scenario.It is currently envisioned that a 50-year,continuous period of record that represents the length of the FERC licensing period will be used for the 1-D modeling, and shorter modeling periods will be used for the 2-D model due to computational limitations. The 50-year period will be divided into three points in time to provide comparison:year-0,year- 25,and year-50.As previously indicated,the 1-D model will be applied to address the analysis of reach-scale issues and the 2-D model to address local-scale issues. The shorter periods for the 2-D model will include specific years or portions of annual hydrographs for selected years of wet,average,and dry hydrologic conditions and warm and cold Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO)phases.Therefore,up to six annual hydrologic conditions will be considered.(The inclusion of the warm and cold PDO phases was requested by NOAA-NMFS and USFWS in the May 31,2012,study requests;the rationale for the request was discussed at the June 14,2012 Water Resources TWG meeting and it was agreed that the PDO phases would be included in the suite of representative annual hydrologic conditions.) Other scenarios might include rapid release of flows from an ice jam or larger flood events that are not contained in the period of the hydrologic record chosen for simulation. Each run will be subjected to a quality control process to ensure that the appropriate data were used and model outputs are reasonable.Naming conventions for the model input and output files for the various scenario files will be applied so that files can be easily archived and retrieved in the future. 6.6.4.2.2.2.Future Conditions -with-Project Scenarios The three with-Project scenarios will represent a maximum load-following,an intermediate load- following,and a base-load scenario.The three with-Project scenarios will provide bookends and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-119 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN an intermediate assessment of potential Project effects.These will provide an understanding of the range of potential Project effects.Similar to the existing conditions,the with-Project scenarios will be modeled with both the 1-D model to determine the reach-scale Project effect and the 2-D model to determine the local-scale Project effects.The with-Project scenarios will be evaluated over the same time periods as the existing conditions base case. 6.6.4.2.2.3.Uncertainty To assist in identifying and understanding uncertainties,sensitivity analysis will be performed for the 1-D and 2-D bed evolution modeling efforts by varying key input parameters within the range of physically reasonable values.Additionally,the 50-year simulation period to be used for the 1-D bed evolution model includes a broad range of hydrologic conditions,and will be used to assess the sensitivity of the study reach to hydrologic variability.Variation in response to the six representative years (wet,average,and dry for wet and cold PDO)based on both the 1-D and 2-D bed evolution model results will also provide an understanding of the uncertainty associated with hydrologic conditions.Specific parameters that will be varied in the uncertainty analysis include hydraulic roughness coefficients,magnitude and gradations of inflowing sediment loads, substrate size gradations,and dimensionless critical shear (i.e.,Shields)values. 6.6.4.2.2.4.Synthesis of Reach-Scale and Local-Scale Analyses In general,based on the spatial resolution of the input and output data,the 1-D model results are used to facilitate analysis of processes at the reach-scale,while the 2-D model is used for local- scale analysis.It is important to recognize that the downstream stage and upstream discharge boundary conditions for the local-scale 2-D models will be taken from the 1-D Mainstem (Open- water)Flow Routing Model,and the inflowing sediment loads will be taken from the 1-D bed- evolution model,ensuring consistency at the model boundaries.(Although this is not anticipated, it may be necessary to take downstream stage boundary conditions from the 1-D bed evolution model for purposes of analyzing future conditions if this model shows sufficient change over the duration of the model runs.)In addition,results from the models are compared within the 2-D model domain to further ensure consistency.This comparison often leads to important adjustments to one or both of the models to improve consistency and predictive quality. As described in the Section 6.6.4.1.2.4,the Focus Areas have been selected to represent the range of geomorphic and habitat conditions that occur within the study area.The detailed analysis at these sites that relies on the 2-D model results will be extrapolated to the overall study reach using the 1-D model results and other relevant information from the Geomorphology,FA- IFS,R-IFS,Ice Process studies,where appropriate,to quantify anticipated Project impacts at the Study Reach Scale. 6.6.4.2.2.5.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this study: e The calibrated existing conditions model(s)developed in the previous tasks,including the data used to develop them. Extended flow records for mainstem gages and major tributaries for existing conditions. With-Project mainstem flows corresponding to the periods and locations in the extended flow record. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-120 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e The with-Project sediment outflow rating curve from Watana Dam. e List of key indicators from the other studies (FA-IFS,R-IFS,Ice Process,Groundwater) to ensure that the models are structured to either directly quantify the indicators or provide quantitative data from which the indicators can be quantified using other relationships outside the context of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. 6.6.4.2.3.|Study Products The products of this component of the modeling study will include the following: e Results from the 1-D mobile boundary sediment-transport model(s)that extend from the location of the proposed dam to a yet-to-be determined downstream limit. e Results from the 2-D sediment-transport models for proposed Focus Areas. e A report describing the model runs,and interpreting the model results. 6.6.4.3.|Study Component:Coordination and Interpretation of Model Results The goal of this study component is to ensure that the information from Geomorphology Study is properly considered and incorporated into the modeling studies,that the results the modeling studies are used to update and refine the understanding of key processes identified in the Geomorphology Study,and to provide the necessary results to the other resources studies that will require knowledge,and where possible and appropriate,quantification of potential natural and Project-induced geomorphic changes.The extent of the study area is the Susitna River downstream of Watana Dam,the specific downstream boundary of which will be determined in the Bed Evolution Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration study component (Section 6.6.4.1). 6.6.4.3.1._Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Several studies require the results of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study to conduct their efforts.These include the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (FA-IFS)(Section 8.5), Groundwater (Section 7.5),Riparian Instream Flow (R-IFS)(Section 8.6),and Ice Processes (Section 7.6)studies.The primary concern is whether the Project will affect aspects of the channel morphology including,but not limited to,substrate characteristics,cross-sectional geometry,connectivity with off-channel habitats and in the most general sense,the distribution of geomorphic features that comprise the aquatic and riparian habitats. 6.6.4.3.2.Methods As discussed in Section 6.5.4.11,initial work for the Geomorphology Study identifies the specific geomorphic processes that affect aquatic and riparian habitat,channel stability and related issues that require further quantification,identifies a significant portion of the data needs, and provides the basic information and context for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. During the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,results from the Geomorphology Study are used in conjunction with knowledge of the specific needs of the other resource teams to insure that the models are developed in an appropriate manner to address the key issues and to provide a reality check on the model results.After completion of the modeling,the study team uses the results from both studies in an integrated manner to provide interpretations with respect to the issues that must be addressed,including predictions of potential changes to key geomorphic Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-121 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN features that comprise the aquatic and riparian habitat.This information is then provided to the other resource teams for use in their evaluation of potential project effects. 6.6.4.3.2.1.Integration of Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study Results The purpose of this task is to integrate the Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Studies to insure that results from both studies are used in a coordinated manner to identify and,to the extent possible,quantify the potential influence of the Project on key geomorphic and habitat features.Section 6.5.4.11 provides a detailed discussion of the specific aspects of the Geomorphology Study that will be used to guide development of the models and interpretation of the model results for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,particularly as they relate to the habitat indicators.Additional examples of key coordination activities between the two studies include the following (It is important to understand that other activities may be identified as the study teams gain additional understanding of the key processes that drive potential Project effects): e The LWD component of the Geomorphology Study will provide information on the status of LWD recruitment to the project reach under existing conditions and qualitative information about the potential effect of the Project on future LWD recruitment.Results from the bed evolution modeling will provide quantitative estimates of certain key processes that affect LWD recruitment under both existing and Project conditions, including potential changes in bank erosion rates. e The Geomorphology Study will identify key locations that control connectivity between the main channel and the side channels,side sloughs and upland sloughs,and will assess how these locations have evolved over the period of coverage of the historical aerial photography.The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling study will quantify the hydraulic and sediment transport behavior of the existing locations,and will provide quantitative projections of how these areas will change in the future under both existing (no Project) and Project conditions based on the bed evolution modeling results. e The Geomorphology Study,coupled with the field data collection activities for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study,will identify the geomorphic characteristics (i.e.,channel geometry,gradient,substrate,bank material and vegetation)that are important drivers of habitat conditions within the side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs under existing and Project conditions.The modeling,particularly 2-D bed evolution modeling at the Focus Areas,will provide a means of directly quantifying these processes by providing detailed hydraulic information and projections of changes in substrate and bed elevations.This will include quantification of the frequency and duration of substrate mobilization and the potential for fines infiltrations and flushing in spawning areas.Other aspects,such as potential changes in channel width,will be estimated based on a combination of the model output and relevant geomorphic relationships. 6.6.4.3.2.2.Coordination of Results with Other Resources Studies The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling and Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)teams will interact extensively with the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3),Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow (Section 8.6),Ice Processes Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-122 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN (Section 7.6),and Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats (Section 9.9)study teams. The types of interaction will vary depending on the specific study,but a considerable amount of physical data describing the system,including transects,topography/bathymetry,substrate characterization,aerial photography,and pre-and post-Project flows generally will be shared. Selection of joint Focus Areas for detailed studies will be an important aspect of the collaboration.By selecting common sites,the potential for exchange of information between the study teams will be maximized to ensure the most effective and extensive use of Focus Area data. Because of the detailed spatial nature of the information produced by the models,GIS will likely be an important tool for visually illustrating and conveying model results for use in the other studies.Development of the plan for transferring results in a manner that will facilitate efficient and effective use by other studies will require considerable effort.The details of the plan will be worked out as the overall modeling approach is developed in the Technical Workgroup meetings and through informal coordination with the respective study teams. The 1-D and 2-D bed evolution models provide quantitative predictions of a range of key variables that are directly related to the geomorphic and habitat conditions along the study reach at a range of spatial and temporal resolutions (Table 6.6-5 and Table 6.6-7).As noted in Table 6.6-6,the values of many of these variables can be used directly to assess geomorphic and habitat conditions,while additional analysis of other variables outside the context of the model is required to obtain useful predictions (Table 6.6-7).The output variables can be broadly grouped into hydraulic conditions (water-surface elevations,depth,velocity,bed shear stress)and sediment transport/bed morphology conditions (substrate size gradations,sediment transport rates,changes in bed elevation). Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Study (Section 8.5.4.3):It is anticipated that the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Study will provide the pre-and post-Project hydrology information for all studies,including the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study.This hydrology information will include mainstem pre-and post-Project flows at various points along the study area and inflows for gaged and ungaged tributaries.This information is expected to be provided for the 50-year,extended flow record. For the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling effort,the upstream boundary condition at RM 184 will be the existing condition or pre-Project daily flows from the extended flow record.For the post-Project condition,the upstream boundary condition will be the average daily releases from Watana Dam unless load-following scenarios are evaluated.In the latter case,the Project outflows will need to be on an hourly or possibly finer time increment.Estimated daily inflows from tributaries provided by the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model will be input along the length of the 1-D sediment transport model and may be inputs to the localized 2-D models depending on the location and specific issues to be addressed. Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (FA-IFS)(Section 8.5):The primary initial interaction with the FA-IFS will be in the selection of the Focus Areas for detailed study.Part of the selection process will consider the use of the specific sites as well as the types of habitat present at the site by target fish species.The local-scale 2-D models can be used to evaluate instream habitat quality on a spatially-distributed basis rather than the cross-sectionally-based approach used in traditional Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM)studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-123 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN For the FA-IFS,an assessment of whether the current channel geometry and substrate characterization used in evaluation of habitats will remain relatively unchanged over the period of the license under both the pre-and post-Project conditions will be important.The Geomorphology Study will determine the equilibrium status of each reach such that the distribution of habitat conditions over the timeframe of the license (assumed to be 50 years, corresponding to the maximum FERC licensing period)will be adequately reflected by existing channel morphology.If it is determined that the river is not in a state of dynamic equilibrium,the Geomorphology Study will provide projections of the direction and magnitude of the changes under both existing and Project conditions.Changes in the relative occurrence of aquatic habitat types and the associated surface area versus flow relationships that may occur as a result of the Project will be an important outcome of these studies.As part of this evaluation,pre-and post- Project changes in channel dimensions (width and depth)and the proportion and distribution of geomorphic features and habitat types will be estimated for each of the delineated reach types using the channel classification system to be developed for the Susitna River.This will provide the FA-IFS with an important part of the information required to evaluate the post-Project effects on aquatic habitat.Other important information to be provided by the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling study for the Instream Flow Study includes the following: e Identification of zones of substrate mobilization,deposition,and scour at the reach scale for pre-and post-Project flow regimes. e Potential changes in off-channel habitat connectivity due to aggradation and degradation. e Pre-and post-Project changes in spatial and seasonal patterns of the fine sediment (wash load)transport and the associated Project effects on turbidity. e Changes in substrate composition in both the main channel and off-channel habitats. e Pre-and post-Project large woody debris (LWD)recruitment and transport. Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6):Riparian vegetation plays a large role in the development of islands and off-channel habitats,primarily by protecting surfaces from erosion and promoting sediment deposition.Vegetation can also contribute to channel narrowing by encroaching onto bars and islands and riverward growth of banks through trapping of sediments. Conversely,changes in the flow regime and/or ice processes can alter riparian vegetation patterns,including the extent,species composition,and age-classes;thus,there is a feedback mechanism between the two processes.As a result,the influence of riparian vegetation on the morphology of the Susitna River is an important consideration in these studies.The R-IFS, Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling studies need to be closely coordinated because of the interaction described above.The collaboration will begin with coordinated selection of the Focus Area among the R-IFS,Ice Processes,Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling study teams.By analyzing the same Focus Areas in a coordinated manner,the teams will develop an understanding of the interaction between the processes that are responsible for creation and maintenance of the islands and off-channel habitats.Estimates of the ages of island and floodplain surfaces from the Riparian Instream Flow Study based on dendrochronology,combined with the inundation results from the 2-D modeling,will greatly facilitate this effort by helping to identify rates of sediment deposition and reworking of these surfaces.Similarly,profiling of deposited sediments in the riparian corridor to identify the types of sediments that make up the floodplain will also contribute to the understanding of the physical Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-124 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN processes and development of the functional model for linkage of the geomorphology,riparian vegetation,and ice processes. The results of the fluvial geomorphology model along with applicable geomorphic principles will be applied to interpret model results.An understanding of the geomorphology of the system will also be used to provide a reality check on the extent of changes indicated by the modeling. Examples of the linkage between the R-IFS and the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling include the following: e Altering Manning's n-values to represent establishment (increased n)or removal (decreased n)of vegetation. e Application of shear stress parameter to determine the erodibility of banks and potential influence of and on vegetation. e Interpretation of flow and sediment transport patterns to determine areas of sediment deposition within and adjacent to vegetation. e More accurate water surface elevations and flow distributions from the local-scale 2-D models than is provided by the 1-D models for periods when the flows only partially inundate the riparian corridor. e Estimation of the change in the rate of floodplain and island building under the with- Project condition and between various operational scenarios.This can be accomplished by scaling the historical rates of sedimentation developed from the R-IFS by the ratio of the with-Project rate of sediment delivery to the floodplain surfaces to the existing rate. The 2-D model will be applied to simulate sediment delivery to the floodplains and islands. e Use of geomorphic threshold relationships to understand the potential for removal of vegetation by the flows and the potential for additional channel narrowing due to changes in the vegetation patterns. Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6):Ice processes influence both the channel morphology and riparian vegetation.For example,ice can prevent vegetation from establishing on bars by annually shearing off or uprooting young vegetation.Similarly,ice can scour vegetation from the banks,increasing their susceptibility to erosion.In both examples these influences affect channel morphology.Ice jams can also directly influence the channel morphology by diverting flows onto floodplains where new channels can form,particularly when the downstream water surface elevations are low,allowing the return flows to headcut back into the floodplain.Ice can also move bed material that would normally not be mobilized by rafting large cobbles and boulders. There will be close collaboration between the Geomorphology and Ice Process studies to identify the key physical processes that interact between the two.Working together to analyze the conditions at the Focus Areas will be a key part of this collaboration.A significant portion of the influences of ice processes on morphology are directly related to their effects on riparian vegetation.Additionally,influences of ice processes beyond the riparian vegetation issues that may be incorporated directly into the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling may include the following: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-125 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Simulating the effects of surges from ice jam break-up on hydraulics,sediment transport, and erosive forces using unsteady-flow 2-D modeling with estimates of breach hydrographs. e Simulating the effect of channel blockage by ice on the hydraulic and erosion conditions resulting from diversion of flow onto islands and the floodplain. e Use of the 2-D model output to assess shear stress magnitudes and patterns in vegetated areas,and the likelihood of removal or scouring. e Use of the 2-D model output to assess shear stress magnitudes and patterns in unvegetated areas,and the likelihood of direct scour of the boundary materials. e Application of the 2-D model to investigate whether ice jams are a significant contributor to floodplain and island deposition as a result of ice jams inundating these features and causing sedimentation. Water Quality Modeling (Section 5.6):The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will have two primary areas of interaction with the Water Quality Modeling Study.The first involves the determination of reservoir sediment trap efficiency.The EFDC model that is being used for studying the water quality of the reservoir,Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments will be used to perform a determination the final determination of reservoir sediment traps efficiency. This will provide a more accurate determination of the fine sediment settling than use us the empirical equations that are described in Section 6.5.4.8.2.1 that will be used for the initial estimate of trap efficiency.The Geomorphology Study will provide the Water Quality Modeling study with the sediment inflow to the reservoir based on the sediment supply analysis conducted in Section 6.5.4.3.The second are of interaction is the routing of fine sediment,silt and clay, downstream.Both the 1-D bed evolution model form this study and the EFDC model from the water quality will route fine sediments in the Middle Susitna River Segment and upper portion of the Lower Susitna River Segment.The water quality models interested in the fine sediment in order to estimate the Project effects on turbidity,while the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study is primarily interested in fine sediment in terms of the Project effects on areas of deposition in the main channel,off-channel and floodplain areas.The results of each model in terms of fine sediment transport results will be compared to insure consistency. 6.6.4.3.2.3.Information Required The following available existing information will be needed to conduct this component of the modeling study: e Study plans for other studies The following additional information will need to be obtained to conduct this component of the modeling study: e Locations of sites for other studies e Lists of output required for other studies,including list of key habitat indicators. e Output formats required for other studies e Schedule dates for providing output Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-126 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.4.3.3.Study Products The products of this component of the modeling study will include summarized results from the 1-D and 2-D sediment-transport modeling in an appropriate format.This will include the values of variables that are taken directly from the models (Table 6.6-6)and variables or indicators that are computed from a combination of the direct model output and other available information using appropriate relationships outside the direct context of the model (Table 6.6-7). Although the desired format of the model output is not known at this time,the formatted products could include the following: e Spreadsheets summarizing predicted hydraulic conditions. e Spreadsheets summarizing the sediment-transport results at various times during the 1-D mobile boundary sediment-transport simulations. e ArcGIS shapefiles,and where necessary,spreadsheets,representing the predicted hydraulic conditions (velocity magnitude and direction,water depth,shear stress magnitude and direction,etc.)at various times during the 2-D modeling simulation at each of the Focus Areas. e ArcGIS shapefiles,and where necessary,spreadsheets,representing the sediment- transport results (predicted change in bed elevation,sediment size,etc.)at various times during the 2-D modeling simulation at each of the Focus Areas. 6.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice A wide range of temporal scale processes,unknown initial and forcing conditions,unresolved heterogeneities,and unanticipated mechanisms make geomorphic prediction challenging and problems of scale important (Wilcock and Iverson 2003).Fluvial geomorphologic analyses typically involve focusing on a variety of spatial scales at which landforms have characteristic features (Grant et al.1990;Rosgen 1996;Thomson et al.2001).These scales generally reference the river channel width (W)due to the similarity of forms among systems of different absolute size that are governed by the same underlying processes (Pasternack 2011).For example,the analysis could include an assessment at the watershed scale,river segment scale(10?-10*W),morphologic or reach scale (10°-10'W),and Focus Area local scale (10°!-10°W). As discussed in more detail below,the Geomorphology Modeling Study will require both reach- scale (1-D modeling)and Focus Area local-scale (2-D modeling)analyses.Synthesis of the reach-scale and local scale analyses will therefore be necessary to identify potential Project- induced changes in the relative occurrence of aquatic habitat types and associated surface area versus flow relationships.In addition to the results of the hydraulic and sediment transport modeling,this synthesis will require application of fluvial geomorphic relationships to develop a comprehensive and defensible assessment of potential Project effects.Examples of this type of integrated analysis that have been successfully performed by the Project team include instream flow,habitat,and recreation flow assessments to support relicensing of Slab Creek Dam in California;a broad range of integrated geomorphic assessments and modeling to assist the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program in Central Nebraska;and ongoing work to support the California Department of Water Resources and Bureau of Reclamation to design restoration measures for the San Joaquin River in the Central Valley of California downstream of Friant Dam. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-127 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 1-D and 2-D models are commonly used tools to assess hydraulic and sediment transportconditionsinrivers*!.The potential models that are described in the model selection section have been in use by the engineering and geomorphic community for many years (in some cases, many decades)for evaluating both existing/baseline conditions and predicting the likely effects of proposed changes in flow regime,sediment supply,and other natural and anthropogenic factors.All of the proposed models have been developed using scientifically-sound relationships to describe the physical processes that are important to the analysis.The proposed modeling steps,that include initial reconnaissance to understand the study reach,field data collection to obtain quantitative information necessary to build the model inputs files,calibration steps to ensure model results are consistent with field conditions,and modifications to the model input to represent the range of potential future conditions,are commonly employed by practitioners and researchers.Results from the application of these types of models have provided significant technical basis for FERC licensing of numerous projects through the U.S.and similar licensing throughout the world. One-Dimensional Modeling at the Reach Scale:Potential 1-D models that are being considered' for this study include the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS (version 4.1;USACE 2010a),the Bureau of Reclamation's SRH-1D (version 2.8;Huang and Greimann 2011),DHI's MIKE 11 (version 2011;DHI 2011a),and Mobile Boundary Hydraulics'HEC-6T (version 5.13.22_08;MBH 2008).Based on the information above and experience with these models,the Geomorphology Study team tentatively proposes to use HEC-6T for the reach-scale sediment transport analysis.This proposal is based on confidence gained that HEC-6T is capable of effectively and efficiently modeling the processes that are important for this scale of geomorphic analysis.HEC-6T has been successfully applied to model the sediment-transport conditions in a wide range of river systems for a variety of studies.The study team is currently using the model to evaluate sediment augmentation for habitat restoration purposes in the Central Platte River in Nebraska (Tetra Tech 2010).It was successfully used to evaluate the effects of seismic retrofit options for San Clemente Dam on sediment-transport through the reservoir and in the downstream Carmel River (Mussetter Engineering,Inc.2008). Two-Dimensional Modeling at the Local Scale:Potential 2-D models that are being considered for this study include the U.S.Bureau of Reclamation's SRH2-D version 3 (Lai 2008;Greimann and Lai 2008),USACE's Adaptive Hydraulics (ADH)version 3.3 (USACE 2010b),USGS's MD_SWMS modeling suite (McDonald et al.2005;Nelson et al.2010),and DHI's MIKE 21 version 2011 (DHI 2011b)River2D modeling suite (University of Alberta 2002;University of British Columbia 2009).The selection of the 2-D model will be coordinated with the other pertinent studies and the licensing participants.In addition to the User's Manuals that are available with each of the potential models,a number of standalone references are also available that provide guidance for development and application of the 2-D models,or highlight successful application of 2-D geomorphologic modeling.For example,Pasternack (2011)includes an entire chapter that provides instruction for 2-D model development,and separate chapters for SRH-2D model execution and interpretation of SRH-2D model results.Conaway and Moran (2004) present successful application of MD_SWMS to modeling sediment-transport conditions in 3!The March 2008 Edition of the American Society of Civil Engineers Journal ofHydraulic Engineering was entirely dedicated to the practice and challenges associated with sediment transport modeling. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-128 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Alaskan rivers.MD_SWMS has also been successfully used to model sediment-transport and Island formation in a gravel bed portion of the Snake River (McDonald et al.2005). 6.6.6.Schedule A schedule for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study has been developed,and indicates the Model Development,Coordination,and Calibration study component will be completed by the end of the second quarter 2014;the Model Existing and with-Project Conditions study component will be completed by the end of the fourth quarter 2014;and Coordination on Model Output study component will be completed by the end of the fourth quarter 2014.The Initial Study Report (ISR)and the Updated Study Report (USR)explaining the actions taken and data collected to date will be due within one and two years,respectively,of FERC's Study Plan Determination.A more specific breakdown of the anticipated schedule is presented in Table 6.6- 8. 6.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies A flow chart describes study interdependencies (Figure 6.6-4)and outlines the information and products required from other studies and the timing of delivery to successfully complete the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study on schedule.In the study interdependencies chart,the studies providing input are listed in the five sided boxes at the top of the chart.The sections of the corresponding study's RSP which develop and provide the information are shown in parentheses.The rectangular boxes below the five sided boxes list the major information and products that the other studies will provide to the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study.The primary studies that the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will require information from are listed below and in Table 6.6-9. e Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5) o Geomorphic Reach delineation o Sediment transport rating curves and sediment balance o Identification of key physical processes e Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) o Collaboration on Focus Area selection o Identification of specific areas of interest with focus areas o Velocity and transect measurements for hydraulic calibration e Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) o Floodplain sedimentation rates o Soil samples e Groundwater Study (Section 7.5) o Level logger information e Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-129 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN o Assistance in identifying tributaries to study o Identification of specific areas of interest with focus areas e Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6) o Identification of ice influences e Reservoir Operations Modeling (Engineering) o Project outflow for alternative scenarios e Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3) o Cross-sections o Measured water surface elevations from level loggers o Hourly flows for alternative scenarios throughout the study area e Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6) o Reservoir trap efficiency for existing conditions and alternative scenarios e Glacial and Runoff Changes Study (Section 7.7) ©Potential increase in sediment supply from glacial surge The USGS will provide the extended hydrologic record for 11 gage locations for a period of 61 years.This information will be used as the hydrologic record for analysis of existing stream flow characteristics and will also provide the flows to be used by the Reservoir Operations Study (Engineering)and the Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3)to generate flow conditions in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments for the with-Project conditions. The timing of delivery of each type of information or study product to be provided to the Geomorphology study is the provided in parentheses by quarter and year.For example,"(Q4- 12)”indicates the information will be provided in the fourth quarter of 2012.Table 6.6-9 provides these interdependencies in tabular form including the study providing the information and which area of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study requires the information or study product. The chart indicates which areas of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study require the information.The Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study areas are identified in the blue ellipses and include: e Field Data Collection e 1-D,2-D and tributary delta model development and calibration e 1-D,2-D and tributary delta modeling of baseline and alternative scenarios e Integration of reach-and local-scale modeling and geomorphic analysis The flow chart also shows products and information the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will provide to other studies and the timing of their delivery.Table 6.6-10 provides these study interdependencies in tabular form including the area of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study providing the information and which study requires the information or study product.The products and information the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will provide are identified Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-130 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN in the rectangles below the study area ellipses.The quarter and year that the products and information will be provided to other studies is indicated in the parentheses adjacent to each item.At the bottom of the chart,the studies that require the information from the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study are listed in the five sided boxes.In parentheses adjacent to each study is the section of the RSP that the product or information will support.The primary studies requiring information from the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study are listed below. The information they will require is identified in Table 6.6-10 (Note:Table 6.6-6 and 6.6-7 provide a detailed list of 1-D and 2-D model output and other information the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling and Geomorphology Studies will provide to other studies): e Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5) e Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) e Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) e Characterization and Mapping of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9) e Groundwater Study (Section 7.5) e River Recreation Flow and Access Study (Section 12.7) e Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6) 6.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost Initial estimates of the costs to perform the components of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study are provided in Table 6.6-11.The total effort for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study is estimated to cost between approximately $2.3 million and $2.8 million. 6.6.9.Literature Cited Acres.1983.Before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Application for License for Major Project Susitna Hydroelectric Project.Volume 5A,Exhibit E,Chapters 1 &2. Prepared for Alaska Power Authority. Alaska Energy Authority (AEA).2010.Railbelt Large Hydro Evaluation Preliminary Decision Document.Prepared by the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA). Alaska Power Authority (APA).1984.Susitna Hydroelectric Project Economic and Financial Update.Draft Report dated February 27,1984.Prepared by the Alaska Power Authority (APA). Ashton,William S.,and R&M Consultants,Inc.1985.Lower Susitna River Aggradation Study: Field Data Final Report.Anchorage,Alaska:Alaska Power Authority. Bovee,K.B.,1982.A guide to stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology.Instream Flow Information Paper No.12.FWS/OBS-82/26.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Office of Biological Services,Fort Collins,Colorado. Bovee,K.,B.L.Lamb,J.M.Bartholow,C.B.Stalnaker,J.Taylor,and J.Henriksen.1998. Stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology.U.S. Geological Survey,Biological Resources Division Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD-1998-0004. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-131 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Brabets,T.P,1997,Geomorphology of the Lower Copper River,Alaska:U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper 1581,89 p. Conaway,J.S.,and Moran,E.H.,2004,Development and calibration of two-dimensional hydrodynamic model of the Tanana River near Tok,Alaska:U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 2004-1225,22 p. DHI,2011a.MIKE 11 A modeling system for Rivers and Channels User Guide.December. DHI,2011b.MIKE 21 Flow Model Hydrodynamic Module User Guide.June. Grant,G.E.,Swanson,F.J.,and Wolman,M.G.,1990.Pattern and origin of stepped-bed morphology in high-gradient streams,Western Cascades,Oregon.Geophysical Society of America Bulletin 102 (3),pp.340-352. Greimann,B.and Y.Lai,2008.Two-Dimensional Total Sediment Load Model Equations, ASCE J Hyd Div,134:8,pp.1142-1146. HDR 2011,Watana transportation access study,Project No.82002.Draft report prepared for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.November 29,2011. Holly,F.M.,Jr.,J.C.Yang,and M.Spasojevic,1985.Numerical Simulation of Water and Sediment Movement in Multiply-Connected Networks of Mobile Bed Channels.Prepared for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.Iowa City,lowa:The University of Iowa. Horritt,M.S.,P.D.Bates,M.J.Mattinson,2006.Effects of mesh resolution and topographic representation in finite volume models of shallow water fluvial flow,J Hydrology,vol 329,Issues 1-2,September,pp 306-314. Huang,J.,Greimann,B.P.,and Bauer,T.,2006.Development and Application of GSTAR-1D, Federal Interagency Sedimentation Conference in Reno,NV,April 2-6. Huang,J.V.and Greimann,B.P.,2011.SRH-1D 2.8 User's Manual,Sedimentation and River Hydraulics -One Dimension,Version 2.8,U.S.Department of Interior,Bureau of Reclamation,Technical Service Center,Sedimentation and River Hydraulics Group.227 Pp. Lai,Y.G.,2008.SRH-2D version 2:Theory and User's Manual,Sedimentation and River Hydraulics -Two-Dimensional River Flow Modeling,U.S.Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation,November,113 p. Mobile Boundary Hydraulics (MBH)Software,Inc.,2010.Sedimentation in Stream Networks (HEC-6T),User Manual,March 16,388 pp. MBH,2008.Sedimentation in Stream Networks (HEC-6T),User Manual,Version 5.13.22 08. McDonald,R.R.,Nelson,J.M.,and Bennett,J.P.,2005,Multi-dimensional surface-water modeling system user's guide:U.S.Geological Survey Techniques and Methods,6-B2, 136 p. McDonald,R.,Nelson,J.,Kinzel,P.,and Conaway,J.,2005.Modeling Surface-Water Flow and Sediment Mobility with the Multi-Dimensional Surface-Water Modeling System (MD_SWMS).U.S.Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2005 -3078,6 p. Mussetter Engineering,Inc.,2008.Flood Inundation Mapping,Flood Hazard Evaluation,and Downstream Impact Analysis of the Carmel River Reroute and Removal Option for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-132 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN San Clemente Dam Seismic Retrofit Project,California.Prepared for California Coastal Conservancy and MWH Americas,Inc.February. Mussetter,R.A.,Harvey,M.D.and Sing,E.F.,1995.Assessment of dam impacts on downstream channel morphology.In Lecture Series,U.S.Committee on Large Dams, San Francisco,California,May 13-18,pp.283-298. Mussetter,R.A.and Harvey,M.D.,1996.Geomorphic and hydraulic characteristics of the Colorado River,Moab,Utah:Potential impacts on a uranium tailings disposal site.Proc. Conference on Tailings and Mine Waste,'96,Colorado State University,January 16-19, 1996,Balkema,Rotterdam,pp.405-414. Nelson,J.M.,Y.Shimizu,H.Takebayashi,and R.R.McDonald,2010.The international river interface cooperative:public domain software for river modeling,2nd Joint Federal Interagency Conference,Las Vegas,June 27 to July 1. Parker,G.,1990.The "Acronym”series of Pascal programs for computing bedload transport in gravel rivers.University of Minnesota,St.Anthony Falls Hydraulic Laboratory,External Memorandum No.M-220. Pasternack,G B.,2011.2D Modeling and Ecohydraulic Analysis,Land,Air,and Water Resources,University of California at Davis,158 pp. Rosgen,D.L.,1996.Applied River Morphology.Wildland Hydrology,Pagosa Springs. Ruark,M.,Niemann,J.,Greimann,B.,and Arabi (2011)."Method for Assessing Impacts of Parameter Uncertainty in Sediment Transport Modeling Applications,”Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,ASCE,Vol.137,No.6,pp.623-636. Smiarowski,A,2010.The evaluation of a two-dimensional sediment transport and bed morphology model based on the Seymour River.Master Thesis,University of British Columbia. Tetra Tech,2010.DRAFT Hydraulic and Sediment-transport Modeling for the Platte River Sediment Augmentation Feasibility Study,Nebraska.Prepared for the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program,September. Tetra Tech,2012.Technical Memorandum:Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling.Prepared for AEA.http://www.susitna Watanahydro.org/documents/AEA_SuWa_FluvialModelingTech Memo20120518_Draft.pdf Thomson,J.R.,Taylor,M.P.,Fryirs,K.A.,and Brierley,G.J.,2001.A geomorphological framework for river characterization and habitat assessment.Aquatic Conservation- Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 11 (5),pp.373-389. University of Alberta,2002.River2D,two-dimensional depth averaged model of river hydrodynamics and fish habitat,introduction to depth averaged modeling and user's manual,September. University of British Columbia,2009.River2D -Morphology,R2DM,user manual for version 5.0,July Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-133 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN URS.2011.AEA Susitna Water Quality and Sediment Transport Data Gap Analysis Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech,URS,and Arctic Hydrologic Consultants.Anchorage,Alaska.62 pp.Appendixes. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE),1993.HEC-6,Scour and Deposition in Rivers and Reservoirs,User's Manual,Hydrologic Engineering Center,Davis,California. USACE,2010a.HEC-RAS,River Analysis System.Users Manual,Version 4.1,Hydrologic Engineering Center,Davis,California. USACE,2010b.Adaptive Hydraulics User Manual Version 3.3.U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station,Vicksburg,Mississippi. Wilcock,P.R.and Crowe,J.C.,2003.Surface-based transport model for mixed-size sediment. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,ASCE,v.129,no.2,February,pp.120-128. Wilcock,P.R.and R.M.Iverson.2003,Prediction in Geomorphology,in Prediction in Geomorphology,edited by Wilcock,P.R.and R.M.Iverson,American Geophysical Monograph. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-134 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.6.10.Tables Table 6.6-1.Schedule for the downstream study limit determination process for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. Step in Downstream Geomorphology Study Limit Determination Date RM 75 downstream geomorphology modeling limit proposal in RSP December 2012 Recon.level assess.of Project effects in the L.Susitna River Segment and flow routing model results |January 2013 Tech.memorandum on recon.level assessment of Project effects in the Lower Susitna RiverSegment January 2013 TWG meeting for confirmation of downstream geomorphology modeling limit Feb /Mar 2013 1-D bed evolution modeling and 2013 Geomorphology Study results and tech memo January 2014 TWG meeting(s)to reevaluate and confirm or adjust downstream modeling limits Feb /Mar 2014 Collect additional data if need identified (Summer 2014)Summer 2014 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-135 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-2.Evaluation of potential 1-D bed evolution models. Models Evaluation Criteria HEC-RAS SRH-1D MIKE 11 HEC-6T General Proprietary/cost (if applicable)O O @ /$8,000 @ /$3,000 Lanspol simulation for sediment Quasi Both Full Quasi Ice for fixed bed e O °O Ice for moveable bed rd]O °O #of transport equations supported 7 13 10 18 Supports user defined transport equation O O °e@ Closed loop capability OC!@ @ @ Moderate (M)Lon(l)H L M H Model Size Limitations #of cross-sections NL NL NL 5,000 #of hydrograph ordinates 40,000 NL NL NL #of sediment sizes 20 8 NL 20 Sediment Sizes Supported Wash load (silts,clays)@ @ e @ Considers settling and resuspension @ @ e e Sand @ @ @ e Gravel and cobble e @ @ @ Notes:@ =Yes;o =No;NL=No Limit 'Not currently available,but in development. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-136 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-3.Evaluation of potential 2-D bed evolution models. Model Evaluation Criteria SRH-2D ADH SToRM MIKE 21 River2D General Proprietary/cost (if applicable)°Oo fe)e /$20,000 ° Unsteady flow capability e °°e e Ice for fixed bed °°°e ° Ice for moveable bed °°°e e Number of transport equationssupported 4 2 of 10 2 Supports user defined transport 5 e of e 6equation Relative execution speed: Fast (F),Slow (S)F s F F S Model stability:High (H),Moderate (M),Low (L)H M M H H Experience with model:High (H), Moderate (M),Low (L)H M L L M Moveable boundary simulation °e o1 e e Grid Structure/Model Formulation Finite element (FE)/ Finite Volume (FV)FV FE FVIFE FV/FE FE Grid structure:Flexible Mesh (FM)FM FM FM FM FM Model Size Limitations #of grid elements 16,000 Unlimited Unlimited Unlimited >100,000 Sediment Sizes Supported Wash load (silts,clays)°°ol e ° Considers settling °e o1 e ° Sand e e o1 °e Gravel and cobble e °ot e e Notes:@ =Yes;0 =No;U =Unknown,currently investigating capabilities;NL =No Limit 'Not currently available,but in development. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-137 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-4.Summary of model parameter precedencies for water resources models to be applied in the Susitna-Watana licensing effort. Model oyn Program Precedence (Parameters that the model results will be adopted for as the governing values) HEC Project releases (discharge from the dam including spills)and reservoir pool elevations.The model will be refined Operations Model Engineering ResSim throughout the study period to reflect any changes in project configuration and as operations scenarios are developed.(Available Q4 2012 ) Initial Flow Routing Model Enaineerin HEC Discharge,stage and other hydraulic parameters such as velocity and depth from RM 184 to RM 84 until the (Hydrologic Routing)9 31 ResSim Mainstem Open-Water Flow Routing Model is developed (Q1 2013) .Discharge,stage and other 1-D hydraulic parameters such as velocity and depth from RM 184 downstream to RMversionP"al(titraule,85 HEC-RAS 74 once the model is developed (Q1 2013 version 1)during open water periods.Model will be updated withaafnyadditionalcross-section from 2013 fieldwork (Q4 2013 ver.2)and finalized (Q4 2104 ver.3).Provides boundaryouting)conditions to 2-D Bed Evolution Model. ,.Discharge,stage,and other 1-D hydraulic parameters such as velocity and depth from RM 184 to RM 100 duringratyeneat)7.6 River 1D |periods of ice formation,ice cover and ice break-up once model is developed (Q4 2013 ver.1,Q4 2014 ver.2).They9modelwillalsoprovidewatertemperature,ice extents and ice thickness for the same period. Susitna River Ice Processes 76 River 1D Hydraulic conditions,water temperature,ice extents and ice thickness within the focus areas during periods of ice Model -Focus Areas 'River 2D formation,ice cover and ice break-up. Susitna River Water Quality 56 EFDC Water temperature during the open water period and other water quality parameters year round from RM 184 to RMModel'26 1-D Bed Evolution Model One-dimensional sediment transport characteristics,bed aggradation/degradation and substrate gradation in the (Hydraulics and Sediment 6.6 TBD!main channel from RM 184 to RM 74,May be used to determine these parameters for localized off-channel habitatTransport)(Q2 2013)within focus areas.Mainstem Open-Water Hydraulic Routing Model will take precedence for 1-D hydraulics. 2-D Bed Evolution Model Detailed two-dimensional hydraulic and sediment transport characteristics,bed aggradation/degradation and (Hydraulics and Sediment 66 TBD2 substrate gradation within the focus areas.Will provide two-dimensional velocity and depth for FA-IFS within focus Transport),(Q2 2013)|area where applied during the open water period.Boundary condition of downstream water surface elevation andupstreaminflowsuppliedbyMainstemOpen-Water Flow Routing Model Notes: 2 Candidate Models:HEC-RAS,HEC-6T,SRH-1D,MIKE-11 3 Candidate Models:SRH-2D,MIKE-21,SToRM,ADH,River-2D Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Pa 138 Decembe REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-5.Potential Focus Areas in the Middle and Lower Susitna River Segments. Feature Downstream RM Upstream RM Geomorphic Reach Reach Type Below Dam 182.0 183.0 MR-1 $C2 (184.7)(185.7)1 MR2-wide 170.7 172.5 MR-2 $C2 (173.6)1 (175.4) MR2-narrow 168.5 170.0 MR-2 SC2 (171.6)1 (173.0)1 Portage Cr 148.3 148.8 MR-5 SC2 (151.8)4 (152.3)1 Slough 21 141.0 142.1 MR-6 SC3 (144.4)!(145.7)1 Indian R 138.4 140.0 MR-6 $C3 (144.8)1 (143.4) Slough 11 135.3 136.6 MR-6 SC3 (138.7)1 (140.0) Slough 8A 124.2 126.1 MR-6 SC3 (128.1)1 (129.7)1 Slough 6A 111.8 113.0 MR-7 $C2 (115.3)1 (116.5)1 Whiskers Slough 101.0 102.2 MR-8 MC1 (104.8)1 (106.0)1 Notes: 1 Values in parenthesis are Project River Miles (PRM) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-139 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-6.Primary output variables for which values are taken directly from the 1-D and 2-D mobile-boundary models and relevance to other studies. Variable Description of Model Output |Spatial Resolution Relevance to Other Studies 1-D mobile-boundary model Water-surface profiles Steady-state water-surface profiles for all discharges Cross-section Geomorphology Cross-sectionally averaged hydraulic Flow depth,velocity,bed shear stress,channel top Cross-section FAFS,R-IFS,Geomorphologyconditionswidth,, Bed material load transport rates Transport rates by grain size fraction Cross-section Geomorphology Bed material (i.e.,substrate)gradations Change in surface layer bed gradations by cross- section over time (0,25,50 years)Cross-section FA-IFS,Geomorphology FA-IFS,R-IFS,Geomorphology, evolution model results Bed elevation Changes in bed elevation with time Cross-section,longitudinal profile GW 2-D mobile-boundary model Water-surface elevations Steady and unsteady water-surface elevations Grid element FALIFS,RFS,Geomorphology. ; .4G Flow depth ,velocity (magnitude and direction),bed .FA-IFS,R-IFS,Geomorphology,Depth-averaged hydraulic conditions shear stress Grid element GW re .Discharge in each branch (including side channels)Flow distribution among multiple channels . ::.FA-IFS,R-IFS,Geomorphology, (including side channels)over range of flows;changes associated with bed Channel width GW Transport rates by grain size fraction,including supply control at the head of side channels .,FA-IFS,R-IFS,Geomorphology,Bed material load transport rates to and transport through side channels Grid element GW aps .Change in substrate gradations by grid element over :FA-IFS,R-IFS,Geomorphology,Bed material (i.e.,substrate)gradations time,including side channels and side sloughs Grid element GW Changes in bed elevation with time,including side Bed elevation channels and side sloughs.Evolution of mouths and Grid element FALFS,RFS,Geomorphology.spawning areas of particular interest Breaching flows Magnitude,frequency and duration of flows overtopping Grid element side channel width FA-IFS,Geomorphology Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Pa 40 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe ? Rt...)STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-7.Key variables needed for the impact assessments for which results are obtained through additional analysis of predictions taken directly from the 1-D and 2- D mobile-boundary models. Variable Description Spatial Resolution Relevance to Other Studies 1-D mobile-boundary model Wash load transport rates Correlations between wash load transport rates and discharge Gage locations WQ,R-IFS Overbank sedimentation rates Rate of sediment delivery into overbanks and vertical accretion rates Reach-averaged R-IFS,Geomorphology Breaching flows Magnitude,sequent).re ¢euof fous Oy ertopping Site R-IFS,Geomorphology Side channel connectivity Frequency,curaon ane gation exent of backwater Site R-IFS Bed Material Motion Thresholds (aka Frequency and duration of flows sufficient to cause Cross-section and/or reach- Incipient Motion Analysis)general mobilization of bed material averaged FA-IFS,Geomorphology Bed material transport capacity rating Bed material transport capacity (total and by-size Cross-section and/or reach-Geomorpholocurvesfraction)as a function of discharge averaged Tpnology won Magnitude and frequency of flows that transport the 7EffectiveDischargemostsedimentoverdefinedperiodoftimeReach-averaged Geomorphology .Estimated rate of erosion into main and side channel Cross-section and/or reach-Bank erosion rates banks averaged R-IFS,Geomorphology .Quantities of LWD delivered to mainstem and sideLWDrecruitmentchannelsduetobankerosion Reach R-IFS,Geomorphology Deposition rates at tributary mouths Evolution of tributary mouth fans/bars over time Geomorphology unit FA-IFS,Geomorphology .ys .Potential effect of changes in tributary mouths and .Hydraulic conditions at tributary mouths effects on fish passage into tributaries Geomorphology unit FA-IFS,Geomorphology 2-D mobile-boundary mode! Weighted-useable-area versus discharge Hydraulic conditions (velocity,depth,substrate size).. curves provided to FA-IFS for WUA estimates Grid element-Habitat unit FA-IFS,Geomorphology .Rate of sediment delivery into overbanks and vertical ,Overbank sedimentation rates accretion rates Grid element R-IFS,Geomorphology Bed Material Motion Thresholds (aka Frequency and duration of flows sufficient to cause ... Incipient Motion Analysis)general mobilization of bed material Grid element->Habitat unit FA-IFS,Geomorphology Bank erosion rates Changes in bank shear BE)and bank energy index Model reach R-IFS,Geomorphology Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-141 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Variable Description Spatial Resolution Relevance to Other Studies Changes in side channel,side slough and ::.,.FA-IFS,R-IFS, upland slough geometry Evolution of channel width and depth Grid element -side channel width Geomorphology ...oo :Potential for infiltration and flushing of fines fromFinesedimentinteractionsinspawningspawningsubstrate,including side channels and side Grid element-Habitat unit FAIFS,RFS, areas sloughs Geomorphology .Changes in bank erosion rates that could affect LWD .FA-IFS,R-IFS,LWD recruitment recruitment Grid element Geomorphology Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authoritv Fl Project No.14241 Pa 42 Decembe: RL.STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-8.Schedule for implementation of the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. 2012 2013 2014 2015 Q1 |}Q2 |Q3 |}Q4}QI |Q2 |Q3 |Q4 {QT |Q2 |Q3 |Q4 {|Ql Selection of 1-D and 2-D Models 2 Selection of Focus Areas 2 Activity eCoordination w/Other Studies on Modeling Needs Including Focus Areas 2013 Field Data Collection /Supplemental Field Data Collection 2014 e |2 Coordinate with Other Studies on Processes Modeled ° 1-D Model Development and Calibration Perform 1-D Modeling of Existing Conditions and Initial Project Run . Reevaluate Downstream Study Limits Based on 1-D Results ° 2-D Mode!Development and Calibration Perform 2-D Modeling of Existing Conditions +--e Perform 1-D Modeling of Alternative Scenarios ] Perform 2-Modeling of Alternative Scenarios ---# Post Process and Provide Model Results to Other Studies r Interpretation of Channel Change and Integration with Other Studies 2 Initial Study Report /Updated Study Report =A A Legend:--Planned Activity e Technical Memorandum or Interim Product A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-143 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-9.Information and products required by the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study from other studies. Source of Product or Information |Information or Product to be Provided |Timing Information or Products Required for:Field Data Collection Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)Collaboration on Focus Area selection Q1-13 Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)Collaboration on modeling needs Q2-13 Groundwater Study (Section 7.5)Sharing of field dataIceProcessesStudy(Section 7.6) oy .:,;Q3-13CharacterizationandMappingofAquaticHabitatsLocationsofspecificinterestwithintheFocusAreas Study (Section 9.9) Information or Products Required for:1-D,2-D and Tributary Delta Model Development and Calibration Sediment Q4-12 & ediment supply 04-13 .Historical channel change Q1-13GeomorphologyStudy(Section 6.5)identify physical processes 04-13 Initial estimates of reservoir sediment trap efficiency Q3-13 Flood frequency and flow duration Q3-13 Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6)Reservoir sediment trap efficiency for alt.scenarios Q2-14 Glacial and Runoff Change Study (Section 7.7)ce increase in sediment supply from glacial Q1-14 Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section |Tributary inflows and accretions Q3-13 8.5.4.3) Reservoir Operations (Engineering)rear case annual hydrographs for representative Q3-13 Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section |Base case continuous record daily flows (50 years)Q3-13 8.5.4.3) Information or Product Required for:1-D,2-D and Tributary Delta Model Baseline and Alternative Scenarios Analysis Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section |Tributary inflows and accretions Q3-13 8.5.4.3) Base case annual hydrographs for representative Q3-13 ;ol yearsReservoirOperations(E -ir Operations (Engineering)Alt.scenarios annual hydrographs for representative Q4-14 yrs Mainstem (Open-water)Flow Routing Model (Section |Base case continuous record daily flows (50 years)Q3-13 8.5.4.3)Alt.scenarios continuous record daily flows (50 years)|Q4-14 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Pai 44 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe ) RL.STUDY PLAN Source of Product or Information |Information or Product to be Provided |Timing Information or Product Required for:Integration of Reach-&Local-Scale Modeling and Geomorphic Analysis Bed material mobilization and effective discharge ;-Q4-13 &Geomorphology (Section 6.5)Assessment Project effects on geomorphic processes +wnchi Q4-14andthresholdrelationships Ice Processes (Section 7.6)Geomorphic influences from ice Q4-13 wo :Historical floodplain sedimentation rates Q1-14Ri.iparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)Vegetation age classes O14 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-145 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-10.Information and products the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study will provide to other studies. Study the Product or Information is Provided to |Information or Product to be Provided |Timing Information or Products Provided by:Field Data Collection Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5) Fish and Aquatics instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6) Cross-section and bathymetry ADCP velocity and depths Bed and bank material sample results Q4-13 Geomorphic site assessments Locations of specific interest within the Focus Areas Information or Products Provided by:1-D,2-D and Tributary Delta Model Development and Calibration 1-D,2-D and Tributary Delta Model Baseline and Alternative Scenarios (Section 6.6.4.2) Calibrated 1-D bed evolution model Q4-13 Calibrated 2-D bed evolution model Q2-14 Tributary delta model for selected tributaries Q1-14 information or Products Provided by:1-D,2-D and Tributary Delta Model Baseline and Alternative Scenarios Analysis Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6)Changes in fine sediment load for turbidity modeling Q4-14 Bed aggradation and degradation -reach scale Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)Change in substrate size -reach scale Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)Changes in erosion and deposition patterns 04-14RiparianInstreamFlowStudy(Section 8.6) Groundwater Study (Section 7.5) Changes in bed material load transport Hydraulic parameters:velocity depth and water surface elevations (WSE) Information or Products Provided by:Integration (see Tables 6.6-6 and 6.6-7 for detailed list of information) of Reach-&Local-Scale Modeling and Geomorphic Analys Ss Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6) Groundwater Study (Section 7.5)Potential changes in channel morphology Q4-14 Recreation and Aesthetics Study (Section 12) Potential changes in habitat:maintenance and evolution Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)Potential changes n habitat relative distribution Q4-14Potentialchangesinhabitat:areas for specific types Potential changes in habitat:connectivity of off- channel Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)Changes in floodplain sedimentation rates Q4-14 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Pa |46 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe ? RL.STUDY PLAN Table 6.6-11.Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study costs. Component Task/Subtask Estimated Cost Range Bed Evolution Model Development of Bed Evolution Develop Approach $50,000 Development,Coordination Modeling Approach and Model and Calibration Develop Model $400,000 to $500,000 Field Data Collection $900,000 to $1,100,000 Coordination with other Studies on Processes Modeled $50,000 Calibration/Validation of Model $200,000 to $300,000 Model Existing and with-Model Existing Conditions (one scenario)$200,000 to $300,000 Project Conditions Model with-Project Conditions (three scenarios)$250,000 to $350,000 Coordination on Model Output/Study Integration $150,000 to $200,000 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-147 December 2012 ReviseD STUDY PLAN 6.6.11.Figures Fi 7 May .ies ried25rth'«ae NY e4CheNGORAE.Yb Dae 2 Be ed FHS.cae aeOWES=Faraae Den OEEoe ;res 3 feveVEAUEgewate.ap we wa i?te'%a "s st tafe Bp gS i..f Wf tag tr *40s AaaieTadreghss SanaeA"heoe,a aeae rh.foawyLAr54|ardirAg« ane252:WsakteesaseSyhreK ht)OU Ried Satagpensleesh. 'e, Whiskers Creek Site -Coarse Mesh Figure 6.6-1.Example of coarse mesh applied to the Whiskers Slough potential Focus Area,Middle Susitna River Segment,Geomorphic Reach MR-8 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authoritv Fl ?roject No.14241 Pac 48 Decembei ' RL.)STUDY PLAN pach oehehe aacySper abdedae xfi ist¥geyserairyPoggaata"4eeas ayBe;8SRxagPomeya ts'x"* +;5 a,"ty 1”4453 ro wt een WA ee (hie 'Bie1Te .Se Utes So ir ett Nh GOCE 200 SDAEL ota Bat Dae Ear ele NY Ge oo q 100 200 Whiskers Creek Site -Fine Mesh Figure 6.6-2.Example of fine mesh applied to the Whiskers Slough proposed Focus Area,Middle Susitna River Segment,Geomorphic Reach MR-8 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-149 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Legend . ¢-}i " .".rr) s geet ::-6RiverSegmentof7i.at RyereUpper;f re Re Oy are Middle "ees:F Ager Lower te re at e . muamees Geomorphic Reach re e .¢MR-5 MR-4f"ef wwLAAinstreamFlowFocusAreaan”&Y'\ ar As '-ra ;D>'t ,Z.4 a .!°,ky af Gold Creek Aas wt 3 a° ..s eo oe a %wo -'fi :9 £co set a ' Me nT ee ”" Sherman " ad ;o s t f 4 ah -es ;oo . _.es 7 Ss ;aw ' .i a A MR-6 on "/.; :;” 6.}wt wet ot .?°ws a -s sy.Gb .k RS ot a oe :re ''?Cn?ir .2ra.in ye 7 e :\ Ae, 'y mos,4 Po wd 2 2 . H roy ' of.;*4 . on ae >/i :{en R a f af aa 4ROJovePree, : tg an as rnPetersvilieMR-7 Pee :64 ?nr i * 6 :Lr}Nady, ”1 '¢' ; my - oy => €!.oy GME ENERGY AUTHORITY wa ee ace ¥<came.Data Sources:See Map ReferencesMR-8 j ';"0 10 Ca ;.i i a J mi fly ? Trapper Creek |Talkeetna ™ve ite Is Aiaeeineleetret al. Lo:eet Y 417)Map Author R2-Joetta Zablotneyifwee.File:Map_PSP_ISF_GeomorphReach_Mid.mxd 7 as ; Figure 6.6-3.Locations of proposed Middle Susitna River Segment Focus Areas. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Pa 50 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe ? Revised STUDY PLAN IFS Fish(8.5) IFS Riparian (8.6) Groundwater (7.5) Ice Processes (7.6) Aquatic Habitat Mapping (9.9 Geomorphology(6.5) WO Mad.(Reservoir)(5.6) Glacia &Runoff Changes(7.7) Site Sefection {Q1-13) Modeling Needs (Q2-13) Field Data Sharing (Q3-13)Specific Interest Locations w/in Sites {Q3-13) Sediment Supply (4-12/Q4-13} Hist.Channel!Change (Q1-13) Identify Phys.Processes (04-13) Reservoir Trap Efficiency (Q4-13/02-14) Glaciat Surge Sediment (Q1-14} Flood Freq.&Flow Duration {Q3-13) Flow Routing(8.5.4.3) Reservoir Ops.(Eng.}Geomorphology (6.5)|1S Riparian (8.6)lee Processes (7.6)Botanical (11.6) Bed Material Mobilization Effective Discharge 'Geomorphic Processes Daily Flows for Threshold Relationships Base and Alt.Scenario:Ice Influences onGeomorph. -Representative Yrs.(AN Q4-13/04-14) -50 Years Daiy Flows -Tributary /Accretion {All G3-13/Q4-14) LIDAR (Mat-Su}(Q4-12) Ne Cross Sections Bathymetry ADCP Vel.&Depth (IFS-Fish) Bed Material Samples Changesin Fine Sed./Turbidity Bed Ageradation/DegradationChangeinSubstrateSizeChangesinErosion/Depasition Ay? Hist.Sed.Rates (Q.1-14) Veg.Age Classes(Q1-14) Changein Channel Morphotogy Change inFloodptain Sed.Rate Potential Changes in Habitat: Maintenance &Evolution -Relative DistributionChangesinBedLoadTransport-Areas Geomorphic SiteAssessnent Hydraulics Parameters (Vel,Depth,WSE)-Connectionto Lateral Hab.[All Q4-13)(All Q4-14)(All.Q4-14) We we Ww Ww Geomorphology .IFS Riparian Aquatic Groundwater River Water QualityIFSFish(8.5)Habitat Recreation ModelingStudy(6.5)(8.6).(7.5)Mapping (9.9)(12.7)(5.6) Figure 6.6-4.Study interdependencies for the Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-151 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.7.Attachments ATTACHMENT 6-1.GLOSSARY OF TERMS -GEOQMORPHOLOGY Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 6-152 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 6-1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS -GEOMORPHOLOGY Revised Study Plan Glossary of Terms and Acronyms ADEC: AEIDC: Aggradation: Alluvial fan: Alluvium: Anabranch: Annual mean discharge: Annual peak discharge: APA: Aquatic: Armor layer: Armoring: Avulsion: Bankfull channel width: Geomorphology Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center. The process of building up a surface by deposition An outspread,gently sloping,fan-shaped alluvial deposit by a stream;especially where a stream issues from a narrow canyon onto a plain or valley floor. Deposits of clay,silt,sand,gravel,cobbles or other particulate material that has been deposited by a stream or other body of running water in a streambed,on a flood plain,on a delta,or at the base of a mountain. A separate channel in a stream that has diverged from the main channel and rejoins the stream at some downstream site;an anabranch is a discrete,semi-permanent channel that may be of equal or smaller size as the main channel,thereby distinguishing it from channel braids that are not discrete and may be highly ephemeral. The average or mean of the daily mean discharges for the water year. The maximum instantaneous discharge that occurs during an individual water year. Alaska Power Authority. Relating to water;living in or near water,or taking place in water. A coarse layer of sediment protecting the finer sediment beneath it. The natural process in which an erosion-resistant layer of relatively large particles is formed on a stream bed or bank due to the removal of finer particles by the flow.(b)Placement of a covering on a stream bank to prevent erosion.(c)Vegetative growth covering the channel bed or banks. As applied to fluvial processes,is a rapid change in the course or position of a stream channel,especially by incision (erosion)of lowland alluvium,to bypass a meander and thereby shorten channel length and increase channel gradient;avulsion commonly occurs during floods but also can occur by normal processes of lateral migration of a stream channel during non-flood discharges. The distance across the channel between the top of the left to right banks at the elevation of the floodplain,measured at right angles to the longitudinal flow direction. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 1 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Bankfull discharge: Bathymetry: Bed Evolution Model: Bed load: Bed material: Bed material load: Braided stream: Channel degradation: Channel aggradation: Channel forming or (dominant)discharge: The maximum discharge that a channel is capable of transmitting without overtopping its banks (i.e.,the channel capacity).In self- adjusted alluvial channels that are in a state of dynamic equilibrium with the imposed water and sediment supply and that are bounded by a self-formed floodplain,the magnitude of the bankfull discharge is often assumed to be about the same as the mean annual flood peak (recurrence interval of 1.5 to 2.33 years), although recurrence intervals for the bankfull discharge of 1 to 25 years have been reported in the literature. Topographic mapping of the bed of the river,lake or other body of water,with depths or elevations typically indicated by contours drawn at regular intervals. A computer model that predicts changes in bed elevations and sediment gradations based on differences in bed material sediment transport capacity between adjacent cross sections (one- dimensional)or elements (two-dimensional)estimated from an appropriate sediment transport capacity equation applied with hydraulic conditions from a dynamically-linked hydraulic model. The portion of the total sediment discharge that moves in contact with the bed by rolling,sliding,or saltation. Sediment material found in the bed of a stream in appreciable quantities. The portion of the total sediment discharge that is composed of particle sizes that are commonly found in the bed.This portion of the total sediment discharge is related to the flow and sediment characteristics of the bed,and is generally carried at the capacity of the stream. A stream whose flow is divided at normal stage by small mid- channel bars and small islands;individual width of bar and islands is less than about three times the water width;a braided stream has the aspect of a single channel within which are subordinate channels resembling in plan a complex braid;especially an overloaded and aggrading stream flowing in a wide channel within a floodplain. Lowering of the channel bed through removal of sediment by flowing water. The raising of the channel bed through deposition of sediment by flowing water. A theoretical discharge that,if constantly maintained in an alluvial stream over a long period of time,would produce the same channel geometry that is produced by the long-term variable runoff Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 2 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Channel geometry: Coefficient: Cohesive sediment: Cross section: Cross-section geometry: Daily mean discharge: Deciduous: Degradation: Deposition: Dominant discharge: Drawdown zone: EFDC: Effective discharge: EPA: EWI: hydrograph.Various surrogates for the channel-forming discharge are often used to facilitate geomorphic analysis.The most common are bankfull discharge,a specific interval from the annual peak or partial duration frequency curves (e.g.,1.5-year peak discharge), and the effective discharge. Shape of a river or stream channel. Multiplicative factor in a mathematical equation. Sediment particles composed primarily of clay-sized materials which stick together due to their surface ionic charges. A two-dimensional (width and depth)section derived from measurement of lateral distance and stream bed elevation across a stream channel that is perpendicular to direction of the flow and is synonymous to a transect. A distance-elevation relationship depicting the shape of the ground surface or bed across the channel,perpendicular to the flow direction.The convention among hydraulic engineers and geomorphologists is to plot the relation from left to right bank looking downstream. Commonly the mean of the 15-minute discharges for the 24-hour period of a day. Trees or shrubs that lose their leaves seasonally. The general lowering of the surface of the land by erosive processes. The laying down of rock-forming material by any natural agent. The channel-forming discharge. The area of the shoreline periodically submerged and exposed to air during operations of a reservoir. Environmental Fluid Dynamics Code.A modeling program for water bodies. The incremental discharge that transports the largest percentage of bed material over the long-term.In self-adjusted,alluvial streams that are in a state of dynamic equilibrium with the imposed water and sediment supply,the magnitudes of the effective discharge and bankfull discharge are usually similar. Environmental protection agency. Equal width increment method.A sampling device is lowered and raised at a uniform rate through equally-spaced vertical increments in a river cross-section.It is a flow-integrated sampling technique employed by USGS. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Exceedance probability: FERC: Floodplain: Flood frequency: Flow duration curve: Froude Number: Geomorphology: Groundwater upwelling: Hydraulic Geometry: Ice dynamics: ILP: Incipient motion: Lateral migration: The probability that a random hydrologic event will exceed a given magnitude,expressed in percent.For flood frequency curves,the exceedance probability is the reciprocal of the recurrence interval. For example,the 100-year flood has a l-percent chance,on average,of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Federal energy regulatory commission. The relatively flat area adjoining a river channel that is constructed by vertical and lateral accretion processes of the river in the present climate and that is overtopped during times of high discharge when the bankfull capacity of the channel is exceeded. Synonymous with Recurrence Interval. The cumulative distribution function that represents the percentage of time that a specified discharge is equaled or exceeded.Flow duration curves are generally based on the daily mean discharge. A dimensionless ratio of inertial forces to gravitational forces in a flowing fluid.If the Froude number is less than 1.0 the flow is considered subcritical.If the Froude number is equal to 1.0 the flow is critical.For Froude numbers greater than 1.0,the flow is considered supercritical. The science that treats the general configuration of the earth's surface;the study of the classification,description,nature,origin, and development of landforms and their relationships to underlying structures and the history of geologic changes as recorded by these surface features. Groundwater driven springs that occur within water bodies.These help to regulate temperature and create thermal refugia for fish. A general term used to characterize the relationships between discharge and the channel morphology,hydraulics,and sediment transport in an alluvial channel.The relationships are usually expressed in the form of power functions of discharge as a function of width,depth,velocity. Processes involving formation and breakup of ice in riverine and reservoir settings and how these events influence surface water conditions. Integrated licensing process. The initiation of sediment movement in a stream. Movement of the channel in a direction that is generally perpendicular to the general down-valley flow direction due to erosion of the channel banks. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Levee: Local scour: Longitudinal stream profile: Manning's n: Mean annual discharge: Meander: Mesh: NMFS: Non-exceedance probability: Numerical stability: One-Dimensional (1D) Hydraulic Model: A natural or manmade earthen barrier along the edge of a stream, lake,or river.Land alongside rivers may be protected from flooding by levees. Erosion caused by an abrupt change of flow duration or velocity. The lowering of the channel bed from the removal of bed material due to turbulence caused by a an obstruction or hard point in the channel such as a bridge piers and abutments,rock jetties,and bedrock outcrop. A profile of elevation versus linear distance along a river reach, usually representing the minimum elevations in the channel cross- section,also known as the thalweg. The coefficient of roughness accounting for energy loss due to friction in a stream channel used in the Manning uniform flow equation (units are sec/ft1/3 in US customary system). The average or mean of the annual mean discharge for more than one water year or for the period of record. One of a series of sinuous curves or loops in the course of a mature stream,produced as the stream swings from side to side in flowing across its floodplain or shifts its course laterally toward the convex side of an original curve. A collection of interrelated polygons that define the spatial structure of a 2-or 3-dimensional model. National Marine Fisheries Service. The probability that a random hydrologic event that will not exceed a given magnitude,expressed in percent. Solutions in a numerical model typically require iterative techniques.A numerically-stable model will converge to a valid solution,while an unstable model will not. A computer model that solves the energy and momentum equations for fluid flow in only the downstream direction using a series of cross section profiles to describe the topography of the stream and empirical parameters (typically Manning's n-values)to describe energy losses due to hydraulic roughness.The model predicts water-surface profiles and related hydraulic conditions, including flow depth,top width and cross sectionally-averaged velocities.The term one-dimensional means that the model does not simulate cross stream and vertical components of the flow field associated with channel curvature,eddies and other two-and three- dimensional flow effects. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 5 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Point of zero flow: Pore water: Project: Q: Recurrence Interval: Regression calculations: Riparian: Riverine: RM: RSP: Scour hole: Sediment: Sediment continuity: Sediment transport: Sediment transport rating curve: Sediment yield: Shear stress: Shields parameter: Sinuosity: The elevation of channel bed in which zero discharge occurs in a stage-discharge relationship.May be abbreviated as PZF. Water that exists within the spaces of sediment. The Susitna-Watana Dam project. Variable typically used to represent the flow or discharge. The average time interval,over the long term,between occurrences of a hydrologic event.For example,the 100-year peak discharge is the instantaneous annual peak discharge that,on average,is equaled or exceeded once every 100 years. A statistical method used to predict the behavior of a dependent variable.The result is an equation representing the relation between selected values of one variable (x)and observed values of the other (y).It allows the prediction of the most probable values of x based on the measured values of y. Pertaining to or situated on the bank of a body of water,especially of a river. Located on or inhabiting the banks ofa river. Abbreviation for river mile.Distance along the Susitna River in miles,as measured from the mouth. Revised study plan. The depression formed by the removal of bed sediment by the action of moving water. Solid fragmental material transported and deposited by water, wind,or ice,e.g.,gravel,sand,silt,clay,till. The balance between the sediment supply,sediment transport capacity and the change in the sediment volume stored in a river reach. Movement of sediment in a water body. The relationship between the sediment transport rate and water discharge. The total sediment outflow from a drainage basin. That component of stress,force per unit area,which acts tangential to a plane through any given point in a body;any of the tangential components of the stream tensor. A number referred to as a dimensionless shear stress used in the determination of bed mobilization. The ratio of channel length to valley length. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 6 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Stage-discharge relationship: Suspended sediment: Suspended-sediment Concentration: Suspended sediment load: Thalweg: Total sediment discharge: Transect: Transect measurements: Trap efficiency: Turbidity: TWG: Two-dimensional (2D) Hydraulic Model: The relationship between the height of the water-surface above an arbitrary or known datum and the discharge at that water-surface. Very fine soil particles that remain in suspension in water for a considerable period of time without contact with the bottom.Such material remains in suspension due to the upward components of turbulence and currents and/or by suspension. The ratio of the mass of dry sediment in a water-sediment mixture to the mass of the water-sediment mixture.Typically expressed in milligrams of dry sediment per liter of water-sediment mixture. The portion of the total sediment discharge that moves in suspension in the water column. The line connecting the lowest points along a channel bed. The total quantity of sediment that passes a cross section of the river over a specified unit of time.The total sediment discharge is the composite of suspended sediment load and bed load.It is also the combination of the bed material load and wash load. A_two-dimensional (width and depth)section derived from measurement of lateral distance and stream bed elevation across a stream channel that is perpendicular to direction of the flow and is synonymous to a cross section.The convention among hydraulic engineers and geomorphologists is to plot the relation from left to right bank looking downstream. Measurements across a river,stream or other water body.Usually performed at right angles to flow.See transect. Proportion of sediment inflow to a stream reach or reservoir that is retained within that reach or reservoir. The cloudiness or haziness of a fluid caused by individual particles (suspended solids)that are generally invisible to the naked eye. Technical Workgroup. A computer model that solves the energy and momentum equations for fluid flow in two dimensions using a mesh that is defined by a series of nodes for which the horizontal coordinates and elevations are specified and empirical parameters describing hydraulic roughness (typically Manning's n-values)and turbulence losses (typically defined by eddy viscosity).The term two- dimensional means that the model predicts velocities in two directions (typically,depth-averaged in the horizontal plane)at each element and node within the model mesh;thus,the model can Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 6-1 Page 7 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan predict horizontal circulation patterns and cross-stream flow components.The model also predicts depths and other related hydraulic parameters. USFWS:U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service. USGS:U.S.Geological Survey. Wash Load:The portion of the total sediment discharge that is composed of particle sizes that are finer than those commonly found in the bed. This portion of the total sediment load depends on the supply of relatively fine-grained sediment from the upstream watershed and banks,and is generally carried at substantially less than the capacity of the stream. Width-depth ratio:The ratio of channel width to channel depth. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 6-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.HYDROLOGY-RELATED RESOURCES 7.1.Introduction Operation of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (Project)is expected to change the hydrology characteristics of the riverine portion of the drainage downstream of the proposed dam and the mainstem Susitna River reach inundated by the Project reservoir.Proposed Project operations will affect flow,water depth,surface water elevation,channel characteristics,and sediment regimes.The potential effects of the Project on ice formation,surface and groundwater temperature and quality,geomorphology,and other hydrologic characteristics need to be carefully evaluated as part of the licensing process,because changes to these parameters can affect aquatic and riparian habitat quality,which can in turn affect fish populations,riparian- dependent species,and roads,bridges,structures,and recreation opportunities along the river corridor. This section includes three study plans:Groundwater Study;Ice Processes Study;and Glacier Runoff Changes Study.The overall goal of the studies is to collect data to characterize baseline conditions for these hydrologic resources and evaluate potential Project effects.These results and analyses will be incorporated into the environmental assessment that will be conducted in support of AEA's FERC License Application.A glossary of hydrology-related terms is included in Attachment 7-1. 7.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied Construction and operation of the Project have the potential to alter the GW/SW interactions and ice processes in the Susitna River.Changes to these processes may affect channel morphology and aquatic habitat downstream of the Project site.Understanding existing conditions provides baseline information needed for predicting the likely extent and nature of potential changes to the river that may occur due to Project construction and operations. For any hydropower project it is important to understand the variability of the discharge.On- going retreat of the glaciers feeding the Upper Susitna drainage,along with the anticipated long life of the Project,means that glacial retreat could have significant impacts to the ecosystem, economics of the Project,and proposed mitigation measures.These impacts from natural changes to the environment may be additive to impacts from the proposed Project operations. The effects will be varied and could include the following: e Glacial retreat can affect runoff contribution from glaciers that could result in reduced summertime stream flows. e Decreased snowpack and glacial runoff,combined with increased air temperatures,could change the thermal regime of the Susitna River and affect fish and aquatic invertebrates. e Sedimentation changes could affect Project longevity and thus cost-benefit calculations for the reservoir.The rate of sedimentation is strongly tied to erosion processes,which may change as glacial ice becomes a smaller contribution to the total runoff. e An understanding of changes in the hydrologic regime (water timing,quantity,and quality)in combination with Project operations will inform post-construction monitoring Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN needs.This could include stream temperature measurements,assessment of fish habitat conditions under changing conditions,instream flow throughout the system to assess changes in flow contribution from tributaries,and stream temperature monitoring in the reservoir and downstream. 7.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives Water quality in the state is regulated by a number of state and federal regulations.This includes the federal Clean Water Act (CWA),and the State of Alaska Title 18,Chapter 70,of the Alaska Administrative Code (18 AAC 70).Aquatic resources including fish and their habitats,and wildlife resources,are generally protected by a variety of state and federal mandates.In addition, various land management agencies,local jurisdictions,and non-governmental interest groups have specific goals related to their land management responsibilities or special interests.These goals are expressed in various statutes,plans,and directives. In addition to providing information needed to characterize the potential Project effects,these water resources studies will inform the evaluation of possible conditions for inclusion in the Project license.These studies are designed to meet Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)licensing requirements and also to be relevant to recent,ongoing,and/or planned resource management activities by other agencies. 7.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants Input regarding the issues to be addressed in these studies has been provided by the TWG during workgroup meetings commencing in late 2011.During 2012,workgroup meetings were held in January,March,April,June,August,September,and October,during which resource issues were identified and discussed and objectives of the studies were defined.A one-and-one-half day field reconnaissance was also conducted in October 2012 with agency representatives to tour three of the proposed Focus Areas and discuss riparian,groundwater,and fish habitat sampling and modeling.Various agencies and other parties (USFWS,NMFS,ADF&G,etc.)provided written comments that have been considered and will be addressed in this plan.Summary tables of comments and responses from formal comment letters filed with FERC through November 14, 2012 are provided in Appendix 1.Copies of the formal FERC-filed comment letters are included in Appendix 2.In addition,a single comprehensive summary table of comments and responses from consultation,dated from PSP filing (July 16,2012)through release of Interim Draft RSPs, is provided in Appendix 3.Copies of relevant informal consultation documentation are included in Appendix 4,grouped by resource area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.Groundwater Study 7.5.1.General Description of the Proposed Study Project construction and operation will affect Susitna River flows downstream of the proposed dam;the degree of these effects will ultimately depend on final Project design and operations. Project operations will cause seasonal,daily,and hourly changes in Susitna River flows compared to existing conditions.The potential alteration in flows will influence downstream resources/processes,including fish and aquatic biota and their habitats,channel form and function including sediment transport,water quality,groundwater/surface water interactions (GW/SW),ice dynamics,and riparian and wildlife communities (AEA 2011).The overall goal of this study is to understand the effects of the Project on GW/SW interactions at multiple spatial and temporal scales as they relate to aquatic and floodplain species in the Susitna River. Additionally,one task is focused on evaluating the potential impacts to shallow groundwater well users in the Susitna River corridor.The study is one part of a set of interdisciplinary resource studies that are designed to evaluate the overall effects of Project operations.The Groundwater Study is specifically linked with both the Riparian Instream Flow Study and the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study since the ecological functionality of riparian and aquatic habitats can be directly influenced by GW/SW interactions.It is therefore important to understand whether and the extent to which Project operations may influence those interactions, and how those effects may impact riparian and aquatic habitats.The study will use existing information and data,as well as new data collected during this and other studies to provide an overall understanding of GW/SW interactions at both the watershed-and local-scales. The overall objectives of this study are as follows: 1.Synthesize historical and contemporary groundwater data available for the Susitna River groundwater and groundwater dependent aquatic and floodplain habitat,including that from the 1980s and other studies. 2.Use the available groundwater data to characterize large-scale geohydrologic process- domains/terrain of the Susitna River (e.g.,geology,topography,geomorphology,regional aquifers,shallow groundwater aquifers,GW/SW interactions). 3.Assess the potential effects of Watana Dam/Reservoir on groundwater and groundwater- influenced aquatic habitats in the vicinity of the proposed dam. 4.Work with other resource studies to map groundwater-influenced aquatic and floodplain habitat (e.g.,upwelling areas,springs,groundwater-dependent wetlands)within the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River including within selected Focus Areas (see Section 8.5.4.2.1.2). 5.Determine the GW/SW relationships of floodplain shallow alluvial aquifers within selected Focus Areas as part of the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.Determine GW/SW relationships of upwelling/downwelling in relation to spawning, incubation,and rearing habitat (particularly in the winter)within selected Focus Areas as part of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5). 7.Characterize water quality (e.g.,temperature,dissolved oxygen [DO],conductivity)of selected upwelling areas that provide biological cues for fish spawning and juvenile rearing,in Focus Areas as part of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5). 8.Characterize the winter flow in the Susitna River and how it relates to GW/SW interactions. 9.Characterize the relationship between the Susitna River flow regime and shallow groundwater users (e.g.,domestic wells). 7.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Groundwater/surface water interactions in the Susitna River watershed have been studied at different locations in the river and at different times.The lower Susitna River watershed is part of the geologic Susitna Basin (Kirschner 1994)(Figure 7.5-1).This region has generally been referred to as the lower Susitna River.The major physiographic regions of the Susitna watershed are described in Wahrhaftig (1994)and Kenneson (1980a,1980b),and include:a)the Alaska Range on the northern portion of the watershed,which also forms the watershed boundary in the headwaters of the watershed;b)the Talkeetna Mountains that cross the central portion of the watershed and result in physiographic features such as Devils Canyon and Watana Canyon;and c)the upper Matanuska Valley that covers the lower portion of the watershed and is bounded on the downstream end by Cook Inlet.The watershed-scale geology covers a range of highly metamorphic marine sedimentary formations,referred to as Flysch belts (Beikman 1994)(Figure 7.5-2).There are also younger volcanic deposits in the middle portion of the watershed.The Susitna River flows out of the Talkeetna Mountains in the vicinity of Talkeetna,where it then flows through the sedimentary Susitna Basin. Hydropower-related studies of the Susitna River watershed during the 1980s included observations and monitoring of GW/SW interactions.These studies focused on river habitats such as side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs that were determined to be important fish habitat.A large amount of physical hydrology data (e.g.,stage-discharge relationships,main stage versus upwelling discharge,piezometers),water quality data (e.g.,temperature),aquatic habitat,and other observations were reported for various study sites (see Section 8.5.2.1). Since the 1980s,various wells have been drilled for domestic water supply,mining exploration, oil and gas exploration,railroad operations,and other activities associated with resource development or evaluations in the watershed. The Groundwater Study is needed to first define the role that existing GW/SW interactions play in the development and sustainability of riparian communities proximal to the Susitna River,and how these interactions serve to create and maintain certain flow dependent biological cues (e.g., upwelling,downwelling,temperature moderation)used by salmonids for spawning,egg Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN incubation,and rearing.In addition,shallow groundwater wells used by residents (e.g.,domestic) may also be dependent on Susitna River GW/SW interactions. The information developed in the Groundwater Study will be used to define and evaluate existing GW/SW interactions as they relate to the ecology of riparian and aquatic habitats,and then use that information for assessing how Project construction and operation may alter those interactions and the corresponding riparian and aquatic habitats. 7.5.3.Study Area The study area related to groundwater processes includes primarily the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River that extends from RM 98.5 to RM 184,as well as portions of the Lower River Segment associated with domestic wells,and the lowermost portion of the Upper River Segment near the proposed dam site associated with potential groundwater changes relative to reservoir elevation change.The groundwater investigations in the Middle River Segment will include those designed to evaluate GW/SW interactions relative to riparian and aquatic habitats,as well as GW/SW interactions on domestic wells.The study in the Middle River Segment will be concentrated within a series of Focus Areas that have been identified for detailed investigation. As noted in Section 8.5.4.2.1.2.,the Focus Areas are intended to serve as specific geographic areas of the river that will be the subject of intensive investigation by multiple resource disciplines including Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6),Groundwater Study,Geomorphology studies (Sections 6.5 and 6.6), Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),and Water Quality studies (Sections 5.5 and 5.6).The Focus Areas were selected during an inter-disciplinary resource meeting that involved a systematic review of aerial imagery within each of the Geomorphic Reaches (MR-1 through MR-8)for the entire Middle River Segment of the river (see Table 8.5-5 in Section 8.5 for a listing of nested and tiered habitat mapping units,categories and definitions that are being used across resource disciplines).Overall,ten potential Focus Areas have been identified,(see Table 8.5-6 in Section 8.5)although GW/SW interactions will not be intensively studied at each of these ten Focus Areas.Rather,the studies will be limited to those Focus Areas exhibiting GW/SW interactions that relate to the ecology of riparian and/or aquatic habitats.These will be determined pending further evaluation of each of the Focus Areas. Determining how far downstream Project operational effects will extend will depend in part on the results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model (see Section 8.5.4.3),which is scheduled to be completed in Q1 2013 as well as results of the operations model (Section 8.5.4.3.2).The results of the Open-water flow routing model completed in Q1 2013 will be used to determine whether and the extent to which Project operations related to load-following as well as seasonal flow changes occur within a section of the Lower River Segment that includes all of geomorphic reach L1 and a portion of L2 (down to RM 75).Thus,an initial assessment of the downstream extent of Project effects will be developed in Q1 2013 with input from the Technical Workgroup. This assessment will include a review of information developed during the 1980s studies and study efforts initiated in 2012,such as sediment transport (Section 6.5),habitat mapping (Sections 6.5 and 9.9),operations modeling (Section 8.5.4.2.2),and the Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3).Nevertheless,the review of background information and large-scale geohydrologic process-domains/terrain of the Susitna River covers all three segments of the Susitna River.This overview is important for determining the boundary conditions affecting groundwater flow conditions along the entire river corridor. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.4.Study Methods The Groundwater Study is divided into nine study components related to the study objectives outlined above:(1)Existing Data Synthesis,(2)Geohydrologic Process-Domains and Terrain; (3)Watana Dam/Reservoir,(4)Upwelling/Springs Broad-Scale Mapping,(5)Riparian Vegetation Dependency on GW/SW Interactions,(6)Fish Habitat GW/SW Interactions,(7) Water Quality in Selected Habitats,(8)Winter GW/SW Interactions,and (9)Shallow Groundwater Users.Each of the components and its related study methods are explained further in the following subsections.The methods described represent standard approaches for summarizing data and assessing the physical/biological processes related to groundwater and aquatic habitat.Many of the study components represent contributory elements of other resourcestudies,for example the 4"component,Upwelling-Springs mapping is linked to both the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5),the Water Quality Study(Section 5.5)and the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5).Likewise,the 7" component,Water Quality is linked to both the Water Quality Study (Section 5.5)as well as Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5). 7.5.4.1.1.Existing Data Synthesis Data from prior Susitna River hydroelectric evaluations and other studies will be used to help develop a detailed reference source of available data to support the study elements and GW/SW interactions and processes related to potential Project operations and design.The addition of the historical data will help provide a more thorough review of the geohydrology of the watershed and relevant GW/SW interactions and how they may change under the various Project operational designs.The use of existing information will also help meet the need for detailed analysis under the proposed Project timeframe.The specific steps of the data synthesis include the following: e Identify existing reports and data from the 1980s licensing effort,prior studies,and more recent studies that relate to geology and geohydrology of the Susitna River watershed and GW/SW interactions and related aquatic habitat in the Susitna River.The reference search will include any information related to the past geohydrology studies,groundwater data and information related to main channel interactions,and impacts of winter ice cover and thickness on groundwater and surface-water interactions. e Identify similar studies,reports and data for hydroelectric projects in northern latitudes and cold climates.The literature search for this task will be coordinated with the University of Alaska Fairbanks -Geophysical Institute research library,which already contains extensive references to northern research basins and circumpolar literature sources. e Identify applicable geology,soils,and other geohydrologic references for the Susitna River watershed.Information will be used that is collected by the Geology and Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5).Water quality data and references will be provided by the Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5)for groundwater and surface water (Figure 7.5-3).Additional water quality data will be provided by the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)historical information reviews. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.4.1.1.1.Work Products The information and data obtained as part of this review will provide valuable background information for the Groundwater Study and will also be integrated into appropriate sections of the Initial Study Report (Initial Study Report).In addition,this component will provide: e A searchable and annotated bibliography of references and data sources for use by study teams and resource agencies.The annotated bibliography will be coordinated with the Alaska Resources Library and Information Services (ARLIS)resource library staff to follow their Susitna reference standards.The annotated bibliography will be provided to ARLIS as part of its Project resource collection program. 7.5.4.1.2.|Geohydrologic Process-Domains Project operations could influence GW/SW interactions at different locations along the river, from the proposed dam and reservoir location to below the Three Rivers Confluence.Site- specific groundwater studies will help characterize these influences for key aquatic habitat and riparian study areas within selected Focus Areas.This will be done by first defining the significant geohydrologic units in the Susitna basin that provide groundwater recharge to the mainstem and associated main channel,side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs and wetlands.ASTM standard D5979 "Standard Guide for Conceptualization and Characterization of Groundwater Systems”will be used to help define the geohydrologic units (ASTM 2008b). ASTM D6106 "Standard Guide for Establishing Nomenclature of Groundwater Aquifers”will be used to help establish the aquifer nomenclature and naming of geohydrologic features (ASTM 2010a).The geohydrologic units (e.g.,bedrock,alluvial)will then be related to geomorphologic and riparian mapping units (process-domain river segments)in coordination with the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)and Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)studies (Montgomery 1999).The geohydrologic units serve as a background layer to riparian process domains,similar to soil or geology map units.The definition of geohydrologic units is independent of riparian,fish or aquatic habitat definitions. The next step will be to define the groundwater regional scale relationship to local flow systems in the Middle River and Lower River segments and the relationship with the process-domain river segments.This will be based on methods used on a similar study for the Tanana watershed, as reported by Anderson (1970).ASTM standard D6106 will be used to help characterize the groundwater aquifers relevant to Project proposed operations.The final step will be identifying the relationship between the process-domain river segments and the planned Focus Areas.This will facilitate the expansion of the analysis of potential Project effects on GW/SW interactions from the Focus Areas individual study areas back to the larger process-domain river segments. 7.5.4.1.3.Work Products The results of this study component will be incorporated into appropriate sections of the Initial Study Report,to be filed with FERC in February 2014.The analysis presented will include: e A detailed description of the significant geohydrologic units in the Susitna basin that provide groundwater recharge to the mainstem and associated main channel,side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs and wetlands. e Descriptions and references defining geohydrologic units. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Relationship between geohydrologic map units and Focus Areas. e GIS map layers of the geology a geohydrologic units that are defined. e An approach for expanding the site specific Groundwater Study results from the Focus Areas to the process-domain river segments. 7.5.4.2.Watana Dam/Reservoir Project construction and operation may influence groundwater conditions downstream of the dam and the characteristics of the discontinuous permafrost conditions in the vicinity of Project operations.Variation in reservoir levels will result in transient head conditions on the upstream side of the dam.Project Engineering Feasibility Studies (ongoing),the Geotechnical Investigation Program and the Geology and Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5)will provide information to help evaluate the groundwater conditions in the Project area and evaluate the potential for groundwater impacts downstream of the dam.This will be accomplished by first evaluating engineering geology information from the dam and reservoir area.This information will be obtained from the Geology and Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5) and past geotechnical studies of the proposed dam location (Figure 7.5-3).This will include geologic well logs,pump tests,seismic data if available,permafrost information,and water level records.The analysis will require close coordination with engineering,as well as the Geomorphology and Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling studies in the Middle River Segment (Sections 6.5 and 6.6,respectively).This will be important for identifying and applying data from existing programs and determining the need for additional data collection. Based on the information,a description of the pre-Project groundwater conditions will be developed in the vicinity of the Watana Dam and Reservoir.This will include a characterization of known permafrost and bedrock hydrogeology in the Watana Dam vicinity.From this, conceptual GW/SW models will be developed that describe pre-Project conditions and post- Project conditions.These models will assist in identifying key potential groundwater flow pathways with the Project (e.g.,Deadman Creek drainage)and how the proposed dam construction may affect groundwater flow.The engineering design of the dam includes a goal of grouting all groundwater pathways that could be subject to bypass groundwater flow in the vicinity of the dam.The models will also be used to evaluate the potential changes in groundwater flow as a result of Project operations. The operation of the proposed reservoir will also result in riparian habitat loss due to permanent inundation below the low pool level.Existing riparian and aquatic habitat at the upstream end of the reservoir will be inundated for different durations between the low pool and high pool elevations.To evaluate this,field reconnaissance trips will be conducted to collect site specific data in late summer and early fall to help characterize the area.Mapping data from the Geomorphology Study (Section 5.5)and the Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Mapping Study (Section 11.5),along with existing aerial and LiDAR GIS information will will be used to develop maps and cross-sections of the study area.This combined information will be used to evaluate the timing and durations of inundation of the potential riparian and aquatic habitats in the area at the upstream end of the reservoir.Inundation timing and duration curves will be produced.Channel Profile and cross-sections will also be produced. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.4.2.1.Work Products Information provided from this study component will include: e Documentation of geologic cross-sections,groundwater data,photos,survey data, geotechnical information,geologic well log,and available seismic data. e Conceptual model of the geohydrology of the dam area,including potential pathways for groundwater flow in the area of the proposed Dam. e GIS map layers of the geology,and geohydrologic units and features near the proposed Watana Dam site. 7.5.4.3.|Upwelling /Springs Broad-Scale Mapping This study component is focused on determining the locations of areas in the Middle River Segment and upper portion of the Lower River Segment that are currently influenced by groundwater inflow.This will rely upon work products that will be developed from several other resource studies including the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)and the Water Quality Study (Section 5.5).These studies will collectively provide a suite of broad-scale maps that will be used in identifying areas of groundwater influence.This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the compilation,review and interpretation of the different mapping work products and will result in development of a GIS map layer that depicts groundwater influenced areas.This work will be closely coordinated with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study and Riparian Instream Flow Study.The identification of these areas will be important for understanding the spatial extent to which Project induced effects to existing GW/SW interactions may occur,and from a planning perspective,will help inform the selection of specific Focus Areas warranting detailed groundwater study. This study will rely on the following activities and work products that will be provided from other resource studies: e Aerial and global positioning system (GPS)mapping of winter open leads,in Q1 and Q2 of 2013,and 2014 as completed by the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)(Figure 7.5-3). Open leads in the Middle River Segment will be compared with the location of open leads documented in 1984-1985,as appropriate.To provide some context,air temperatures from 1984-1985 will be compared with air temperatures measured during the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 winter seasons from the closest long-term monitoring site with data covering both periods.Geographic Information System (GIS)coverages of open leads will be developed.The Groundwater Study will focus on the entire Middle River Segment and the upper portion of the Lower River Segment upstream from RM 84 (located near USGS Gage on Susitna River at Sunshine). e Aerial photography and aerial videography of the ice-free period showing turbid and clear water habitat that was completed in Q3 and Q4 2012 as part of the Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5)and Characterization of Aquatic Habitats Study (Section 9.9).The aerial photography and videography will be used in part to document turbid and clear water (i.e.,groundwater-influenced)habitats.Clear water inflow from side drainages (e.g.,Portage Creek)will be separated from that dominated by groundwater recharge (upwelling). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-9 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Thermal Infrared Imagery (TIR)of the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River as provided from a pilot study to be completed during Q1 2013 as part of Water Quality Study (Section 5.5).In coordination with the Fish and Aquatics Studies (Section 9)a determination will be made about the value of the TIR and whether additional imaging data should be collected in the Lower River Segment or in other portions of the Middle River Segment.If TIR can successfully identify spatially discrete areas of groundwater upwelling as validated through on-the-ground confirmatory surveys,then these areas can be mapped within the entire river segment. e Observational data concerning GW/SW interactions collected as part of the Habitat Suitability Criteria (HSC)studies associated with spawning and/or rearing fish conducted under the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5.4.5.1.1.4)as well as fish tracking studies completed as part of the Salmon Escapement Study (Section 9.7).In these studies,where aggregations of spawning or rearing fish are observed,temperature probes test whether or not upwelling is present by using temperature profiling techniques (e.g.,measuring the vertical temperature profile or measuring the temperature along the bottom of the river along a transect). e Characterize the identified upwelling/spring areas at a reconnaissance level to determine if the identified upwelling/spring areas using the methods outlined above are likely either to be (1)main flow/stage dependent,(2)regional/upland groundwater dependent,or (3) mixed influence. 7.5.4.3.1.Work Products This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the compilation,review and interpretation of the different mapping work products and will result in development of a GIS map layer depicting groundwater upwelling and influenced areas.Results will be provided in appropriate sections of the Initial Study Report.Information resulting from this study component will include the following: e GIS map layer of upwelling and groundwater influenced areas. e Analysis of the identified upwelling/spring areas to determine if they are (1)main flow/stage dependent,(2)regional/upland groundwater dependent,or (3)of mixed influence. 7.5.4.4.Riparian Vegetation Dependency on Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions This study component is directly linked to the Riparian Instream Flow Study and associated with a number of other multidisciplinary resource studies that will be jointly working on the Focus Areas including the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (RSP-Section 8.5),Geomorphology Study (Section 6.5,Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),and Water Quality Study (Section 5.5). Figure 7.5-3 shows the relationship between these studies and the Groundwater Study.The overall goal of this study component is to collect information and data to define GW/SW interactions and relationships to riparian community health and function at a number of Focus Area locations so results can be used to scale up to other locations in the river.These Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-10 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN relationships will then allow for a determination of how Project operations may influence GW/SW interactions and the riparian communities at unmeasured areas. This will be accomplished in part through development of physical groundwater models (Montgomery 1999)at Focus Areas applicable for evaluating riparian community structure. Physical models,including surface water hydraulic (1-D and 2-D),geomorphic reach analyses, GW/SW interactions,and ice processes will be integrated such that physical process controls of riparian vegetation recruitment and establishment can be quantitatively assessed (see Section 8.6) under both existing conditions and under different Project operations. Empirical data will be collected at the Focus Areas to define GW/SW interactions.This will include the use of piezometers,stage recorders,thermographs,dissolved oxygen recorders and selected water quality meters (conductivity,pH,turbidity).These data will be collected along linear transect arrays of groundwater wells,piezometers,and stage gages.Wells will be placed to help describe the hydrologic conditions at internal boundaries (such as sloughs,side channels) and at varying distances from these boundaries to help measure the time lag in groundwater level response to changes in surface water stage.Well locations will take into account the riparian vegetation mapping units.Some wells will be placed at boundaries of the groundwater model simulation domains to provide model boundary input data,or validation data sets.Additional information,such as unfrozen volumetric soil moisture content and soil temperature profiles will be measured to help understand the characteristics of active freeze/thaw processes and moisture transfer from infiltration and underlying dynamic groundwater tables in the soil horizon critical to riparian root zones.Table 7.5-1 shows a listing of the data collection system sensors and measurements.The data will be used to quantify,and model,the relationship between floodplain shallow surface aquifers and floodplain plant community types. Precipitation data will also be measured at the Focus Areas.Shielded summer precipitation gages will be installed in early spring 2013 in time for the 2013 summer season.This information will be compared with the recent update to the statewide precipitation evaluation and new index maps.Additionally,precipitation information collected by the Glacier and Runoff Changes Study (Section 7.7)will be incorporated into the precipitation analysis for the Focus Areas. In groundwater wells and surface water measurement stations,the minimum recording interval for water levels,temperature,and other parameters will be 15 minutes.There will be some locations close to surface water sources where stage changes are expected to be rapid;for these areas,data collection intervals may be reduced down to one minute.In all cases,hourly maximum,minimum,and average values will be recorded,as well as daily statistics.The data collection intervals are intended to provide data for studying and understanding transient pressure pulses in the GW/SW systems and to provide both input and calibration data sets for groundwater model development and simulations goals.The current network of surface flow gaging stations started in the summer of 2012 will continue operation through 2014.Technical evaluations will be made in the summer of 2014 about which gaging stations need to be operated during Q4 2014 and Q1 2015.Groundwater monitoring programs will begin on a small scale in winter 2012-2013 and increase during the summer of 2013.The monitoring of groundwater wells will continue into 2014.At that time,a subset of the groundwater wells may be monitored for the winter of 2014-2015. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-11 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Monitoring wells will be surveyed with a combination of RTK survey methods and optical level loop methods.This will be done at least two times a year,or more frequently if well movements are recorded.Pressure transducer measurements will be verified with manual measurements at least monthly during summer months,and three to four times during winter periods.Both calibration (for determining offsets)and verification water levels will be collected.Calibration checks will be performed on conductivity and temperature sensors before field installations,and field calibration checks will be performed monthly during summer months.Calibration checks during winter months will be performed at least once during the mid-winter period when safe access and weather conditions allow,and before spring break-up and fall freeze-up. The Groundwater Study will provide a time series of measured and simulated groundwater levels and will provide summary statistics needed for developing plant-response curves (see Riparian Instream Flow Study,Section 8.6).The groundwater and surface water field measurements for continuously monitored stations will be 15 minutes or less.Model simulations will also be 15 minutes or less,based on analysis of modeling results.This information will produce time series data sets from which water level summary statistics can be calculated for a range of analysis objectives,such as running averages in hourly and daily increments. Where appropriate,MODFLOW (Feinstein et al.2012;Maddock et al.2012;USGS 2005,2012) GW/SW interaction models of floodplain shallow alluvial aquifer and surface water relationships will be developed.The selection of MODFLOW modeling package will utilize ASTM D6170 "Standard Guide for Selecting a Groundwater Modeling Code”as the guideline for documenting the code selection process (ASTM 2010b).MODFLOW GW/SW interaction models will be used to model GW/SW relationships using empirical monitoring data collected at the Focus Areas. Similar approaches to understanding GW/SW interactions have been reported in Nakanishi and Lilly 1998.ASTM standard D6170 will also be used to help determine the model code and approach used for analysis (ASTM 2008b).ASTM standard D5981 will be used to help develop calibration goals and procedures for groundwater modeling efforts (ASTM 2008c).Both generic and interpretative models will be used to help improve process understanding and design of data collection field programs,and for developing the framework for predictive models that will simulate Project effects.The application of snowmelt and precipitation runoff stage-change events will be used to develop and calibrate groundwater models,and independent hydrologic events will be used to validate the models.Thus,a year with snowmelt peak and three precipitation peaks may provide three peaks for model development and calibration and one event to validate the model simulation capabilities.Figure 7.5-4 illustrates the use of snowmelt or precipitation peaks for collection of data for hydrologic model (surface and groundwater) development,calibration,and validation.The daily discharge for the last three years is shown to illustrate how future hydrologic data will be used with the modeling development planned for the study.Data from the 2013-2014 study periods will be used to provide information similar to that provided for the period of record shown in the figure.The interaction between the river stage changing and adjacent groundwater is shown in Figure 7.5-5.An example of GW/SW interactions is shown in Figure 7.5-6 for the Chena River and a line of adjacent wells installed at varying distances from the river up to 8,800 feet away (Nakanishi and Lilly 1998).The Chena River stage is shown on the left,with groundwater levels show for wells that are increasing distances away from the Chena River.The spring snowmelt peal and two primary precipitation peaks in the Chena River can be seen in each of the groundwater hydrographs shown.The pressure response to the river stage changes is illustrated by each of the groundwater hydrographs.The three main stage peaks on the Chena River are shown in each well out to the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-12 December 2012 REviSED STUDY PLAN farthest well 8,800 feet away.Figure 7.5-7 illustrates the application of river and groundwater levels being used as boundary conditions for a two-dimensional groundwater flow model. Example groundwater,surface-water,and meteorological data collection networks for a typical Focus Area is shown in Figure 7.5-8.This figure illustrates wells placed along transect locations,along surface-water hydrologic boundaries,and various riparian zones.The same approach will be used for the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study as displayed in Figure 7.5- 9. 7.5.4.4.1.Work Products This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the installation,data collection efforts and analysis of the GW/SW interactions and will support the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6).Results will be provided in the Initial Study Report,to be filed with FERC February 2014.The study component will result in the following work products: e Data collection networks and stations metadata,including data collection standards and methods,wiring diagrams,programs,horizontal and vertical survey control network data. e Groundwater,surface water,meteorological,geotechnical (soil temperature,soil moisture)data sets. e Groundwater modeling archived flow models,model input and calibration data sets and files,groundwater model documentation. 7.5.4.5.|Aquatic Habitat Groundwater/Surface-Water Interactions The same general approach as described above for the riparian component will be used for evaluating GW/SW interactions within aquatic habitats as part of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)(see Figure 7.5-9).Hydraulic unsteady flow routing will help identify water surface elevations.The mainstem flow routing model will serve to predict water surface elevations under different flow conditions longitudinally throughout the length of the river below the Watana Dam site (RM 184).The model will thus be able to predict water surface elevations (WSEs)proximal to the Focus Areas noted above,as well as other areas identified as being groundwater-influenced.The WSEs empirically measured in side channels,sloughs,and groundwater wells installed in the floodplain at the Focus Areas can therefore be related to mainstem WSEs,allowing for a detailed analysis of spatial and temporal changes in WSE under different operating conditions,including base load and load-following scenarios. Habitat Suitability Criteria (HSC)and a Habitat Suitability Index (HSI)will be developed that include groundwater-related parameters (upwelling/downwelling).Development of HSC and HSI will follow the general procedures outlined in the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5).Parameters specific to groundwater that will be measured,where appropriate, include turbidity,evidence of upwelling/downwelling currents,substrate characteristics,and water temperature.Other parameters may also be included.These parameters will be incorporated into the development of HSC type curves that reflect utilization of these parameters by fish.This work will be closely coordinated with the fish studies (Section 9). Mainstem,side channel,slough habitat models will be developed that incorporate GW/SW related processes (main channel head,upwelling/downwelling)(see Figure 8.5-3 in Section 8.5, Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study).An integral part of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Flow Study will be development of habitat-specific models that can be used in evaluating flow (and WSE)relationships between the mainstem river and other habitat types (including those influenced by groundwater)under different operational scenarios.These types of models (e.g., flow routing)are generally described in more detail in the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (see Section 8.5). The groundwater aquatics study is coordinating with both instream flow and fisheries studies on the selection of Focus Areas.The groundwater study will be measuring both horizontal and vertical head gradients through combinations of nested wells installed at different depths and shallow wells installed in surface water habitat areas to measure the gradients between surface water sources and underlying groundwater conditions.Details on the measurement of fluxes are described in Section 7.4.5.These gradients will be compared with simulated gradients from groundwater/surface water models under the field conditions measured in 2013 and 2014 and compared with Project operation scenarios.Example groundwater,surface-water,and meteorological data collection networks for a typical Focus Area is shown in Figure 7.5-9.This figure illustrated wells placed along transect locations,along surface-water hydrologic boundaries,and various riparian zones.The same approach will be used for evaluating aquatic habitats within Focus Areas,with less of a focus on riparian zones and more on surface-water habitat (main channel,side channel,side slough,upload slough)features.The application of 3D and 2D groundwater flow models is illustrated in this same example in Figure 7.5-10.This figure also shows the addition of several wells to provide water-level information for boundary conditions at several of the groundwater model boundaries.Figure 7.5-11 illustrates some of the interaction that may take place between groundwater and surface water.The top figure shows a typical cross across the floodplain,main channel,side channel or slough and island.Example fluctuation surface water levels and groundwater tables are illustrated.The fluctuations driven by river station during the summer will be transient and vary each year.The lower portion of the figure shows how the Susitna River at Gold Creek stage has varied between 2005 and 2009. These fluctuations in stage will create fluctuations in water table levels which can be used to help define geohydrologic properties.This example illustrates a number of concepts that will be applied to all of the geohydrologic cross-sections and resulting data stations supporting the riparian and aquatic analysis efforts. The Groundwater Study will be responsible for the coordination and collection of information, analysis and reporting of final deliverables for this study element. 7.5.4.5.1.Work Products This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the installation,data collection efforts and analysis of the GW/SW interaction important for support of the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5).Results will be provided in the Initial Study Report,to be filed with FERC in February 2014.Information provided will include the following: e Data collection networks and stations metadata,including data collection standards and methods,wiring diagrams,programs,horizontal and vertical survey control network data, well logs. e Groundwater,surface water,meteorological,geotechnical (soil temperature,soil moisture)data sets. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-14 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Groundwater modeling archived flow models,model input and calibration data sets and files,groundwater model documentation. 7.5.4.6.|Water Quality in Selected Habitats Water quality characteristics are likely to vary with GW/SW interactions and potential impacts due to proposed Project operations.Project water quality activities will be coordinated with the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6),Geomorphology studies (Sections 6.5 and 6.6),and Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5).The work under this objective will be accomplished by the Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5).The following methods will be used in coordination with the indicated studies to understand water quality characteristics and the variation between groundwater and surface water.This will help evaluate the potential changes in water quality related to GW/SW interactions and potential impacts related to proposed Project operations. At selected instream flow,fish population,and riparian study sites,basic water chemistry (temperature,DO,conductivity,pH,turbidity,redox potential)data will be collected that define habitat conditions and characterize GW/SW interactions (Section 5.5).For example,where possible,differences between groundwater representative of regional groundwater conditions, groundwater in the mixing zone at the GW/SW interface (slough or river bed),and surface water sources (sloughs and side channels)will be characterized. Water quality differences will be characterized between a set of key productive aquatic habitat types (three to five sites)and a set of non-productive habitat types (three to five sites)that are related to the absence or presence of groundwater upwelling to improve the understanding of the water quality differences and related GW/SW processes.For example,results from fish population and habitat studies (Sections 9.6 and 9.9)will be used and coordinated with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)to select paired productive and non-productive habitats. 7.5.4.6.17.Work Products This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the installation,data collection efforts and analysis of the GW/SW -waterquality interactions important for support of the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5).Results will be provided in the Initial Study Report,to be filed with FERC February 2014.Information provided will include the following: e Data collection networks and stations metadata,including data collection standards and methods,wiring diagrams,programs,horizontal and vertical survey control network data, well logs. e Groundwater,surface water,meteorological,geotechnical (streambed temperature)data sets,including water quality meter and sensor calibration and calibration validation data and forms. e Groundwater modeling archived flow models,model input and calibration data sets and files,groundwater model documentation. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-15 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Water quality differences between a set of key productive aquatic habitat types (three to five sites)and a set of non-productive habitat types (three to five sites)that are related to the absence or presence of groundwater upwelling. 7.5.4.7.|Winter Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions Winter GW/SW interactions are critical to aquatic habitat functions.Proposed Project operations will have an impact on the winter flow conditions of the mainstem and side channels and sloughs.The collection of hydrologic conditions (i.e.,water levels,discharge,ice conditions)is critical to understanding current winter flow conditions and evaluating the potential impacts of Project operations. Water levels/pressure will be measured at the continuous gaging stations on the Susitna River during winter flow periods.Continuous gaging stations will be measuring water levels and temperature as part of the instream flow studies.Water levels measured during full ice cover are generally referred to as water pressure and represent the hydrostatic head of the river.The Project is expected to increase average monthly flows in the Susitna River during the winter months,and this may have an impact on GW/SW interactions during that season. Winter discharge measurements will help identify key sections of the mainstem with groundwater baseflow recharge to the river (upwelling).Winter discharge will be measured as part of the instream flow study (Section 8.5)and in coordination with U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)winter measurement efforts at USGS gaging stations to identify winter gaining and losing reaches.These field activities will be closely coordinated with the Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6). In Focus Areas,channel/slough temperature profiles will be measured to help characterize the GW/SW interactions and temporal variations over the winter flow season. The Groundwater Study will be responsible for the coordination and collection of information, analysis and reporting of final deliverables for this study element. 7.5.4.7.1.Work Products This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the data collection efforts and analysis of the winter GW/SW interactions important for support of the Fish and Aquatic Instream Flow Study (see Section 8.5).Results will be provided in the Initial Study Report,to be filed with FERC February 2014.Information provided will include the following: e Groundwater,surface water,meteorological,geotechmical (streambed temperature,)data sets,including water quality meter and sensor calibration and calibration validation data and forms. 7.5.4.8.|Shallow Groundwater Users There are a number of groundwater wells located in the Susitna River floodplain that have demonstrated the interconnections between groundwater and surface water.The influence of proposed Project operations could change water levels and water quality in water supply wells. A majority of the wells are expected to be private homeowner wells.The methods listed below Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-16 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN will be used to evaluate the potential impacts of the Project on water supply wells in the area under potential impact by the Project: e The Alaska Department of Natural Resources Well Log Tracking System (WELTS)and the USGS Groundwater Site Inventory (GWSI)Database will be used to map domestic and other water supply wells along the Susitna River downstream of the proposed Watana Reservoir. e At a reconnaissance level,wells will be stratified by potential to be affected by the Susitna River flow regime (high,medium,and low)using factors such as depth and proximity to the Susitna River.A small number of representative wells will be selected with high potential to be affected by the Susitna River flow regime and well levels and river stage will be monitored.River stage information will come from correlations with the gaging stations measuring water levels that are part of the instream flow studies. e Based on the results from the well monitoring and an analysis of potential Project operations flow data,the potential effects of the Project will be determined on shallow groundwater wells and it will be determined if additional monitoring of wells may be appropriate.ASTM method D6030 will be used to help address groundwater vulnerability (ASTM 2008a). e The data from this study element will also be used for the other study elements,where appropriate,to help extend the application of the data and analysis regarding shallow groundwater well users to other Groundwater Study objectives. The Groundwater Study will be responsible for the coordination and collection of information, analysis and reporting of final deliverables for this study element. 7.5.4.8.1.Work Products This component of the Groundwater Study will provide for the installation,data collection efforts and analysis of the GW/SW interaction important for private groundwater well users. Results will be provided in the Initial Study Report,to be filed with FERC February 2014. Information provided will include the following: e Data collection stations metadata,including data collection standards and methods, wiring diagrams,programs,horizontal and vertical survey control network data,well logs. e Groundwater and surface water data sets. 7.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice The proposed study methodology was cooperatively developed with the assistance of science and technical experts from state and federal management agencies.Many of these technical experts have experience in multiple FERC licensing and relicensing proceedings.The methods for data collection,data analysis,modeling,and interpretation are consistent with common scientific and professional practices.ASTM and USGS standards and practices will be used with each study component,as applicable.The scope of each of the studies is consistent with common approaches used for other FERC proceedings and reference specific protocols and survey methodologies,as appropriate. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-17 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.6.Schedule The groundwater study will occur during the 2013 and 2014 study period (Table 7.5-2). Coordination with other studies will occur throughout the licensing period (Figures 7.5-3,7.5-4, 7.5-5).The collection of information for the existing data synthesis will be initiated at the beginning of the study period and be completed by the end of summer 2013.The definition and development of geohydrologic process domains and terrains will take place in the same time period to help guide other study design and field efforts during the summer of 2013. Winter focus studies will begin with existing data collection activities started in 2012 and increase with the installation of data collection systems in study sites in early summer 2013. Data from water quality,instream flow,and other studies will be provided after data quality assurance review has been completed,normally within a month of data collection in the field. Coordination with each of the associated studies providing data will occur at the beginning of the study period and be part of the schedules for each study.The Initial Study Report and the Updated Study Report will be issued February 2014 and February 2015,respectively.Updates on study progress will be presented at Technical Workgroup meetings,to be held quarterly during 2013 and 2014. 7.5.7.Relationship to Other Studies The Groundwater Study is designed to interact and support a number of other studies.It is providing data,references,process understanding on groundwater/surface-water interactions to help determine the potential effects of Project operations on various natural resources,such as riparian and aquatic,and the public,primarily for shallow groundwater well users.The following sections describe the relationship of each study element to other environmental and engineering studies.Some of the study elements also support other Groundwater Study elements. 7.5.7.1.Existing Data Synthesis The existing data synthesis will coordinate and use data from other studies,such as Geology and Soils Characterization (Section 4.5),Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5), Geomorphology (Section 6.5),Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),and Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)but will not be dependent on the other studies as the primary focus of the synthesis is geohydrology information.The synthesis will coordinate with the major library networks (ARLIS and UAF Geophysical Institute Library),the Alaska Department of Natural Resources,Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys,and USGS information sources and information specialists.The products of this study element can be used by all study groups as needed,but are designed primarily to support the additional Groundwater Study objectives.These independencies are illustrated in Figure 7.5-3. 7.5.7.2._Geohydrologic Process-Domains and Terrain The geohydrologic process domain study element will primarily obtain its data from sources found in the data synthesis and statewide data sources at Alaska Department of Natural Resources and UAF-GINA (Figure 7.5-3).The products generated for this study element will be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-18 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN available to all studies,but will primarily be needed by Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),and Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6). 7.5.7.3.Watana Dam/Reservoir The study objectives for the proposed Watana Dam area will require coordination with the Engineering Feasibility Studies (ongoing)Geotechnical Investigation Program and the Geology and Soils Characterization Study (Section 4.5)(Figure 7.5-3).The study will coordinate any data collection activities with these two projects.Geotechnical drilling and potential well installations will be under the engineering studies.The products from this study element will be available to all studies,but no studies have specific dependencies on the information.The information will support the general assessments of aquatic habitat and potential Project effects. 7.5.7.4.Upwelling /Springs Broad-Scale Mapping This study element has specific dependencies on Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5),Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)and Fish and the Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5) (Figure 7.5-3).The Groundwater Study will use the observations of open leads,water quality (temperature,conductivity),thermal imaging,winter discharge measurements,hydrologic data collection network data for the broad-scale mapping of the groundwater discharge (upwelling) areas.This information will primarily be used by Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),and Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)for habitat assessment and upscaling of Focus Area studies to unmeasured sites (see Section 8.5.4.7). 7.5.7.5.Riparian Vegetation Dependency on Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions This study element will have a number of active dependencies to other projects,primarily to the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)(Figure 7.5-3).Other important studies providing data input to this study element are Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5),Geomorphology (Section 6.5),Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study (Section 6.6),Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),and Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5). Coordination with the Riparian Instream Flow Study will be ongoing,with data collection and analysis activities conducted jointly by both studies.Riparian study leads will provide priorities and input to the groundwater leads throughout the project.The primary user of the products from this study element is the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6). 7.5.7.6.|Aquatic Habitat Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions This study element will have a number of active dependencies to other projects,primarily to the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)(Figure 7.5-3).Other important studies providing data input to this study element are Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5), Geomorphology (Section 6.5),Fluvial Geomorphology Modeling Below Watana Dam Study (Section 6.6),Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6),and Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6). Coordination with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study will be ongoing,with data collection and analysis activities conducted jointly by both studies.Aquatics study leads will provide priorities and input to the groundwater leads throughout the Project.This study element will closely coordinate between the riparian and aquatics studies on activities in the Focus Areas Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-19 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN where data collection networks will be optimized to serve the objectives of both studies and limit unneeded duplication.The primary user of the products from this study element is the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5). 7.5.7.7.Water Quality in Selected Habitats This study element will have a number of active dependencies to other projects,primarily to the Baseline Water Quality Study (Section 5.5)and Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)and the Study of Fish Distribution and Abundance in the Middle and Lower Sustina River (Section 9.6)(Figure 7.5-3).Coordination with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study will be ongoing,with data collection and analysis activities conducted jointly by both studies. Aquatics study leads will provide priorities and input to the groundwater leads throughout the Project.This study element will closely coordinate between the chemistry and aquatics studies on activities in the Focus Areas where data collection networks will be optimized to serve the objectives of both studies and limit unneeded duplication.The primary user of the products from this study element is the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study study (Section 8.5). 7.5.7.8.Winter Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions This study element will have a number of active dependencies to other studies,primarily to the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)(Figure 7.5-3)and Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6).This study element will also involve coordination with USGS winter data collection efforts.Coordination with the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study will be ongoing,with data collection and analysis activities conducted jointly by both studies.Aquatics study leads will provide priorities and input to the groundwater leads throughout the Project. The primary user of the products from this study element is the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)and the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6). 7.5.7.9.Shallow Groundwater Users This study element will coordinate with Alaska Department of Natural Resources (ADNR)for identifying shallow groundwater well users.The ADNR-WELTS database and USGS GWSI database will be used to help identify the number of shallow groundwater well users and technical details of the wells and water use (Figure 7.5-3).The products from this study element will also be used to help in the analysis objectives for other Groundwater Study elements. 7.5.8.Level of Effort and Cost The level of effort for the groundwater study objectives is distributed in this and other studies. The groundwater study costs reflect the analysis of data collected in this and other studies.The study objectives and associated primary costs associated with each objective for the 2013-2014 study period are as follows: e 7.5.4.1 -Existing Data Synthesis o Groundwater Study e 7.5.4.2 -Geohydrologic Process-Domains and Terrain o Groundwater Study Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-20 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.4.3 -Watana Dam/Reservoir o Groundwater Study-analysis only o Engineering,Geology (Section 4.5),Geomorphology (Sections 6.5,6.6)studies include field and data collection costs 7.5.4.4 -Upwelling /Springs Broad-Scale Mapping o Groundwater Study--analysis only o Ice Processes (Section 7.6),Geomorphology (Sections 6.5,6.6),Instream Flow (Section 8.5),and Water Quality (Sections 5.5,5.6)studies include field and data collection costs 7.5.4.5 -Riparian Vegetation Dependency on Groundwater /Surface Water Interactions o Groundwater Study-field installation of groundwater wells and data collection stations and instrumentation,coordination,and analysis o Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)includes field and data collection costs 7.5.4.6 -Fish Habitat Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions o Groundwater Study -field installation of groundwater wells and data collection stations and instrumentation in combination with Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),coordination and analysis o Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)also includes field and data collection costs 7.5.4.7 -Water Quality in Selected Habitats o Groundwater Study-coordination and analysis only,some sensors in coordination with riparian and instream flow study elements o Water Quality (Sections 5.5,5.6),Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (Section 8.5) studies include field and data collection costs 7.5.4.8 -Winter Groundwater /Surface Water Interactions o Groundwater Study-field data collection,coordination and analysis o Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)also includes some field and data collection costs 7.5.4.9 -Shallow Groundwater Users o Groundwater Study The groundwater study costs are estimated to be about $2,000,000 beyond the data collection costs allocated throughout the studies mentioned above.The final cost will be determined by the final number of Focus Areas that are selected and included in the riparian and instream flow studies.The instrumentation,wells installation,and analysis could be $250,000 depending on the scale of each site. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-21 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.9.Literature Cited Anderson,G.S.1970.Hydrologic reconnaissance of the Tanana Basin,central Alaska,4 sheets, scale 1:1,000,000. Anderson,M.P.and W.W.Woessner.1992.Applied Groundwater Modeling:Simulation of flow and advective transport.Academic Press,372 pp. ASTM.2008a.D6030 -96(2008)Standard Guide for Selection of Methods for Assessing Groundwater or Aquifer Sensitivity and Vulnerability,ASTM,9 pp. ASTM.2008b.D5979 -96(2008)Standard Guide for Conceptualization and Characterization of Groundwater Systems ASTM,19 pp. ASTM.2008c.D5981 -96(2008)Standard Guide for Calibrating a Groundwater Flow Model Application,ASTM,19 pp. ASTM.2010a.D6106 -97(2010)Standard Guide for Establishing Nomenclature of Groundwater Aquifers,ASTM,17 pp. ASTM.2010b.D6170 -97(2010)Standard Guide for Selecting a Groundwater Modeling Code, ASTM,19 pp. Beikman,H.M.1994.Geologic map of Alaska.Jn Plafker,George,and Berg,H.C.,The Geology of Alaska:Geological Society of America,1 sheet,scale 1:2,500,000. Feinstein,D.T.,Fienen,M.N.,Kennedy,J.L.,Buchwald,C.A.,and Greenwood,M.M.2012. Development and application of a groundwater/surface-water flow model using MODFLOW-NWT for the Upper Fox River Basin,southeastern Wisconsin:U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012-5108,124 p. Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture.1984.Lower Susitna River Sedimentation Study Project Effects on Suspended Sediment Concentration,prepared for Alaska Power Authority, June. Jorgenson,M.T.,J.E.Roth,M.Emers,S.F.Schlentner,D.K.Swanson,E.R.Pullman,J.S. Mitchell,and A.A.Stickney.2003.An ecological land survey in the Northeast Planning Area of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska,2002.ABR,Inc.,Fairbanks,AK.128 PP. Kenneson,D.G.1980a.Surficial Geology of the Susitna-Chulitna River Area,Alaska,Part 1: Text,Susitna Basin Planning Background Report.Prepared for Land and Resource Planning Section Division of Research and Development,Alaska Department of Natural Resources,March 1980.35 pp. Kenneson,D.G.1980b.Surficial Geology of the Susitna-Chulitna River Area,Alaska,Part 2: Maps,Susitna Basin Planning Background Report.Prepared for Land and Resource Planning Section Division of Research and Development,Alaska Department of Natural Resources,March 1980.27 pp. Kirschner,C.E.1994.Sedimentary basins in Alaska.Jn Plafker,George,and Berg,H.C.,The Geology of Alaska:Geological Society of America,1 sheet,scale 1:2,500,000. Locke,A.,C.Stalnaker,S.Zellmer,K.Williams,H.Beecher,T.Richards,C.Robertson,A. Wald,A.Paul and T.Annear.2008.Integrated Approaches to Riverine Resource Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-22 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Management:Case Studies,Science,Law,People,and Policy.Instream Flow Council, Cheyenne,WY.430 pp/ Maddock,Thomas,III,Baird,K.J.,Hanson,R.T.,Schmid,Wolfgang,and Ajami,Hoori.2012. RIP-ET:A riparian evapotranspiration package for MODFLOW-2005:U.S.Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6-A39,76 p. Montgomery,D.1999.Process domains and the river continuum.Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35 (2):397-410. Nakanishi,A.S.,and Lilly,M.R.1998.Estimate of aquifer properties by numerically simulating ground-water/surface-water interactions,Fort Wainwright,Alaska:U.S.Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 98-4088,27 p. Rosenberry,D.O.,and LaBaugh,J.W.2008.Field techniques for estimating water fluxes between surface water and ground water:U.S.Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 4-D2. Sandone,G.,and C.C.Estes.1984.Evaluations of the effectiveness of applying infrared imagery techniques to detect upwelling ground water.Chapter 10 in:C.C.Estes,and D.S. Vincent-Lang,editors.Aquatic habitat and instream flow investigations,May-October 1983.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Report No.3.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document #1939. USGS (U.S.Geological Survey).2005.MODFLOW-2005,The U.S.Geological Survey modular ground-water model-the Ground-Water Flow Process:U.S.Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6-A16. Viereck,L.A.,C.T.Dyrness,A.R.Batten,and K.J.Wenzlick.1992.The Alaska Vegetation Classification.Pacific Northwest Research Station,U.S.Forest Service,Portland,OR. Gen.Tech.Rep.PNW-GTR-286.278 pp. Wahrhaftig,Clyde.1994.Physiographic divisions of Alaska.Jn Plafker,George,and Berg, H.C.,The Geology of Alaska:Geological Society of America,|sheet,scale 1:2,500,000. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-23 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.10.Tables Table 7.5-1.Data collection parameters and associated sensors that will be used for the Groundwater Studyat selected Focus Areas. Process Parameter Sensor Type Surface-water stage fluctuation Pressure -calculated water levels CSI CS 450 Pressure transducer Groundwater stage fluctuation Pressure -calculated water levels CSI CS 450 Pressure transducer Active-layer freezing and thawing Resistance -calculated temperature GWS-YS]Vertical thermistor strings Active-layer freezing and thawing, Moisture availability Unfrozen volumetric moisture content (%)CSI CS616 Soil-moisture sensors Evapotranspiration Air temperature,Relative Humidity CSI HC2S3 AT/RH sensor Evapotranspiration Wind Speed,Direction RM Yound 05103 WS/WD sensor Evapotranspiration Radiation CMP3 -Kipp &Zonen Pyranometer Evapotranspiration Soil-surface temperature GWS-YSI Thermistor Evapotranspiration Precipitation TI 525-US Tipping bucket rain gage Plant transpiration Delta-Temperature DI Dynagage and TDP sensors and Notes: sap flow algorithms 1 Campbell Scientific Inc.,CSI;Dynomax tnc.,Dl;Texas Instruments,TI,GW Scientific,GWS. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-24 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised STUDY PLAN Table 7.5-2.Schedule for implementation of the Groundwater Study. 2012 2013 2014 2015 Activity 3Q|4Q])1Q/2Q|3Q)4Q/1Q)2Q/3Q)4Q)1Q 7.5.4.1 Existing Data Synthesis 7.5.4.2 Geohydrology Process-Domains and Terrain 7.5.4.3 Watana Dam/Reservoir 7.5.4.4 Upwelling/Springs Broad-Scale Mapping 7.5.4.5 Riparian Vegetation Dependency on SW/GW Interactions 7.5.4.6 Aquatic Habitat GW/SW Interactions 7.5.4.7 Water Quality in Selected Habitats 7.5.4.8 Winter GW/SW Interactions 7.5.4.9 Shallow Groundwater Users Initial Study Report /Updated Study Report A A Legend:-Planned Activity - A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-25 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.5.11.Figures oc pe.[take Minchuimingg {04 a {os Figure 7.5-1.Sedimentary basins and geologic structure in the Susitna watershed (modified from Kirschner 1994). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-26 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN thd aiLa/BRS ee BNA OESpun,SOL EP Ee ria Jags 25 qmalStaley2ATee22utneaySyJKn ee Figure 7.5-2.Geologic units in the Susitna watershed (modified from Beikman 1994). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-27 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN STUDY INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR GROUNDWATER STUDY Geology and Soils (4) IFS Fish (8.5) IFS Riparian (8.6) Fluvial Geomorphology (6.6) ADNR/GINA Mapping Information Background Information (Q1-13) Geologic and Terrain Mapping Layers ((Q1-13) Geology and Soils (4) Fluvial Geomorphology (6.6) Ice Processes (7.6) IFS Fish (8.5) Geologic Data Geotechnical Data Ice and IFS Data (Q2-Q4-13) ice Processes (7.6) Water Quality (5.0) Winter Aerial Surveys Water Quality (Q2-Q3-13,Q1-14) Draft Annotated Draft Process Domain Groundwater Groundwater Hydrology Bibliography (Q2-13)Mapping (Q2-13).and Upwelling Annotated Bibliography Process Domain Mapping Evaluation Evaluations (04-13){Q4-13)vee ce (Q1-14/04-14) All Studies IFS Fish (8.5)All Studies IFS Fish (8.5) IFS Riparian (8.6) Figure 7.5-3.Study interdependencies for the Groundwater Study. IFS Riparian (8.6) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-28 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN STUDY INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR GROUNDWATER STUDY tee Processes (7.6) IFS Fish (8.5) USGS Gaging Program I#S Fish (8-5) Water Quality (5.0) Fluvial Geomorphology (6.6) Geomorphology (§.9} Water Quality (5.0) Fish Distribution Study (9.6) IFS Fish (8.5) IFS Riparian (8.6) Fluvial Geomorphology (6.6) Geomorphology (6.0) ice Processes (7.6) Fish Studies (9) Wy +..Winter Aerial Surveys Design Information,Soils Data,River oe information,Sells Data,Water Chemistry Design information Bed Characteristics,Riparian Zones Prod me WNon-Preductve zone.Standards,Water Winter Flows (Q4-12,01-03-13)Qa-12,01.0313)Chemistry Data (Q4-12 to 02-13, .(Q2-04-13)}Q4-13 to Q2-14)} Groundwater,Surface-wWater Groundwater ,Surfece-WaterData,Soil Temperatures,Soil Levels,See '5 Met Dats Groundwater and Surface-Water Groundwater Hydrology and Moisture,Met Data,Sap Flow eM (02-13 wo3-14)Differences and interaction Upwelling Evaluations (Q2-13 to Q3-14){Q2-13 to Q3-14){Q1-14/Q4-14) l |L IFS Fish (8.5)IFS Fish (8.5)IFS Fish (8.5} IFS Riparian (8.6}IFS Riparian (8.6)IFS Riparian (8.6)1FS Riparian (8.6) Figure 7.5-3.Study interdependencies for the Groundwater Study (continued). Alaska Energy AuthoritySusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project December 2012FERCProjectNo.14241 Page 7-29 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 7.5-3.Study interdependencies for the Groundwater Study (continued). STUDY INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR GROUNDWATER STUDY Alaska Department of Natural Resources USGS WELTS,GWS!Databases, (Q1-Q3-23) Groundwater Level Fluctuations,impact Assessments {Q2-13 to Q3-14) 1 Residential Groundwater UsersOtherGroundwater Study Objectives Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-30 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN DailyMeanDischarge,InCFSUSGS Susitna River at Gold Creek Gauging Station,15292000 Daily Discharge for 2009 to 2012 Period with POR Median 80,000 tr vt vf vv FF an Lom |v v v t v TT §fF fs eoTr Tr vTTTTTTT'Study Year | 70.000 | Study Year Two me 'Pre-Study One ea L Year Cece fo wares aera 4 60,000 +pee es ie "Example Modell 7 r Example Model Development Validation Events 50,000 ---.and Calibration Events __| 40,000 30,000 N 20,000 Winter Study Periods Se10,000 Lt rm pritisttia ait210 -- Winter Study Periods ati Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Mean Daily Discharge Median,50%Exceedance Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Spring Breakup Fall Freezeup Figure 7.5-4.Discharge hydrograph and analysis examples for the Susitna River at Gold Creek. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-31 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REviSED STUDY PLAN HIGH RIVER STAGE Ground surface Ground-water Water table Riverbed flow direction River River discharges into the aquifer channe! LOW OR NORMAL RIVER STAGE WY .y ad Aquifer discharges into the river Figure 7.5-5.Illustration of groundwater and surface-water interactions with changing stage levels. 40 -remaret _._ Ore pent We tenders 0 8 ten bert #10 0 bo tert 4.700 0 ton tert 6.2000 tem ore.Gm et son tae J a>Pf&&ae|1t|4_|4rs£tawcS)q. 430 N tpeptypeypu tft tt tp tt |ie ee | JAstDOscALOLATOFASIOATOSATIOIASIOSrNrs}@'WATER-LEVELELEVATION,INFEETASOVESEALEVELFigure 7.5-6.Groundwater responses to stage changes in the Chena River (Nakanishi and Lilly 1998). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-32 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Chena River at Apple Road Monitoring Well FWMS5756 ELEVATION,INFEETTime-Variant Specified Head in cell(Stage-elevation follows hydrograph of Time-Variant Specified Heads in column of cells(Stage-elevation follows hydrograph at 1,0328DepthChena River at Apple Road)Monitoring Well FWM5756) Elevation .432 Nn i Bin naHORE=I _.600 ftag-11Layers45 Cot 9,000 ft length Figure 7,5-7.An example of applying surface water stage conditions and groundwater levels from a well as input to boundary conditions to a two-dimensional groundwater model (Nakanishi and Lilly 1998). Stations Types e@ =shallow well Routing Model Section #=surface water A=meteorological Main Channel ,XS$1 °?wo @ 3° e.| Cc A . e -e ected at \e Migh stageemeex: ®e SS s Cross Section Transects Figure 7.5-8.Example schematic of groundwater well and surface water station network in a hypothetical Focus Area targeting riparian analysis. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-33 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Stations Types .. e =shallow well Routing Model sectiong=surface water g =water temperat Main Channel .XS1 e {7 e a e | A slough, \©connected at "high stage ,7a §8 ( e SOS |Cross a 8 a<Section e r e »x52 ransects Note:shallow wells with pressure transducers include temperature Figure 7.5-9.Example schematic of groundwater well and surface water station network in a hypothetical Focus Area targeting fish and aquatic habitat analysis. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-34 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 3D groundwater model grid Routing Model Section 9 - IN s et ine y a ry 2 =!I |hs7SVrainCrannel 'A a |- +Pa Laer ap MK ba baat3at J 4 q Cr d °o a) 4 L-4 Va LIA ||oy 2.flVA1Y \i,'LA!fT LTT L Land!Vi A AloisHatTet-/ey y,hed 7 Ji*m ly .jel connected atLVA\A.Z/A \a”A nhigh|stagerrAf»BavaLaiyLaa eNOES7am4>=|_-4 <r 7 edSN_a ; N z ¢7 -4 \ @ iXS2e*2 I 9 | Figure 7.5-10.Example schematic of a 3D groundwater model grid in a hypothetical Focus Area targeting fish and aquatic analysis.2D cross-section models would be developed in this hypothetical case at sections XS1 and XS2. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-35 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 3 s |=$2|3 a Flood Levels Ss 4 ™ TAL a [y=_-!KY ee Wate?» CoTableooStage Recorder V_=Wells,Soil Temperature,Soil Moisture WV Stage Recorder 1<qBalsamPoplar||}fcv -Sx x g vo az3a25scFd$ocaVvVvenowes|eee = -omen WT---ee wee eee [eee ees Fluctuating Stage Water Table Recorder Regional Groundwater Gradient and Fluctuations USGS Susitna River at Gold Creek Gauging Station,15292000 18 T T a en ne ||wy 2005| -WY 2006 16 -WY 2007 r ||--WY 2008 14 -WY 2009 12 we \ 40 Nix Safa [h i fNitGal?DailyMeanGaugeHeight,InFeetFigure 7.5-11.The upper graphic is an example schematic of a 2D cross-section across the floodplain,main channel,and a side channel or slough.Groundwater and surface water interactions and examples data collection stations are shown. The lower plots show the daily mean gage height for the Susitna River at Gold Creek. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-36 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study 7.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study The Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study will further the understanding of natural ice processes in the Susitna River and provide a method to model/predict pre-Project and post- Project ice processes in the Susitna River.The study will provide a basis for impact assessment, which will inform the development of any necessary protection,mitigation,and enhancement measures.The study also will provide ice processes input data for other resource studies with winter components (e.g.,fluvial geomorphology modeling,instream flow,instream flow riparian,and groundwater). Study Goals and Objectives The overall goals of the ice processes study are to understand existing ice processes in the Susitna River and to predict post-Project ice processes.The specific objectives are as follows: e Document the timing,progression,and physical processes of freeze-up and break-up during 2012-2014 between the Oshetna River confluence (river mile [RM]233.4)and tidewater (RM 0),using historical data,aerial reconnaissance,stationary time-lapse cameras,and physical evidence. e Determine the potential effect of various Project operational scenarios on ice processes downstream of Watana Dam using modeling and analytical methods. o Develop a modeling approach for quantitatively assessing ice processes in the Susitna River. o Calibrate the model based on existing conditions.Use the model to determine the extent of the open water reach downstream of Watana Dam during Project operations. o Use the model to determine the changes in timing and ice-cover progression and ice thickness and extent during Project operations. e Develop detailed models and characterizations of ice processes at instream flow Focus Areas in order to provide physical data on winter habitat for the instream flow study. e Provide observational data of existing ice processes and modeling results of post-Project ice processes to the fisheries,instream flow,instream flow riparian,fluvial geomorphology,groundwater,recreation,and socio-economic studies. e Research and summarize large river ice processes relevant to the Susitna River,analytical methods that have been used to assess impacts of projects on ice-covered rivers,and the known effects of existing hydropower operations in cold climates. Thermal and ice modeling for the reservoir and the general thermal modeling for the river during the five months when ice is not present will be accomplished under the Water Quality Modeling Study (Section 5.6).The output from that work will be used in this river ice processes study. Likewise,open water flow routing will be performed under the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5),while ice-affected flow routing will be performed by this study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-37 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information 7.6.2.1.Existing Information Ice affects the Susitna River for approximately seven months of the year,between October and May.When air and water temperatures drop below freezing in September and October,border ice grows along the banks of the river,and frazil ice begins accumulating in the water column and flowing downstream.Flowing ice eventually clogs the channel in shallow or constricted reaches,or at tidewater,forming ice bridges.Frazil pans flowing downstream accumulate against ice bridges,causing the ice cover to progress upstream.By January,much of the river is under a stable ice cover,with the exception of persistent open leads corresponding with warm upwelling water or turbulent,high-velocity flows.Flows generally drop slowly throughout the winter until snowmelt commences in April.During April and May,river stages rise and the ice cover weakens,eventually breaking into pieces and flushing downstream (R&M 1982b).Ice jams are recurrent events in some reaches of the river.If severe,jams can flood upstream and adjacent areas,drive ice overbank onto gravel bars and into sloughs and side channels,shear-off or scar riparian vegetation,and threaten infrastructure such as the Alaska Railroad and riverbank property (R&M 1982b). Ice processes were documented between the mouth of the Susitna River (RM 0)and the proposed dam site (RM 184)between 1980 and 1985 (R&M 1981,1982a,1983,1984,1985, 1986).Both freeze-up and break-up progressions were monitored using aerial reconnaissance. Locations of ice bridges during freeze-up and ice jams during break-up were recorded each season.One winter,a time-lapse camera was installed in Devils Canyon to observe ice processes through the narrow,turbulent rapids.Additional ice data were collected to calibrate a model. These included ice thicknesses at selected river transects,top-of-ice elevations,air and water temperatures at meteorological stations and Gold Creek,slush ice porosity at selected transects in the Middle and Lower River,and frazil concentration and density at Gold Creek. Winter observations have spanned a range of climatic conditions.The freeze-up period of 1985 was unusually cold,with about twice the accumulated freezing-degree days as the long-term average (R&M 1986),while the freeze-up period of 1984 was warm (R&M 1985).In the 1980s modeling studies,cold,average,and warm conditions were simulated using records from the winters of 1971-1972,1976-1977,and 1981-1982,respectively (Harza-Ebasco 1984b).The winter of 1971-1972 still stands as one of the coldest on record at Talkeetna;however,according to the Western Regional Climate Data Center,the warmest winter on record occurred in 2002- 2003. Of particular interest was the influence of freeze-up and ice cover on salmon habitat areas.Water levels at certain sloughs in the Middle River and Lower River were monitored during the winter to determine whether staging during freeze-up and ice cover diverted water into side channels and sloughs (R&M 1984). Other entities (National Weather Service,U.S.Geological Survey [USGS],and U.S.Army Corps of Engineers [USACE])also have collected and compiled ice thickness,break-up,and freeze-up data for various locations on the river (Bilello 1980).Although these data were not collected for the purpose of understanding the potential effects of the Project,they are relevant for furthering our understanding of winter hydrology along the Susitna River. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-38 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Freeze-up and melt-out processes in the Middle River (between Gold Creek and Talkeetna)were modeled using ICECAL,a numerical model developed by the USACE Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL)(Harza-Ebasco 1984).The model utilized the outputs from a temperature model developed for the river (SNTEMP)and empirical data on frazil production and ice-cover progression derived from observations.Both the Watana-only and Watana-Devils Canyon operations,as proposed in the 1980s,were modeled for a range of meteorological conditions that had been encountered,including a cold winter (1971-1972),a very warm winter (1976-1977),a warm winter (1982-1983),and an average winter (1981- 1982).The results of the model included predictions of the extent of ice cover,the timing of ice- cover progression,ice surface elevations,and the inundated area beneath the ice cover for selected cross-sections.The elevation of water flowing beneath the ice was compared to the elevation necessary to overtop slough berms at selected fish habitat study areas in the Middle River in order to assess the impacts of Project operation on winter flow in these sloughs. Empirical data on frazil production and ice-cover progression was used to estimate changes in ice-cover progression between tidewater and Talkeetna.Reservoir ice was simulated using a DYRESM model and calibrated to conditions at Eklutna Lake (Harza-Ebasco 1986). Key findings of the 1980s modeling effort included the following (for the Watana-only scenarios): The open water reach would likely extend 44-57 miles downstream of the dam site. Ice thicknesses were generally similar under project conditions,where ice was predicted to occur. e Winter water surface elevations under ice would be 2-7 feet higher under project conditions,and would result in the flooding of some sloughs with mainstem water in the Middle River without mitigation. e Freeze-up would be delayed by 2-5 weeks in the fall,and ice-out would occur 5-7 weeks earlier in the spring. e Ice jams during break-up would be reduced in severity post-project because of the regulation of spring snowmelt flows. R&M undertook a survey of ice-affected hydropower projects in other northern regions (Harza- Ebasco 1985).The results of the survey indicated that other hydroelectric projects generally relied on observations and operator experience to limit adverse effects of flow regulation on winter conditions.Ice jamming during the freeze-up and subsequent flooding of infrastructure and communities were the primary concerns. 7.6.2.2.Additional Information Needs The need for additional information beyond what was gathered and analyzed during the 1980s is driven by four factors:(1)the new proposed configuration of the Project and Project operational scenarios;(2)advances in predictive models of winter flow regimes beyond what was available in the 1980s;(3)the need to capture any changes (due to channel or climate changes)since the 1980s;and (4)the need to supply ice-related hydraulic data in greater detail for Focus Areas selected for the instream flow study. The 1980s Su-Hydro project was envisioned as a two-dam project,with an upper dam,reservoir, and powerhouse near river mile (RM)184 (Watana Dam).It was envisioned that the upper development would be operated in load-following mode to meet power demands.A lower dam, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-39 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN reservoir,and powerhouse (Devils Canyon Dam)would provide additional power generation,but would also re-regulate flow releases from the upper development.Downstream flow releases from the Devils Canyon Dam would not have the daily flow fluctuations associated with load- following operations of the upper development. The Pre-Application Document (PAD)describes an operational scenario that would release more water in the winter,with a potential for day-to-day fluctuations.The ICECAL model was a steady flow model,and thus could not simulate flow fluctuations or route winter flows.A dynamic model will be able to simultaneously predict flow and temperature fluctuations downstream of the dam,as well as ice-cover progression.Finally,the ICECAL model was only calibrated to flows between Talkeetna and Gold Creek.There are several important fish habitat areas upstream of Gold Creek where knowledge of winter conditions is necessary to predict post- Project habitat changes. Despite changes in channel form,which are likely to have the greatest effect at the Chulitna confluence near Talkeetna,most of the detailed data collected in the 1980s can be used in the current effort,including verifying the model.Freeze-up progression upstream from tidewater was catalogued each year of the study,including the rate of ice front advance,ice bridging locations,daily frazil discharges at Gold Creek and weekly discharges for the Yentna,Chulitna, Talkeetna,and Middle Susitna.Daily meteorological observations were recorded in Talkeetna and near the dam site.Staging observations were made in the Lower and Middle Rivers,which described the rise in water level immediately upstream from the progressing ice front.Ice thicknesses and elevations were collected in the Lower and Middle Rivers each year of the study, and the shape of the ice cover across transects was characterized,since thicknesses varied between the bank and the thalweg.Open leads were mapped in the late winter for several years, including open sloughs and side channels.Break-up progression was monitored each spring of the study,and ice jam locations were mapped.All of these observations are relevant to the current study.Detailed observations were also made if frazil density,in order to determine the source of frazil,and effects of snowfall,low and high discharges,and variable temperatures on ice cover development.It is especially important to have detailed observations for a range of climatic conditions so that the role of meteorological factors in influencing ice cover formation can be better understood. Freeze-up and break-up processes depend on a complex suite of variables,some of which currently are outside the realm of predictive modeling,usually because the process depends on very local conditions,or sequence of events.Ice bridging locations are an example of a process that cannot currently be predicted by a model;thus,analytical methods to predict ice-cover progression depend on multiple years of observations.The presence of open thermal leads is another phenomenon that is not captured by ice processes models because it depends on local hyporheic flow conditions or groundwater contributions.Additional documentation is needed to determine whether locations of these features and timing of ice-cover progression are similar to conditions observed in the 1980s.In addition,in the 1980s,the location of frazil production early in the freeze-up period varied significantly between study years.An assessment is needed to determine the importance of the Susitna River upstream and downstream of the proposed dam in frazil production for a range of meteorological conditions. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-40 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.3.Study Area 7.6.3.1.Observations The ice processes observation study area includes the 234-mile segment of river between tidewater and the Oshetna River confluence (from RM 0 to RM 233.4).Observations of open leads,break-up progression,and freeze-up progression will be made in this area.In addition,ice thickness,top-of-ice elevations,and under-ice water stages will be surveyed in the Middle River to calibrate and verify a predictive ice model. 7.6.3.2.Middle River River1D Modeling Predictive ice,hydrodynamic,and thermal modeling using River1D is planned for the Middle River between the proposed dam and the Three Rivers Confluence near Talkeetna (from RM 184 to RM 100). 7.6.3.3.Middle River Detailed Modeling (Focus Areas) Several Focus Areas determined in conjunction with the instream flow habitat and riparian studies in the Middle River will receive more detailed ice modeling and observation attention. Depending on the local channel geometry,either detailed Riverl1D or River2D models will be developed,and observations of ice-cover progression,ice thickness,and open leads will be more detailed in order to calibrate these models.See the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (Section 8.5)for criteria and potential sites. 7.6.3.4.Lower River There are currently no accepted models for predicting dynamic ice processes on complex braided channels,such as those found in the Lower Susitna River downstream of Talkeetna;therefore,no hydrodynamic modeling is planned for the 100-mile reach between tidewater and the Talkeetna River (from RM 0 to RM 100).However,there is a need to assess the potential for change to ice cover on the Lower River both for fish habitat studies and to understand the potential effects of the Project on winter transportation access and recreation,which depend on ice cover on the Lower Susitna River.Project effects to the Lower River will be determined based on the magnitude of change seen at the downstream boundary of the River1D model (approximately RM 100),the estimated contributions of frazil ice to the Lower River from the Middle River from observations and modeling,and with simpler steady flow models (HEC-RAS with ice cover)for short sections of interest in the Lower River (Section 7.6.4.10). 7.6.4.Study Methods The observation and modeling efforts described below will be used to characterize the Susitna River ice regime,identify spatial and temporal variations in ice processes,and provide information on the physical channel environment in the winter to other study disciplines.Some of the information (aerial reconnaissance and transect data)is similar to information collected in the 1980s.Collecting the same observations over a period of years will help define the year-to- year variability in the ice regime.Characterizing the existing ice regime ans its variability will provide a basis for evaluating the impacts of the project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-41 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.4.1.Aerial Reconnaissance Aerial reconnaissance and global positioning system (GPS)mapping of ice features,including ice jams,ice bridges,frazil accumulations,and open leads during the break-up and freeze-up periods will be performed from tidewater to the Oshetna River confluence (from RM 0 to RM 233.4).The number of observations will vary depending on ice process conditions,but it is anticipated that approximately 10 reconnaissance trips per spring will occur during break-up and 15 reconnaissance trips per winter will occur during freeze-up in 2012,2013,and 2014.The data collected will include concentrations of frazil ice,locations of ice features and open leads,timing of ice-cover progression,geo-referenced photographs,and videos of ice processes.Ice processes field observation standards follow those of EM-1110-2-1612,Ice Engineering,developed by USACE (2002)and Michel (1972).Aerial reconnaissance will include observations of the main Sustina River,and mouths of major tributaries including the Yentna,Chulitna,and Talkeetna rivers. 7.6.4.2._Time-Lapse Camera Monitoring Time-lapse cameras will monitor break-up and freeze-up at locations corresponding to flow routing model instrumentation,key ice processes,and fish habitat locations.Time-lapse cameras are set to take photos of the main channel or a side slough at one-hour intervals,and the results are compiled into a video.Key information to be derived from time-lapse videos includes the timing of ice cover advance and decay past the camera location,the relative abundance of frazil ice visible in the channel during freeze-up,the growth of border ice during freeze-up from the shore,and the local interaction of ice with the floodplain.The selection of camera locations may be refined when the final determination of Focus Areas is made for the instream flow study,or if aerial observations indicate other more important locations.The current locations of the time- lapse cameras for 2012 are as follows: RM 9.5 -Near Upper Tidal Influence RM 25.6 -Susitna Station RM 59 -Rustic Wilderness Side Channel RM 88 -Birch Creek Slough RM 99 -Slough 1 (2012 break-up only) RM 101.5 -Whiskers Slough (2012 freeze-up) RM 103 -Talkeetna Station RM 121 -Curry Slough RM 129 -Slough 9 RM 141 -Slough 21 RM 149 -Mouth of Portage Creek RM 184 -Dam Site Planned camera locations for 2013-2014 include the following: e RM9.5 -Near Upper Tidal Influence e RM 25.6 -Susitna Station e RM 101 -Whiskers Slough e RM112-Slough 6A Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-42 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN RM 124 -Slough 8A RM 135 -Slough 11 RM 138 -Indian River RM 141 -Slough 21 RM 149 -Mouth of Portage Creek RM 171 --MR2-wide RM 184 -Dam Site Additional telemetered time-lapse cameras are located at the following sites by the flow transect study: RM 11 -Susitna River near Flathorn Lake (ESS10) RM 13 -Susitna River near Dinglishna Hill (ESS15) RM 26 -Susitna River at Susitna Station (ESS20) RM 96 -Susitna River near Twister Creek (ESS30) RM 98 -Susitna River near Chulitna River (ESS35) RM 103 -Susitna River above Whiskers Creek (ESS40) RM 113 -Susitna River below Lane Creek (ESS45) RM 121 -Susitna River at Curry (ESS50) RM 149 -Susitna River below Portage Creek (ESS55) RM 165 -Susitna River near Devil Creek (ESS60) RM 176.5 -Susitna River near Fog Creek (ESS65) RM 184 -Susitna River below Deadman Creek (ESS70) RM 223 -Susitna Gage near Cantwell (now ESS80) And by the USGS at the following stations: RM 182 -Susitna River Above Tsusena Creek RM 137 -Susitna River at Gold Creek RM 84 -Susitna River at Sunshine Station Chulitna River near the Susitna confluence 7.6.4.3.Transect Data Winter field data will be collected at the 13 transects identified above for the flow routing model study (ESS80-ESS10).These transect data will be used to calibrate the existing condition ice processes model.The following data will be collected in conjunction with the flow routing study: Ice thickness,including total and submerged ice thicknesses and slush ice thickness (January and March)using drill or auger and plunge pole. Top-of-ice elevation (January and March)using standard survey techniques and established benchmarks. e Air temperature (continuously). e Water temperature (continuously where sensors survive freeze-up). e Water stage (continuously where sensors survive freeze-up,January and March otherwise)using pressure transducers. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-43 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Discharge (January and March,except at ESS10 and ESS15)and under-ice velocity profiles using current meter and ADCP. e Thickness of snow cover (January and March). 7.6.4.4.Focus Area Field Data Collection When Focus Area locations have been determined,a winter field data collection program will be established at each site in consultation with the instream flow,geomorphology,riparian,and groundwater studies.At a minimum,winter data collected at Focus Areas will include ice thicknesses,elevations,and water depths sufficient to characterize the ice cover and calibrate a detailed model of the short reach.Freeze-up timing and processes,the presense of open leads, and historical ice jam processes will be characterized for each site in order to further understanding of how winter conditions affect fish habitat and geomorphology. Field conditions during winter data collection are likely to occasionally be challenging,owing to hazardous weather,limited daylight,and river ice conditions.Where large open leads or questionable ice stability preclude measurements at established transects,measurements may need to be relocated upstream or downstream of the transect.Likewise,equipment such as pressure transducers,temperature probes,and cameras will likely fail from time to time.The field data collection program may be revised where needed to overcome these challenges. 7.6.4.5.Other Field Data The Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)will be collecting field data on ice interactions with floodplains and vegetation,including tree scars and floodplain disturbance by ice.These data indicate locations where ice events have been significant.The results of the Riparian Instream Flow Study will be used to delineate reaches of the river where ice processes,primarily break-up jams,have occurred in the past.The Riparian Instream Flow Study will use these data to develop a model of riparian-floodplain interactions,while the ice study will use these data to supplement historical observations of ice jams. 7.6.4.6.River Ice Processes Model Development for Existing Conditions A River1D model will be developed and applied to the Susitna River between the proposed dam site and Talkeetna.River1D is a hydrodynamic flow routing and thermal model that also models frazil generation,ice-cover progression,and decay (Hicks and Steffler 1992;Andrishak and Hicks 2005a and 2005b;She and Hicks 2006;She et al.2009;She et al.2012).The model has the ability to route reservoir releases downstream at small time-steps (hourly or less)and was designed to be able to predict when fluctuating flows can destabilize a winter ice cover (She et al.2012).The model has been developed by the University of Alberta River Ice Engineering Program (Hicks 2005;Andrishak and Hicks 2005a).Updated code is due to be released to the public domain on January 1,2013. The Susitna River Ice Processes Model will be used to simulate time-variable flow routing,heat- flux processes,seasonal water temperature variation,frazil ice development,ice transport processes,and ice-cover growth and decay.The first step is to calibrate an open-water model using known discharge events.The second step is to simulate pre-Project ice processes to verify that the model is correctly working on the Susitna River.The model will also be used to provide Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-44 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN boundary conditions to more detailed Focus Area models embedded in the reach.Inputs to the existing condition model include the following: e River geometry from the instream flow routing study e Discharge as measured by gages along the modeled reach e Air temperature and solar radiation from meteorological stations e Water temperature along the river and tributaries from the Water Quality Study (Section 5.0) e Boundary conditions for ice-cover progression (bridging locations and_ice concentrations) The model will be verified using ice thickness and elevation measurements at Flow Routing Transects,and observed timing of ice-cover progression and decay.Data from the 1980s will be used to verify the model for differing climate conditions.The existing conditions model may be updated with 2013 or 2014 data if new information is gained that will improve model accuracy. 7.6.4.7.|River Ice Processes Model Projections for Proposed Conditions For the Middle River,the calibrated River1D model will be used to model the proposed Project operational scenarios.The model will predict water temperature,frazil ice production,ice cover formation,elevation and extent of ice cover,and flow hydrograph (winter flow routing and water levels)between the proposed dam site and Talkeetna.The model will also predict ice cover stability,including potential for jamming,under load-following fluctuations.For the spring melt period,the model will predict ice-cover decay,including the potential for break-up jams. Proposed operational scenarios will include,at a minimum,the load-following scenario described in the PAD and a base load scenario. Additional inputs to the proposed conditions model include the following: e Flow releases from Watana Dam provided by the Reservoir Operations Model e Temperature of released flow provided by the Water Quality Model e Range of meteorological conditions (warm,cold,wet,and dry winters)as developed in coordination with the Water Quality Study (Section 5.0) The River1D model will model temperature between freeze-up and break-up on the Susitna River,while the EFDC Water Quality Model (Section 5.6)will model temperature during the open water season and the HEC-RAS model (Section 8.5)will model flow routing during open water conditions.Both temperature models will use the same meteorological and water temperature baseline data outlined in Section 5.The models will overlap during early freeze-up, usually mid-September to October,and late break-up,usually late April to mid-May.This will provide an independent check of model accuracy.When the models predict that river temperatures will reach freezing (32°F)for a portion of the mainstem,the Ice Processes Model results will take precedence for temperature and hydraulic routing. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-45 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.4.8.|Focus Areas Ice Processes Model The River1D model will be at the same scale as the Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model (Section 8.5.4.3),and will be using the same river channel geometry.Focus Areas selected by the ISF study (Section 8.5.4.2)will be subject to more detailed geometric surveys and modeling in order to evaluate Project effects to smaller scale habitat.In some of the proposed Focus Areas near the dam site,the river may not be predicted to freeze over post-Project.For these sites,year- round conditions will be modeled using the open-water model.If ice cover is predicted by the River1D model to occur at these sites post-Project,winter hydraulic conditions at these sites will be modeled using either more detailed Riverl1D models or River2D models,depending on channel geometry and the influence of two-dimensional hydraulics.In some cases,the River1D model may be applied to split flow or bend reaches if the advantages of computational simplicity appear to outweigh the potential reduction in accuracy of not simulating cross-channel flow.The extent of the detailed models may be modified from the instream flow Focus Area boundaries to accommodate appropriate boundary conditions for ice processes. Boundary conditions for the Focus Area models will be derived from the River1D flow routing model,and geometric input will include more detailed ice cover characterization based on 2013- 2014 winter measurements.Location-specific details such as open leads,channel blockage by ice,or ice jam flood releases may be modeled.These processes will be simulated if needed by other studies and if sufficient calibration data (open lead locations,ice-scars,ice jam dimensions, etc.)can be determined or estimated from observations.The hydraulic data to be derived from the Focus Area ice models will be determined on a case-by-case basis by the needs of instream flow,geomorphology,and other studies,but will include at a minimum extent of inundation, flow stages and velocities for post-Project winter conditions under load-following and base-load scenarios. 7.6.4.9.|Model Accuracy and Error Analysis The limitations of the ice model fall under three basic categories:1)simplifying assumptions in the governing equations,2)interpolation between measured points,and 3)error in measuring input data.The error introduced to the model for each of these categories will be analyzed as part of the ice processes model development. All hydraulic and ice-processes models rely on simplifying assumptions in order to render the governing equations solvable.For instance,frictional resistance to flow in a channel is a complex phenomenon influenced by channel geometry,bed material,turbulence,and the texture of the underside of the ice cover,if present.However,most hydraulic models simplify all frictional resistance into a single value known as Manning's n.Estimating Manning's n for different flow conditions introduces error to the model.This error can be evaluated by varying Manning's n and determining the difference in results that would occur if the input value were 50%greater or smaller than the chosen value. Models are generally limited in application to hydraulic conditions that best match the assumptions of the simplifying equations.RiverlD is a hydrodynamic and thermal model designed to route rapidly varying flows (such as reservoir releases)and calculate heat transfer between the atmosphere and the river.As a 1-D model,it assumes flow vectors are parallel across the channel and that water surface elevations are constant across a transect.Where flow is split into multiple channels or makes sharp curves,River!1D would still assume all flow is Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-46 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN parallel,even though in reality flow is diverging and converging.For most of the Middle River, this assumption should still allow reasonably accurate predictions of the effects of project operations on ice processes and winter flow routing.For smaller scale investigations into hydraulic conditions at specific side slough habitats,for instance,more accurate determination of flow around an island or bend may be needed.Thus,River2D may be applied to portions of some of the Focus Areas.The primary limitations of River2D are input data needs (detailed geometry and calibration data)and computational complexity.These limitations currently preclude the application of River2D to long reaches. Models also rely on interpolation between measured input values,such as surveyed transects and meteorological data.Modeled values at surveyed cross-sections will be more accurate than those derived from the model between surveyed cross-sections.Surveyed sections were thus chosen carefully to coincide with changes in channel geometry.Air temperature and solar radiation varies along the river in between measurement points.Data collected in the 1980s in different locations and in 2012-2013 at ESS10-ESS80 will allow us to analyze the variability and estimate the likely error at unmeasured locations. An assessment of model accuracy and sources of error will be included in the discussion of model results.The main sources of error to be analyzed include the following: e Error associated with measuring input data (air temperature,solar radiation,water temperature,and ice concentration).This will be estimated by performing a sensitivity analysis to variance in each of these parameters. e Error associated with estimating Manning's n under ice.This will be estimated by performing a sensitivity analysis using different values of Manning's n. e Error associated with interpolating measured values over distances (river channel geometry between measured cross-sections,air temperature and solar radiation between meteorological stations).In some cases,this will be evaluated using a sensitivity analysis (for instance,to assess the impact of temperature variations between stations).To reduce the error associated with geometric interpolation,only results at measured cross-sections will be reported. The limitations of applying a simplified model to complex conditions,such as applying River1D to sections of river with two-dimensional flow,will be assessed by comparing the results of the existing condition model to observed conditions (i.e.,model calibration).The methods for calibration are described in Sections 7.6.4.1 through 7.6.4.4. 7.6.4.10.Lower River Assessment The primary impact of Project operations on the Lower River in the winter is likely to be increased stage owing to reservoir releases in excess of natural winter discharge.Increased stage will be modeled where transect data exist.Transect data exist between RM 75 and RM 100 (from the 2012 hydrology study),at Susitna Station at RM 26,and at RM 40,RM 48,and RM 60 (R&M 1985).Projected maximum monthly discharge from the preliminary reservoir operations model will be modeled with a range of ice thicknesses based on historical measurements.The potential for ice-cover delay in the Lower River will be assessed based on the estimated contributions of frazil ice to the Lower River from the Middle River using observations and model output. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-47 December 2012 REviISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.4.11..Review and Compilation of Existing Cold Regions Hydropower Project Operations and Effects Hydropower projects in northern North America,especially in Canada,and in other northern countries have operated on ice-covered rivers for many decades (National Research Council of Canada 1990).Other river systems where ice modeling has been completed include the following: e Peace River,Canada (Andrishak and Hicks 2005b;Andrishak and Hicks 2008;Hicks and Steffler 1992;She et al.2012) e Athabasca River,Canada (Katopodis and Ghamry 2005) e Ohio River,USA (Shen et al.1991) e St.Clair River,USA (Kolerski and Shen 2010) e Romaine River,Canada (Theriault et al.2010) The product of this portion of the study will be a memorandum that will summarize the following: e ice processes on the Susitna River as they relate to impacts of the project on fish habitat and other resources, e the impacts of other hydropower projects on river ice processes in northern regions. e Methods of analysis and modeling used to assess hydropower impacts to ice processes and fish habitat in other systems,and a discussion of how these methods may be applicable to the Susitna River. Relevant references will be summarized and study authors contacted to obtain additional information that may be relevant to the Susitna River. 7.6.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice This study's methodologies for data collection,analysis,modeling,field schedules,and study durations are consistent with generally accepted practice in the scientific community.Field study methods follow those of the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL)Engineering Manual (USACE 2002)and Michel (1972).The study plans were developed with the input of technical experts including the University of Alberta Ice Engineering Group.The Riverl1D model is a state-of-the-art numerical model designed to evaluate freeze-up and break-up processes on large rivers,including the effects of hydropower regulation,and it will be applied under the guidance of the model developers. 7.6.6.Schedule Field data will be collected as follows (freeze-up and break-up dates will vary depending on meteorological conditions,but are expected to fall within the range specified below): e Continuous time-lapse camera data will be collected during the break-up and freeze-up periods 2012-2014. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-48 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Freeze-up reconnaissance observations will be conducted between October 1 and January 15,2012,2013,and 2014. e Ice thickness and elevation data along transects will be collected in conjunction with winter discharges collected by the instream flow routing study in January and March of 2013,and again in January and March of 2014. e Open lead locations will be documented between March 1 and April 1 of 2012,2013,and 2014. e Break-up reconnaissance observations will be conducted between April 1 and May 15, 2012,2013,and 2014. Model development and calibration will occur continuously during 2013 and 2014 (see Table 7.6-1).Preliminary modeling runs for existing conditions will be calibrated to 2012 and 2013 conditions by the end of 2013,and proposed operations scenarios will be run primarily in 2014. AEA will issue Initial and Updated Study Reports documenting actions taken to date within one and two years,respectively,of FERC's Study Plan Determination (i.e.,February 1,2013). 7.6.7.Relationship with Other Studies The interdependency of the ice study with other studies is illustrated in Figures 7.6-1 and 7.6-2. Field observations of ice-scars and ice-related floodplain impacts from the Riparian Instream Flow Study (Section 8.6)will contribute to the Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study.The instream flow habitat and geomorphology studies will help define where Focus Areas should be for detailed winter data collection and modeling.The instream flow routing study will contribute winter stage and discharge measurements at transect locations.The Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study will contribute observations of open lead locations to the groundwater study ,and observations of ice thickness and extent at Focus Areas and transect locations to the instream flow habitat,instream flow riparian,and geomorphology studies.General observations about break-up and freeze-up processes,especially where these processes impact the floodplain and riparian vegetation,will contribute to the instream flow riparian and geomorphology studies. These data will be provided in the form of aerial photographs and videos,GIS map layers, tabular data,and field reports. The ice modeling study requires input data primarily from the water quality and instream flow routing studies.The water quality study will contribute baseline water temperature and meteorological data for the existing conditions model and predicted outflow temperatures for the proposed condition model.The instream flow routing study will contribute river channel geometry,rating curves,and predicted outflow hydrographs to the Ice Processes Model.Output from the model includes under-ice flow routing,temperature,ice thickness and elevation,and extent and timing of freeze-up and break-up.These data will be used by a number of studies including geomorphology,riparian,transportation,recreation,and instream flow.These data will be provided in tabular form and map form,where applicable. The ice modeling study will perform detailed 1-D and 2-D modeling at Focus Areas defined by the instream flow study.The results of these models may include hydraulic properties of ice jam flood releases in reaches where ice jams have been observed.These results will be used by the geomorphology and instream flow riparian studies to estimate the effects of ice jam floods on Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-49 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN sediment transport and riparian vegetation.Details of how these models will be applied will be worked out when the Focus Areas have been agreed upon,and the applicability of ice jam floods to local floodplain processes is assessed. Several hydraulic and temperature models will be developed for the Middle River and Focus Areas.The Ice Processes River1D Model will provide flow routing and temperature results for the Middle River for the ice-affected period.The ice-affected period begins whena portion of the river cools to 32 degrees and ice begins to form in the fall,and continues until ice has flushed out of the river in the spring and ice is no longer affecting water temperature or river hydraulics.As discussed above,the Water Quality Temperature Model and the Open-Water Hydraulic Routing Model will provide flow routing and temperature results for the Middle River for the ice-free period.The detailed River2D and River1D models developed for instream flow Focus Areas will provide hydraulic data for the ice-affected period for these Focus Areas. 7.6.8.Level of Effort and Cost Below is an estimate of costs associated with field documentation and model development in 2013-2014,which are the major components of the ice study. Costs of Field Observation Effort The 2013-2014 field components include the following,and are anticipated to roughly total about $1.5M (including helicopter hours): e Ice thickness and elevation measurements e Open lead reconnaissance,mapping,and video processing e Break-up reconnaissance,mapping,and video processing e Time-lapse camera setup,maintenance,and processing e Freeze-up reconnaissance,mapping,and video processing The 2013-2014 modeling components include the following,and are anticipated to roughly total about $850,000: e Geometric and meteorological data compilation and input e Open water flow routing model development and calibration e Existing condition ice-covered model development and calibration e Focus Area geometry input e Existing condition Focus Area model development e Proposed condition hydrologic and meteorological data compilation and input e Project alternative River!D model development e Project alternative Focus Area model development e Lower River HEC-RAS assessment Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-50 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.9.Literature Cited Andrishak,R.and F.Hicks.2005a.RiverID hydraulic flood routing model -Supplement 1 - thermal river modeling -model description and user's manual.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,University of Alberta. Andrishak,R.and F.Hicks.2005b.Impact of climate change on the Peace River thermal ice regime.Proc.13th Workshop on River Ice,CGU -Hydrology Section,Comm.on River Ice Processes and the Env.,Hanover,NH,p.21-40. Andrishak,R.and F.Hicks.2008.Simulating the effects of climate change on the winter regime of the Peace River.Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering,35:461-472. AEIDC (Arctic Environmental Information and Data Center).1984.Assessment of the Effects of the Proposed Susitna Hydroelectric Project on Instream Temperature and Fishery Resources in the Watana to Talkeetna Reach.Draft Report for Harza-Ebasco for Alaska Power Authority. Bilello,Michael A.1980.A winter environmental data survey of the drainage basin of the Upper Susitna River,Alaska.Special Report 80-19.USACE Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. Harza-Ebasco.1984.Instream Ice Calibration of Computer Model.Document No.1122.for Alaska Power Authority. Harza-Ebasco.1984b.Instream Ice Simulation Study.Document No.1986.for Alaska Power Authority. Harza-Ebasco.1985.Survey of experience in operation hydroelectric projects in cold regions. Document No.2654 for Alaska Power Authority. Harza-Ebasco.1986.Watana and Devil Canyon Reservoir Temperature/Ice and Suspended Sediment Study.Document No.3415 For Alaska Power Authority. Hicks,F.,2005.River1D hydraulic flood routing model -model description and user's manual. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,University of Alberta. Hicks,F.E.and ,Steffler,P.M.1992.A Characteristic-Dissipative-Galerkin Scheme for Open Channel Flow.ASCE Journal of Hydraulic Eng.,118(2):337-352. Katopodis,Chris,and Haitham Ghamry.2005.Ice-covered hydrodynamic simulation:model calibration and comparisons for three reaches of the Athabasca River,Alberta,Canada. Proc.13th Workshop on River Ice,CGU -Hydrology Section,Comm.on River Ice Processes and the Env.,Hanover,NH,p.455-469. Kolerski,Tomasz,and Hung Tao Shen.2010.St.Clair River Ice Jam Dynamics and Possible Effect on Bed Changes.20th IAHR International Symposium on Ice,Lahti,Finland,June 14-18,2010. Michel,Bernard.1971.Winter Regime of Rivers and Lakes.Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory. National Research Council of Canada.1990.Optimum operation of hydro-electric plants during the ice regime of rivers,a Canadian experience.Associate Committee on Hydrology, Subcommitte on Hydraulics of Ice Covered Rivers. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-51 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN R&M Consultants,Inc.1981.Ice Observations.1980-81.For Acres American for Alaska Power Authority. R&M Consultants,Inc.1982a.Winter 1981-82,Ice Observations Report.For Acres American for Alaska Power Authority. R&M Consultants,Inc.1982b.Hydraulic and Ice Studies.For Acres American for Alaska Power Authority. R&M Consultants.Inc.1983.Susitna River Ice Study.1982-83.For Harza-Ebasco for Alaska Power Authority. R&M Consultants,Inc.1984.Susitna River Ice Study,1983-84.Draft Report for Harza-Ebasco for Alaska Power Authority. R&M Consultants,Inc.1985.Susitna River Ice Study,Final Report.Document No.2747 for Harza-Ebasco for Alaska Power Authority. R&M Consultants,Inc.1986.1985 Susitna River Freeze-up.Document No.3401 for Harza- Ebasco for Alaska Power Authority. She,Y.and F.Hicks.2006.Modeling Ice Jam Release Waves with Consideration for Ice Effects. Journal of Cold Regions Science and Technology,45:137-147. She,Y.,F.Hicks,P.Steffler,and D.Healy.2009.Constitutive Model for Internal Resistance of Moving Ice Accumulations and Eulerian Implementation for River Ice Jam Formation. Journal of Cold Regions Science and Technology,55:286-294. She,Y.,F.Hicks and R.Andrishak.2012.The Role of Hydro-peaking in Freeze-up Consolidation Events on Regulated Rivers.Journal of Cold Regions Science and Technology,73:41-49. Shen,Hung Tao,Goranka Bjedov,Steven F.Daly,and A.M.Wasantha Lal.1991.Numerical Model for Forecasting Ice Conditions on the Ohio River,CRREL Report 91-16,U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,September 1991. Steffler,Peter,and Julia Blackburn.2002.River2D,two-dimensional depth averaged model of river hydrodynamics and fish habitat,introduction to depth averaged modeling and user's manual.September. Thériault,Isabelle,Jean-Philippe Saucet,and Wael Taha.2010.Validation of MIKE-Ice model simulating river flows in presence of ice and forecast changes to the ice regime of the Romaine River due to hydroelectric project.20th IAHR International Symposium on Ice, Lahti,Finland,June 14-18,2010. USACE (U.S.Army Corps of Engineers).2002.EM 1110-2-1612 Engineering and design,Ice Engineering.Department Of The Army.U.S.Army Corps of Engineers CECW-EH Washington,D.C.20314-1000. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-52 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.10.Tables Table 7.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Ice Processes in the Susitna River Study. Activity 2012 2013 2014 2015 1Q 2Q/3Q|4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q}3Q|4Q 1Q Open Lead Surveys,ice thickness and elevation Break-up Reconnaissance Freeze-up Reconnaissance Initial Study Report Existing Condition 1-D Model Development eneccced Proposed Condition 1-D Model Development Intensive Site Models Updated Study Report Legend: --Planned Activity -----Follow-up activity (as needed) A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-53 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.6.11.Figures ISF Riparian (8.6)(SF Habitat (8.5)Geomornoleey SFF "y uting fo '4 Ice/Tree Scar Focus AreaLlocations (10-2013)eee ModelingNeeds (10-2013 to 30-2013)Winter Stage and Locations (3 Field Data Sharing (10-2103 to3Q-2014)Discharge (4Q-2012,ee 2012)Specific interest Locations w/in Sites (2Q-2013)10-2013) 7 "RiparianVeg andoatsTeeoeGroundwater(Open Geomorpholegy (Winter ,2014)a Leads}(20-2012,20 Ice Extent and Thickness,Focus Arca Observations 2013,20-2014)Break-up Observations) (242012,1-20-2013,1-WA NN \20-2014} .\Va ISF Habitat Study Geomorphology Groundwater-related ISF Riparian (8.6)Geomorphology Aquatic Habitat Study P :(6.6) {7.5 (8.5){6.6} Figure 7.6-1.Relationship of ice observations to other studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-54 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Baseline Water Quality Water Quality Modeling SF Flow (5.5)55)Routing (8.5) wr Water i Open Water PredictedTemperature,Temperature Predicted j Focus Area Solar from water Outflow Rating Outflow Model Radiation,temperature Temperatures Curves (1Q,Hydrographs Geometry Dew Point &monitoring (32013)2013){30,2013)(30,2013) HET stations stations (10, (1Q,2013-2013) 39,2014) Post-Projectice - Post-Project Post-Project Elevation,Post Project ice Underice Winter Winter Flow Thickness and Thickness and PostProject Ice hydraulic Temperature Routing (20-Winter Flow Timing of Ice Elevations (20-modeling (2Q@4Q,2014)40,2014)Depthsat SS Formation (20-4Q 2014)results{20-4Q, Sites(20-4Q,40,2014)2014) //2014) M4 kK L z 3 \\ Water Quality ISF Flow Routing SF Habitat Recreation and Transportation ISF Riparian eon ,(5.5)8.5)Study (8.5)Study (15.7)Study (8.6)stevenStudy(12) Figure 7.6-2.Relationship of ice modeling to other studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-55 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.7.Glacier and Runoff Changes Study 7.7.1.General Description of the Proposed Study Glaciers have generally retreated during the last century (Kaser et al.2006;Meier et al.2007), and glaciers in Alaska are currently subject to some of the highest glacial wastage rates on Earth (Arendt et al.2002;Hock et al.2009).Projections indicate that Alaskan glaciers may lose up to 60 percent of their current volume within the next 100 years (Radic and Hock 2011).Figure 7.7- 1 provides an example of a glacier within the Upper Susitna basin that has recently retreated. Such changes will alter stream flow both in quantity and timing (Hock and Jansson 2005a).This is because glaciers temporarily store water as snow and ice during varying time scales with the release controlled by both climate and internal drainage (Jansson et al.2003). Typical characteristics of discharge from glacier-dominated drainages include pronounced diurnal patterns and mid-to late summer high flows due to the dominance of glacier meltwater over precipitation.Annual runoff from a glaciered basin strongly depends on glacier mass balance.During years of positive glacier net,balance water is withdrawn from the annual hydrological cycle into glacier storage,and total stream flow is reduced.During years of negative glacier mass,balance water is released from storage and total stream flow increases. Glaciers also tend to dampen interannual streamflow variations,where melting variations tend to offset precipitation variations.As little as 10 percent glacierization in a hydrologic basin reduces year-to-year variability in precipitation to a minimum (Huber 2005).As glaciers retreat,total glacier runoff will initially increase but then be followed by a reduction in runoff as the mass of the glacier dwindles (Figure 7.7-2). With a high fraction of ice cover in the drainage basin,the increases in runoff during glacial mass wasting events can temporarily exceed any other component of the water budget. Nevertheless,glaciers tend to be only crudely represented in hydrological modeling (Hock et al. 2005b).Hence,the watershed runoff response due to glacier retreat is not well understood. The primary goal of this study is to analyze the potential impacts of glacier wastage and retreat on the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project (Project).Specifically,how will glacier wastage and retreat,along with associated changes to the climate,affect the flow of water into the proposed reservoir?Currently several glaciers flow down the southern flanks of the Alaska Range near 13,832-foot Mount Hayes to form the three forks of the Upper Susitna River (Figure 7.7-3). Glaciers in this area provide a significant portion of the total runoff within the Upper Susitna drainage,and it is well documented that these glaciers are currently retreating (Molnia 2008). Given this trend,changes to the runoff represented by glacial melting may occur in the future, and may affect the Project.Therefore,it is important to understand how changes to the upper basin hydrology due to glacial retreat and climate change can affect Project operations and environmental resources. Specific objectives of the study are as follows: 1)Review existing literature relevant to glacier retreat in Southcentral Alaska and the Upper Susitna watershed.This review will summarize the current understanding of potential future changes in runoff associated with glacier wastage and retreat. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-56 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2)Develop a hydrological modeling framework that includes the effects of glacier wastage and retreat on runoff in the Susitna basin,and estimate potential glacier mass changes until the year 2100. 3)Simulate the inflow of water to the proposed Watana Reservoir and project this runoff from the Upper Susitna basin to the year 2100 using downscaled climate projections. 4)Analyze the response of the Susitna River above the proposed Watana Dam site to changes in climate with respect to annual runoff,seasonality,and peak flows. 5)Analyze potential changes to sediment load resulting from glacial surges. 6)Summarize the results in a technical report. Modeling will rely on two existing coupled models.Hydrological processes outside the glacier will be modeled using the Water Balance Simulation Model (WaSiM),and glacier response will be simulated using the glacier melt and runoff model by Hock (1999),which is now included in WaSiM. 7.7.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Approximately 5 percent of the Upper Susitna River basin is covered by glaciers.Permafrost is generally discontinuous,although seasonal freeze and thaw cycles affect the entire basin.Long- term,discontinuous ( 60 years)stream flow observations from the U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)are available at five locations in the basin:Denali,Cantwell,Gold Creek,Sunshine,and Susitna Station. 7.7.2.1.Existing information on Glacier Retreat in Alaska There has been extensive melting of glaciers in Alaska in recent decades (Molnia 2008).Statewide,Alaskan glaciers lost 10.1 mi?(41.9 km?)of water per year,plus or minus 2.1 mi?(8.6km*)of water per year,between 1962 and 2006 (Berthier et al.2010).However,like temperature and precipitation,glacier ice loss is not uniform across wide areas;even while most glaciers in Alaska are losing mass,a small number have been advancing (e.g.,Hubbard Glacier in Southeast Alaska).Alaska glaciers with the most rapid mass loss are those terminating in sea water or lakes (Markon et al,2012). 7.7.2.2._Documented Changes in Climate Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning (SNAP)(2011)reported that Alaska has seenastatewideincreaseintemperaturesof2.69 degrees Fahrenheit (F)since 1971.This has notbeenequalacrossthestate.Statewide,Barrow displayed the greatest increase (4.16F)andKodiakshowedtheleast(0.87F).The U.S.Global Change Research Program (2009)reportedthatAlaskahasexperienceda3.4F rise in average annual temperatures over the past 50 years,with an increase in winter temperatures of 6.4F.These increases in temperatures have led to other related changes in climate.For example,the average snow-free days have increased across Alaska by 10 days,and the number of frost-free days has steadily increased in Fairbanks,Alaska (Figure 7.7-4). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-57 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Precipitation rates are generally increasing across the state.On the whole,Alaska saw a 10 percent increase in precipitation from 1949 to 2005,with the greatest increases recorded during winters (U.S.Global Change Research Program 2009).However,this trend is very location-specific across Alaska.Figure 7.7-5 shows that while temperatures have increased in Talkeetna,mean annual precipitation has remained relatively constant (Alaska Climate Research Center 2012). 7.7.2.3.Projections of the Future For any hydropower project it is important to understand the variability of the discharge as it directly affects power generation.. The observed trends in temperature,precipitation,and snowpack are largely consistent with climate model projections for Alaska (Christensen et al.2007;Karl et al.2009).The magnitude of projected changes depends on many factors and will vary seasonally.Projected changes in climate will translate into hydrologic changes through alteration of rain and snowfall timing and intensity,evapotranspiration,and groundwater and surface flows.For example,precipitation is predicted to increase in the Susitna basin,but this may be offset by an increase in evapotranspiration from warmer temperatures.Milder winters could result in reductions in snowpack because a higher percentage of precipitation would occur as rain.But given the elevation of the Upper Susitna basin,increases in precipitation may simply result in increased seasonal snow storage,resulting in greater spring runoff. Both air temperature and precipitation are currently predicted to increase over time in Alaska, including the southcentral region (SNAP 2011).Temperatures in this region are projected to increase over the coming decades at an average rate of about 1°F ( 0.6 °C)per decade (SNAP 2011). 7.7.3.Study Area The proposed study area is the Susitna River basin upstream of the proposed Watana Dam site. 7.7.4.Study Methods The studies and study components to be conducted include the following: e Review existing literature relevant to Southcentral Alaska,the Susitna watershed,and glacier retreat,and document trends in the historic record. e Develop a hydrological modeling framework. e Analyze changes in glacial systems,temperature,and precipitation,and their impacts on watershed hydrology,and project future runoff in a set of climate projection scenarios to year 2100. e Analyze potential changes to sediment load resulting from glacial surges. e Summarize results in a technical report. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-58 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.7.4.1.Review Existing Literature Existing literature will be reviewed to summarize the current understanding of the rate and trend of glacier retreat and the contribution of glacial mass wasting to the overall flow of the Upper Susitna watershed.This will include trend analyses of glacier retreat,temperature,and precipitation. 7.7.4.2.|Develop a Modeling Framework The study will use the fully-distributed temperature index mass balance model by Hock (1999, 2003),that computes snow and ice melt and resulting runoff on hourly to annual time scales based on temperature and precipitation data.The model incorporates the effects of topography on melt by varying the degree-day factor according to potential direct solar radiation,which is computed from topography and solar geometry.The model converts mass changes into glacier geometry changes,and thus it is able to model the effects of a changing geometry on the mass balance. The model has been used world-wide on many glaciers of different sizes and located in a wide range of climatic settings for a wide range of applications in different disciplines,including basic and applied research,and ranging from providing the mass balance input to ice flow modeling on valley glacier and continental ice sheet scales (Schneeberger et al.2001),predicting the response of glaciers and glacier discharge to future climate (Schuler et al.2005;de Woul and Hock 2005),quantifying the risk for glacier outburst floods (Schuler et al.2002;Huss et al.2007), assessing the glacial history of empty cirques (Diihnforth and Anderson 2011),and reconstructing the mass balance history on a century time scale (Huss et al.2008).Applications have recently been broadened by using global climate datasets including output from global and regional climate models for impact studies (Hock et al.2007).The model requires a digital elevation model (DEM),temperature,and precipitation data. Data generated from the glacier mass balance model will be input into the WaSiM to analyze the present and future runoff,soil water storage variations,and permafrost distribution.WaSiM (Schulla 2012)is a well-established tool for modeling the spatial and temporal variability ofhydrologicalprocessesincomplexbasinsrangingfromlessthan0.4 mi?(1 km”)(Liljedahl et al.2009)to more than 193,000 mi?(500,000 km')(Kleinn et al.2005).It has been widely used by both research scientists and state agencies for water resources management.In total,WaSiM has been applied to more than 55 watersheds on all continents resulting in more than 120 publications documenting the wide range of applications that have led to constant improvement and refinement of the model. WaSiM calculates evapotranspiration,snow accumulation,snow and glacier melt,runoff, interception,infiltration,soil water storage,and runoff,such as surface,interflow,and baseflow. Recently,the model has been enhanced to include soil heat transfer and permafrost (Liljedahl et al.2012).Minimum input data requirements include a digital elevation model,vegetation and soil maps,precipitation,and air temperature.Complementary inputs are wind speed,vapor pressure,and shortwave incoming radiation.Spatial interpolation of the meteorological input data may be applied along with corrections of precipitation and adjustment of radiation due to solar and local geometry.The model can be run with hourly to monthly time steps. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-59 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN WaSiM currently includes a simple glacier melt model that describes the melt of firn,ice,and snow on glaciers as well as routing of the water through the glacier.The melt model is represented by an extended temperature index method including potential direct radiation (Hock 1999),and the water is routed through the glacier using three linear reservoirs (Hock and Noetzli 1997)to account for the different travel times for firn,snow,and ice storages.WaSiM is considered the ideal model for this Project because of the following: e The model is robust and has been successfully applied to many watersheds as evidenced by the extensive publication record. e WaSiM is a reasonable compromise between detailed physical basis and minimum data requirements and,therefore,suitable in data-sparse regions such as Alaska. e WaSiM isa very suitable model because it includes a heat transfer model and it couples a soil thermal regime model to the Richards equation,two dimensional (2-D)groundwater module,and the soil moisture evapotranspiration dynamics. e The model is coded in a modular way allowing easy adjustments and modifications in model formulations,and it can also easily be coupled to existing glacier models. e The model is user-friendly and includes a very detailed model description and user manual facilitating use of the model code (Schulla 2012). Although this approach has been shown to be highly efficient in modeling glacier runoff (Hock et al.2005b),the model does not allow any changes in glacier firn extent,glacier geometry,and area,i.e.,the glacier cannot retreat nor advance.Hence,the model will not be able to accurately predict the runoff changes due to expected glacier retreat as the reservoir of ice is depleted.Also, because the firn areas (i.e.,the high reaching accumulation areas)are assumed constant in the current version,the model is not able to account for a faster runoff generation when firn areas decline and more bare ice becomes exposed at the surface.The glacier module will be enhanced by allowing for a time-variant firn area and by updating the glacier extent after each mass- balance year.This will be accomplished by volume-area scaling (Bahr et al.1997;Radic et al. 2008).By accounting for glacier retreat/advance,the model will be able to represent changes in glacier volume and their effects on long-term river runoff. Input data will include air temperature,precipitation,relative humidity,wind speed,and radiation data.These will be obtained in part from the Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM)dataset (OSU 2012).PRISM is a unique knowledge-based system that uses point measurements of precipitation,temperature,and other climatic factors to produce continuous,digital grid estimates of monthly,yearly,and event-based climatic parameters.To obtain daily and sub-daily data,a WGEN (Weather Generator)model will be used that provides daily values for precipitation,maximum temperature,minimum temperature, and solar radiation.The model accounts for the persistence of each variable,the dependence among the variables,and the seasonal characteristics of each variable (Richardson and Wright 1984).For re-analysis and present-day assessment,the North America Regional Reanalysis (NARR)will be used,which was computed at NCEP and initially covers the period from 1979 to 2003.The highest resolution output is 20 miles (32 kilometers)every 3 hours.Where available, meteorological data will be used with hourly time resolution from the National Weather Service and from the Alaska-Pacific River Forecast Center,Anchorage. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-60 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Field data will be generated from locally installed meteorological stations stations to aid in downscaling the data from gridded climate products (see the Baseline Water Quality Study, Section 5.5).The data will allow smaller-scale climate variability to be accessed and guide determination of some model parameters (for example,the temperature lapse rate). Future hydrological simulations will be forced with the five-model SNAP (monthly)composite projection scenarios.The SNAP dataset includes the years 1980-2099,with data downscaled to 2-kilometer grid cells.Future projections from SNAP are derived from a composition of the five best-ranked General Circulation Models (out of 15 used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC])models for Alaska.Based on how closely the model outputs matched climate station data for temperature,precipitation,and sea level pressure for the recent past,their individual ranking order for overall accuracy in Alaska and the far north was as follows:(1) ECHAMS,(2)GFDL21,(3)MIROC,(4)HAD,and (5)CCCMA.The five-model composite uses mean values from the outputs of these models.Results from three emission scenarios (A2, A1B,and B2)are available from the SNAP website (http://www.snap.uaf.edu/home).Input parameters to the permafrost model within WASIM are spatial datasets of vegetation and soil thermal properties,which are specific for each vegetation and soil class and geographical area. The following datasets will be used: e Soils Properties.Input parameters to the heat transfer model within WaSiM,enabling the modeling of permafrost impacts on the hydrology,are thermal and hydraulic soil characteristics defined by spatial datasets.The parametrization will be based on the U.S. General Soil Map (STATSGO)Data,a digital general soil association map developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey and distributed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the U.S.Department of Agriculture.The soil map units,in Esri digital format,are linked to tabular data stored in an Access Database,containing estimated data on the physical and chemical soil properties,soil interpretations,and static and dynamic metadata.Further data for calibration and validation purposes will be acquired through the Permafrost Laboratory at the Geophysical Institute,University of Alaska,Fairbanks (Jafarov et al.2012). e Land cover map.Land cover properties will be specified for a land cover map obtained from the National Land Cover Database 2001 (Homer et al.2007).The dataset,produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC)Consortium,is derived from 30-m resolution Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) and Enhanced Thematic Mapper-plus (ETM+)circa 2001 satellite imagery and is available since 2008 (Selkowitz and Stehman 2011).In their accuracy assessment, Selkowitz and Stehman (2011)evaluated these data to be reasonable for a wide variety of research,analysis,and modeling efforts.The seasonality of different land cover classes will be parameterized according to products available through the Earth Resources Observation System (EROS)Data Center.These include MODIS-based products (ranging from 250-m to 1-km resolution),such as leaf area index (LAI)maps,and are provided through the Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center (LP DAAC). The models will be calibrated and validated against existing and new AEA-collected river discharge records and glacier mass balance data.The model will be run over the period from 1960 to present.Future simulations will be forced with the SNAP projection scenarios and,if available,the newer ARS simulations.Assessment of changes in glacier mass and river runoff Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-61 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN will be the primary focus,but detailed output from the WaSiM model,such as future permafrost and active layer and soil water storage,will also be analyzed.Change in streamflow will be analyzed on annual,seasonal,and single event (observational period only)time scales.Results will allow quantification of the integrated glacier-hydrology responses to climate change for the Upper Susitna basin. 7.7.4.3.Analyze Potential Changes in Sediment Delivery to Watana Reservoir Glaciers in Alaska can exhibit surges (advancement of the ice)with a sudden onset,extremely high (tens of meters/day)maximum flow rate,and a sudden termination,often with a discharge of stored water.Glacial surges have been reported for a number of Alaskan glaciers (Humphrey and Raymond 1994;Clarke et al.1986),including those that are located in the Alaska Range. Glacial surges have been reported for the Susitna and West Fork glaciers in the Upper Susitna basin (Harrison 1994). Suspended sediment loads as a result of a glacial surge on the Variegated Glacier were reported to increase significantly (Humphrey and Raymond 1994),and it has been suggested that the increased suspended sediment loads resulting from glacial surges might increase sediment delivery to the Watana Reservoir,thereby accelerating reservoir sedimentation (R&M Consultants and Harrison 1981;Harrison 2012). This study will analyze potential changes to sediment load resulting from glacial surges. Unpublished sediment data at the West Fork Glacier,Denali Highway Bridge,and Gold Creek following the 1987-1988 surge of the West Fork Glacier (Harrison 2012)will be obtained and reviewed to determine whether the glacial surge produced significantly increased sediment loads at those locations. It should be noted that the presence of extensive braided streams between the termini of the Upper Susitna basin glaciers and the head of the Watana Reservoir is likely to buffer the impacts of any surge-related increase in sediment concentration at the reservoir.The braided streams strongly suggest that sediment delivery to the Watana Reservoir will not be supply-dependent. Also,there is typically an order of magnitude variability in the suspended sediment loads during times without a glacial surge (Meyer 2012).Because of this sediment delivery,glacial surge may be within normal background variations. An initial investigation of the potential loading of sediment from a glacial surge will be developed.The potential for increased sediment loading to the Watana Resovoir from a glacial surge will be based on the following: e The magnitude of previous glacial surges in the Upper Susitna River basin glaciers as reported by Harrison (1994)and Humphrey and Raymond (1994). e The sediment transport capacity of the reaches of the Susitna River upstream of the reservoir. At the end of this study it may be determined that the increased sediment load will impact project operations and a sediment loading scenario accounting for glacial surge will be added to the reservoir geomorphology study component of the Geomorphology Study.This would include an estimate of the reduction in reservoir life that could result from sediment loading associated with periodic glacial surges. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-62 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.7.4.4.Assess the Potential Effects on Basin Hydrology Changes in snowpack,temperature,and precipitation have been previously documented over time in the state (Christensen et al.2007;Karl et al.2009).The magnitude of future changes depends on many factors and will vary seasonally.Projected changes in climate will translate into hydrologic changes through alteration of rain and snowfall timing and _intensity, evapotranspiration,and groundwater and surface flows.This study will quantitatively evaluate the effects of projected changes in precipitation and temperature on watershed hydrology over the next 100 years in the Upper Susitna basin. 7.7.4.5.|Summarize Results in a Technical Report The technical report will include a description of the assumptions made,methods used (including models and projection scenarios),and other background information.Additionally,this report will include an analysis of the impacts of future climate scenarios on the watershed hydrology of the Upper Susitna basin. 7.7.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice Modeling will rely on two existing models.Glacier response will be simulated using the glacier melt and runoff model by Hock (1999),which will be fully coupled to WaSiM,a physically- based hydrological model. 7.7.6.Schedule The study elements will be completed in several stages and based on the timeline summarized in Table 7.7-1.In 2014 and 2015,licensing participants will have opportunities to review and comment on the study reports (ISR in early 2014 and USR in early 2015).Updates on the study progress will be provided during Technical Workgroup meetings which will be held quarterly in 2013 and 2014. 7.7.7.Relationship with Other Studies A flow chart (Figure 7.7-6)describing interdependencies outlines the origin of existing data and related historical studies,specific output for each element of the study,and where the output information generated will be directed.Integral portions of this interdependency chart are previous studies performed on glacier retreat,and historical aerial photographs of the area.In addition,climate change studies providing parameters for anticipated precipitation and temperature changes are relevant to the study.The results of this study will feed directly into the water quality modeling for the reservoir and downstream areas. 7.7.8.Level of Effort and Cost The total estimated cost is $1,000,000. 7.7.9.Literature Cited Alaska Climate Research Center.2012.Climate Time Series,Talkeetna. http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/Climate/Location/TimeSeries/Talkeetna.html Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-63 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Arendt,A.A.,K.A.Echelmeyer,W.D.Harrison,C.S.Lingle,and V.B.Valentine.2002.Rapid wastage of Alaska glaciers and their contribution to rising sea level.Science 19 Vol.297 no.5580 pp.382-386. Bahr,D.B.,M.F.Meier,and S.D.Peckham.1997.The physical basis of glacier volume-area scaling.J.Geophys.Res.,102,20,355-20,362. Berthier,E.,E.Schiefer,G.Clarke,B.Menounos,and F.Rémy.2010.Contribution of Alaskan glaciers to sea-level rise derived from satellite imagery.Nature Geoscience,Volume 3, Issue 2,pp 92-95. Christensen,J.H.,B.Hewitson,A.Busioc,X.Gao Chen,I.Held,R.Jones,R.K.Kolli,W.T. Kwon,R.Laprise,V.Magana Rueda,L.Mearns,C.G.Menendez,J.Raisaned,A.Rinke, A.Sarr,and P.Whetton.2007.Regional Climate Projection.In:Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis.Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon,S.D.,D.Qin,M. Manning,Z.Chen,M.Marquis,K.B.Averyt,M.Tignor,and H.L.Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge,United Kingdom and New York,NY,USA. Clarke,T.S.,D.Johnson,and W.D.Harrison.1986.Some aspects of glacier hydrology in the upper Susitna and Maclaren River Basins,Alaska.Proc.Symp.Cold Regions Hydrology, Univ.Alaska-Fairbanks.D.Kane (Ed)American Water Resources Association, Bethesda,MD,329-337. de Woul,M.and R.Hock.2005.Static mass balance sensitivity of Arctic glaciers and ice caps using a degree-day approach.Annals of Glaciology 42,217-224. Dithnforth,M.and R.S.Anderson.2011.Reconstructing the Glacial History of Green Lakes Valley,North Boulder Creek.Colorado Front Range Journal Arctic,Antarctic,and Alpine Research,University of Colorado.ISSN 1523-0430 (Print)1938-4246 (Online) Issue Volume 43,Number 4 /November 2011 Pages 527-542. Harrison,W.D.1994.The 1987-88 surge of West Fork Glacier,Susitna Basin.Alaska.J. Glaciol.,40(135),241-253. Harrison,W.D.2012.Effect of glacier surges on the sediment regime of the Susitna Basin. Submitted to Susitna-Watana Project (P-14241-000). Hock,R.and C.Noetzli.1997.Areal mass balance and discharge modeling of Storglaciaren, Sweden.Ann.Glaciol.,24,211-217. Hock,R.1999.A distributed temperature index ice and snow melt model including potential direct solar radiation.Journal of Glaciology 45(149),101-111. Hock,R.2003.Temperature index melt modeling in mountain regions.Journal of Hydrology 282(1-4),104-115.doi:10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00257-9. Hock,R.and P.Jansson.2005a.Modeling glacier hydrology.In:Anderson,M.G.and J. McDonnell (Eds.).Encyclopedia of Hydrology Science,John Wiley &Sons,Ltd, Chichester,4,2647-2655. Hock,R.,P.Jansson,and L.Braun.2005b.Modeling the response of mountain glacier discharge to climate warming.In:Huber,U.M.,M.A.Reasoner,and H.Bugmann (Eds.):Global Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-64 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Change and Mountain Regions -A State of Knowledge Overview.Springer,Dordrecht. pp.243-252. Hock,R.,V.Radié,and M.de woul.2007.Climate sensitivity of Storglaciaren,Sweden:an intercomparison of mass-balance models using ERA-40 re-analysis and regional climate model data.Annals of Glaciology,Volume 46,Number 1,October 2007,pp.342-348(7). Hock,R.,M.de Woul,V.Radic,and M.Dyurgerov.2009.Mountain glaciers and ice caps around Antarctica make a large sea-level rise contribution.Geophysics Research Letters, 36,LO7501. Homer,C.,Dewitz,J.,Fry,J.,Coan,M.,Hossain,N.,Larson,C.,Herold,N.,McKerrow,A., VanDriel,J.N.,and Wickham,J.2007.Completion of the 2001 National Land Cover Database for the Conterminous United States.Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing,Vol.73,No.4,pp 337-341. Huber,U.M.,2005.Global Change And Mountain Regions:An Overview of Current Knowledge.Springer Press,650pp. Humphrey,N.F.and C.F.Raymond.1994.Hydrology,erosion and sediment production in a surging glacier:Variegated Glacier,Alaska,1982-83.J.Glaciol.,40(136),539-552. Huss,M.,A.Bauder,M.Werder,M.Funk,and R.Hock.2007.Glacier-dammed lake outburst events of Gornersee,Switzerland.Journal of Glaciology,Volume 53,Number 181, March 2007,pp.189-200(12). Huss,M.,A.Bauder,M.Funk,and R.Hock.2008.Determination of the seasonal mass balance of four Alpine glaciers since 1865.Journal of Geophysical Research Vol.113,11 pp. Jafarov,E.,S.S.Marchenko,and V.E.Romanovsky.2012.Numerical modeling of permafrost dynamics in Alaska using a high spatial resolution dataset.The Cryosphere,6,613-624, 2012. Jansson,P.,R.Hock,and T.Schneider.2003.The concept of glacier water storage -a review. J.Hydrol.,282(1-4),116-129. Karl,Thomas R.,Jerry M.Melillo,and Thomas C.Peterson,(eds.).2009.Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States.Cambridge University Press. Kaser,G.,J.G.Cogley,M.Dyurgerov,M.F.Meier,and A.Ohmura.2006.Mass balance of glaciers and ice caps:Consensus estimates for 1961-2004.Geophys.Res.Lett.,33, L19501. Kleinn,J.,C.Frei,J.Gurtz,D.Luthi,P.-L.Vidale,and C.Schar.2005.Hydrologic simulations in the Rhine Basin driven by a regional climate model.J.Geophys.Res.,110(D0),4102. Liljedahl,A.K.,J.Schulla,and L.D.Hinzman.2009.The first application and validation of the hydrologic model WaSiM-ETH at a watershed underlain by permafrost.Abstract C51A- 461 American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting,December 14-18,San Francisco,CA, 2009. Liljedahl,AK,L.D.Hinzman and J.Schulla.2012.Ice-wedge polygon type controls low- gradient watershed-scale hydrology.In Tenth International Conference on Permafrost Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-65 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Vol.1:International Contributions,Hinkel K.M.(Ed.),The Northern Publisher, Salekhard,Russia,pp 231-236. Markon,C.J.,Trainor,S.F.,and Chapin,F.S.,IL,eds.,2012,The United States National Climate Assessment-Alaska Technical Regional Report:U.S.Geological Survey Circular 1379, 148 p. Meier,M.F.,M.B.Dyurgerov,U.K.Rick,S.O'Neel,W.T.Pfeffer,R.S.Anderson,S.P. Anderson,and A.F.Glazovsky.2007.Glaciers dominate eustatic sea-level rise in the 21st century.Science,317,1064,doi:10.1126/science.1143906. Meyer,D.2012.Personal Communication.U.S.Geological Survey. Milliman,J.D.,and R.H.Meade.1983.World-wide delivery of river sediment to the oceans: Journal of Geology:v.91,p.1-21. Molnia,B.F.2008.Glaciers of North America --Glaciers of Alaska,in Williams,R.S.,Jr.,and Ferrigno,J.G.,eds.,Satellite image atlas of glaciers of the world:U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper 1386-K,525 p. Oregon State University (OSU).2012.Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model (PRISM)climate mapping system.Developed by Dr.Christopher Daly,PRISM Climate Group,Oregon State University.http:/\www.prism.oregonstate.edu/. Radic,V.,R.Hock,and J.Oerlemans.2008.Analysis of scaling methods in deriving future volume evolutions of valley glaciers.Journal of Glaciology,54(187),601-612,2008. Radié,V.and R.Hock.2011.Regional differentiated contribution of mountain glaciers and ice caps to future sealevel rise.Nature Geoscience,4,91-94,DOI:10.1038/NGEO1052. Richardson,C.W.and D.A.Wright.1984.WGEN:A model for generating daily weather variables.USDA-ARS Bulletin No ARS-8.Washington,D.C. R&M Consultants,Inc.and W.D.Harrison.1981.Alaska Power Authority Susitna hydroelectric project;Task 3 -hydrology;glacier studies.Report for Acres American Inc.,Buffalo, NY. Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning (SNAP).2011.Regional Climate Projections- Southcentral Alaska.Alaska Climate Change Adaptation Series.Available at:www .accap.uaf.edu/documents/4pg_Climate Projections Statewide.pdf and www .accap.uaf.edu/documents/2pg_ClimateProjections Regional.pdf. Schneeberger,C.,O.Albrecht,H.Blatter,M.Wild,and R.Hock.2001.Modeling the response of glaciers to a doubling in atmospheric CO2:a case study on Storglaciaren,northern Sweden.Climate Dynamics 17,825-834. Schuler,T.,U.Fischer,R.Sterr,R.Hock,and H.Gudmundson.2002.Comparison of modeled water input and measured discharge prior to a release event:Unteraar-gletscher,Bernese Alps,Switzerland.Nordic Hydrology 33 (1),27-46. Schuler,T.,R.Hock,M.Jackson,H.Elvehgy,M.Braun,I.Brown,and I.O.Hagen.2005. Distributed mass balance and climate sensitivity modeling of Engabreen,Norway.Annals of Glaciology 42,395-401. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-66 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Schulla,J.2012.Model Description WaSiM (Water balance Simulation Model).Completely revised version 2012,last change May 01,2012.Available at: http://www.wasim.ch/downloads/doku/wasim/wasim_2012_en.pdf Selkowitz,D.J.,and S.V.Stehman.2011.Thematic accuracy of the National Land Cover Database (NLCD)2001 land cover for Alaska.Remote Sensing of Environment,115 (6), pp.1401-1407. USGS (U.S.Geological Survey).2012.Global Land Cover Characterization Global Land Cover Characteristics Data Base Version 2.0.http://edc2.usgs.gov/glec/globdoc2_0.php. U.S.Global Change Research Program.2009.Global climate change impacts in the United States.Cambridge University Press,New York. http://downloads.globalchange.gov/usimpacts/pdfs/alaska.pdf. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-67 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.7.10.Tables Table 7.7-1.Glacier and Runoff Changes Study schedule. 2012 2013 2014 2015 1Q]2Q]/3Q/4Q/1Q)/2Q/3Q]/4Q/1Q/2Q/3Q]/4Q|1QActivity Compile data,review glacier wastage & watershed hydrology literature Process remote sensing imagery Spring fieldwork (winter balance -- measurements and instrument and station deployment} Fall fieldwork (summer balance --ot measurements and data collection) Analyze glacier mass balance and meteordogical data =a| Glacier extent variation Hydrological &giacier melt model a development Hydrological &gacier melt model calibration and validation Initial study report issued A Updated study report issued A Legend: --Planned Activity A Initial Study Report A =Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-68 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.7.11.Figures Figure 7.7-1.September 1999 oblique aerial photograph of the terminus of an unnamed glacier that drains to the East Fork of the Susitna River,looking northeast.The western end of the lake corresponds to the 1955 position of the terminus.The large trimline suggests that the glacier has recently thinned significantly more than 50 meters (164 feet) and retreated more than 2 kilometers (1.2 miles).From Molnia 2008. Aa Glacier volume Run-off Time Figure 7.7-2.Schematic representation of the long-term effects of negative glacier mass balances on a)glacier volume and b)glacier runoff.Note that runoff is initially larger during prolonged mass wasting until the glacier is small enough to reduce excess runoff (Jansson et al.2003). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-69 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN West Fork Glacier Susitna Glacier East Fork Glacier Figure 7.7-3.Susitna Glacier and other unnamed glaciers contributing to Upper Susitna River drainage. ® @ NumberofFrost-fr45; 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Year Figure 7.7-4.Fairbanks Frost-Free Season,1904 to 2008.Over the past 100 years,the length of the frost-free season in Fairbanks,Alaska,has increased by 50 percent.U.S.Global Change Research Program (2009). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-70 December 2012 Talkeetna Mean Annual Temperature (°F) REVISED STUDY PLAN 4 i) 4 co]g ;1Oty j\1\'\' . it \1 \'ai rr eo whanntn ng "7% ete ieieied sieieie ees senna > \'''§ \ ' O- Ptig \ '{j'gs wade abnntges tine rat r Sesg7 770 Trctat iil a Gee ' Bu bot es "Sa ee res pt i---b--4---1 8 anax F SO dd -- -- em poy PM eene++ re '' To] ee '' t ' a rot 4 ' \' ' \i ,t' ' t1 --3--4--teleedebee pnt otro re 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990955 }F---------{----, gepoy™ -----_---4 a ee en aa nas Saree Eee Talkeetna Total Annual Precipitation (in) T 1 { --4 1 1 4 ©Aaska Ciamate Research Center,Geophy sical 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1 42 4p 4 -- 33 4 -- 96|-- 4 4 32 +- 394-- 28 +-- 26 50 45 40 35 30 | 25 20 15 10 December 2012 00 2005 2010 Alaska Energy Authority 205198049851990199601965197019755519 Page 7-71 ©Aaska Cana Research Cons,Geophy scat 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 19 Figure 7.7-5.Mean annual temperature and total annual precipitation at Talkeetna,Alaska 1915-2010 showing the trend line.From Alaska Climate Research Center,http://climate.gi.alaska.edu/Climate/Location/TimeSeries/Talkeetna.html. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 REVISED STUDY PLAN INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR GLACIER AND RUNOFF CHANGES STUDY Existing Glacier Literature Runoff, changes in sedimentation Met station data Historical photos Climate change estimates , Historicalinfo andclimate change projections Water Quality Model (WesiM) «Impacts on hydrology ¢Impacts on sediment delivery (40-2014) | Water Quality Modeling Study Figure 7.7-6.Interdependencies for Glacier and Runoff Changes Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-72 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.8.Attachments ATTACHMENT 7-1.GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS - HYDROLOGY. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 7-73 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 7-1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS -HYDROLOGY Revised Study Plan Glossary of Terms and Acronyms Hydrology Included in this list are definitions obtained from the glossary prepared by the Instream Flow Council (Locke et al.2008),the Multi-language Glossary ofPermafrost and Pelated Ground-Ice Terms (van Everdingen 1998),and the USGS Hydrologic Definitions (USGS 2012),as well as definitions developed for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Active floodplain AEA Anchor ice Aquifer Bank Baseflow Border ice Braided streams Brash ice Break-up The flat valley floor constructed by a river during lateral channel migration and deposition of sediment under current climate _conditions. Alaska Energy Authority. Submerged ice attached or anchored to the bottom,irrespective of the nature of its formation.Often accumulates as frazil slush in open reaches. A geologic formation,group of formations,or part of a formation that contains sufficient saturated permeable material to yield significant quantities of water to springs and wells. The sloping land bordering a stream channel that forms the usual boundaries of a channel.The bank has a steeper slope than the bottom of the channel and is usually steeper than the land surrounding the channel. The portion of stream flow that comes from the sum of deep subsurface flow and delayed shallow subsurface flow.It should not be confused with groundwater flow. Ice sheet in the form of a long border attached to the bank or shore;shore ice. Stream consisting of multiple small,shallow channels that divide and recombine numerous times.Associated with glaciers,the braiding is caused by excess sediment load. Accumulations of floating ice made up of fragments not more than about 2 meters (6 feet)across;the wreckage of other forms of ice. Disintegration of ice cover. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 1 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Break-up jam Break-up period Calibration Capillary fringe CCCMA Channel Cirques Conductivity Confluence Consecutive dry days Consecutive wet days Cross-section CRREL Ice jam that occurs as a result of the accumulation of broken ice pieces.Break-up jams usually occur in the spring after a stable ice cover has formed,and are caused by a combination of increased discharge and thermal decay of the ice cover. Period of disintegration of an ice cover. In the context of hydrologic modeling,calibration is the process of adjusting input variables to minimize the error between predicted and observed water surface elevations or other hydrologic parameters. The subsurface layer in which groundwater seeps up from a water table by capillary action to fill soil pores. Canadian Centre for Climate Modeling and Analysis. A natural or artificial watercourse that continuously or intermittently contains water,with definite bed and banks that confine all but overbank stream flows. A bowl-shaped depression on the side of a mountain at the head of a glacier. In terms of water conductivity,the ability of water to conduct electricity,normally through the presence of dissolved solids that carry electrical charges.It can be an indication of total dissolved solids (TDS). The junction of two or more rivers or streams. Number of days in a row without precipitation. Number of days in a row with precipitation.Soil can hold precipitation,but as more consecutive days of precipitation occur, runoff increases. A plane across a river or stream channel perpendicular to the direction of water flow. U.S.Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, Hanover,New Hampshire. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 2 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Degree-day Datum DEM Depth Direct solar radiation Discharge Discontinuous permafrost Dissolved oxygen (DO) Diurnal Downwelling Drainage area Duration of ice cover Also termed freezing degree-day,a measure of the departure of the mean daily temperature below a given standard,usually 0°C (32°F).For example,a day with an average temperature of -5°C (23°F)represents 9 freezing degree-days by the Fahrenheit scale (5 freezing degree-days by the Celsius scale).Accumulated freezing degree-days (AFDD)are simply the sum of any number of degree-days.For example,the AFDD of a week with mean daily temperatures of -5,0,+5,0,-5,-10,and -5°C is 20 freezing degree-days by the Celsius scale (23,32,41,32,23,14, and 23°F)and 36 freezing degree-days by the Fahrenheit scale. A geometric plane of known or arbitrary elevation used as a point of reference to determine the elevation,or change of elevation,of another plane (see gage datum). Digital elevation model. Water depth at the measuring point (station). Sunlight not blocked by clouds. The rate of stream flow or the volume of water flowing at a location within a specified time interval.Usually expressed as cubic meters per second (cms)or cubic feet per second (cfs). Permafrost that is laterally discontinuous,or isolated by thawed soils or bedrock. The amount of gaseous oxygen (O2)dissolved in the water column.Oxygen gets into water by diffusion from the surrounding air,by aeration (rapid movement),and as a waste product of photosynthesis.More than 5 parts oxygen per million parts water is considered healthy;below 3 parts oxygen per million is generally stressful to aquatic organisms. Any pattern that reoccurs daily. The downward movement of water from rivers,streams,sloughs and other surface water features into soils and bedrock.Water movement can be into unsaturated or saturated material.This is also called groundwater recharge and may be associated with a losing reach of a river or stream. The total land area draining to any point in a stream.Also called catchment area,watershed,and basin. The time from freeze-up to break-up of an ice cover. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 3 December 2012 Revised Study Plan ECHAMS Electrofishing EROS Evapotranspiration Firn FLIR Flood Floodplain Floodplain vegetation - groundwater /surface water regime functional groups Focus Area Frazil Frazil pan Freeze-up jam Freeze-up period A global climate model developed by the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology. A biological collection method that uses electric current to facilitate capturing fishes. Earth Resources Observation System. The sum of evaporation and plant transpiration to the atmosphere. Granular,partially consolidated snow that has passed through one summer melt season but is not yet glacial ice. Forward looking infrared (FLIR)is an imaging technology that senses infrared radiation.Can be used for watershed temperature monitoring. Any flow that exceeds the bankfull capacity of a stream or channel and flows out on the floodplain. 1.The area along waterways that is subject to periodic inundation by out-of-bank flows.2.The area adjoining a water body that becomes inundated during periods of over-bank flooding and that is given rigorous legal definition in regulatory programs.3.Land beyond a stream channel that forms the perimeter for the maximum probability flood.4.A relatively flat strip of land bordering a stream that is formed by sediment deposition.5.A deposit of alluvium that covers a valley flat from lateral erosion of meandering streams and rivers. Assemblages of plants that have established and developed under similar groundwater and surface water hydrologic regimes. Areas selected for intensive investigation by multiple disciplines as part of the AEA study program. Fine spicules,plates,or discoids of ice suspended in water.In rivers and lakes it is formed in supercooled,turbulent waters. A circular agglomerate of loosely packed frazil that floats. Ice jam formed as frazil ice accumulates and thickens during the freeze-up period. Period of initial formation of an ice cover. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 4 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Gaging station Geographic Information System (GIS) Geohydrology Geohydrologic unit Glacial mass wasting Glacial surge Glacier geometry changes Glacier mass balance Glacier outburst Glacier retreat Global positioning system (GPS) Gradient A specific site on a stream where systematic observations of stream flow or other hydrologic data are obtained. An integrated collection of computer software and data used to view and manage information about geographic places,analyze spatial relationships,and model spatial processes.A GIS provides a framework for gathering and organizing spatial data and related information so that it can be displayed and analyzed. In the simplest terms,GIS is the merging of cartography, statistical analysis,and database technology. The study of water in the Earth's surface,commonly called groundwater. An aquifer,a confining unit,or a combination of aquifers and confining units comprising a framework for a reasonably distinct geohydrologic system. When large amounts of glacial ice rapidly disintegrate and melt. Relatively rapid movement of a glacier down-gradient. Frequently accompanied by increased flow of meltwater and additional sediment production.These events typically have a sudden onset,extremely high (tens of meters/day)maximum flow rate,and a sudden termination,often with a discharge of stored water. Changes in the size or shape of a glacier over time. The difference between accumulation and ablation of a glacier. Changes in mass balance control a glacier's long-term behavior, and cause either advance or retreat. A sudden release of water from a glacier. The upslope migration of the terminus of a glacier. A system of radio-emitting and -receiving satellites used for determining positions on the earth.The orbiting satellites transmit signals that allow a GPS receiver anywhere on Earth to calculate its own location through trilateration.Developed and operated by the U.S.Department of Defense,the system is used in navigation, mapping,surveying,and other applications in which precise positioning is necessary. The rate of change of any characteristic,expressed per unit of length (see Slope). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 5 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Grounded ice Groundwater (GW) GW/SW interactions Hanging dam Heat transfer model Hummocked ice Hydraulic head Hydraulic model Hydrograph Hyporheic Hyporheic flow Ice bridge Ice concentration Ice cover Ice that has run aground or is in contact with the ground underneath it. In the broadest sense,all subsurface water;more commonly that part of the subsurface water in the saturated zone. The physical interactions between groundwater and surface water.Interactions can include pressure,thermal,or mass exchanges between groundwater and surface water.GW/SW interactions are predominately transient processes. A mass of ice composed mainly of frazil or broken ice deposited under an ice cover in a region of low flow velocity. A model for migration of heat from a warm body to cold. Ice piled haphazardly,one piece over another,to form an uneven surface. A measure of energy or pressure,expressed in terms of the vertical height of a column of water that has the same pressure difference. A computer model of a segment of river used to evaluate stream flow characteristics over a range of flows. A graph showing stage,flow,velocity,or other property of water with respect to time. The hyporheic zone is the subsurface volume of sediment and porous space beneath and lateral to a river or streambed,where there is mixing of shallow groundwater and surface water. Shallow subsurface (groundwater)flow through porous sediments adjacent to river channels. A continuous ice cover of limited size extending from shore to shore like a bridge.Often grows upstream via accumulation of frazil pans into an ice cover in lower gradient reaches.In higher gradient reaches,ice bridges may remain limited in extent as floating frazil is sucked underneath. The ratio (in eighths or tenths)of the water surface actually covered by ice to the total area of surface,both ice-covered and ice-free,at a specific location or over a defined area. A significant expanse of ice of any form on the surface of a body of water. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 6 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Ice floe Ice-free Ice jam Ice run Instream flow Interannual stream flow variations Interflow Intergravel IPCC LAI Leading edge of ice cover LiDAR LP DAAC Free-floating piece of ice greater than about 1 meter (3 feet)in extent. No floating ice present. A stationary accumulation of fragmented ice or frazil that restricts or blocks a stream channel. Flow of ice in a river.An ice run may be light or heavy,and may consist of frazil or broken sheet ice. The rate of flow in a river or stream channel at any time of year. Changes in stream flow on a year-to-year basis. The lateral movement of water in the upper part of the unsaturated zone,or vadose zone,which directly enters a stream channel or other body of water.It is above the regions where baseflow takes place.Interflow is slower than throughflow but faster than groundwater flow. Intergravel refers to the subsurface environment within the riverbed. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Leaf area index.LAI is the one-sided green leaf area per unit ground area in broadleaf canopies,or as the projected needle leaf area per unit ground area in needle canopies. The upstream extent of a continuous ice cover that is progressing upstream via juxtaposition (accumulation)of frazil ice pans. Light detection and ranging.An optical remote sensing technology that can measure the distance to a target;can be used to create a topographic map. Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 7 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Main channel Mainstem Manning's equation MET MIROC MODFLOW MRLC NARR Off-channel Open lead Main Channel Habitat Types: Main Channel:Single dominant main channel Split Main Channel:Less than 3 distributed dominant channels Braided Main Channel:Greater than 3 distributed dominant channels Side Channel:Channel that is turbid and connected to the active main channel but represents non-dominant proportion of flow Tributary Mouth:Clear water areas that exist where tributaries flow into the Susitna River main channel or side channel habitats Mainstem refers to the primary river corridor,as contrasted to its tributaries.Mainstem habitats include the main channel,split main channels,side channels,tributary mouths,and off-channel habitats. V =1.486 R2/3S1/2/n in English units (V =R2/3S1/2/n in SI units)where V =mean flow velocity,R =hydraulic radius,and S$ =hydraulic slope;n is a coefficient of roughness. Meteorological stations. Model for Interdisciplinary Research on Climate. The name of a common USGS finite difference 3-D groundwater flow model. Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics. North America Regional Reanalysis. Those bodies of water adjacent to the main channel that have surface water connections to the main river at some discharge levels. Off-channel Habitat Types: Side Slough:Overflow channel contained in the floodplain,but disconnected from the main channel.Has clear water.2 Upland Slough:Similar to a side slough,but contains a vegetated bar and is rarely overtopped by mainstem flow.Has clear water.2 Backwater:Found along channel margins and generally within the influence of the active main channel.Water is not clear. Beaver Complex:Complex ponded water body created by beaver dams Elongated opening in the ice cover caused by water current (velocity lead)or warm water (thermal lead). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Overbank flow Period of record Permafrost Permeability Piezometer Porosity Potentiometric surface PRECPTOT PRISM Process domains Pump test Flow that exceeds the level of a river's banks and extends into the floodplain.Also overflow. The length of time for which data for an environmental variable has been collected on a regular and continuous basis. Earth materials that remains continuously at or below OoC for at least two consecutive years. The capacity of a rock for transmitting a fluid;a measure of the relative ease with which a porous medium can transmit a liquid. A type of groundwater well installed to specifically measure water levels or pressure levels.A piezometer can be deep or shallow and is usually not used for water supply applications.A piezometer can also be called a groundwater well,or groundwater monitoring well. A measure of the acidity or basicity of a solution.Pure water is said to be neutral,with a pH close to 7.0 at 25 °C (77 °F). Solutions with a pH less than 7 are said to be acidic,and solutions with a pH greater than 7 are said to be basic or alkaline. The ratio of the volume of voids in a rock or soil to the total volume. An imaginary surface representing the static head of ground water in tighty cased wells that tap a water-bearing rock unit (aquifer);or,in the case of unconfined aquifers,the water table. Total precipitation for a year. Parameter-elevation Regressions on Independent Slopes Model. PRISM uses point measurements of precipitation,temperature, and other climatic factors to produce continuous,digital grid estimates of monthly,yearly,and event-based climatic parameters. Define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern habitat attributes and dynamics (Montgomery 1999). A method of determining aquifer properties by pumping water from a well and measuring the water level drawdown or recovery in the well,and nearby piezometers or wells. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 9 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Refugia Regime Reservoir Riffle Riparian Riparian process domain Riparian vegetation Riparian zone River River corridor River mile Hydrological abbreviation for discharge,usually presented as cfs (cubic feet per second)or cms (cubic meters per second).Flow (discharge at a cross-section). An area protected from disturbance and exposure to adverse environmental conditions where fish or other animals can find shelter from sudden flow surges,adverse water quality,or other short-duration disturbances. The general pattern (magnitude and frequency)of flow or temperature events through time at a particular location (such as snowmelt regime,rainfall regime). A body of water,either natural or artificial,that is used to manipulate flow or store water for future use. A fast water habitat with turbulent,shallow flow over submerged or partially submerged gravel and cobble substrates.Generally broad,uniform cross section.Low gradient;usually 0.5-2.0% slope. Pertaining to anything connected with or adjacent to the bank ofa stream or other body of water. Define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern floodplain habitat attributes and dynamics. Vegetation that is dependent upon an excess of moisture during a portion of the growing season on a site that is perceptively more moist than the surrounding area. A stream and all the vegetation on its banks that is influenced by the presence of the stream,including surface flow,hyporheic flow and microclimate. A large stream that serves as the natural drainage channel for a relatively large catchment or drainage basin. A perennial,intermittent,or ephemeral stream and adjacent vegetative fringe.The corridor is the area occupied during high water and the land immediately adjacent,including riparian vegetation that shades the stream,provides input of organic debris,and protects banks from excessive erosion. The distance of a point on a river measured in miles from the river's mouth along the low-water channel. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 10 December 2012 Revised Study Plan RTK Side channel Simple daily intensity index Slope Slush ice SNAP Soil heat transfer Soil water storage variations Solar geometry Spring Stage Staging Real time kinematic,in reference to a GPS survey method. Lateral channel with an axis of flow roughly parallel to the mainstem,which is fed by water from the mainstem;a braid of a river with flow appreciably lower than the main channel.Side channel habitat may exist either in well-defined secondary (overflow)channels,or in poorly-defined watercourses flowing through partially submerged gravel bars and islands along the margins of the mainstem. Known also as SDII,it is the annual total precipitation divided by the number of wet days in the year. The inclination or gradient from the horizontal of a line or surface.The degree of inclination can be expressed as a ratio, such as 1:25,indicating one unit rise in 25 units of horizontal distance or as 0.04 height per length.Often expressed as a percentage and sometimes also expressed as feet (or inches)per mile. An agglomerate of loosely packed frazil floating on the water surface or adhered to the bed or underside of the ice cover. Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning. Heat flow between the soil surface and the deeper layers.Heat transfer varies with soil type,moisture,horizon,etc.The flow of heat is directed from warmer layers to cooler layers.Heat transfer in soil is substantially influenced by the snow cover,vegetation, and terrain. Seasonal changes in where and how water is stored in a hydraulic system. Angle of the sun's rays to the surface. Area where there is a concentrated discharge of groundwater that flows at the ground surface. The distance of the water surface in a river above a known datum. Increase in water levels upstream of the leading edge of ice cover caused by the partial blockage of the channel by ice. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 11 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan STATSGO Streambed Supercooled water SW Terminus Thermal break-up Thermal ice ™ Tracer study Tributary Trimline WaSiM Unconfined aquifer Upwelling Unsaturated zone U.S.General Soil Map Data,a digital general soil association map developed by the National Cooperative Soil Survey and distributed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the U.S.Department of Agriculture. The bottom of the stream channel;may be wet or dry. Water with a temperature slightly below the freezing point (0°C or 32°F). Surface water.Water that has not infiltrated below ground surface,including rivers,streams,sloughs,lakes,ponds, wetlands. The down-gradient end of a glacier. Melting in place.Also called in situ breakup. Solid ice formed in place in low-velocity areas. Thematic Mapper.One of the Earth observing sensors introduced in the Landsat program. In terms of groundwater applications,the use chemical or physical (usually temperature)properties to determine groundwater pathways and mass exchange with surface water. Natural tracer studies commonly use water temperature and conductivity to help understand groundwater movement and GW/SW interaction. A stream feeding,joining,or flowing into a larger stream (at any point along its course or into a lake).Synonyms:feeder stream, side stream. Soil stripped of vegetation by a glacier. Water Balance Simulation Model. Aquifer whose upper surface is a water table free to fluctuate. The movement of groundwater into rivers,stream,sloughs and other surface water features.This is also called groundwater discharge and may be associated with a gaining reach of a river or stream. A subsurface zone above the water table where the pore spaces may contain a combination of air and water. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 7-1 Page 12 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Water slope Change in water surface elevation per unit distance. Water stage The water surface elevation above the bottom of the river channel or above some arbitrary datum. Water table The top water surface of an unconfined aquifer at atmospheric pressure. WGEN Weather generator model that can be used to generate daily values for precipitation,maximum temperature,minimum temperature,and solar radiation.The model accounts for the persistence of each variable,the dependence among the variables, and the seasonal characteristics of each variable. Citation information: Locke,A.,C.Stalnaker,S.Zellmer,K.Williams,H.Beecher,T.Richards,C.Robertson,A. Wald,A.Paul,T.Annear,and Instream Flow Council.2008.Integrated Approaches to Riverine Resource Stewardship:Case Studies,Science,Law,People,and Policy. Instream Flow Council,Cheyenne,WY. Montgomery,D.1999.Process domains and the river continuum.Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35 (2):397-410. van Everdingen,Robert,ed.1998,revised May 2005.Multi-language glossary ofpermafrost and related ground-ice terms.Boulder,CO:National Snow and Ice Data Center. USGS,2012.Hydrologic Definitions.http://water-usgs.gov/wsc/glossary.html,accessed December 6,2012. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 7-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.INSTREAM FLOW STUDY:FISH,AQUATICS,AND RIPARIAN 8.1.Introduction Project construction and operation will affect Susitna River flows downstream of the dam;the degree of these effects will ultimately depend on final Project design and operating characteristics.The Project will be operated in a load-following mode.Project operations will cause seasonal,daily,and hourly changes in Susitna River flows compared to existing conditions.The potential alteration in flows will influence downstream resources/processes, including fish and aquatic biota and their habitats,channel form and function including sediment transport,water quality,groundwater/surface water interactions,ice dynamics,and riparian and wildlife communities (AEA 2011). The potential operational flow-induced effects of the Project will need to be carefully evaluated as part of the licensing process.This Revised Study Plan (RSP)describes the Susitna-Watana Instream Flow Study (IFS)that will be conducted to characterize and evaluate these effects.The plan includes a statement of objectives,a description of the technical framework that is at the foundation of the IFS,the general methods that will be applied,and the study nexus to the Project.This plan will be subject to revision and refinements as part of the Technical Workgroup (TWG)review and comment process identified as part of the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP). Pursuant to the standards,schedule,and process described below,these details will be developed in consultation with the TWG as part of the continuing study planning process and during study implementation. The RSP has already benefitted from formal written comments submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)from Proposed Study Plan (PSP)filing (July 16,2012)through submittal of Interim Draft RSPs (October 31,2012),and formal comment letters filed with FERC between November 1 and 14,2012 (see Section 8.4).In addition,comments and suggestions have been provided during eight agency and licensing participant TWG meetings that were conducted to describe various elements of the proposed studies.These meetings were conducted in 2012 on January 1,March 2,April 5,June 13,August 16,September 14,October 2, and October 24 and included specific discussions on study area selection,methods and models, and linkages with other resource studies.Detailed notes were recorded during each of these meetings that highlighted action items and/or technical issues and comments that have been considered in the current RSP.A one-and-one-half-day field reconnaissance was also conducted with the agencies on October 3-4,2012,to visit three of the proposed study areas (termed Focus Areas (Focus Areas)-see Section 8.5.4.2.1.2)and discuss sampling methodologies.These agency interactions,coupled with direct communications via e-mail and telephone,have all contributed to refinements in the IFS plan that are reflected in this RSP.Even so,as noted above and depicted in the IFS schedule (see Section 8.5.6),refinements will continue to be made to the plan as more information from this and other interdependently-linked studies is collected and evaluated. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-1 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.2.Nexus Between Project Construction /Existence /Operations and Effects on Resources to be Studied As described above,the operational strategy of the Project could result in a variety of flow responses to the river below Watana Dam.These may include seasonal,daily,and hourly changes in river stage that would vary longitudinally along the river.Having a clear understanding of Project effects on instream flow and riparian habitats and biological resources present within the Susitna River corridor will be critical to environmental analysis of the Project. 8.3.Resource Management Goals and Objectives Several natural resources agencies have jurisdiction over aquatic species and their habitats in the Project area.These agencies will be using,in part,the results of the IFS and other fish and aquatic studies to satisfy their respective mandates.The federal and state agencies and Alaska Native entities mentioned below have identified their resource management goals,or provided comments in the context of FERC licensing related to instream flow and riparian resource issues. 8.3.1.National Marine Fisheries Service The following text is an excerpt of the May 31,2012,National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) letter and Instream Flow Study Request: NMFS has authority to request water quality and other natural resource studies related to the project pursuant to the:Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act,as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)of 1969 (83 Stat.852;42 U.S.C.§4321 et seq.),Endangered Species Act (ESA)of 1973 (87 Stat.884,as amended;16 U.S.C.§1531 et seq.),Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)(54 Stat.250,as amended,16 U.S.C.§668a-d),Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)(40 Stat.755,as amended;16 U.S.C.$703 et seq.),Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat.401,as amended;16 U.S.C.$661 et seq.),and Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.§91 et seq.). Under Section 18 of the FPA,NMFS and the USFWS have authority to issue mandatory fishway prescriptions for safe,timely,and effective fish passage.Under Section 10(j)of the FPA,NMFS and USFWS are authorized to recommend license conditions necessary to adequately and equitably protect,mitigate damages to,and enhance,fish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat)affected by the development,operation, and management of hydropower projects.Section 10(a)(1)of the FPA requires FERC to condition hydropower licenses to best improve or develop a waterway or waterways for the adequate protection,mitigation,and enhancement of fish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat)based on NMFS and Service recommendations and plans for affected waterways.Therefore,one of the resource management goals of NMFS is to inform development of fishway prescriptions for this project pursuant to Section 18 of the FPA. A number of Federal regulations address the need to protect and preserve fish and wildlife resources and their habitats,including preventing the "take”of certain species (or groups of species).The following is a list of some of the most important of these Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-2 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN regulations which are applicable or may be applicable to the proposed license applications: e Federal Power Act -FERC is required to give equal consideration to "protection, mitigation of damage to,and enhancement of,fish and wildlife (including spawning grounds and habitat).”' e Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act -Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act,as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267),established a new requirement to describe and identify EFH in each fishery management plan.The EFH provisions of the MSA (§305(b))require federal agencies to consult with NMFS on all actions,or proposed actions,authorized,funded,or undertaken by the agency,that may adversely affect EFH e Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act -Requires equal consideration and coordination of wildlife conservation with other water resources development programs. e National Environmental Policy Act -Requires evaluation ofproject alternatives,cumulative effects. e Endangered Species Act -Section 7(a)(2)requires Federal agencies to ensure that their activities are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. e Anadromous Fish Conservation Act 8.3.2.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service The following text is an excerpt of the May 31,2012,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Instream Flow Study Request: The U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),U.S.Department of Interior,has authority to request fish and wildlife resources studies related to this project pursuant to: The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)of 1969 (83 Stat.852;42 U.S.C.4321 et seq.),the Endangered Species Act (ESA)of 1973 (87 Stat.884,as amended;16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)(54 Stat.250,as amended,16 U.S.C.668a-d),the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)(40 Stat.755,as amended;16 U.S.C.703 et seq.),the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat.401,as amended;16 U.S.C.661 et seq.),and the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.§791 et seq.). Under Section 18 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),U.S.Department of Commerce and the USFWS have authority to issue mandatory fishway prescriptions for safe,timely,and effective fish passage.Under Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-3 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Section 10(j)of the FPA,NMFS and USFWS are authorized to recommend license conditions necessary to adequately and equitably protect,mitigate damages to,and enhance,fish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat)affected by the development,operation,and management of hydropower projects.Section 10(a)(1)of the FPA requires FERC to condition hydropower licenses to best improve or develop a waterway or waterways for the adequate protection,mitigation,and enhancement offish and wildlife (including related spawning grounds and habitat)based on NMFS and USFWS recommendations and plans for affected waterways. Consistent with our mission and with the legal authorities described above,our resource goal in this matter is to conserve existing fish and wildlife resources and their habitats in the Susitna River basin.With regard to fish passage,we will recommend scientifically- based and coordinated studies,collaborate with others,and ensure development of the best information possible to inform potential development offishway prescriptions for this project pursuant to Section 18 of the Federal Power Act. 8.3.3.Alaska Department of Fish and Game The following text is an excerpt of the May 30,2012,ADF&G letter and Instream Flow Study Request: The Fish and Game Act requires the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to,among other responsibilities,"...manage,protect,maintain,improve,and extend the fish,game and aquatic plant resources of the state in the interest of the economy and general well- being of the state”(AS 16.05.020). 8.3.4.Alaska Native Entities 8.3.4.1.Chickaloon Village Traditional Council The Chickaloon Native Village provided comments on Project licensing activities in a May 31, 2012,letter to the FERC.Chickaloon Native Village is a federally recognized Alaska Native tribe.Chickaloon Village is an Ahtna Athabascan Indian Tribe governed by the nine-member Chickaloon Village Traditional Council.The Chickaloon Village Traditional Council strives to increase traditional Ahtna Dene'practices for the betterment of all residents in the area. Preserving and restoring the region's natural resources is one way of supporting Ahtna culture and the regional ecosystem. 8.4.Summary of Consultation with Agencies,Alaska Native Entities,and Other Licensing Participants Input regarding the issues to be addressed in the IFS has been provided by the TWG during workgroup meetings commencing in late 2011.During 2012,workgroup meetings were held in January,March,April,June,August,September,and October,during which resource issues were identified and discussed and objectives of the instream flow studies were defined.A one- and-one-half day field reconnaissance was also conducted in October 2012 with agency representatives to tour three of the proposed Focus Areas and discuss riparian,groundwater,and fish habitat sampling and modeling.In addition,agency interactions via e-mail and telephone contributed to refinements in the IFS.Various agencies and other parties (USFWS,NMFS, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-4 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN ADF&G,etc.)provided written comments specific to this study that have been considered and will be addressed as part of this plan.Summary tables of comments and responses from formal comment letters filed with FERC through November 14,2012 are provided in Appendix 1. Copies of the formal FERC-filed comment letters are included in Appendix 2.In addition,a single comprehensive summary table of comments and responses from consultation,dated from PSP filing (July 16,2012)through release of Interim Draft RSPs,is provided in Appendix 3. Copies of relevant informal consultation documentation are included in Appendix 4,grouped by resource area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-5 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study 8.5.1.General Description of the Study 8.5.1.1.Focus of IFS The 2013-2014 IFS plan is specifically directed toward establishing an understanding of important biological communities and associated habitats,and the hydrologic,physical,and chemical processes in the Susitna River that directly influence those resources.The focus of much of this work will be on establishing a set of analytical tools/models based on the best available information and data that can be used for defining both existing or base conditions,i.e., without Project,and how these resources and processes will respond to alternative Project operational scenarios. 8.5.1.2.Study Objectives The goal of the IFS and its component study efforts is to provide quantitative indices of existing aquatic habitats that enable a determination of the effects of alternative Project operational scenarios.Achievement of this goal will require close coordination with a number of interrelated studies (e.g.,Fish Distribution/Abundance [see Section 9.6],Characterization of Aquatic Habitats [see Section 9.9],Geomorphology [see Section 6.0],Water Quality [see Section 5.0], etc.)that will provide important inputs into an overall Project effects analysis (see Figure 8.5-1). Specific objectives of this and associated companion studies include the following: 1.Map the current aquatic habitat in main channel and off-channel habitats of the Susitna River affected by Project operations.This objective will be completed as part of the Characterization of Aquatic Habitats Study (see Section 9.9)(see Figure 8.5-1). 2.Select study areas and sampling procedures to collect data and information that can be used to characterize,quantify,and model mainstem and lateral Susitna River habitat types at different scales.This objective will be completed via a collaborative process involving this study,Riparian Instream Flow (see Section 8.6),Groundwater (see Section 7.5),Geomorphology (see Section 6.0),Water Quality (see Section 5.0),and Fish and Aquatics (see Section 9.0). 3.Develop a Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model that estimates water surface elevations and average water velocity along modeled transects on an hourly basis under alternative operational scenarios. 4,Develop site-specific Habitat Suitability Criteria (HSC)and Habitat Suitability Indices (HSI)for various species and life stages of fish for biologically relevant time periods selected in consultation with the TWG.Criteria will include observed physical phenomena that may be a factor in fish preference (e.g.,depth,velocity,substrate, embeddedness,proximity to cover,groundwater influence,turbidity,etc.).If study efforts are unable to develop robust site-specific data,HSC/HSI will be developed using the best available information and selected in consultation with the TWG. 5.Develop integrated aquatic habitat models that produce a time series of data for a variety of biological metrics under existing conditions and alternative operational scenarios. These metrics may include (but are not limited to)the following: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-6 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Water surface elevation at selected river locations e Water velocity within study areas subdivisions (cells or transects)over a range of flows during seasonal conditions e Length of edge habitats in main channel and off-channel habitats e Habitat area associated with off-channel habitats e Clear water area zones e Effective spawning and incubation habitats e Varial zone area e Frequency and duration of exposure/inundation of the varial zone at selected river locations e Habitat suitability indices 6.Evaluate existing conditions and alternative operational scenarios using a hydrologic database that includes specific years or portions of annual hydrographs for wet,average, and dry hydrologic conditions and warm and cold Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) phases. 7.Coordinate instream flow modeling and evaluation procedures with complementary study efforts including Riparian (see Section 8.6),Geomorphology (see Sections 6.5 and 6.6), Groundwater (see Section 7.5),Baseline Water Quality (see Section 5.5),Fish Passage Barriers (see Section 9.12),and Ice Processes (see Section 7.6)(see Figure 8.5-1).If channel conditions are expected to change over the license period,instream flow habitat modeling efforts will incorporate changes identified and quantified by riverine process studies. 8.Develop a Decision Support System-type framework to conduct a variety of post- processing comparative analyses derived from the output metrics estimated under aquatic habitat models.These include (but are not limited to)the following: e Seasonal juvenile and adult fish rearing e Habitat connectivity e Spawning and egg incubation e Juvenile fish stranding and trapping e Ramping rates e Distribution and abundance of benthic macroinvertebrates 8.5.2.Existing Information and Need for Additional Information 8.5.2.1.©Summary of Existing Susitna River Information Substantial physical,hydrologic,and biological information is available for the Susitna River as a result of previous hydropower licensing efforts conducted during the 1970s and 1980s.The extent and details of many of those studies were provided in the Draft Environmental Impact Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-7 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Statement (FERC 1984)for the previously-proposed Susitna-Hydroelectric (Su-Hydro)Project (FERC No.7114)along with companion appendices and attachments in the way of Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G)reports.A gap analysis conducted by HDR (2011) summarized some of the data.The gap analysis provided an initial listing of salient reports and data that warranted more detailed evaluations. A more focused review of existing reports and data specific to the Su-Hydro Project proposed in the 1980s was initiated by Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)in 2012.This has included the identification,acquisition,and compilation of study plans,reports,data,maps,drawings, photographs,and technical correspondence pertaining to the 1980s Su-Hydro Project.Although a substantial amount of this information had already been provided to and made available through the Alaska Resources Library and Information Services (ARLIS),AEA has identified and is working with ARLIS in acquiring the majority of original files,documents,maps,drawings,and other information that had been archived in several locations in Alaska.These documents are in a variety of formats including textual,microfiche,and maps.The majority of documents will be housed in the ARLIS library in Anchorage,Alaska (some are available online through the University of Alaska,Fairbanks library)and will be made available either electronically or by on-site review to interested parties,licensing participants,and Project team members. As part of the 2012 effort,AEA also commissioned the targeted review of reports,data,and other information specific to the 1980s studies of fish,fish habitats,and instream flow-related assessments.This work is nearing completion and will result in the preparation of Technical Memoranda (TMs)that summarize the salient fish and instream flow-related information from those studies.To date,over 60 reports from the 1980s and earlier have been identified and reviewed.These documents include 83 separate volumes containing descriptions of field studies and reports with tabular data,figures,and maps.The reports describe studies that were focused on a wide range of interrelated topics designed to provide information that would allow for an evaluation of the potential effects of the Su-Hydro Project operations on downstream fish and aquatic resources and habitats.These included studies focused on the following: e Adult salmon passage in sloughs and side channels e Adult salmon spawn timing and distribution e Salmon Habitat Suitability Criteria e Salmon spawning habitat evaluation e Juvenile salmon abundance and distribution including winter studies e Resident fish abundance,distribution,and life history e Channel geometry investigations e Groundwater upwelling detection e Hydrological investigations and modeling of anadromous and resident fish habitat The documents are well organized and rich in detail regarding study rationale,site descriptions, methods applied,and results.With respect to instream flow analysis,the studies generally followed the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM)described by Bovee (1982),and therefore careful consideration was given to study design,site selection,data collection,and data Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-8 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN analysis and modeling.In addition,recognizing the spatial variability in the diversity and complexity of habitat types within different segments of the Susitna River,substantial effort was spent on developing approaches that could be used for expansion/extrapolation of flow-habitat model results obtained from one location to unmeasured sites (Aaserude et al.1985).Overall,the documents represent a remarkable source of information that is directly relevant to the types of studies that are proposed in this RSP.Indeed,many of the study components presented in the RSP have been founded on certain elements provided in one or more of the earlier reports. However,the studies presented in the RSP are not simply repeating or duplicating those conducted in the 1980s.Rather,the earlier studies have been appropriately used to make informed decisions regarding study design,methods selection,and modeling approaches that are best suited to address the specific objectives of the RSP as stated in Section 8.5.1.2. One consideration that was taken into account relative to the applicability of the earlier studies was that the 1980s Su-Hydro Project was envisioned as a two-dam project,with an upper dam, reservoir,and powerhouse near river mile (RM)184 (Watana Dam).It was envisioned that the upper development would be operated in load-following mode to meet power demands.A lower dam,reservoir,and powerhouse (Devils Canyon Dam)would provide additional power generation,but would also re-regulate flow releases from the upper development.Downstream flow releases from the Devils Canyon Dam would not have the daily flow fluctuations associated with load-following operations of the upper development.In addition,because the Devils Canyon Dam would create a reservoir that would inundate much of the river between the two dams,the instream flow and riparian study efforts in the 1980s focused on the effects of flow releases to the Susitna River downstream of the Devils Canyon Dam site,and the reach between the Devils Canyon Dam and Watana Dam sites was not modeled as part of the instream flow study.Instream flow-related issues that were the focus of studies completed in the 1980s were thus more concerned with determining the effects of changes in the timing and magnitude of flows on the quantity and quality of fish habitats that would occur with the two dams as configured,rather than flow fluctuations. The Project,as currently proposed,without the re-regulation of flows that a second dam would allow,will require the evaluation of downstream effects of load-following operations on fish and wildlife resources downstream of the Watana Dam site,in addition to an assessment of overall effects due to shifts and changes in flow timing and magnitude.These are important differences between the current proposal and that of the 1980s,and have directly factored into the design of studies proposed in the RSP.In particular,the proposed studies now include the development of a flow routing model that will predict water surface elevation changes at different locations in the river under variable flow conditions.Linkage of this model with those developed as part of this RSP that are focused on defining habitat-flow relationships in different habitat types of the river will allow for an integrated evaluation of Project effects under different operational scenarios,including load-following.Other related resource studies (e.g.,Riparian [see Section 8.6],Geomorphology [see Section 6.0],Water Quality [see Section 5.0],and Ice Processes [see Section 7.6])will also rely on this model and will use it to evaluate Project operational effects on their respective resources. As background and to provide context for the studies that are contained in this RSP,some of the salient information from the 1980s studies is summarized below. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-9 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.2.2.Habitat Distribution The spatial distribution and characterization of existing habitat conditions in the Susitna River are important aspects of 2013-2014 instream flow studies.Fish species in the Susitna River basin rely on a range of aquatic habitats,and specific habitat types may be selectively used by different species and life stages (Jennings 1985;Sundet and Pachek 1985).Furthermore,fish utilization of specific habitats may vary seasonally or spatially within the basin (Suchanek et al. 1985).The distribution of aquatic habitats in the Susitna River will be an important consideration during instream flow studies to evaluate potential effects of stream flow fluctuations on habitat and fish communities. Habitat distribution mapping was performed during 1980s studies at the macro-habitat scale (i.e., main channel,side channel,side slough,upland slough,tributary mouth,tributary,and lake)(see Section 9.9).The character and distribution of habitat during the 1980s were mapped using aerial photography based on hydrology and channel morphology (Trihey 1982;ADF&G 1983).The aerial photos were recorded at various stream flow levels to identify the effect of Susitna River discharge on habitat distribution (Figure 8.5-2)(Klinger-Kingsley et al.1985).Most of the mapping effort targeted the Middle River Segment and relatively less for the Lower River Segment;very little habitat data are available for the Upper River Segment from the 1980s (Klinger-Kingsley et al.1985;Buckwalter 2011).A more complete summary of the existing information relating to habitat distribution in the Susitna River is provided in Section 9.9 (Characterization of Aquatic Habitats in the Susitna River). 8.5.2.3.Fish Distribution and Abundance The distribution and abundance of fish species in the Susitna River will play an important role in evaluating the potential flow-induced effects of the Project,particularly in the Middle and Lower Susitna River.The distribution of fish species among Susitna River segments (Upper,Middle, and Lower)and among main channel,off-channel,and tributary habitats is essential information for 2013-2014 instream flow studies to identify species and life stages that may be affected by Susitna River stream flow fluctuations.Relative abundance of fish species among river segments and habitats will similarly provide a basis for evaluating the effects of hydrologic changes on fish in the Susitna River. Extensive studies were conducted during the 1980s related to fish distribution and abundance and more recent fish distribution studies performed during the 2000s have supplemented data collected during the earlier efforts (see Section 9.0).At least 20 anadromous and resident fish species are known to inhabit the Susitna River between headwater areas and Cook Inlet (RM 0.0) (Jennings 1985;Delaney et al.1981a,1981b).Species richness is greatest in the Lower River Segment and declines in the Middle and Upper River segments (Jennings 1985;Delaney et al. 1981b).Steep,high-velocity cascades in Devils Canyon (RM 152 -160)represent the upstream extent of distribution for many species (Jennings 1985;Delaney et al.1981a).Fish species found in the Middle and Lower River segments include,but are not limited to,Pacific salmon species (Chinook,sockeye,chum,coho,and pink),Arctic grayling,rainbow trout,Dolly Varden, humpback whitefish,round whitefish,and burbot (Jennings 1985;Delaney et al.1981b,1981c ). Within the Middle and Lower River segments,these fish species utilize main channel,off- channel,and tributary habitats (Jennings 1985;Delaney et al.1981b,1981c).In terms of instream flow studies,fish utilization in main channel and off-channel habitats is of principal Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-10 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN importance because these areas are influenced by Susitna River stream flow fluctuations.A more detailed synthesis of fish distribution and abundance is provided in Section 9.0 (Fish and Aquatics). 8.5.2.4.Salmonid Spawning and Incubation Salmonid spawning and egg incubation are critical life history phases and are important considerations for development of Susitna River instream flow studies.Water depth,velocity, and temperature of surface stream flow are important habitat characteristics for spawning adult salmonids,while intergravel flow and water quality can be critical for salmonid egg incubation and emergent fry survival.As a result,each biological process is sensitive to stream flow fluctuations.As part of Susitna River instream flow studies,it is important to identify the distribution and timing of salmonid spawning in the Susitna River (see Section 9.0).Main channel (main channels,side channels,and tributary mouths),off-channel (side sloughs,upland sloughs,and backwater areas),and tributary habitats are used by adult salmonids for migration and spawning,though main channel and off-channel habitats are of principal importance with regard to instream flow studies because these areas are most influenced by Susitna River stream flow fluctuations.Knowledge of the timing of salmonid spawning and associated migrations will help identify the periods during which fish populations may be affected by changes in Susitna River stream flow.In addition,the behavior of spawning salmonids,such as colonization rates of new spawning areas and redd residence time by spawners,is an important aspect of this life history stage and will help guide instream flow studies in the Susitna River. Pacific salmon species are known to utilize Middle and Lower Susitna River habitats for migration and spawning between RM 206.8 and Cook Inlet (RM 0.0)(Jennings 1985;Thompson et al.1986;Buckwalter 2011).During upstream spawning migrations,all Pacific salmon species utilize the mainstem Susitna River to access spawning areas located in main channel,off- channel,and/or tributary habitats of the Middle and Lower Susitna River.For spawning in the Middle Susitna River,adult sockeye,chum,and pink salmon utilized main channel and off- channel habitats during the 1980s,while Chinook and coho salmon typically spawned in tributary habitats not influenced by Susitna River stream flow conditions (see Section 8.5.2.1.2) (Jennings 1985;Barrett et al.1985;Thompson et al.1986).In the Lower Susitna,the primary spawning areas for chum and pink salmon occurred in main channel and off-channel habitats, while Chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon generally used tributaries for spawning (Barrett et al. 1983;Barrett et al.1985;Thompson et al.1986). The timing of salmon spawning migrations in the Susitna River during the 1980s began in late May and continued through September,though specific timing of movement differed by species (see Section 8.5.2.1.7).In the Middle and Lower Susitna River,salmon species that utilized main channel and off-channel habitat for spawning typically spawned from late July through early October (see Section 8.5.2.1.7)(Jennings 1985;Barrett et al.1985;Thompson et al.1986).The period of salmon egg incubation occurred from the onset of spawning through the end of fry emergence,which was estimated to begin in late January and continue through April and/or May (see Section 8.5.2.1.7)(Bigler and Levesque 1985;Jennings 1985;Stratton 1986;Vining et al. 1985).Among habitats utilized by spawning salmon,side channel and side slough habitats were observed to be most vulnerable to dewatering and/or freezing as a result of fluctuations in Susitna River discharge (Vining et al.1985). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-11 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.2.5.Study Area Selection In general,the Susitna River was divided in the 1980s studies into segments,sub-reaches,and study sites based on hydrology,channel morphology,tributary input,macro-and mesohabitat features,and fish use.At the broadest scale,the Susitna River was divided into three reaches following the historic river mile convention used at the time: 1.Upper river -Representing that portion of the watershed above the proposed Devils Canyon Dam site at RM 152. 2.Middle river -Extending approximately 53.5 miles from RM 152 downstream through Devils Canyon to the Three Rivers Confluence at RM 98.5. 3.Lower river -Extending 98.5 miles downstream from the Three Rivers Confluence to Cook Inlet (RM 0). These three breaks formed the first order level of stratification in the 1980s studies. A second level of stratification was designated based on classifying riverine-related habitats of the Susitna River into six macro-habitat categories consisting of mainstem,side channel,side slough,upland slough,tributaries,and tributary mouths (Estes and Vincent-Lang 1984).The distribution and frequency of these habitats varied longitudinally within the river depending in large part on its confinement by adjoining floodplain areas,size,and gradient.The habitat types were described by ADF&G with respect to mainstem flow influence in the Susitna Hydroelectric Aquatic Studies Procedures Manual (ADF&G 1984)as follows,with additional clarification added here where considered appropriate: e Mainstem habitat consists of those portions of the Susitna River that normally convey stream flow throughout the year.Both single and multiple channel reaches are included in this habitat category.Groundwater and tributary inflows appear to be inconsequential contributors to the overall characteristics of mainstem habitat. Mainstem habitat is typically characterized by high water velocities and well-armored streambeds.Substrates generally consist of boulder-and cobble-size materials with interstitial spaces filled with a grout-like mixture of small gravels and glacial sands. Suspended sediment concentrations and turbidity are high during summer due to the influence of glacial meltwater.Stream flows recede in early fall and the mainstem clears appreciably in October.An ice cover forms on the river in late November or December. e Side channel habitat consists of those portions of the Susitna River that normally convey stream flow during the open-water season but become appreciably dewatered during periods of low flow.Side channel habitat may exist either in well-defined overflow channels,or in poorly defined water courses flowing through partially submerged gravel bars and islands along the margins of the mainstem river.Side channel streambed elevations are typically lower than the mean monthly water surface elevations of the mainstem Susitna River observed during June,July,and August.Side channel habitats are characterized by shallower depths,lower velocities, and smaller streambed materials than the adjacent habitat of the mainstem river. e "Side”slough habitat is located in spring-or tributary-fed overflow channels between the edge of the floodplain and the mainstem and side channels of the Susitna Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-12 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN River and is usually separated from the mainstem and side channels by well-vegetated bars.An exposed alluvial berm often separates the head of the slough from mainstem or side channel flows.The controlling streambed/stream bank elevations at the upstream end of the side sloughs are slightly less than the water surface elevations of the mean monthly flows of the mainstem Susitna River observed for June,July,and August.At intermediate-and low-flow periods,the side sloughs convey clear water from small tributaries and/or upwelling groundwater (Estes et al.1981).These clear water inflows are essential contributors to the existence of this habitat type.The water surface elevation of the Susitna River generally causes a backwater to extend well up into the slough from its lower end (Estes et al.1981).Even though this substantial backwater exists,the sloughs function hydraulically very much like small stream systems and several hundred feet of the slough channel often conveys water independent of mainstem backwater effects.At high flows the water surface elevation of the mainstem river is sufficient to overtop the upper end of the slough (Estes et al. 1981).Surface water temperatures in the side sloughs during summer months are principally a function of air temperature,solar radiation,and the temperature of the local runoff. e "Upland”slough habitat differs from the side slough habitat in that the upstream end of the slough is not interconnected with the surface waters of the mainstem Susitna River or its side channels at less than bankfull flows.The upstream end can be vegetated with mature trees,although a morphologic signature of a converging inlet and gravel levee closure can still be discerned.These sloughs are characterized by the presence of beaver dams and an accumulation of silt covering the substrate resulting from the absence of mainstem scouring flows.They are not truly "upland” in the geomorphic sense,but the use of this nomenclature in the 1980s studies reflects the observation that the understanding of floodplain and channel forming processes was in the early stage in fisheries,where some variation in interpretation existed over what constituted a floodplain versus an upland terrace (e.g.,see Williams 1978). Essentially,the main distinguishing characteristic between a "side”slough and an "upland”slough was the level of high flow at which each was engaged. e Tributary habitat consists of the full complement of hydraulic and morphologic conditions that occur in the tributaries.Their seasonal stream flow,sediment,and thermal regimes reflect the integration of the hydrology,geology,and climate of the tributary drainage.The physical attributes of tributary habitat are not dependent on mainstem conditions. e Tributary mouth habitat extends from the uppermost point in the tributary influenced by mainstem Susitna River or slough backwater effects to the downstream extent of the tributary plume that extends into the mainstem Susitna River or slough (Estes et al.1981). A schematic of these types of habitats as applied in the 1980s studies is depicted in Figure 8.5-3. These categories were also used by Trihey and Associates in its instream flow modeling studies (Aaserude et al.1985).Beginning in the 1983 open-water studies,however,a fundamental change was made in how side sloughs and side channels were identified during field studies (Dugan et al.1984).During 1981 and 1982,side sloughs and side channels were distinguished primarily on their morphology.Side sloughs included an unvegetated berm at the head of the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-13 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN slough and were rarely overtopped.In contrast,a side channel conveyed mainstream flow during most of the year.During 1983 and following years,if a berm was overtopped and a channel conveyed mainstem flows it was characterized as a side channel.If the berm was not overtopped it was characterized as a side slough.Consequently,during the latter years of the 1980s Fish and Aquatic Program an area may have been characterized as a side channel during periods of high flows and a side slough during periods of lower flows. Specific sites chosen for completion of the various studies by ADF&G between 1981 and 1985 varied from year to year and study to study.In general,sampling was relatively broad during 1981 and 1982,and more focused during 1983 to 1985.The 1981 Aquatic Habitat Studies were focused on 'Fishery Habitat'evaluations and 'Selected Habitat'evaluations (Estes et al.1981). The Fishery Habitat evaluations collected point information on observed fish habitat use and general habitat evaluations (water quality,hydrology,and mapping).The Selected Habitat evaluations collected water quality,discharge,and mapping information at selected sloughs between Talkeetna and Devils Canyon. A total of 5 river reaches were delineated and 8 to 13 representative study sites were selected in each,without consideration of proportional sampling or optimal allocation (e.g.,see Cochran 1977).These included the following: e Yentna Reach (Cook Inlet to Little Willow Creek;RM 0.0-50.5):13 sites e Sunshine Reach (Rustic Wilderness to Parks Highway Bridge;RM 58.1-83.5):10 sites e Talkeetna Reach (Parks Highway Bridge to Curry;RM 83.5-120.7):11 sites e Gold Creek Reach (Curry to Portage Creek;RM 120.7-148.8):12 sites e Impoundment Reach (Devils Canyon to Denali Highway;RM 151-281):8 tributaries With few exceptions,the sites sampled for aquatic habitat studies were the same as those sampled under resident and juvenile anadromous fish studies in 1981 and 1982.Selection of specific sampling sites was apparently not based upona statistical sampling design.Instead,sites were considered representative of each reach,and were based effectively on where fish were found.This basis was carried forward in subsequent years.For example,in 1982,habitat information was collected where spawning fish were located within the mainstem Susitna River downstream of Devils Canyon (tributary/mainstem confluence areas and sloughs were not sampled).Only spawning sites for chum salmon were observed in the mainstem,which led to the identification of eight mainstem spawning locations between Lane Creek (RM 113.6)to Devils Canyon. In addition,17 Designated Fish Habitat (DFH)sites were chosen in 1982 based upon four criteria (Estes and Schmidt 1983;ADF&G 1983): 1.Areas that will be affected by changes in discharge of the mainstem Susitna. 2.Sites identified from previous studies to have significant populations of resident and juvenile anadromous species. 3.Access to areas will not create severe logistics problems and limit the overall scope of the studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-14 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 4.Sites selected represent a cross-section of critical areas available to resident and juvenile anadromous fish of the Susitna River. Five of the DFH sites were located downstream of Talkeetna from RM 88.4 to 73.1 and twelve were located in the reach from Portage Creek (RM 148.8)to Whiskers Creek (RM 101.2). During 1983 and 1984,studies became focused on collecting specific data needed to develop three types of instream flow models:Resident and Juvenile Habitat (RJHAB)models,Instream Flow Group (IFG)models,and Direct Input Habitat (DIHAB)models developed by Trihey and Associates (Hilliard et al.1985).As before,sites were selected based on where fish were found. During 1983,32 sites (11 tributaries,3 upland sloughs,8 side slough/channel,6 side channel,4 side slough)were sampled in the reach from Talkeetna to Devils Canyon for fish distribution, and 13 sites were modeled by ADF&G with either the RJHAB (2 upland sloughs,2 side channel/ sloughs,1 side slough,1 side channel)approach or IFG approach (3 side slough/channels,1 side slough,3 side channels).The 13 modeled sites were chosen based upon observations of large numbers of spawning salmon or concentrations of juvenile salmon during 1981 and 1982 studies (Dugan et al.1984).They were also selected as being representative of the habitat types present between the Chulitna River and Devils Canyon likely to be affected by changes in mainstem flow from the proposed project (Dugan et al.1984;Marshall et al.1984). Sampling in 1984 focused on main channel margins,side channels,side sloughs,and tributary mouth habitats in the middle and lower river segments between RM 147.1 and 35.2.During 1984,crews sampled three types of study sites: e RJHAB sites (16 sites) e IFG sites (6 sites) e DIHAB sites (14 sites) e Opportunistic sites (31 sites) Opportunistic sites were sampled only once to expand the understanding of juvenile and resident fish distribution (Suchanek et al.1985). Instream flow modeling of spawning habitat was conducted for chum and sockeye salmon at mainstem margin,side channel,upland slough,and side slough habitat types.Modeled sites were considered to represent the range of spawning conditions for sloughs and side channels present in the mainstem between the Chulitna River and Devils Canyon.In addition,instream flow studies were performed to describe juvenile Chinook habitat-flow responses within mainstem margins, side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs of the middle river.The modeling studies relied effectively on the habitat classification,and manipulations thereof,for stratifying and extrapolating model results from sampled sites to larger study reaches (Steward et al.1985; Ashton and Klinger-Kingsley 1985;and Klinger-Kingsley et al.1985).The overall approach proposed for the extrapolation process was described in Aaserude et al.(1985)and consisted of methods for both single thread and multiple thread portions of the river.However,project funding was curtailed in 1985 and the approach was never implemented. 8.5.2.6.HSC An important element of these studies was the collection of microhabitat data of various species and life stages of fish reflective of a suite of different parameters influenced by,or potentially Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-15 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN influenced by,flow.These included water depth,water velocity,substrate,upwelling occurrence, and turbidity. A more detailed synthesis of pertinent information will be completed as part of the IFS and supplemented by analysis of aquatic-related information conducted as part of the Fish and Aquatics Study (see Section 9.0).As part of this synthesis,information will be compiled and reviewed related to instream flow regimes implemented at other large hydropower projects,with a special emphasis on projects developed in arctic and sub-arctic environments. An extensive set of Habitat Suitability Criteria were developed as part of the 1980s instream flow studies.These criteria were developed using a combination of site-specific data collected through fish sampling and literature sources,and through refinement based on the professional judgment of project biologists.Table 8.5-1 summarizes the species and life stages for which HSC were developed during the 1980s efforts.Also described are the various habitat parameters for which curves describing HSC were developed (e.g.,depth). HSC for rearing juvenile salmon were developed for the habitat parameters of depth,velocity, and cover used by juvenile Chinook,coho,sockeye,and chum salmon (Suchanek et al.1984b). These HSC were developed based on field data collected at representative tributary,slough,and side channel sites between the Chulitna River confluence and Devils Canyon (Middle Susitna River)and were considered to be specific to this reach.Fish observations were obtained by beach seining (turbid water)or electrofishing (clear water)systematically established 300-square-foot cells with relatively uniform physical habitat (within cells)that captured the overall variability of site habitat conditions (across cells).Fish observations were then related to depth,velocity,and cover conditions characterized by each cell and collectively used to develop HSC for these parameters.In addition,if differences in habitat utilization were apparent at varying turbidity levels,separate HSC were developed for turbid vs.clear water conditions for those species with sufficient sample sizes (i.e.,juvenile Chinook).An example of HSC developed through this effort is shown in Figure 8.5-4.A subsequent effort used similar methods to verify the applicability of these juvenile salmon rearing HSC curves for the lower river downstream of the Chulitna River confluence (Suchanek et al.1985).Findings from this effort resulted in some modifications to HSC for use in the Lower River,particularly for water depth. Spawning HSC for chum and sockeye salmon were developed from redd observations in sloughs and side channels of the middle Susitna River (Vincent-Lang et al.1984b).Data collection sites were concentrated in areas used for hydraulic simulation modeling to maximize the concomitant collection of utilization and availability data necessary for the evaluation of preference.HSC for chum salmon were modified using limited preference data;however,preference could not be incorporated for sockeye salmon.HSC for depth,velocity,and substrate were developed from this effort.Additionally,modified HSC were developed for substrate that reflected the presence or absence of upwelling.A related study also examined chum salmon spawning habitat utilization in select tributary mouths of the middle Susitna River and found that the range of utilized depths,velocities,and substrates was generally comparable to redds in sloughs in side channels (Sandone et al.1984).Spawning habitat utilization for Chinook,coho,and pink salmon was evaluated in tributaries of the middle Susitna River (Vincent-Lang et al.1984a).Sufficient data were collected to develop depth,velocity,and substrate HSC curves for Chinook salmon. However,observations for spawning coho and pink salmon were insufficient to develop HSC. Instead,spawning HSC for these two species were based solely on literature data and modified using qualitative field observations. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-16 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN HSC for resident fish species were developed based on data collected through electrofishing, beach seining,and hook-and-line sampling in tributary mouths,tributaries,and sloughs of the middle Susitna River (Suchanek et al.1984a).Cover and velocity HSC were developed for adult rainbow trout,arctic grayling,round whitefish,and longnose sucker.HSC for cover were developed separately for turbid vs.clear water conditions.A single depth HSC was developed for all of these species combined.Only round whitefish were collected in sufficient numbers to develop separate HSC for juveniles. 8.5.2.7.Winter Studies Winter instream flow conditions are a critical component of fish habitat,particularly with respect to egg incubation and juvenile rearing.Intergravel flow and groundwater upwelling are critical for egg incubation and emergent fry survival,while depth,velocity,and temperature of surface flow are important habitat characteristics for juvenile and adult fish.Project operations will likely result in substantially higher flows during the winter period,which may influence the quality and quantity of existing rearing and holding habitats for juvenile and adult fish and may affect the extent and degree of intergravel flow or lateral exchange between mainstem and off- channel habitats,which can consequently alter subsurface water temperatures critical for salmonid egg incubation and fry survival.Winter studies conducted in the Susitna River during the 1980s were primarily focused on relationships between salmon egg incubation and discharge, water quality and temperature,and fish movement and habitat utilization. Success of salmon egg incubation during winter is dependent on discharge conditions in addition to water quality and temperature.During winter studies conducted during 1983-1984 in the middle Susitna River,redd dewatering and freezing were observed to be primary sources of chum salmon egg mortality as discharge levels declined after the fall spawn period through winter (Vining et al.1985).During the study,chum salmon eggs located in side channel habitats were most susceptible to mortality,while eggs located in side slough habitats that were less affected by main channel stream flow and influenced by groundwater upwelling were less prone to freezing and dewatering (Vining et al.1985).Similar results were observed during a concurrent study on the lower Susitna (Bigler and Levesque 1985).Groundwater upwelling can provide a thermal buffer for incubating eggs from climatic changes and colder surface stream flow and aid egg development in terms of increasing intergravel water exchange,replenishment of dissolved oxygen,and removal of metabolic wastes (Vining et al.1985;Burgner 1991).Based on the results of the 1983-1984 study,Vining et al.(1985)observed that the amount of spawning habitat available in fall does not necessarily predict the amount of egg incubation habitat and recommended that future analyses of effective spawning habitat area account for seasonal changes in Susitna River discharge (Vining et al.1985).In addition,Vining et al.(1985)also noted that future project operations could cause higher Susitna River winter discharges and that the effect of such changes on redd dewatering and/or freezing might depend on whether temperatures of Project outflows were higher or lower than existing stream temperatures. The rate of salmonid egg incubation is a function of water temperature because egg development occurs more quickly in warmer winter temperatures and slower in colder thermal regimes,with mortality occurring at the point of freezing (Burgner 1991).In the Susitna River during the 1980s,intergravel water temperatures were observed to vary among habitat types,such that intergravel water temperatures in tributary and main channel areas were strongly affected by Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-17 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN surface water and were near freezing during winter,while temperatures in side sloughs were more stable as a result of groundwater influence (Figure 8.5-5)(Hoffman et al.1983;Seagren and Wilkey 1985;Vining et al.1985).In side channel areas,intergravel temperature was highly variable and was most dependent on-site-specific conditions that controlled the relative influence of groundwater and surface water sources (Vining et al.1985).Vining et al.(1985)recorded faster development times among salmon eggs fertilized on the same date and artificially planted in Susitna River side channel and side slough habitats fed by groundwater upwelling relative to main channel areas with no groundwater influence.Similarly,the development times of chum and sockeye salmon eggs in laboratory conditions that reflected winter temperature regimes from main channel and side slough Susitna River habitats were faster in warmer side slough water temperature regimes influenced by groundwater upwelling (Wangaard and Burger 1983).Water quality conditions at salmon spawning sites during winter varied between surface and intergravel water and according to the relative influence of groundwater (Hoffman et al.1983;Vining et al. 1985).Vining et al.(1985)observed that the difference between intergravel and surface water dissolved oxygen levels was greatest for slough habitat and least for tributary and mainstem habitats,while differences were intermediate in side channel habitats.In terms of salmon egg incubation,dissolved oxygen levels in the Susitna River were generally above recommended values (7.19 mg/L;Alderdice and Velsen 1978)and low levels of dissolved oxygen were most likely ameliorated by the presence of upwelling water (Vining et al.1985). Substrate was characterized among salmon spawning areas in main channel,side channel,and slough habitats in the Susitna River during winter 1983-1984 (Vining et al.1985).Vining et al. 1985 observed that slough habitats had the highest level of fines,followed by side channel, tributary,and mainstem habitats,though fine sediment compositions in substrates sampled directly from redds were typically lower than in the surrounding habitat.Percent composition of fine substrates among sampled slough habitats in the middle Susitna indicated greater than 35 percent fines;however,the percent of fine substrate at redd locations among slough samples did not exceed 16 percent in five of the six sites evaluated (Vining et al.1985).Bigler and Levesque (1985)similarly concluded that substrate was not a limiting factor to embryo development. Little information is available about winter habitat use by juvenile salmon in the Susitna River. Surveys during the winter of 1980 to 1981 by Delaney et al.(1981c)found that the majority of juvenile Chinook salmon captured between Cook Inlet and Devils Canyon occurred at slough and mainstem Susitna River sites.The majority of juvenile coho salmon captured between Cook Inlet and Talkeetna during winter occurred at tributary mouth sites,whereas between Talkeetna and Devils Canyon,winter occurrence was greater at slough sites.Stratton (1986)studied overwinter habitat use by Chinook and coho salmon at four locations (Indian River,Slough 9A, Slough 10,and Slough 22)from October 1985 to April 1986.Findings suggested that coho salmon preferred areas with greater depth and cover consisting of debris,vegetation,and undercut banks,and beaver dams and ponds in particular.Chinook salmon preferred shallower, slightly higher velocity and cover consisting of rocks and boulders.Bigler and Levesque (1985) captured Chinook salmon juveniles using fyke nets at several side channels in the Lower Susitna River Trapper side channel in April and May,suggesting these side channels were being utilized as overwintering habitat. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-18 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.2.8.Periodicity Fish periodicity analyses will describe the temporal and spatial utilization of mainstem and tributary habitats in the Susitna River by individual fish species and life stages and will be essential to evaluate potential effects of Susitna River stream flow fluctuations on fish communities.Fish spawning and egg incubation are critical life history stages that are particularly sensitive to fluctuations in stream flow.Moreover,rearing and holding conditions in main channel and off-channel habitats in the Susitna River that are utilized by juvenile and adult fish can be transformed in response to Susitna River discharge.During 2013-2014 instream flow studies,periodicity analyses will be used to inform selection of study areas and guide habitat- specific modeling and spatial and temporal habitat analyses. Periodicity of fish habitat use in the middle and lower Susitna River during the 1980s was developed based on data collected during fish distribution and abundance studies.Salmon species in particular were studied intensively during the 1980s to identify the distribution, abundance of each life stage,and species that used available aquatic habitats in the Susitna River.Periods of peak and off-peak habitat use by salmon in the Susitna River during the 1980s were developed by species and life stage based on juvenile and adult salmon distribution and abundance investigations conducted primarily during 1981-1985 (Table 8.5-2)(see Fish and Aquatics,Section 9.0).Other anadromous and freshwater resident fish species were studied, primarily to identify spawn locations and timing of seasonal movement patterns. Adult salmon species (Chinook,sockeye,chum,coho,and pink)migrate upstream from marine areas into the Susitna River beginning in late May and continue through September,though specific timing of movement differs by species (Table 8.5-2).Salmon spawning timing in the Middle and Lower Susitna River typically occurs from late July through early October in tributary,main channel,and off-channel habitats (Jennings 1985;Barrett et al.1985;Thompson et al.1986).During the 1980s studies,Chinook and coho salmon spawned almost exclusively in tributary habitats that were not directly influenced by Susitna River stream flow,whereas sockeye,chum,and pink utilized habitats that were hydrologically connected to main channel stream flows (Jennings 1985;Barrett et al.1985;Thompson et al.1986).Subsequent to the spawn period,salmon egg incubation in the Susitna River occurred from July through the end of fry emergence in April and May during the following spring (Table 8.5-2)(Bigler and Levesque 1985;Jennings 1985;Vining et al.1985).Among habitats utilized by spawning salmon,side channel and side slough marginal habitats were observed to be most vulnerable to dewatering and/or freezing as a result of fluctuations in Susitna River discharge (Vining et al.1985). Juvenile salmon exhibit a range of life history patterns in the Susitna River.Chum and pink salmon typically emigrate from riverine areas to the ocean soon after emerging from the gravel or within the first several months (Table 8.5-2)(Jennings 1985).Most Chinook,coho,and sockeye salmon utilize Susitna River nursery habitats for at least one year prior to emigrating to marine areas (Table 8.5-2)(Jennings 1985).During the period of residence in the Susitna River, salmon fry were observed to use a wide range of habitats during 1980s studies (Dugan et al. 1984).Salmon fry and juveniles were typically most abundant in off-channel areas,though habitat utilization appeared to vary seasonally and by ontogenetic stage (Dugan et al.1984; Stratton 1986).The timing of salmon emigration to estuarine and marine areas typically occurs over a long period in the spring and early summer in the Susitna River,from March through early August (Table 8.5-2)(Jennings 1985;Roth and Stratton 1985;Roth et al.1986). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-19 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN For resident and non-salmonid fish,the timing and distribution of juvenile and adult fish, location and periodicity of adult spawning,and descriptions of seasonal movements patterns were described in association with fish distribution and abundance studies during 1981-1985 (see Fish and Aquatics,Section 9.0).Studies during the 1980s were conducted in the lower, middle,and upper Susitna River and included rainbow trout,Arctic grayling,burbot,round whitefish,humpback whitefish,longnose sucker,Bering cisco,and Dolly Varden. 8.5.2.9.|Instream Flow Methods and Models Instream flow studies conducted during the 1980s focused on the middle and lower Susitna River downstream of Devils Canyon.Studies during the 1980s evaluated changes in fish habitat relative to changes in mainstem Susitna River stream flow using hydraulic and/or habitat modeling and habitat mapping techniques.Modeling and mapping efforts were performed during 1983 and 1984 at 20 sites in the lower Susitna River between RM 35 and RM 92 and at 36 sites in the middle Susitna River between RM 101 and RM 148 (Table 8.5-3).Fish habitat availability was modeled over a range of Susitna River discharges using the following habitat models:IFIM HABTAT,Direct Input Habitat (DIHAB),and Resident Juvenile Habitat (RJHAB).The IFIM HABTAT model was used in conjunction with Instream Flow Group (IFG)hydraulic models, whereas no hydraulic modeling was completed in association with DIHAB or RJHAB models. Two-dimensional mapping was also used to quantify available habitat at tributary mouths in the middle river and was done independently of IFG hydraulic modeling.Habitat model selection was based on-site-specific channel and hydrologic characteristics,the desired resolution of microhabitat simulation,and the field logistics associated with each method. Instream flow sites during the 1980s were primarily located in side channel,side slough,and upland slough habitats with relatively few sites in tributary mouths and mainstem channel margins.The IFIM HABTAT model was used in conjunction with IFG hydraulic models at sites characterized by steady or uniform flow conditions and rigid stream channels and where stream flow was assumed to be the primary determinant of fish habitat quality (Trihey 1979;Hilliard et al.1985).In the middle and lower Susitna River,IFG models were applied in side channel and slough habitats (Hilliard et al.1985).The IFG and HABTAT models were used to model changes in juvenile and adult fish habitats at 6 sites in the lower river in 1983 and at 15 sites in the middle river during 1983 and 1984 (Vincent-Lang 1984b;Hilliard et al.1985)(Table 8.5-3). At each site,water depth and velocity data were measured at multiple cross-sections at multiple Susitna River stream flows to model hydraulic conditions at the site over a range of flows. Modeled stream flow data were used in conjunction with channel geometry and substrate data from the site to model changes in usable fish habitat area over the modeled flow range.Examples of IFG site locations in various side channel habitats in the Middle Susitna River are depicted in Figure 8.5-6 and Figure 8.5-7. The DIHAB model was created for areas where steady,gradually varied flow did not exist (Hilliard et al.1985).During the 1980s,DIHAB models were used at chum spawning sites characterized by spatially variable hydraulic conditions or near zero water velocities;such conditions were incompatible with IFG hydraulic models (Hilliard et al.1985).The DIHAB models were used to evaluate changes in adult chum spawning habitat at 14 sites located on mainstem margins and side channel habitats in the middle river in 1984 (Table 8.5-3).In addition to water depth and velocity and substrate data,the presence of upwelling was incorporated into DIHAB models as a binary variable (i.e.,present,not present).DIHAB models used hydraulic Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-20 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN and channel geometry data to estimate changes to habitat area over the range of measured stream flows,but did not incorporate hydraulic models.An example DIHAB site location in side channel habitat is shown in Figure 8.5-7. The RJHAB habitat model was a simplified means of estimating changes in fish habitat without using hydraulic models.RJHAB modeling was applied at 22 side channel,tributary mouth,side slough,and upland slough sites in 1983 and 1984 in the middle and lower river (Table 8.5-3) (Marshall et al.1984;Quane et al.1985;Suchanek et al.1985).At each RJHAB site,multiple cross-sections were established and divided into shoreline and mid-channel cells (Figure 8.5-8). Depth,velocity,and instream and overhead cover data measured in shoreline and mid-channel cells at a range of Susitna River stream flows were assumed to be representative of the usable fish habitat at each cross-section and for the site (Marshall et al.1984).An example of an RJHAB site location in Whiskers Creek side slough is shown in Figure 8.5-7. Habitat mapping was conducted at tributary mouths in the middle river in 1983 to characterize changes in spawning habitat independent of hydraulic modeling.The two tributary mouth sites measured in 1983 were considered to be representative of the 14 major tributary confluences in the middle river (Table 8.5-3)(Sandone et al.1984).At habitat mapping sites,depth,velocity, and substrate habitat parameters were measured across multiple transects at four separate Susitna River stream flows.These data were used to create two-dimensional parameter-specific maps delineating the area of suitable chum spawning habitat.The three separate parameter-specific maps were overlaid to identify the composite area of habitat suitability that was available at each measured flow level (Sandone et al.1984). The output provided by IFIM HABTAT,DIHAB,and RJHAB habitat models was generally similar to that supplied by the habitat mapping method used at tributary mouths.Each method characterized changes in fish habitat by relating the amounts of wetted surface area and area usable for juvenile and adult fish to Susitna River discharge.The amount of wetted surface area at modeling sites invariably increased with rising stream flows;however,the relationship between the amount of habitat area suitable for juvenile and adult fish use was often not directly correlated with Susitna River discharge.Suitable depth,velocity,substrate,and/or cover habitat was defined for each life stage of anadromous and resident fish species in the form of HSC. Species and life stage-specific HSC provided a basis for evaluating the amount of usable habitat at observed and simulated stream flow levels for each habitat model. Results from intensively studied modeling sites were extrapolated to non-modeled habitats throughout the Susitna River based on characterization of aquatic habitats over a range of stream flow levels and classification of habitats into discrete groups.In 1984,172 specific areas of the middle river,including modeled and non-modeled areas,were characterized in terms of the hydrology,hydraulics,and channel morphology at the site using aerial photography recorded at various stream flow levels and site-specific data (Aaserude et al.1985;Klinger-Kingsley et al. 1985).Based on hydrological,hydraulic,and morphological site characteristics,specific areas were stratified into 10 representative habitat groups,which served as the basis for extrapolation of modeled results to non-modeled sites (Aaserude et al.1985;Steward et al.1985).The relationship between usable fish habitat area to changes in Susitna River stream flow was evaluated at the micro-habitat scale at individual modeling sites and these results were summarized to create a composite habitat-discharge relationship for all habitats within the same group (Aaserude et al.1985;Steward et al.1985).To address variability in structural habitat characteristics (i.e.,fish cover type,substrate size and embeddedness,channel geometry and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-21 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN streamside vegetation)among individual areas within representative groups,structural habitat indices were developed (Aaserude et al.1985).Extrapolation of habitat availability results from modeled sites to non-modeled sites with an adjustment for differences in structural habitat (Aaserude et al.1985). 8.5.2.10.Need for Additional Information The 1980s reports and information serve as a valuable resource and reference point from which to view conditions in the Susitna River as they existed in the early 1980s.The information also provides details on fish species distribution and abundance and riverine processes as they were operating at that time and includes distinct habitat-flow response relationships that were defined for different habitat types and different locations.However,additional information needs to be collected to provide a contemporary understanding of the baseline conditions existing in the Susitna River,and among other things test hypotheses regarding the validity of the 1980s habitat-flow response relationships.In addition,the configuration and proposed operations of the Project are different from the previously proposed project and must be evaluated within the context of the existing environmental setting.This includes consideration of potential load- following effects on important aquatic and riparian habitats downstream of the proposed Watana Dam site (including both the Middle River and Lower River segments,as appropriate).Potential effects of proposed Project operations on aquatic habitats and biota and potential benefits and impacts of alternative operational scenarios have not been quantitatively analyzed.The aquatic habitat-specific models will provide an integrated assessment of the effects of Project operations on biological resources and riverine processes.These models will provide an analytical framework for assessing alternative operational scenarios and quantitative metrics that will provide the basis for the environmental assessment and aid in comparing alternatives that may lead to refinements in proposed Project operations. 8.5.3.Study Area During the 1980s studies,the Susitna River was characterized into three segments extending above and below the two proposed dam sites.After researching potential Project configurations, AEA is proposing a single dam configuration at the Watana Dam site at RM 184.The proposed study characterizes the Susitna River as three segments (Figure 8.5-9).The Upper River Segment represents that portion of the watershed above the Watana Dam site at RM 184,the Middle River Segment extends from RM 184 downstream to the Three Rivers Confluence at RM 98.5,and the Lower River Segment extends from the Three Rivers Confluence to Cook Inlet (RM 0).Potential Project effects to the Upper River Segment above the Watana Dam site are addressed in Section 9.0,Fish and Aquatics;Section 10.0,Wildlife;Section 11.0,Botanical;and other studies. Potential Project effects to the Upper River Segment will not be addressed in the IFS (see Section 8.5).The study area of the IFS includes the two lower segments of the river:the Middle River Segment and the Lower River Segment. The Middle River Segment encompasses approximately 85 miles between the proposed Watana Dam site (at RM 184)and the Three Rivers Confluence,located at RM 98.5.The river flows from Watana Canyon into Devils Canyon,the narrowest and steepest gradient reach on the Susitna River.In Devils Canyon,constriction creates extreme hydraulic conditions including deep plunge pools,drops,and high velocities.The Devils Canyon rapids appear to present a partial barrier to the migration of anadromous fish,hindering upstream passage at some flow Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-22 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN conditions;only a few adult Chinook salmon have been observed upstream of Devils Canyon. Downstream of Devils Canyon,the Middle Susitna River widens but remains essentially a single channel with stable islands,occasional side channels,and sloughs. The Lower River Segment consists of an approximate 98-mile section between the Three Rivers Confluence and Cook Inlet (RM 0).An abrupt change in channel form occurs where the Chulitna River joins the Susitna River near the town of Talkeetna.The Chulitna River drains a smaller area than the Middle River Segment at the confluence,but drains higher elevations (including Denali and Mount Foraker)and many glaciers.The annual flow of the Chulitna River is approximately the same as the Susitna River at the confluence,though the Chulitna contributes much more sediment than the Susitna River.For several miles downstream of the Three Rivers Confluence,the Susitna River becomes braided,characterized by unstable,shifting gravel bars and shallow subchannels.For the remainder of its course to Cook Inlet,the Susitna River alternates between single channel,braided,and meandering plan forms with multiple side channels and sloughs.Major tributaries drain the western Talkeetna Mountains (the Talkeetna River,Montana Creek,Willow Creek,Kashwitna River),the Susitna lowlands (Deshka River), and the Alaska Range (Yentna River).The Yentna River is the largest tributary in the Lower River Segment,supplying about 40 percent of the mean annual flow at the mouth. Although both Middle and Lower River segments are under consideration as part of this IFS,the majority of detailed study elements described in this RSP are concentrated within the Middle River Segment.This is because Project operations related to load-following and variable flow regulation will likely have the greatest potential effects on this segment of the river.These effects tend to attenuate in a downstream direction as channel morphologies change,and flows change due to tributary inflow and flow accretion.The diversity of habitat types and the information from previous and current studies that indicate substantial fish use of a number of slough and side channel complexes within this segment,also support the need to develop a strong understanding of habitat-flow response relationships in this segment. Determining how far downstream Project operational effects will extend will depend in part on the results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model (see Section 8.5.4.3),which is scheduled to be completed in Q1 2013 as well as results of the operations model (see Section 8.5.4.3.2).The results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model completed in Q1 2013 will be used to determine whether and the extent to which Project operations related to load-following as well as seasonal flow changes occur within a section of the Lower River Segment that includes all of Geomorphic Reach LR-1 and a portion of LR-2 (down to RM 75).Thus,an initial assessment of the downstream extent of Project effects will be developed in Q1 2013 with review and input of the TWG.This assessment will include a review of information developed during the 1980s studies and study efforts initiated in 2012,such as sediment transport (see Section 6.5),habitat mapping (see Sections 6.5 and 9.9),operations modeling (see Section 8.5.4.2.2),and the Mainstem Open- water Flow Routing Model (see Section 8.5.4.3).The assessment and the following criteria will be used to evaluate the need to extend studies into the Lower River Segment and if studies are needed,will identify which geomorphic reaches require instream flow analysis in 2013.The criteria include:1)Magnitude of daily stage change due to load-following operations relative to the range of variability for a given location and time under existing conditions (i.e.,unregulated flows);2)Magnitude of monthly and seasonal stage change under Project operations relative to the range of variability under unregulated flow conditions;3)Changes in surface area (as estimated from relationships derived from LiDAR and comparative evaluations of habitat unit Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-23 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN area depicted in aerial digital imagery under different flow conditions)due to Project operations; 4)Anticipated changes in flow and stage to Lower River off-channel habitats;5)Anticipated Project effects resulting from changes in flow,stage and surface area on habitat use and function, and fish distribution (based on historical and current information concerning fish distribution and use)by geomorphic reaches in the Lower River Segment;and 6)Initial assessment of potential changes in channel morphology of the Lower River (see Section 6.5.4.6)based on Project-related changes to hydrology and sediment supply in the Lower River.Results of the 2013 studies will then be used to determine the extent to which Lower River Segment studies should be adjusted in 2014. 8.5.4.Study Methods Evaluation of potential Project effects to Middle and Lower river habitats will consist of the following components (these components will be refined based on TWG review and input): e IFS Analytical Framework (see Section 8.5.4.1) e River Stratification and Study Area Selection (see Section 8.5.4.2) e Hydraulic Routing (see Section 8.5.4.3) e Hydrologic Data Analysis (see Section 8.5.4.4) e Habitat Suitability Criteria Development (see Section 8.5.4.5) e Habitat-Specific Model Development (see Section 8.5.4.6) e Temporal and Spatial Habitat Analyses (see Section 8.5.4.7) e Instream Flow Study Integration (see Section 8.5.4.8) Details concerning each of these components including proposed methodologies and resulting work products are provided below. 8.5.4.1.IFS Analytical Framework The Instream Flow Study is designed to characterize the existing,unregulated flow regime and the relationship of instream flow to riparian and aquatic habitats under alternative operational scenarios.The instream flow framework is designed to integrate riverine processes,including geomorphology,ice processes,water quality,and groundwater-surface water interactions to quantify changes in indicators used to measure the integrity of aquatic resources.Figure 8.5-10 depicts the analytical framework of the IFS that will be used to evaluate unregulated flows and alternative operational scenarios under average,wet,dry,warm,and cold hydrological conditions.The overall framework includes analytical steps that are consistent with those described in the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM)(Stalnaker et al.1995),which will be used as a guide for completing the instream flow evaluation for the Project. The proposed Project will alter stream flow and sediment and large woody debris (LWD) transport downstream of the proposed dam site.These stressors will affect channel morphology and the quantity,quality,and timing of downstream habitats.The IFS framework will be used to assess Project effects on downstream habitats under existing channel conditions,and will also provide for the evaluation of alternative operational scenarios under estimated future channel Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-24 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN conditions.Changes in flow,ice processes,and sediment and LWD transport may cause channel degradation,avulsion,and other channel changes and may contribute to changes in the distribution and abundance of various habitat units (see page 2 of Figure 8.5-10).Integration of the Geomorphology Study (see Section 6.0)and other riverine process studies will allow future channel change to be evaluated at future time steps within the expected term of the license. These time steps will be determined in consultation with the TWG after initial geomorphology investigations provide insight into the magnitude and rate of downstream channel change. Figure 8.5-10 depicts the analytical framework of the IFS commencing with the Reservoir Operations Model (ROM)that will be used to generate Project flow releases under alternative operational scenarios.The ROM (see Section 8.5.4.3.2)will provide input data to the mainstem open-water flow routing model (see Section 8.5.4.3.1)and Ice Processes Model (see Section 7.6) that will be used to predict hourly flow and water surface elevations at multiple downstream locations,taking into account accretion and flow attenuation.Coincident with the development of the open-water flow routing model,a series of biological and riverine process studies will be completed to supplement the information collected in the 1980s,as necessary,to assess the temporal and spatial relationships between riverine and biological functions.These analyses will result in development of a series of flow-sensitive models that will quantify Project effects on indicators for each aquatic and riparian resource. Resource and process effects will be location-and habitat-specific (e.g.,responses are expected to be different in off-channel sloughs versus main channel versus split channel versus tributary delta versus riparian habitats),but there will also be a cumulative analysis that translates effects throughout the Susitna River.The IFS framework provides for the analysis of indicators that estimate flow-habitat response patterns for different species and life stages of fish and other aquatic biota.These models represent core tools that will be used for assessing changes in aquatic habitats under alternative operational scenarios.Additionally,a fish passage analysis (see Section 9.12)will be used to develop the relationship between main channel flow and connectivity with side channel and off-channel areas.Data collection and modeling for the Fish Passage Study will be coordinated with the Instream Flow,Fish and Aquatics (see Section 9.0), and Geomorphology (see Section 6.0)studies to ensure identification of potential fish passage barriers and hydraulic control points (see Figure 8.5-1). Alternative operational scenarios will likely affect habitats and riverine processes on both a spatial and temporal scale.The habitat and process models will therefore be spatially discrete (e.g.,by Focus Area,reach,and segment)and yet able to be integrated to allow for a holistic evaluation by alternative operational scenario.This will allow for an Integrated Resource Analysis (IRA)of multiple resources for each operational scenario and provides feedback, leading to potential modifications of alternative operational scenarios (see Section 8.5.4.8). The IFS framework (Figure 8.5-10)represents a measurement-oriented approach to assessing the relationship of hydrologic and geomorphic variables to the biological and ecological resources of concern.Stressors associated with Project effects include changes in the volume,timing,and quality of instream flow,and changes in ice processes and sediment and large woody debris transport.The effects of these stressors on resources of concern will be evaluated using indicators that measure changes in habitat suitability,quality,and accessibility.Reference conditions establish the range of variation for each indicator and are defined by analysis of unregulated flows under average,wet,and dry hydrologic conditions and warm and cold Pacific decadal oscillation phases.Project effects under alternative operational scenarios are defined as Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-25 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN departures from the reference conditions.The IFS framework provides the tools to identify operational scenarios that balance resource interests and quantify any loss of aquatic resources and their habitats that result from Project operations. As part of the analytical framework,an Instream Flow Study-Technical Workgroup (IFS-TWG) has been formed consisting of technical representatives from the TWG.The IFS-TWG will provide input into specific study design elements pertaining to the IFS including selection of study areas,selection of methods and models,selection of HSC criteria,review and evaluation of hydrology and habitat-flow modeling results,and review of Project operations/habitat modeling results.For example,a TWG meeting occurred on September 14,2012,and focused on the study area selection process.Additional TWG meetings are expected to occur on a regular basis through development of the License Application. 8.5.4.2.River Stratification and Study Area Selection 8.5.4.2.1.|Proposed Methodology 8.5.4.2.1.1.River Stratification The fundamental question in stratifying the river system for the 2012-2014 studies is as follows: How many levels of stratification are necessary for each study focus before study areas should be selected?Effects to physical processes and aquatic resources will be resource type-,location-, and habitat-specific.For example,at the site scale level,responses of fish habitat to changes in flow are expected to be different in side sloughs versus mainstem versus side channel versus tributary delta versus riparian habitats.At a broader scale,e.g.,segment,it is plausible that effects to the same mainstem habitat types will differ depending on location in the river network, not only at the Project footprint scale listed above,but also between geomorphic reaches.In addition,there will be a cumulative effect running down the length of the Susitna River below the dam.Different Project operations will likely affect different habitats and processes differently,both spatially and temporally.The habitat and process models will therefore need to be spatially discrete,at potentially the site/area level,mainstem habitat type level,and segment levels,and yet able to be integrated to allow for a holistic evaluation of each alternative operational scenario. As noted in Section 8.5.3,the study area consists of two segments of the river: e Middle River Segment -Susitna River from Watana Dam site to confluence of Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers (Three Rivers Confluence)(RM 184 to RM 98.5) e Lower River Segment -Susitna River extending below Talkeetna River to mouth (RM 98.5 to RM 0) The Middle River Segment represents the section of river below the Project dam that is projected to experience the greatest effects of flow regulation caused by Project operations.Within this reach,the river flows from Watana Canyon into Devils Canyon,the narrowest and steepest gradient reach on the Susitna River.The Devils Canyon constriction creates extreme hydraulic conditions including deep plunge pools,drops,and high velocities.Downstream of Devils Canyon,the Susitna River widens but remains essentially a single main channel with stable islands,numerous side channels,and sloughs. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-26 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The Lower River Segment receives inflow from three other large river systems.An abrupt,large- scale change in channel form occurs where the Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers join the Susitna River near the town of Talkeetna.The annual flow of the Chulitna River is approximately the same as the Susitna River at the confluence,though the Chulitna contributes much more sediment than the Susitna.The Talkeetna River also supplies substantial flow rates and sediment volumes.Farther downriver,the Susitna River becomes notably more braided,characterized by unstable,shifting gravel bars and shallow subchannels.The Yentna River is a large tributary to the Lower Susitna River and supplies about 40 percent of the mean annual flow at the mouth. Geomorphic analysis of both the Middle River and Lower River segments confirmed the distinct variations in geomorphic attributes (e.g.,channel gradient,confinement,channel planform types, and others)(see Section 6.5).That analysis resulted in a further refinement of the classification into eight geomorphic reaches in the Middle River Segment (Figure 8.5-11)and six geomorphic reaches in the Lower River Segment (Figure 8.5-12). Further refinements to the stratification system being applied to the Susitna River have been made since the PSP as a result of discussions during the August,September,and October 2012 TWG meetings and two interdisciplinary team meetings that were focused on study area selection and habitat mapping.Although the major divisions associated with the Middle and Lower segments have been retained,these are now incorporated into a more refined hierarchical stratification system that scales from relatively broad to more narrowly defined categories as follows: Segment -Geomorphic Reach -Mainstem Habitat Type > Main Channel Mesohabitat Types -Edge Habitat Types The highest level category is termed Segment and refers to the Middle River Segment and the Lower River Segment.The Geomorphic Reach level is next and consists of the eight categories (MR-1 through MR-8)for the Middle River Segment and six categories (LR-1 through LR-4)for the Lower River Segment (see Section 6.5.4.1.2.2 and Table 8.5-4).The geomorphic reach breaks were based in part on the following five factors:1)Planform type (single channel, island/side channel,braided);2)Confinement (approximate extent of floodplain,off-channel features);3)Gradient;4)Bed material /geology;and 5)Major river confluences.This level is followed by Mainstem Habitat Types,which capture the same general categories applied during the 1980s studies but includes additional sub-categories to provide a more refined delineation of habitat features (Table 8.5-5).Major categories and sub-categories under this level include Main Channel Habitats consisting of Main Channel,Split Main Channel,Braided Main Channel,Side Channel,and Off-channel Habitats that include Side Slough,Upland Slough, Backwater and Beaver Complexes;and Tributary Habitats that consist of the segment of the tributary influenced by mainstem flow.The next level in the hierarchy is Main Channel and Tributary Mesohabitats,which classifies habitats into categories of Cascades,Riffle,Pool, Run,and Glide.The mesohabitat level of classification is currently limited to the main channel and tributary mouths for which the ability to delineate these features is possible via aerial imagery and videography.Mesohabitat mapping in side channel and slough habitat types will require ground surveys.The last level in the classification is Edge Habitat and is intended to provide an estimate of the length of shoreline in contact with water within each habitat unit.The amount of edge habitat within a given habitat unit will provide an index of habitat complexity, i.e.,more complex areas that consist of islands,side channels,etc.will contain more edge habitat Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-27 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN than uniform,single channel areas.These stratification levels are described in Table 8.5-5 with further information provided in both the Geomorphic Study Plan (see Section 6.5.4.1.2.2)and the Habitat Characterization Study Plan (see Section 9.9). The fundamental goal of stratification is to define segments/reaches with effectively similar characteristics where,ideally,repeated replicate sampling would result in parameter estimates with similar statistical distributions.The stratification/classification system described above is designed to provide sufficient partitioning of sources of variation that can be evaluated through focused study efforts that target each of the habitat types,and from which inferences concerning habitat-flow responses in unmeasured sites can be drawn. 8.5.4.2.1.2.Selection of Study Areas/Study Sites The selection of study areas or study sites represents an important aspect of instream flow study development inasmuch as the sites or areas studied are those that will ultimately be used for evaluating Project effects.It is therefore fundamentally important that the logic and rationale for the selection of such areas be clearly articulated,understood,and agreed to by agencies and licensing participants. In general (as noted by Bovee 1982),there are three characteristic approaches to instream flow studies that pertain to site selection that have been considered for application in the Project. These are described below. Representative Sites -where professional judgment or numerically and/or qualitatively derived criteria are relied on to select one or more sites/areas that are considered representative of the stratum or larger river.Representative sites typically contain all habitat types of importance.In general,the representative site approach can be applied fairly readily to simple,single thread channel reaches,where the attributes that are measured are extrapolated linearly based on stream length or area.In this case,the goal of stratification will be to identify river segments that are relatively homogenous in terms of mesohabitat mixes,and the methods used for stratification tend to be classification-based using logical or heuristic rules.This approach typically requires completing some form of mapping up front,and using the results to select sites that encompass the range of habitat conditions desired.The number of replicate sites can be identified via power analysis,although this ideally requires a priori knowledge of the statistical variance associated with a measurable quantity.In the absence of such knowledge,a distribution may be assumed (e.g.,standard normal,Student's t statistic,other). -Applicability to the Susitna-Watana Project:Yes,but will require results of more detailed habitat mapping that will be completed in QI1 2013 to determine representativeness of study areas. Critical Sites -where available knowledge indicates that either (i)a sizable fraction of the target fish population relies on a specific location,(ii)a particular habitat type(s)is (are)highly important biologically,or (iii)where a particular habitat type is well known to be influenced by flow changes in a characteristic way,and the decision is made to focus on those areas.For example,in the case of the Susitna River,historical fish studies repeatedly showed the importance of certain side slough,upland slough,and side channel areas for spawning and juvenile rearing.Critical sites or areas are typically selected assuming that project effects to other areas are secondary in terms of implications to fish population structure,health,and size.This assumption can only really be tested if other sites are identified that are similar looking but were Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-28 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN not deemed critical,and sampling is performed on those sites as well to confirm the critical nature of the sites that were identified as such. -Applicability to the Susitna-Watana Project:Yes,especially with respect to selection of side channel/side slough/upland slough complexes that have been shown to be influenced by main channel flows and that are biologically important. Randomly Located Sites -where sites,areas,or measurement locations are selected randomly from each defined stratum or habitat type,and replicate sites or cross-sections are sampled to estimate variance (e.g.,Williams,1996;Payne et al.2004).Site selection based on random sampling tends to involve statistical multivariate grouping or stratification approaches,such as cluster analysis or ordination techniques.In this case,initial groundwork is necessary to identify relevant variables suitable for grouping,and then the data need to be collected or derived to describe those variables spatially.The approach is the least subject to potential for bias,because it relies on distinct rules and algorithms.However,this approach becomes increasingly difficult to apply in site selection when the sites become more complex,such as is the case on the Susitna River.In addition,the number of sites will be contingent on the variability within the universal data set:the greater the number of clusters,the greater the potential number of sites.Strict random sampling is therefore not likely applicable for evaluating off-channel habitats and sloughs where the morphology of multiple channels varies substantially and in complex ways within and across sites. -Applicability to the Susitna-Watana Project:Yes,but more appropriate with respect to main channel mesohabitat sampling (i.e.,riffle,run,glide,pool)or selection of mainstem habitat types for HSC sampling (see Section 8.5.4.5). These approaches were reviewed at a recent TWG meeting (September 11,2012)and the proposed process and criteria used for the selection of study areas/sites presented. Focus Areas During the September 11,2012,TWG meeting,the concept of "intensive study areas”was introduced and discussed.Such areas represent specific sections of the river that will be investigated across resource disciplines that will provide for an overall understanding of interrelationships of river flow dynamics on the physical,chemical,and biological factors that influence fish habitat. The concept represents a combination of all three of the methods described above,inasmuch as (1)the areas would contain habitat types representative of other areas;(2)the areas would include certain habitat types repeatedly used by fish and therefore can be considered "critical areas”;and (3)sampling of certain habitat features or mesohabitat types within the areas would be best approached via random sampling. A total of 10 intensive study areas (hereafter referred to as Focus Areas [Focus Areas]),were presented and discussed with the TWG and are proposed in this RSP for detailed study within the Middle River Segment.Locations of the Focus Areas are depicted in Figure 8.5-11.The Focus Areas are intended to serve as specific geographic areas of the river that will be the subject of intensive investigation by multiple resource disciplines including Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow,Riparian Instream Flow (see Section 8.6),Groundwater (see Section 7.5),Geomorphology (see Section 6.0),Ice Processes (see Section 7.6),and Water Quality (see Section 5.0).The Focus Areas were selected during an inter-disciplinary resource meeting that involved a Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-29 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN systematic review of aerial imagery within each of the Geomorphic Reaches (MR-1 through MR-8)for the entire Middle Segment of the river.Focus Areas were selected within Geomorphic Reach MR-1 (one Focus Area),Geomorphic Reach MR-2 (two Focus Areas),Geomorphic Reach MR-5 (one Focus Area),Geomorphic Reach MR-6 (four Focus Areas),Geomorphic Reach MR-7 (one Focus Area),and Geomorphic Reach MR-8 (one Focus Area).Focus Areas were not selected for Geomorphic Reaches MR-3 or MR-4 due to safety considerations related to Devils Canyon.MR-3 is a relatively short (3.5-mile)steep (17 ft/mi.)reach located just upstream from the Devils Canyon reach.The reach is confined within a relatively narrow canyon. Although flow routing transects were initially considered for this reach,any attempt to sample it was abandoned once field teams were on the ground and realized it could not be safely measured.Of particular concern were the swift currents within the reach and the lack of any margin of safety for recovering someone before they would be swept into Devils Canyon.MR-3 consists primarily of single-thread main channel habitat with two areas with split-main channel islands.No major tributaries enter the reach and it is likely that any anadromous salmonids (Chinook)that make it through Devils Canyon simply pass through MR-3.The main channel portions of the reach are similar to those in MR-2 and MR-1.The Devils Canyon Reach (MR-4) is non-navigable and cannot,under any flow condition,be safely surveyed. The areas selected were those deemed representative of the major features in the geomorphic reach and included mainstem habitat types of known biological significance (i.e.,where fish have been observed based on previous and/or contemporary studies),as well as some locations (e.g.,Slough 17)where previous sampling revealed few/no fish.The Focus Areas include representative side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs,and tributary mouths. Three of the Focus Areas in Geomorphic Reach MR-6 and one in Geomorphic Reach MR-8 contain specific habitat types that were found,during the 1980s studies,to be consistently used by salmon for spawning and/or rearing.These areas included Slough 21,Slough 11,and Skull Creek in Geomorphic Reach MR-6 and Whiskers Slough in Geomorphic Reach MR-8.Overall, 92 percent of the sockeye,70 percent of the chum,and 44 percent of the slough-spawning pink salmon were found in just these four sloughs.By definition,these areas represent "critical areas” and were included in the Focus Areas to allow some comparisons with the 1980s data.Although other portions of these same Focus Areas were not studied during the 1980s,these areas will be studied as part of the RSP.The upper three Focus Areas (one in Geomorphic Reach MR-1 and two in Geomorphic Reach MR-2)were selected based on their representativeness of the respective geomorphic reaches and the inclusion of a mix of side channel and slough habitat types.However,there is no existing fish information on these areas because they were not sampled in the 1980s.Nominally,the Focus Areas range in length from 0.5 mile to 1.9 miles. Details of each of the Focus Areas including their identification number,common name, description,geomorphic reach assignment,location (RM),length,habitat types included in the Focus Area,fish use and types of instream flow studies conducted in the 1980s,and the rationale for selection,are presented in Table 8.5-6;schematic photos of each of the areas are depicted in Figure 8.5-13 through Figure 8.5-22.A similar process will be applied to the Lower Segment of the river in December 2012 but will focus on the upper portions of that segment that will be most susceptible to flow modification. These 10 areas have been selected for planning purposes but will be evaluated further for their representativeness of other areas based on results of habitat mapping that will be completed at the end of 2012.The results of this evaluation will be discussed with the TWG and refinements Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-30 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN in Focus Area selection made prior to commencement of the 2013 studies.The initial set of study areas will be developed in consultation with the TWG by February/March of 2013 to enable detailed field studies to occur.The data and information collected in 2013 from this study and other related investigations (e.g.,fish distribution -Section 9.5;radio-tagging -Section 9.7; habitat characterization -Section 9.9;and others)will be reviewed,and necessary refinements to existing sites made or new sites added to the studies completed in 2014.This adaptive management approach to site selection will allow for shifts in study focus to other areas,should results of 2013 studies reveal their biological importance and sensitivity to flow modifications. It should be noted that the criteria applied in the selection of the Focus Areas incorporated (or will incorporate)elements from all three of the above mentioned selection methods and considered the following: e All major habitat types (main channel,side channel,side slough,upland slough, tributary delta)will be sampled within each geomorphic reach. e At least one (and up to three)Focus Area(s)per geomorphic reach (excepting geomorphic reaches associated with Devils Canyon -MR-3 and MR-4)will be studied that is/are representative of other areas. e A replicate sampling strategy will be used for measuring habitat types within each Focus Area,which may include a random selection process of mesohabitat types. e Areas that are known (based on existing and contemporary data)to be biologically important for salmon spawning/rearing in mainstem and off-channel habitats will be sampled (i.e.,critical areas). e Areas for which little or no fish use has been documented or for which information on fish use is lacking will also be sampled. Sites Outside of the Focus Areas In addition to the identified Focus Areas,a total of 80 cross-sectional transects in the Middle River Segment and 8 transects in the Lower River Segment have been established and flow data collected to support development of the open-water flow routing model (see Section 8.5.4.3 and Table 8.5-7).These transects were primarily located across single thread sections of the river; however,some do extend across more complex sections.In most cases,two to three sets of flow measurements have been made at each transect.The resulting data sets can be used,at a minimum,for evaluating velocity-depth distributions across the channel that can be related to biologically relevant criteria associated with various life stage requirements (e.g.,spawning, adult holding,juvenile rearing).In many cases (pending review of the cross-sectional data),it should be possible to develop actual habitat-flow relationships following a 1-D PHABSIM type analysis (see Section 8.5.4.6).The cross-sectional transects represent an important dataset that can be used to characterize habitat-flow response characteristics of the main channel of the Susitna River.These types of data were never collected during the 1980s studies and no main channel habitat-flow relationships were developed.Importantly,once the main channel habitat mapping is completed (see Section 9.9),the transect locations will be assigned to specific mesohabitat types (e.g.,riffle,run,glide,pool)that could be randomly selected for analysis. These additional transects may also be useful for extrapolating results/relationships from measured to unmeasured sites (see Section 8.5.4.7).Supplemental main channel transects will be established as needed to more fully characterize main channel habitats,either as part of the Focus Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-31 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Area analysis or at separate locations associated with specific mesohabitat types.The need for and exact number of the supplemental transects will be determined based on results of the habitat mapping. 8.5.4.2.2.Work Products A detailed description of the rationale and methods used in the selection of study areas and study sites will be provided in the Instream Flow Study Report.Information provided will include the following: e Maps and orthophotos depicting geomorphic reach breaks and highlighting locations of Focus Areas as well as locations of all Open Water Flow Routing Model cross-sections. e Aerial photos of each of the Focus Areas depicting upper and lower boundaries and highlighting the different habitat types contained within each Focus Area. e Results of mainstem habitat mapping presented in both tabular and graphical formats that present the relative proportions of habitat features contained in the Focus Areas within a given geomorphic reach relative to those features contained in the entire geomorphic reach. e Ground-based,geo-referenced,and labeled digital images of each of the Focus Areas to include specific habitat types and features within each Focus Area. e Detailed narrative describing the study area selection process leading to the selection of Focus Areas.This will include stratification procedures,site/area criteria development and application,as well as results of any statistical analysis including both perspective and retrospective power analysis used for determining sample size. 8.5.4.3.|Hydraulic Routing and Operations Modeling Project operations will likely store water during the snowmelt season (May through August)and release it during the winter (October through April;AEA 2011).This would alter the seasonal hydrology in the Susitna River downstream from the dam,resulting in lower flows from May through August and higher flows from October through April.In addition to these seasonal changes,the Project may be operated in a load-following mode.Daily load-following operations will typically release higher volumes of water during peak-load hours,and lower volumes of water during off-peak hours.Flow fluctuations that originate at the powerhouse will travel downstream and attenuate,or dampen,as they travel downstream.The waves created by load- following operations will affect the aquatic habitat of the Susitna River downstream from the powerhouse,especially along the margins of the river alternately wetted and dewatered (the varial zone). 8.5.4.3.1.Proposed Methodology To analyze the impacts of alternative Project operational scenarios on habitats downstream of the Watana Dam site,an open-water flow routing model will be used to translate the effects of changes in flow associated with Project operations to downstream Susitna River locations;the open-water flow routing model will be extended downstream until the flow fluctuations are within the range of the without-Project natural variation and conditions. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-32 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Steady-state flow models assume that velocity or flow at a given location remains constant. Unsteady flow models are used when flows change rapidly and the consideration of time is an additional variable.One-dimensional unsteady flow hydraulic models are commonly used to route flow and stage fluctuations through rivers and reservoirs.Examples of public-domain computer models used to perform these types of processes include FEQ (USGS 1997), FLDWAV (U.S.National Weather Service 1998),UNET (U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 2001), and HEC-RAS (U.S.Army Corps of Engineers 2010a,2010b,and 2010c).The HEC-RAS model has proven to be very robust under mixed flow conditions (subcritical and supercritical),as will be expected in the Susitna River.The HEC-RAS model also has the capability of automatically varying Manning's "n”with stage through the use of the equivalent roughness option.Another feature of HEC-RAS is the capability of varying Manning's "n”on a seasonal basis.The robust performance and flexibility of HEC-RAS make this model an appropriate choice for routing stage fluctuations downstream from the proposed Project dam under open-water conditions (i.e., summer,ice-free).Under winter ice-covered conditions,the CRISSP1D (Comprehensive River Ice Simulation System Project)model or the River1D model could be used to route unsteady flows downstream through the Susitna River.CRISSP1D is a one-dimensional unsteady flow model that can be used to analyze water temperature,thermal ice transport processes,and ice cover break-up (Chen et al.2006).Likewise,River!D,developed by the University of Alberta,is an alternate one-dimensional unsteady flow model that could be used to analyze ice processes. The seasonal timing of the transition from the HEC-RAS model to the Ice Processes Model and vice versa will vary from year-to-year and will depend on seasonal climate conditions.The Ice Processes Model and how it will be used to model flow in the Susitna River is described in Section 7.6.This section,8.5.4.3,concentrates on how the HEC-RAS model will be developed and calibrated for the mainstem open-water period. The foundation of the IFS analyses rests with the development of the Susitna River Mainstem Flow Routing Models (MFRM)(HEC-RAS,Ice Processes Model)that will provide hourly flow and water surface elevation data at numerous locations longitudinally distributed throughout the length of the river extending from RM 184 downstream to RM 75 (about 23 miles downstream from the confluence with the Chulitna River).Two different flow routing models will be developed:an open-water model (HEC-RAS)and a winter model to route flows under ice- covered conditions.The HEC-RAS routing model will initially be developed based on river cross-sections and on gaging stations on the Susitna River that were established and measured in 2012 as part of the IFS program.A list of the river cross-sections that were surveyed is provided in Table 8.5-7.A total of 88 cross-sections were surveyed in 2012 (16 between the proposed dam site and Devils Canyon,59 between Devils Canyon and the Three Rivers Confluence,and 13 downstream from the Three Rivers Confluence).The table shows the preliminary river mile of each section,the date of measurement,the measured discharge,and reference discharge from the USGS Susitna River at Gold Creek.Both sets of discharge values are currently preliminary and in the review process.The cross-sections were measured during three field trips intended to capture high-flow (28,000 cfs),medium-flow (16,000 cfs),and low-flow (8,000 cfs)conditions corresponding to the USGS gage station at Gold Creek (No 15292000).The first two trips were successful at capturing high-flow and medium-flow conditions during late June-early July and August,respectively.However,the low-flow trip that began on September 14 was interrupted by a 25-year flood event that required evacuation of the field team on September 20.Work resumed on September 29,but was suspended on October 6 when a second late fall storm resulted in Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-33 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN unseasonably high flows.A final attempt commenced on October 15,but abundant river ice and slush pans precluded accurate flow measurements. At each river cross-section,ground surface and water surface elevations were surveyed using Real Time Kinematic (RTK)GPS instrumentation.River bathymetry and flow velocities were measured using an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP)system consisting of a Sontek M9 equipped with RTK GPS positioning.Water surface slopes were also measured at each section. Photographs of each section were also taken and vegetation descriptions were also developed. Examples of some of the river cross-sections that were surveyed in 2012 are shown in Figure 8.5-23.At RM 170 (between the proposed dam site and Devils Canyon),the channel had a single thread with a width of about 600 feet.At RM 75 (downstream from the Three Rivers Confluence),the channel was multi-threaded with a total width of about 1 mile. At each river cross-section,a minimum of four passes across the channel width were used to measure the flow in accordance with U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)standards.An example of the output from one of the passes is shown in Figure 8.5-24 for RM 170 on June 21,2012.While maximum velocities in the 10 to 15 feet per second (fps)range were recorded,the cross-sectional average velocity was 8.0 fps. A total of 13 gaging stations were established on the Susitna River in 2012 at the locations listed in Table 8.5-8.These stations were set up to measure stage in real time every 15 minutes.The stations will be maintained in 2013-2014.Data recorded at these stations will be used to calibrate flow pulse arrival time in the open-water flow routing model,based on measured diurnal glacial melt pulses and rainstorm-generated flood peaks. The hourly flow records from USGS gaging stations on the Susitna River will also be utilized to help develop the HEC-RAS routing model.Depending on the initial results of the flow routing models,it may be necessary to add additional transects to improve the performance of the models between RM 75 and RM 184,and to possibly extend the models farther downstream past RM 75.Additional transects between RM 75 and RM 184 will be added if calibration of certain sections of the river proves problematic without supplementing the HEC-RAS model with additional intermediate cross-sections. Results of the draft open-water flow routing model will be available in Q1 2013.These initial results will be used to assess the magnitude,timing,and frequency of hourly flow and stage changes associated with proposed load-following operations during ice-free periods.Project operations will likely include storing water during the snowmelt season (May through August) and releasing it during the winter (October through April)(AEA 2011).This would reduce flows downstream of the dam site from May through August and increase flows October through April. During Q1 2013,results of the draft open-water flow routing model will also be used to evaluate downstream changes in flow and stage associated with reduced Project flow releases during the open-water portions of the reservoir refill period.Because the results of the Ice Processes Model will not be available prior to the start of the 2013 summer field season,the downstream extent of Project effects on flow and stage during the winter will be assessed by routing winter flow releases identified by the operations model (see Section 8.5.4.3.2)downstream using the open- water flow routing model.Although stage and flow projections during the winter will not be robust,they will provide sufficient information on downstream flow and stage effects to support early 2013 decisions regarding the need to extend resource studies into the Lower River Segment.Should extension of an open-water flow routing model downstream of RM 75 be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-34 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN needed to address data needs of riverine process and habitat modeling studies,the additional channel and hydraulic data can be collected in Q3 2013. During the development and calibration of the HEC-RAS model,the drainage areas of ungaged tributaries will be quantified and used to help estimate accretion flows to the Susitna River between locations where flows are measured.The flow estimates developed for ungaged tributaries will be refined based on flows measured in those tributaries in 2013 and 2014. The gaging stations initially installed in 2012 will be maintained through 2013 and 2014 to help calibrate and validate the flow routing models and provide data supporting other studies.The gaging stations will be used to monitor stage and flow under summer ice-free conditions and to monitor water pressure under winter ice-covered conditions.The stations record additional measurements including water temperature and camera images of the river conditions (summer and winter).Continuous measurement of water pressures during the 2012-2013 and the 2013-14 winter periods under ice-covered conditions will produce information different from open-water conditions.During partial ice cover,the pressure levels measured by the pressure transducers are affected by flow velocities,ice-cover roughness characteristics,and other factors such as entrained ice in the water column.The pressure-head data are important for understanding groundwater/surface water interactions. Periodic winter discharge measurements (January and March)will be completed at selected gaging stations in the winter,in coordination with USGS winter measurement programs,and will provide valuable information for understanding hydraulic conditions in the river during a season when groundwater plays a more prominent role in aquatic habitat functions.Winter flow measurements will also be used to help develop the Ice Processes Model and supporting analysis (see Section 7.6). Once developed and calibrated,the HEC-RAS model can be provided a time history of flow releases from the dam and it will predict the flow and stage history at each of the downstream cross-sections.These predicted flow and stage responses can then be evaluated at multiple levels to assess the impacts to aquatic habitat. Output from the flow routing models will provide the fundamental input data to a suite of habitat-specific and riverine process-specific models that will be used to describe how the existing flow regime relates to and has influenced various resource elements (e.g.,salmonid spawning and rearing habitats and the accessibility to these habitats in the mainstem,side channels,sloughs,and tributary deltas;invertebrate habitat;sediment transport processes;ice dynamics;large woody debris (LWD);the health and composition of the riparian zone).These same models will likewise be used to evaluate resource responses to alternative Project operational scenarios,again via output from the routing models,including various baseload and load-following alternatives,as appropriate.As an unsteady flow model,the routing models will be capable of providing flow and water surface elevation information at each location on an hourly basis and therefore Project effects on flow can be evaluated on multiple time steps (hourly,daily,and monthly)as necessary to evaluate different resource elements. The study objective for the flow routing data collection effort is to provide input,calibration,and verification data for a river flow routing model extending from the proposed dam site to RM 75. Specific objectives are as follows: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-35 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Survey cross-sections to define channel topography and hydraulic controls between RM 75 and RM 184,excluding Devils Canyon (for safety reasons). e Measure stage and discharge at each cross-section during high and low flows,with the potential addition of an intermediate flow measurement. e Measure the water surface slope during discharge measurements,and document the substrate type,groundcover,habitat type,and woody debris in the flood-prone area for the purposes of developing roughness estimates. e Install and operate 13 water-level recording stations within the mainstem Susitna River. The HEC-RAS routing model will rely upon existing Susitna River hydrology as well as on output from the ROM. 8.5.4.3.2.Operations Model The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC)reservoir system simulation model HEC-ResSim (USACE 2007)Version 3.0 will be used to develop the reservoir outflows used in the Instream Flow Study.HEC-ResSim is a general-purpose,sequential stream flow routing model.The model is free and in the public domain.HEC-ResSim includes a graphical user interface,and graphics and reporting facilities.HEC's Data Storage System (HEC-DSS)is used for storage and retrieval of input and output time-series data. Essential HEC-ResSim capabilities applicable to Watana Reservoir are summarized in this section.The model time increment of operation,which is an input variable,will be hourly. Reservoir operations are driven by a set of operating rules.Refinements are achieved through iterative model runs.HEC-ResSim incorporates a reservoir water balance such that inflow minus outflow,minus losses such as evaporation,equals the change in reservoir storage for the time period. Although the HEC-ResSim program contains river channel routing capabilities,the more detailed hydraulic channel routing capabilities of HEC-RAS will be used in the Instream Flow Study for river channel flow routing downstream from Watana Dam.Therefore,a description of HEC-ResSim river channel flow routing capabilities has not been included.Where specific data values are provided herein for the dam,reservoir,and operating parameters,it must be understood that all values are preliminary and subject to change as studies progress. 8.5.4.3.2.1.Hydrology Required model input data includes long-term reservoir inflow time-series data.For Watana Dam,the reservoir inflows will be a continuous 61-year record of daily flows for Water Years 1950 through 2010.The U.S.Geological Survey (USGS)provided the basis for the continuous long-term daily flows with a Susitna River watershed record extension study (Curran 2012).Two of the USGS gages included in the record extension study were Susitna River at Gold Creek (USGS gage 15292000)that has a drainage area of 6,160 square miles,and Susitna River near Cantwell (USGS gage 15291500)that has a drainage area of 4,140 square miles.Watana Dam has a drainage area of 5,180 square miles,about half-way between these two USGS gages. Inflows to Watana Reservoir were based on proportioning the USGS flows based on drainage area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-36 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Providing environmental flows at the Gold Creek USGS gage is a primary reservoir operating criterion.With Watana Dam,a majority of the flow tributary to the Gold Creek USGS gage will be regulated,but significant natural inflows between Watana Dam and Gold Creek must also be included.To accomplish this,a 61-year daily record was constructed from the Gold Creek USGS gage flows minus the calculated Watana Reservoir inflows and used as time-series natural inflow data for input to the model. 8.5.4.3.2.2.Reservoir Operations The basic reservoir input data includes a table of values for elevation (feet),reservoir storage (acre-feet),and water surface area (acres),and a table of values for release capacities based on elevation including the spillway,valves,and the turbines.Release capabilities can be broken down by individual valve or spillway bay. Releases from the reservoir in the HEC-ResSim model are based on zones,defined by reservoir water surface elevations,and a reservoir operating scheme.The initially defined zones in the model configuration were an Inactive zone up to 1,850 feet in elevation,a Conservation zone up to 2,050 feet in elevation,a Flood Control zone up to 2,064 feet in elevation and a Spillway Operation zone that extended to the top of the dam crest at 2,075 feet in elevation.It is possible to create additional user-defined zones in HEC-ResSim.The operating scheme in HEC-ResSim is defined by adding rules to the zones,with the exception of the Inactive zone from which releases cannot occur.A rule represents the goals and constraints upon the releases.The reservoir operating scheme,called an operations set,controls releases from the various reservoir outlets, and therefore,the downstream discharge resulting from the Project.The rules within each zone are prioritized to control the actual releases from the reservoir outlets.The allocation of releases from the outlets can also be specified. The highest priority rules in the Conservation zone would be the minimum and maximum flow requirements at Gold Creek (USGS gage No.15292000),which was initially used as a downstream control point for releases from the reservoir based on studies from the 1980s.The initial environmental flow requirements from Case E-VI in the 1985 FERC License Application Amendment were used,with the exception of the flow requirements from October 29 to May 5, which were updated to reflect an increase from 2,000 cfs to 3,000 cfs.A sequential release allocation for the reservoir outlets was also added in order to increase the flow,as necessary, through the powerhouse when the flow to meet the hourly Watana load was less than the minimum release required from the reservoir to meet flow requirements at Gold Creek. Hydropower operations in the Conservation zone form the other primary reservoir release rule. The Flood Control zone used the same operating rules as the Conservation zone and included a release rule for the low-level fixed-cone outlet valves.The Spillway Operation zone included a release rule for operation of the gated spillway. 8.5.4.3.2.3..Hydropower Operations Basic hydropower input data includes installed capacity and unit efficiencies as a constant or as a function of flow,reservoir elevation,or operating head.A tailwater rating table,hydraulic losses as a constant or a function of flow,turbine hydraulic capacities,and an allowance for station use are also included as input data. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-37 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Hydropower rules specify the minimum releases needed from a reservoir's powerhouse to meet a power generation requirement and schedule.The hydropower rules available in the model specify the generation requirement as a function of time of year (month,week,or day with hourly load factors),power guide curve,or as an external time-series dataset of the load.The release from the powerhouse,which is a function of the plant's generating efficiency,the hydraulic head,and the required energy can also be specified based on limits to the rate of change of flow through the powerhouse and downstream flow requirements,which in turn affect the energy generation. The initial Watana powerhouse hydropower rule was to specify time-series energy generation requirements for each hour of the year (8,760 values).The required generation values were based on the Watana powerhouse generating a specified part of the total Railbelt energy demand.As studies progress,the hourly time-series generation requirements at Watana are expected to be based on studies that integrate the Watana generation capabilities into the Railbelt system.The hourly load data for Watana would then be based on the total projected load for the Project considering the capability of other Railbelt Utilities loads and resources in the region.Factors such as outages of other Railbelt generating units could then be incorporated in the generation requirements at Watana Dam. 8.5.4.3.2.4.Model Output HEC-ResSim can provide results for many parameters such as the simulated reservoir elevation and powerhouse generation.Data can be plotted or output in standard or user-customized reports. Only one parameter,total reservoir outflow,must be provided from HEC-ResSim for input to the HEC-RAS model.Total reservoir outflow is the summation of all outlets including the powerhouse,spillway,and the fixed-cone outlets.The extent of data to be provided is yet to be determined,but it could include hourly outflow for all 61 years of operation (over 500,000 values).The outflows could also be provided on a daily average flow basis if needed. 8.5.4.3.3.Work Products Work products for open-water flow routing will consist of a calibrated executable model and a draft and final report.Specific work products will include the following: e A detailed description of the methods used to develop the routing model. e Map displaying the location of all mainstem transects used as part of open-water flow routing modeling. e Data used in the modeling effort including topographic,bathymetric,and digital terrain model data,USGS flow records,and water surface elevations. e Plot of channel cross-section profiles for all transects used as part of the modeling. e Details of model calibration including calibration period,observed and simulated water surface elevations,Manning's roughness values,and tabular listing of calibration results. These work products will be compiled and presented in the open-water flow routing component of the Initial Study Report (ISR)and Updated Study Report (USR). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-38 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.4.|Hydrologic Data Analysis The assessment of hydrology data will include a summary of seasonal and long-term hydrologic characteristics for the river including daily,monthly,and annual summaries,exceedance summaries,and recurrence intervals of small and large floods.The recent record extension analysis performed by USGS (Curran 2012)will be used to develop the synthetic period of record (POR)flows for the past 61 years at selected tributaries.The hydrologic data collection at tributaries will provide data required for the simulation of flows at hourly intervals required for evaluating potential Project effects. 8.5.4.4.1._Proposed Methodology 8.5.4.4.1.1.Hydrologic Data Collection As part of the 2013-2014 IFS,hydrologic data collection will include stage and discharge measurements,cross-sectional and areal bathymetric surveys,velocity mapping,and roughness determinations.The IFS will also incorporate hydrologic data collected by other studies, including water quality (see Section 5.0),water temperature,and ice process data (see Section 7.6). Stage and discharge measurements were performed in 2012 at 88 cross-sections between RM 75 and RM 184.Twelve of these cross-sections are located at or near gaging stations operated by USGS or AEA.Stage and discharge measurements were also performed at inactive USGS gaging stations in the Lower River (Susitna River at Susitna Station [ESS20],RM 20)and in the upper basin (Susitna River near Cantwell [ESS80],RM 224)(see Table 8.5-8 for gaging station naming convention).Gaging equipment was re-installed at these locations,as well as at two tidal monitoring stations in the Susitna delta.Water level,water temperature,camera images,and meteorological data from these stations are shared online via an internal project website. Depending on results of the 2012 open-water flow routing model and analysis from other studies, additional cross-sections will be surveyed in 2013 and 2014.The geomorphology studies (see Sections 6.5 and 6.6)will require 50 to 100 additional cross-sections for the development of the 1-D sediment transport model and other geomorphologic analysis.The location for these sections and the field data collection will closely coordinate with the Geomorphology Discipline Lead and relevant study staff.These cross-sections should satisfy most of the additional cross-sections needed for the open-water flow routing model.Sections of the river that demonstrate changes in cross-section profiles seasonally,or event-based (floods),may require additional cross-section measurements during each summer season.Stage and discharge measurements will be used to calibrate the flow routing models,and to develop or confirm ratings for new and existing gaging stations. Instantaneous stage measurements will be performed using either RTK GPS methods or optical levels,using benchmarks and geodetic control points that are part of the Project control network. The 2012 river cross-section field program established that the RTK survey method allowed for the greatest number of cross-sections to be surveyed each day and helped maintain safety objectives.In addition,the RTK data quality parameters and time stamp information contained in the field controller database files ensured the accuracy of the water level measurements and eliminated the possibility for transformation of numbers by the field crews.The GPS Project survey-control (CP)network (horizontal and vertical)will be evaluated each spring.Vertical Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-39 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN datum will be verified and any missing benchmarks due to bank erosion or other issues replaced if needed.Additional CP surveys will be conducted to support Focus Areas and other studies from the Lower River Segment to the Upper River Segment,as needed.RTK survey control points will be placed at final Focus Areas to provide study field teams with horizontal and vertical control networks designed to allow efficient ground surveying with RTK,optical levels, or other conventional survey methods. A standard operating procedure (SOP)guide will be established to provide uniform survey methods and data reporting standards.This will include the use of Focus Area survey control networks (horizontal and vertical)by the various field study teams working in these areas.The SOP will include the appropriate reporting of RTK survey methods and data.All surveying information will be provided in data sets applicable to existing or developing relational or spatial databases. While conducting field surveys for new or existing survey control points in study Focus Areas, additional survey control points will be established to verify the accuracy of Project Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR)information.The field plans for collecting the LiDAR validation data will be coordinated with the study teams depending on this data and the Project Geographic Information System (GIS)technical group.Existing RTK river cross-section survey control points will be relabeled in the spring of 2013 to reflect final Project River Mile (PRM) designations. During 2012,a number of 1980s cross-section and survey-control points were found and surveyed to current horizontal and vertical datum standards.Additional survey control points will be reviewed from any newly found 1980s information.The potential 1980s information will be evaluated for follow-up field surveying.An evaluation will be made on how to project the 1980s project survey-control datum (horizontal and vertical)to current Project standards. Any new AEA gaging or water level stations will have RTK or CP surveys established as well as temporary benchmarks (TBMs)to allow efficient optical level-loop surveys.Project survey control will be maintained,or established if needed,at USGS gaging stations on the Susitna River within the Project study area,and at key tributaries.The offsets from USGS local datum to Project elevation datum will be maintained to provide USGS to Project vertical datum conversion standards.These conversions are critical to using the USGS gage water levels in all relevant Project hydrology modeling and studies. Together with water temperature and meteorological data,continuous stage measurements will be recorded at AEA gaging stations with a minimum of 15-minute intervals and made available to studies via the near-real-time reporting data network.Continuous stage measurements are made using vented pressure transducers accurate to within about 0.02 feet.The gaging stations will require periodic elevation surveys,either performed by RTK surveying or by optical level- loop survey methods.The elevations surveys will be conducted during discharge measurements, changes or repositioning of pressure transducers,and before and after major hydrologic events such as fall freeze-up and spring break-up.The data collection stations will be operated throughout the year to support both summer (open-water)and winter (ice covered)study needs for the IFS and other studies.Table 8.5-9 showsa listing of the current 2012 stations in the near- real-time reporting data network. Maintaining a constant stage record during river freeze-up and spring break-up is a challenge. River ice jams and ice jam break-ups will result in some minor losses of stage data.In the early Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-40 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN winter,when ice conditions become more stable and safe for field crews to operate on the ice, pressure transducers and water temperature sensors will be added at gaging stations to provide the Ice Processes Study team (see Section 7.6)with winter pressure (water pressures under ice, water levels in ice-free or partial ice cover reaches)and water temperature measurements. Sensors lost during spring break-up will be replaced as soon as it is safe and practical to install new pressure transducers.All data are recorded on Campbell Scientific CR1000 data loggers, with internal memory backup.AEA gaging stations also have data archived through hourly data retrievals over the radio telemetry network.This approach will help ensure that no data are lost from icing conditions except for the narrow period when pressure transducers are damaged at a gaging station and new sensors have not yet been installed. Additional gaging stations will be added at selected tributaries to help provide additional hydrologic analysis for hydrologic and fisheries studies.These tributaries will include Fog Creek,Portage Creek,and Indian River.These gaging stations will be installed in spring 2013 to help measure the spring snowmelt peaks.The stations will use the same Metadata standards as the existing AEA gaging stations and will report similar data.Additional stations may be added to the near-time-reporting network as warranted by study activities and analysis needs and deadlines.Additional gaging stations may be added on additional tributaries based on the drainage area evaluations being performed by UAF-GINA. During open-water conditions,mainstem discharge measurements will be performed using acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs)following current USGS guidance (Mueller and Wagner 2009).Due to their shallow depths,tributary inflows will usually be measured using conventional current meter methods (Rantz et al.1982).Winter mainstem flows will be measured using a combination of current meter and ADCP methods.The winter gaging program will be coordinated with USGS so that the measurements from both programs occur at the same general time period.The current schedule is to conduct winter measurements in January and March of 2013 and 2014.The winter discharge measurement will occur at the AEA gaging stations from ESS80 downstream to ESS20 (Table 8.5-8).Winter discharge measurement will not be collected at ESS10 and ESS15.These discharge measurements will help assess gaining and losing river reaches during winter conditions.This effort will be coordinated with Ice Processes (see Section 7.6)so that measurements also have direct applications to the ice processes analysis and model development efforts.The winter and summer discharge measurement events will likely involve multiple teams to allow collection of data under a shorter period so flow conditions can be more similar for comparisons between gaging stations in the network. In accordance with current USGS guidance (Mueller 2012),all discharge measurements will include sufficient quality assurance data to rate the measurements as Excellent,Good,Fair,or Poor,corresponding to categories of uncertainty ranging from 0 to over 8 percent. During 2012,cross-sectional bathymetric surveys were performed as part of discharge measurements completed using the Sontek M9 ADCP.The Sontek M9 is equipped with a 0.5- megahertz (MHz)vertical-beam depth sounder and RTK GPS positioning.A minimum of four transects were completed at each cross-section,and results were used to prepare a digital elevation model of the streambed.Together with shore-based RTK GPS surveys,the digital elevation model was used to develop cross-sections for use in the open-water flow routing model. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-41 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Additional cross-sections will be needed for geomorphology modeling,flow routing,and other IFS models.Depending on the need for concurrent flow data,the cross-sections will be surveyed using either ADCPs or single-beam depth sounders.In either case,bathymetric data will be referenced to the Project geodetic control network using RTK GPS survey methods. Roughness determinations will be made by solving Manning's equation using field measurements of discharge and water-surface slope.Each cross-section will have vegetation descriptions and photographs (upstream,downstream,into bank,opposite bank)above ordinary high water elevations.The distance away from shoreline for cross-section surveys is determined in the field by the Lead Field Hydrologist.These results will be compared against visual estimates based on handbook values. 8.5.4.4.1.1.1.Hydrologic Data Real-time Reporting Network Operations Project hydrologic studies include river-flow routing models (see Section 8.5)ice, geomorphology (see Section 6.6)and water quality (see Section 5.6)models and several studies to look at the potential effects of the Project and how to minimize them.In order to accurately simulate unsteady flows,the studies require a series of gaging (water level and discharge),water level,and meteorological stations.These stations are connected through a radio telemetry system using spread-spectrum radio communication and a network of base stations.The purpose of the radio telemetry system is to provide a number of key Project objectives,described below. Safety e Real-time access to data can reduce field hours associated with data retrieval;in some cases this reduces trips per year,or time on-site for each trip. e Providing real-time access to field weather conditions for travel logistics such as helicopters or small aircraft.The data reporting network was used for supporting helicopter logistics and inclement weather evaluations. Data Quality e Real-time access to data can allow easier and more cost effective data monitoring; thus,field-related problems (e.g.,ice jam floods,bears,lightning strikes)can be detected quickly,and site conditions better understood before going in the field,all of which reduces data loss. e Real-time data access minimizes data loss by enabling timely response to problems caught when they occur,rather than their discovery during a site visit.By providing information on a specific problem,proper equipment replacements and tools can be brought along for the site visit,ensuring that the problem will be corrected without necessitating an additional trip. e Real-time retrieval of data also allows off-site data storage,so if a site is severely damaged,there is no data loss,even if there is a complete failure of data acquisition equipment.Data are preserved both on the data servers and the data loggers to provide redundant data security. e Study teams have access to data for ongoing data quality control (QC)before going into the field,so teams can better address potential sensor or programming issues and Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-42 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN proactively plan for field repairs.Two-way communications allow programming updates and modifications to be accomplished without expensive site visits. Deadlines e Real-time access allows field staff access to data 24/7,so data QC,reduction,and analysis applications can be accomplished between field trips.This also benefits the effectiveness of field trips by allowing a better understanding of field conditions before going in the field.QC checks and graphs can be set up,tested,and adjusted early in the Project in an unhurried manner.QC can be up-to-date when it is time to create reports. Data network management includes maintaining network Metadata standards.This results in sharing of common data-acquisition equipment,and allows savings for backup equipment to help support the various station types in the network.Network management also includes the coordination of network operation and maintenance activities;bulk procurement of network station supplies;setup of water level,gaging,repeater,and base stations;and coordinated reporting for the stations in the network linked together with the radio telemetry data communication system. The data network installed in 2012 established the following equipment standards: e Campbell Scientific CR1000 data control/acquisition loggers,extended temperature rating e Campbell Scientific RF450 Spread-Spectrum Radios for data transmissions e Campbell Scientific CS450 vented pressure transducers for water stage and temperature (at transducer location) e GWS-YSI Cold-Range air temperature sensors e Campbell Scientific CCSMPX lower power,cold weather digital cameras with lens heaters for supporting winter operations e HC283-L Rotronic air temperature,relative humidity sensor e Campbell Scientific CS109 temperature sensors for general water level and soil temperatures e 12-volt solar power systems for all stations Data network operations also include data retrieval and online reporting for water level and gaging stations,repeater stations,base stations,meteorological stations,and associated co- located meteorological sensors.Internal information reporting is currently available on an internal website/wiki and includes network status and diagnostics information (Figure 8.5-25). Data reporting includes current conditions pages for each station (Figure 8.5-26),basic station information pages,and near-real-time graphs for selected sensors (such as air temperature, relative humidity,water level over sensor,water temperature,and station diagnostics information).Data plots are set up to display in 7-and 14-day periods,as well as 2-,4-,6-,and 12-month graphs.Short-period graphs are updated hourly,while long-period graphs (1 month or longer)are updated every three hours.Cameras will be maintained at gaging stations and selected repeater stations.Low and high resolution cameras image are taken hourly.The low Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-43 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN resolution images are transferred to the CR1000 data logger and transmitted with other station data and reported hourly,and displayed online internally in 24-hour sequences.The high resolution camera images are stored locally on the camera on camera internal memory cards and downloaded during regular station visits.All camera images collected are accessible through the online image interface. The radio telemetry remote collection of data from gaging and meteorological stations is supported by a series of repeater stations.Some data collection stations (gaging or meteorological)also serve as repeater stations.Additional repeater stations may be installed in 2013 and 2014 as the data network changes to meet various study needs.Typically repeater stations will be visited once a year for annual maintenance,or as needed for station problems from issues such as bear damage or extreme weather events. 8.5.4.4.1.2.|Hydrologic Data Analyses The hydrologic period of record for the Project has been established for the 61-year period extending from Water Years 1950 through 2011 (October 1,1949 to September 30,2011). Historically,flows have been measured by USGS in the Susitna basin at various locations and over different time periods.USGS gaging stations on the Susitna River are listed in Table 8.5-10, and USGS gaging stations on tributaries of the Susitna River are listed in Table 8.5-11. The periods of record of measured flows at each of the sites listed in Table 8.5-10 and Table 8.5-11 were extended to cover the 61-year period (Water Years 1950 through 2011)by synthesizing the missing daily flow records to fill in the gaps.This work was performed by USGS (Curran 2012).The 61-year period of record at the sites listed in Table 8.5-10 and Table 8.5-11 will establish a baseline hydrologic condition from which to assess Project effects. Potential alterations to this baseline condition will be assessed as part of the Glacier and Runoff Changes Study (see Section 7.7).These evaluations will be performed with the WaSiM-ETH model (Water Balance Simulation Model).The WaSiM-ETH model accounts for evapotranspiration,snow accumulation,snow and glacier melt,interception,infiltration,soil water storage,and runoff,such as surface,interflow,and baseflow.The model will be calibrated to match conditions observed from 1960 through 2010,and used to forecast conditions out to the year 2100.The proposed extent of the WaSiM-ETH model is the Susitna River basin upstream from the proposed dam site. Hydrologic data analyses will include post-processing of discharge data,correction of pressure transducer records and conversions to station gage height records,rating curve development, stream flow computations,and cross-section and bathymetric data post-processing. Discharge data post-processing will include the elements described in Mueller (2012)for ADCP measurements.A similar procedure will be used for current meter data,resulting in data qualification as Excellent,Good,Fair,or Poor. Pressure transducer records will be corrected using instantaneous stage measurements and hydrologic data correction software such as Aquarius Workstation.The software maintains a record of all corrections used in the computation of hourly and daily stream flow data.Other data from the gaging,water level,and repeater stations will have monthly quality assurance evaluations performed as well as a shorter timer check made to identify problems with station or sensor operations. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-44 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Rating curves for new gaging stations will be developed using rating development software such as the Aquarius Rating Development Toolbox.Stream flow computations will be performed using hydrologic data management software such as Aquarius Workstation. Bathymetric data will be post-processed using hydrographic data processing software (e.g., HyPack)to obtain a digital terrain model.The digital terrain model can be used to develop cross- sections or as input for 2-D hydraulic and other instream flow models.ADCP files will be post- processed using velocity mapping software (e.g.,VMS)to develop cross-sectional or plan-view velocity maps for calibration of hydraulic models. Data analysis will include the development of daily and hourly inflow routing to Focus Areas from the Susitna open-water flow routing modeling and analysis for selected tributaries.Analysis will also include calculations of hydrologic data statistics for the Susitna River and selected tributaries. Five representative years will be selected that represent wet,average,and dry conditions,and warm and cold Pacific decadal oscillation phases so that Project effects for various project alternatives can be evaluated under a range of climatic and hydrologic conditions.In addition,a multi-year continuous flow record will be evaluated to identify year-to-year variations independent of average,wet,or dry conditions.The specific representative years and the duration of the continuous flow record will be selected by AEA in consultation with the TWG in Q3 2013 (Table 8.5-14). 8.5.4.4.1.3.Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration and Environmental Flow Components The assessment of hydrology data will include a summary of seasonal and short-term and long- term hydrologic characteristics for the river including daily,monthly,and annual summaries,and exceedance summaries and recurrence intervals of small and large floods.The analysis will utilize the Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA)and Range of Variability models developed by The Nature Conservancy (TNC 2009)for computing baseline hydrologic characteristics.The IHA models are components of an analytical software package designed to assess the impacts of a project on unregulated hydrologic conditions (TNC 2009).These analyses are based on hydrologic statistics defined in Table 8.5-12,and Environmental Flow Components (EFC) defined in Table 8.5-13. The traditional approach developed by The Nature Conservancy utilizes average daily flows to compute parameters that may be categorized in five general groups of statistics: 1.Magnitude of annual extremes (1-,3-,7-,30-,and 90-day maximum and minimum flows) 2.Timing of annual extremes (Julian date of 1-day maximum and minimum) 3.Magnitude of monthly conditions (variability of monthly means over analysis period) 4.Frequency and duration of high and low flow pulses (defined by annual exceedance flows) 5.Rate and frequency of changes in daily flows The environmental flow components listed in Table 8.5-13 are divided into five parameter groups:(1)monthly low flows;(2)extreme low flows;(3)high flow pulses;(4)small floods;and (5)large floods. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-45 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The hydrologic statistics described in Table 8.5-12 and Table 8.5-13 will be reviewed in consultation with the TWG to identify those parameters that are ecologically relevant to Susitna River resources.Pre-and post-Project hydrologic conditions will be assessed by performing THA/EFC evaluations in the Susitna River at one or more locations downstream from the proposed dam site.The period of assessment will be based on the 61-year duration from Water Years 1950 through 2010 (October 1,1949 to September 30,2010).Daily flows will be used to perform these assessments in accordance with standard IHA/EFC statistics;however, modifications to the standard list of statistics are envisioned to address alternative operational scenarios.In addition to the analyses using daily flow records,modifications to the analysis package will be developed in collaboration with the TWG to utilize hourly data instead of daily data to evaluate flow components specific to the evaluation of hydropower load-following operations: e Minimum,maximum,and mean within-day flow hydrograph e Hourly rate of stage change for various event types (load-following operations;diurnal meltwater fluctuations) e Monthly and seasonal frequency of stage change rates e Reservoir pool levels (annual and monthly extremes;daily stage change) The aquatic resources working group for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project (FERC No. 2150)used a similar process to evaluate effects of load-following operations on the Skagit River, Washington.To compare baseline and alternative operational scenarios they evaluated standard IHA/EFC parameters using daily flow records,modified flow parameters in response to project- specific applications (e.g.,2-day minimum),and developed additional statistics based on hourly flow records (Hilgert et al.2008). For the Susitna-Watana Project,an acceptable range of variation in IHA/EFC indicator condition will be identified by evaluating existing,unregulated flows over individual Water Years selected to represent average,wet,and dry hydrologic conditions and warm and cold Pacific decadal oscillation phases.In addition,the available continuous flow record will be evaluated to identify year-to-year variations independent of average,wet,or dry conditions.The selection of representative hydrologic conditions and the duration of the continuous flow record will be developed in consultation with the TWG in Q4 2013 (Table 8.5-14). The IHA/EFC-type statistics represent one tool to evaluate comparisons between existing, unregulated flow conditions and alternative operational scenarios.The U.S.Army Corps of Engineers HEC-EFM (Ecosystem Functions Model)program (http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/software/hec-efm/index.html)is another planning tool that aids in analyzing ecosystem responses to changes in flow.The strength of the HEC-EFM is that it can evaluate project-specific functional relationships developed from expert knowledge,it links ecology with established hydrologic,hydraulic,and GIS tools,and it can be applied quickly and inexpensively.The merits of these planning tools will be discussed with the TWG in Q3 2013, and if HEC-EFM is deemed preferable by the TWG,it will be used to support the evaluation of potential Project effects on resources of concern. The IHA/EFC analysis or the HEC-EFM program,depending on TWG preference,are planning tools that are part of the IFS Analytical Framework.The IFS Analytical Framework (see Section 8.5.4.1)is designed to integrate study and model results of riverine processes and to assess Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-46 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN relationships between riverine and biological functions.One objective of the IFS modeling efforts is to extrapolate measured conditions to non-modeled conditions both spatially and temporally.This allows data collected over the study period to be used to evaluate Project effects over the range of environmental conditions that occur naturally.The results of the hydrologic analyses,combined with the results of the habitat modeling efforts,provide guidance when identifying potential modifications to operational rules to minimize harmful Project effects on downstream resources. In consultation with the TWG,the IHA/EFC or HEC-EFM programs will be used to evaluate existing conditions and alternative operational scenarios for the Susitna-Watana Project.Select hydrologic parameters,considered to be ecologically relevant to Susitna River resources,will be developed in consultation with the TWG in Q3 2013,and initial results and potential modification reviewed by the TWG in Q1 2014 (Table 8.5-14). 8.5.4.4.2.Work Products The hydrologic data analysis component will include the following work products: e Period of Record (POR)data files from gaging stations,including gage height calculations of hourly and daily discharge,and rating curve summaries. e Cross-section profiles and roughness calculations,and measured water surface elevations. e POR data files from gaging stations for air and water temperature,and camera image data sets for stations with camera systems installed. ©Project GPS Survey Control Network (horizontal and vertical)Annual Reports. e Tabular summaries of selected IHA-type and general hydrologic statistics. e Summary charts to provide visual comparisons of selected hydrologic statistics to facilitate discussion of the effect of modeled future operational scenarios on the without- Project hydrologic regime. Interim results of the IHA-type analyses will be presented in the ISR,and final results presented in the USR in Q1 2015 (Table 8.5-14). 8.5.4.5.|Habitat Suitability Criteria Development Habitat Suitability Criteria and index curves have been utilized by natural resources scientists for over two decades to assess the effects of habitat changes on biota.The abbreviation "HSI"is used in this document to refer to either Habitat Suitability Index (HSI)models or Habitat Suitability Criteria (HSC)curves,depending on the context.HSI models provide a quantitative relationship between numerous environmental variables and habitat suitability.An HSI model describes how well each habitat variable individually and collectively meets the habitat requirements of the target species and life stage,under the structure of Habitat Evaluation Procedures (USFWS 1980).Alternatively,HSC are designed for use in the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology to quantify changes in habitat under various flow regimes (Bovee et al.1998).HSC describes the instream suitability of habitat variables related only to stream hydraulics and channel structure.Both HSC and HSI models are scaled to produce an index between 0 (unsuitable habitat)and 1 (optimal habitat),Both models are hypotheses of species- habitat relationships and are intended to provide indicators of habitat change,not to directly Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-47 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN quantify or predict the abundance of target organisms.For the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project aquatic habitat studies,both HSC (i.e.,depth,velocity,and substrate/cover)and HSI (e.g.,turbidity,colonization rate,dewatering mortality)models will be used to analyze the effects of alternative operational scenarios. For the mainstem aquatic habitat model,HSC/HSI curves for some species (e.g.,benthic macroinvertebrates,benthic algae,fry)will also need to be developed to describe the response of aquatic organisms to relatively short-term flow fluctuations (i.e.,ramping).Methods for development of HSC/HSI for benthic macroinvertebrate and algal habitats are described in the River Productivity Study (see Section 9.8),but in general include the collection of velocity, depth,and substrate composition data during benthic macroinvertebrate and algae sampling. Development of HSC/HSI curves for fish is described in the following section. 8.5.4.5.1.|HSC/HSI Proposed Methodology The fish community in the Susitna River is dominated by anadromous and non-anadromous salmonids,although numerous non-salmonid species are also present (Table 8.5-15). Development of HSC will involve the following steps:(1)selection of target species and life stages,(2)development of draft HSC curves using existing information,(3)collection of site- specific HSC data,(4)development of habitat utilization frequency histograms/preference curves from the collected data,(5)determination of the variability/uncertainty around the HSC curves, and (6)finalization of the HSC curves in collaboration with the TWG.Each of these steps will be described in the following sections. 8.5.4.5.1.1.Habitat Suitability Criteria (HSC) HSC curves represent an assumed functional relationship between an independent variable,such as depth,velocity,substrate,groundwater upwelling,turbidity,etc.,and the response of a species life stage to a gradient of the independent variable (suitability).In traditional instream flow studies,HSC curves for depth,velocity,substrate,and/or cover are combined in a multiplicative fashion to rate the suitability of discrete areas of a stream for use by a species and life stage of interest.HSC curves translate hydraulic and channel characteristics into measures of overall habitat suitability in the form of weighted usable area (WUA).Depending on the extent of data available,HSC curves can be developed from the literature,or from physical and hydraulic measurements made in the field in areas used by the species and life stages of interest (Bovee 1986).HSC curves for the Project will be based on information consisting of the following (in order of preference):(1)new site-specific data collected for selected target species and life stages (seasonally if possible [e.g.,winter]);(2)existing site-specific data collected from the Susitna River during the 1980s studies;(3)site-specific data collected from other similar Alaska river systems;and (4)professional opinion (roundtable or Delphi)of local resource specialists that are familiar with habitat use by the species and life stages of interest for this study. 8.5.4.5.1.1.1.Select Target Species and Life Stages For planning purposes,target species are assumed to include Chinook,coho,chum,and sockeye salmon;rainbow trout;arctic grayling;Dolly Varden;burbot;longnose sucker;humpback whitefish;and round whitefish.The target species are generally considered the most sensitive to habitat loss through manipulation of flows in the Susitna River.Other species and life stages will Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-48 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN be considered in collaboration with the TWG (Table 8.5-15).A draft list of target species and life stages will be presented to the TWG during a meeting to be held in Q1 2013.The final list of species and life stages to be included in the HSC/HSI development process will be developed during a subsequent TWG meeting to be held just prior to field activities in Q2 2013. 8.5.4.5.1.1.2.Develop Draft HSC Curves The initial determination of mainstem,microhabitats used by the target fish species in the Susitna River will rely heavily on information obtained as part of the 1980s assessments,in particular,the Instream Flow Relationships Report (Trihey &Associates and Entrix 1985 a,b) and a four-volume series on the aquatic habitat and instream flow assessment (Hilliard et al. 1985;Klinger-Kingsley et al.1985;Stewart et al.1985;Aaserude et al.1985).This information will be synthesized and compared to findings of other studies and data gaps will be identified. Comparisons will be made to an available set of library-based HSC curve sets including a data set of over 1,300 recently obtained field microhabitat observations for most of the same species found in the Susitna.Study gaps will be identified and plans to fill the gaps integrated into the 2013-2014 HSC sampling plan.The existing HSC curve sets developed during the 1980s will be compared with more contemporary curve sets developed for similar river systems.In addition, the HSC data collected in 2012 will be compared with existing curve sets to see if patterns of use are similar.Several different methods will be evaluated for updating the 1980s HSC curve sets including the following:Enveloping,Habitat Guilds,bootstrapping,roundtable/expert opinion, and statistical approaches as noted by Ahmadi-Nedushan et al.(2006).To the extent available, habitat suitability information will address fish responses to changes in depth,velocity,substrate, cover,groundwater upwelling,and turbidity.A summary of the 1980s data sets available and reviewed to date is presented in Table 8.5-1.The draft HSC curve will be presented in the HSC/Periodicity TM scheduled for completion Q4 2012,and will be reviewed during a Q1 2013 TWG meeting (Table 8.5-14). 8.5.4.5.1.1.3.HSC Study Area Selection The distribution and number of HSC study areas for the 2013 and 2014 data collection will be based on a stratified random sampling approach,based on the hierarchical classification system described in Section 8.5.4.2.1.1 as well as several other attributes.This will include levels based on river segment,geomorphic reach (see Section 6.0),and mainstem habitat composition (see Section 6.8.4.1)(Table 8.5-5),as well as relative fish use,number of instream flow Focus Areas, mesohabitat composition (see Section 9.9),and site-specific attributes including the presence of groundwater upwelling,water clarity (turbid vs.clear water areas),and safety concerns. A stratified random sampling scheme will be used to select study areas to cover the range of habitat types.The mainstem Susitna River and its tributaries downstream of the proposed dam will be subjected to Project operations that will affect flow levels on an hourly,daily,seasonal, and annual timeframe.It is assumed that the effects of Project operations on mainstem and tributary habitats will diminish below the Three Rivers Confluence.The mainstem Susitna River and its tributaries upstream of the proposed dam will be within the proposed impoundment zone and therefore are not included as part of the instream flow sampling effort.Hence,sample sites will be stratified and randomly selected from within the Middle River Segment (RM 98-RM 184) and Lower River Segment (RM 77-RM 98)of the Susitna River. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-49 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN A second level of stratification will be based on geomorphic reaches as described in Section 8.5.3 and in more detail in Section 6.5)(Table 8.5-4).The Lower and Middle River segments have been delineated into large-scale geomorphic river reaches with relatively homogeneous landform characteristics,including at generally decreasing scales:geology,hydrology (inflow from major tributaries),slope,channel form,braiding or sinuosity index (where relevant), entrenchment ratio,channel width,and substrate size (Figure 8.5-11 and Figure 8.5-12).Reach stratification facilitates a relatively unbiased extrapolation of sampled site data within the individual reaches because sources of variability associated with large-scale features will be reduced. The third level of stratification that will be employed is based on a modified 1980s classification of river types.Major categories and sub-categories under this level include Main Channel Habitats consisting of Main Channel,Split Main Channel,Braided Main Channel,Side Channel, and Off-channel Habitats that include Side Slough,Upland Slough,Backwater and Beaver Complexes;and Tributary Habitats that consist of the segment of the tributary influenced by mainstem flow.Each of these main channel and off-channel habitat types will be identified and mapped based on the use of aerial imagery,LIDAR,and aerial videography (see Section 6.8.4.1). The distribution and frequency of these habitats vary longitudinally within the river depending in large part on its confinement by adjoining floodplain areas,size,and gradient. The Geomorphic Study Team will complete the delineation of mainstem habitat units for the Middle River Segment before the end of Q4 2012.Once the mainstem habitat areas are mapped, a minimum of three replicates will be randomly selected from each of the mainstem habitat types (or bins)that are represented within each of the geomorphic reaches. Applying the stratification system discussed above,the proposed HSC sampling effort for the Lower River Segment (RM 77 -RM 97)will include three replicates of each mainstem channel type for a maximum of 24 sample sites.Similarly,in the Middle River Segment,three sites of each habitat type will be randomly selected from within each of the seven geomorphic reaches (excludes Reach MR-4 due to safety issues)for a maximum of 168 potential sampling locations, including sites within the Focus Areas.For each of the Middle River Segment sampling sites,a special effort will be made to ensure that HSC sampling occurs within each of the main channel mesohabitat types present.The proposed number and distribution of 2013 HSC sampling sites will be presented to the TWG during the Q2 2013 meeting (Table 8.5-14). Site selection includes completing the geomorphic reach delineation and habitat mapping tasks first.In addition to technical considerations,access and safety will be key non-technical attributes for site selection for all studies.This,too,influenced site selection in the 1980s studies, and will certainly influence site selection in the present studies. Finally,winter sites will be selected based on information gathered from winter 2012-2013 pilot studies at Whiskers Slough and Skull Creek (Figure 8.5-27).At a minimum,attempts will be made to complete winter sampling at all Focus Areas located downstream of Devils Canyon. Winter sampling upstream of Devils Canyon will be dependent on access/safety issues.The farthest upstream sites will need to be accessed by air travel;sites closer to Talkeetna may be accessed by snow machine.Safety and access are important considerations for the selection of these sites.Sampling methodologies including,but not limited to,under-ice use of Dual Frequency Identification Sonar (DIDSON)and video cameras will be tested in 2012-2013. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-50 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.5.1.1.4.Collect Site-Specific Habitat Suitability Information Collection of site-specific habitat suitability information was initiated in the Susitna River during a pilot effort in 2012 and will continue during 2013-2014.The primary goals of the 2012 pilot effort were to evaluate various sampling techniques,assess logistical aspects of site access,and begin collection of site-specific habitat suitability data for target species.Information gathered during the 2012 sampling effort was used to guide development of 2013-2014 study methods. The 2012 pilot effort consisted of three separate sampling events completed during July 17-19, August 21-23,and September 17-19.During 2012,site-specific habitat data were collected at 22 Middle River Segment sites located in tributary,tributary mouth,main channel,side channel, side slough,and upland slough sites between RM 178.0 and RM 101.4 (Table 8.5-16).In the Lower River Segment,11 sites were sampled in tributary,tributary mouth,side channel and side slough habitats between RM 95.4 and RM 77.0 (Table 8.5-16).Site-specific observations were obtained using visual means in clear water areas during snorkel surveys and pedestrian surveys of spawning grounds,and using beach seine methods in turbid areas.Specific locations of juvenile fish located during snorkel surveys were identified using colored weights,while fish position was transmitted verbally from the snorkeler to the data recorder.Seine sampling was performed in turbid areas of uniform depth and velocity and micro-habitat data were recorded at a representative location within the seined area.Micro-habitat and biological data recorded during the 2012 sampling effort consisted of the following datum: e Site location (aerial photographs and/or GPS) e Mesohabitat type e Fish species e Assumed life stage (adult,juvenile,or fry) e Total fish length (mm)for juvenile fish and/or life stage for adult fish e Number of fish observed e Water depth (nearest 0.1 ft)at juvenile observations using a top setting rod e Water depth at upstream end of the redd (nearest 0.1 ft)for adult spawning observations e Position in water column of juvenile fish (distance from the bottom) e Focal point and mean column velocity (feet per second to nearest 0.05 fps)measured using a calibrated Swoffer current meter e Substrate size (dominant,sub-dominant,percent dominant)characterized in accordance with a Wentworth grain size scale modified to reflect English units (Table 8.5-17) e Proximity to habitat structure/cover features (juvenile observations):boulder (>10 inch diameter),large wood debris (>4 inch diameter,>10 feet long),aquatic vegetation, undercut bank,overhanging vegetation (<3.3 ft of water surface),and water depth (>3.3 ft depth) e Relevant comments pertaining to fish cover associations and/or behavioral characteristics Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-51 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Presence of groundwater upwelling (changes in water clarity,temperature,or visible upwelling) e Water turbidity (Hach 2100P portable turbidity meter) e Redd dimensions (length and width in feet to nearest 0.1 ft) A total of 252 observations of site-specific habitat use were recorded during 2012 in the Middle and Lower segments (Table 8.5-16).Habitat measurements were obtained for juvenile and/or adult stages of Chinook,sockeye,coho,chum,and pink salmon;rainbow trout;Arctic grayling; and longnose sucker. For 2013-2014 studies,site-specific habitat suitability information will be collected for target species using HSC-focused field surveys to locate and measure micro-habitat use by spawning and rearing (adult and juvenile)life stages.Proposed sampling methods include biotelemetry, pedestrian,snorkel,and seining.Two other possible methods,DIDSON sonar and electrofishing, are being explored for use in detecting habitat use in turbid water conditions.Selected methods will vary based on habitat characteristics,season,and species/life history of interest.Selected methods are subject to ADF&G Fishery Resource Collection Permit requirements.Additionally, winter surveys will utilize underwater video during clear water periods to identify under-ice and open-water habitat use by rearing life stages.Depending on safety concerns,it has been proposed to conduct both daytime and nighttime surveys during winter sampling to determine any differences in habitat use. For development of site-specific HSC curves,habitat use information (water depth,velocity, substrate type,upwelling,turbidity,and cover)will be collected at the location of each identified target fish and life stage.If possible,a minimum of 100 habitat use observations will be collected for each target species life stage.However,the actual number of measurements targeted for each species and life stage will be based on a statistical analysis that considers variability and uncertainty (Bootstrapping).While information will be collected on all species and life stages encountered,the locations,timing,and methods of sampling efforts may target key species and life stages identified in consultation with the TWG during Q1 of 2013.A description of each of the proposed sampling methods is presented below. 8.5.4.5.1.1.5.Spawning/Redd Surveys The timing and location of spawning/redd surveys will be based in part on the periodicity data developed in a previous step (see Section 8.5.4.5.1.2)as well as from information obtained during radio telemetry surveys conducted as part of fisheries studies.This information will be used to help identify sampling timing and areas with the highest concentration of spawning activity for the five salmon species (sockeye,coho,Chinook,pink,and chum salmon).A proposed schedule for 2013 and 2014 spawning/redd surveys is presented in Table 8.5-14. Although several different methods may be used to identify the presence of spawning fish (biotelemetry,pedestrian survey,or DIDSON sonar),once an actively spawning fish or newly constructed redd is identified,each of the following measurements will be made: e Location of sample area on high-resolution aerial photographs and/or GPS location for individual or groups of measurements Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-52 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Species of fish occupying the redd or responsible for construction e Redd dimensions (length and width in feet to nearest 0.1 ft) e Water depth at upstream end of the redd (nearest 0.1 ft),using a top setting rod e Mean water column velocity (feet per second to nearest 0.05 fps),using a Price AA current meter e Substrate size (dominant,sub-dominant,and percent dominant)characterized in accordance with a Wentworth grain size scale modified to reflect English units (Table 8.5-17) e Water temperature (to nearest 0.1 degree Celsius) e Dissolved oxygen,using a hand-held probe e Indications of the presence of groundwater upwelling (changes in water clarity, temperature,or visible upwelling) e Turbidity (using a portable turbidity meter)for each group of redds or in mainstem habitat areas with relatively large concentrations of spawning fish (this information to be used for comparison to measurements made during the 1980s survey) The accuracy of water velocity meters and water quality probes and meters will be assessed prior to each field effort and,if possible,concurrently with field data collection.Price AA current meter accuracy will be tested prior to use by performing a spin test and meter performance will be evaluated continuously during field measurements by monitoring bucket wheel rotation (USGS 1999).For each spin test,the meter bucket wheel should spin freely for a minimum of two minutes,though optimum spin time is more than four minutes (USGS 1999).Results of all Price AA meter spin tests will be recorded in a current meter accuracy test log.Accuracy of hand-held temperature probes will be tested prior to field use in controlled water baths using a National Institute of Standards and Technology thermometer as a control (Dunham et al.2005). Dissolved oxygen probe accuracy will be tested using known 0 percent oxygen (sodium sulfite) and 100 percent oxygen (water-saturated air)solutions.Turbidity meters will be checked for accuracy prior to each use using multiple turbidity standards that encompass a wide range of turbidity values (<0.1 NTU -800 NTU).All data will be recorded on waterproof data sheets to ensure consistent data collection between surveys. 8.5.4.5.1.1.6.Juvenile and Resident Rearing To ensure the identification of habitat use by adult (resident species)and juvenile rearing species,a combination of survey methods will be employed including snorkel surveys, beach/stick seining,underwater video,and if permitted,electrofishing.Seining and electrofishing techniques will predominately be used in turbid water areas (main channel,side channels,side sloughs)where underwater visibility is limited (generally greater than 4 nephelometric turbidity units [NTU]).The surveys will be conducted by a team of two or three fish biologists with extensive experience in salmonid species identification.A proposed schedule for 2013 and 2014 adult and juvenile rearing surveys is presented in Table 8.5-14.A general description of each of the proposed sampling methods is presented below. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-53 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.5.1.1.6.1 Snorkel Survey/Fish Observations Prior to each survey,a Secchi disk reading will be taken to determine the visibility corridor for sampling.For this,a Secchi disk will be held underwater by the data recorder,and a tape measure extended by the snorkeler from the Secchi disk outward to a point where the disk is no longer clearly visible.As a general rule,when visibility conditions are less than four feet,no underwater sampling will occur.Water temperature will also be recorded at the beginning of each survey. To ensure accurate estimation of fish size underwater,the snorkelers will calibrate their sight to a ruler prior to beginning each survey.Rulers and objects of known length (e.g.,fingers,marks on diving gloves)will be used during the survey to maintain accuracy in the estimation of fish length.Starting at the lower/downstream point within a study area,the snorkelers will proceed in an upstream direction making observations of all microhabitat types within their line of sight. When two divers are working together,both sides of the clear water slough or side channel will be covered,with the midpoint of the water body serving as the delineation point of coverage for each diver.When only a single diver is conducting the survey,the diver will survey one or bothsidesofthechannel,depending on the range of microhabitats present.When a fish is observed the snorkeler will verbally transmit the following information to the data recorder: e Location of sample site or area on high-resolution aerial photographs and/or GPS location for individual or groups of measurements e Fish species e Assumed life stage (adult,juvenile,or fry) e Total fish length (mm) e Number of fish observed e Mesohabitat type e Water depth (nearest 0.1 ft)using a top setting rod e Location in water column (distance from the bottom) e Focal point and mean column velocity (feet per second to nearest 0.05 fps)measured using a Price AA current meter e Substrate size (dominant,sub-dominant,and percent dominant)characterized in accordance with a Wentworth grain size scale modified to reflect English units (Table 8.5-17) e Proximity/affinity to habitat structure/cover features (e.g.,boulder,wood debris,aquatic vegetation,undercut bank,and overhanging vegetation) e Relevant comments pertaining to cover associations and/or behavioral characteristics of the fish observed All data will be recorded on waterproof data sheets to ensure consistent data collection between surveys.Accuracy of instruments used in association with snorkel observations will be tested as described for equipment used in spawning observations (see Section 8.5.4.5.1.1.5). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-54 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Only fish holding over a fixed position will be included in the microhabitat survey.Moving fish will not be enumerated in order to minimize inaccurate habitat measurements,and to prevent double-counting of fish. 8.5.4.5.1.1.6.2 Pole/Beach Seining Pole seining will be used in turbid water areas of all mainstem habitat types that cannot be sampled with underwater techniques due to visibility limitations.Pole seines used for this effort will be 4 feet in depth and 40 feet in length,3/16-inch mesh (net body)with a 1/8-inch mesh net bag.The pole seine is operated with one person on each pole and the net is worked through the sample area in an upstream direction.A bag is kept in the middle of the net to collect fish as they are directed into the net by the wings.The operators must work carefully to ensure that the lead line is kept on the bottom to prevent the fish from escaping from under the net and to keep the bag expanded as they work the net upstream. An attempt should be made to sample fish from relatively small areas of approximately 5 meters by 5 meters with consistent depths,velocities,and substrates;however,exact size and dimensions will sometimes change to facilitate sampling larger areas of relatively uniform habitat when fish densities are low.The field crew should measure and record the area sampled by the seine in order to express the number of fish captured per unit area. Once captured,fish will be identified to species,counted,and released in close proximity to the capture site.For each area sampled,data collection will be similar to that collected during snorkel surveys with the exception of fish distance from the bottom and focal velocity.Because no direct observation of the position of the fish in the water column can be made in turbid water, fish position and focal velocity will not be recorded;a single depth and velocity measurement will be recorded at a location with representative characteristics of the area seined.Additionally, surveyors will need to rely on feeling the channel bottom with their hands and feet to characterize substrate composition.All data will be recorded on waterproof data sheets.Digital photographs will be taken of representative habitat types where fish of different species and size classes are observed. 8.5.4.5.1.1.6.3 Electrofishing If electrofishing is permitted in turbid water areas of the Middle and Lower River segments, barge or backpack electrofishing surveys maybe used to capture fish and determine micro-habitat use.Barge-mounted electrofishing is effective in areas that are wadeable,but have relatively large areas to cover.Backpack electrofishing is effective in wadeable areas that are relatively narrow and shallow.The effectiveness of barge and backpack electrofishing systems can be enhanced through the use of block nets.In all cases the electrofishing unit will be operated and configured with settings consistent with guidelines established by ADF&G.The location of each electrofishing area will be mapped using hand-held GPS units and marked on high-resolution aerial photographs. Selection of the appropriate electrofishing system will be made as part of site selection.To the extent possible,the selected electrofishing system will be standardized and the methods will be repeated during each sampling period at a specific site to evaluate temporal changes in fish habitat use.HSC measurements will be collected at each site using the methods described in the Pole/Beach Seining section above.Where safety concerns can be adequately addressed, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-55 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN electrofishing may also be conducted after sunset in clear water areas;otherwise,electrofishing surveys will be conducted during daylight hours. 8.5.4.5.1.1.7.Habitat Utilization Frequency Histogram/HSC Curve Development Histograms (i.e.,bar charts)will be developed for each of the habitat parameters (e.g.,depth, velocity,substrate,cover,groundwater use,etc.)using the site-specific field observations.The histogram developed using field observations will be compared to the draft HSC curves and literature-based HSC curves.Prior to calculation of the HSC curves,the habitat data from each stream will be organized by species and life stage,entered into commercially available spreadsheets,and subsequently checked for data entry accuracy.Frequency distributions will then be generated for mean velocity,depth,and substrate type for each species and then normalized.Histogram plots of depth and mean column velocity utilization will be developed using bin sizes defined by using the Stuges (1926)formula: R/(1+3.322Log(n)) Where R is the range of values and n is the total number of observations.The frequency of the field observations will then be converted into HSC curves by scaling the distribution between 0 and 1 (utilization values divided by the maximum value observed).The resulting curves will be inspected and visually adjusted,in part to smooth-out sharp breakpoints,and in the case of depth, extend the range of the curve to reflect a non-limiting condition. For comparative purposes,HSC curves for each species and life stage will first be developed using pooled data from all sampling areas and time periods,and then (depending on available data)separate curves will be developed based on stream-specific data (i.e.,geomorphic reach, mainstem habitat type,clear vs.turbid water,and upwelling areas)and winter vs.summertime sampling efforts.Thus,for certain species and life stages,four or five separate HSC curves may be generated. 8.5.4.5.1.1.8.Bootstrap Analysis for HSC Curve Development For data sets with less than the target number of observations (n >100),bootstrap analysis will be used to assess the variability and confidence intervals around each of the data sets used to develop the HSC curves.Bootstrapping is a data-based simulation method for assigning measures of accuracy to statistical estimates and can be used to produce inferences such as confidence intervals (Efron and Tibshirani 1993).This method is especially useful when the sample size is insufficient for straightforward statistical inference.Bootstrapping provides a way to account for the distortions that may be caused by a specific sample that may not be fully representative of a population. To complete the analysis,a group of individual observations (e.g.,depth,velocity measurement for a particular species and life stage)will be resampled with replacement up to the number of the original data set.Each sample involves the following steps: 4.A vector of length equal to the observed data set (N)is created. 5.The vector is filled with the N random samples (with replacement)from the observed data set. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-56 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 6.The observations are then grouped into bins for velocity and depth-bin sizes will be driven by the desire to group a minimum of 25 observations within each velocity and depth bin. 7.The bin counts will be normalized so that the HSC value for the bin with the maximum count equals 1.0. The resulting bootstrap samples represent 1,000 possible HSC curves that might be generated from empirical data assuming random chance in observing fish.Using the resulting curve sets, confidence intervals can then be derived from the resulting HSC curves. 8.5.4.5.1.2.Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Additionally,criteria will be developed related to juvenile fish stranding and trapping in the varial zone (e.g.,the size,species,and periodicity of susceptible fish,recolonization rates, critical streambed gradient,cover factor,periodicity of cover factor,isolation elevations with/without cover,and minimum size of trapping areas).These criteria are described in more detail in subsequent sections. 8.5.4.5.1.2.1.Winter Habitat Use Sampling Susitna River overwintering habitats are critical to juvenile and adult fish species.Susitna River stream flows are typically lowest during the winter period and,with the exception of open-water leads associated with groundwater upwelling,the river is largely covered in surface ice. Although some winter studies were conducted in the Susitna River during the 1980s,information related to salmon egg development and juvenile and adult fish behavior and habitat utilization during winter is limited (see Section 8.5.2.1.6)(Vining et al.1985;Stratton 1986;Sundet 1986). Project operations will likely result in substantially higher stream flow levels during the winter period,and will likely influence the quality and quantity of existing habitat for salmon egg incubation,and juvenile and adult fish rearing and holding.To understand potential effects of Project operations during winter,it will be important to evaluate the relationship between intergravel flow characteristics in different habitat types (e.g.,side channels,side sloughs,upland sloughs)and main channel surface flow and to identify winter habitat use and behavior of juvenile and adult fish species.Observations of site-specific habitat utilization and diurnal behavior of juvenile and adult fish behavior will provide important support to HSC and HSI development and habitat modeling efforts for the 2013-2014 Instream Flow Study. Winter habitat use and intergravel water quality monitoring studies will be initiated during a 2012-2013 pilot effort and will be continued during winter 2013-2014.The winter 2012-2013 pilot study will be comprised of three components:1)intergravel temperature,dissolved oxygen, and water level monitoring;2)fish behavior and habitat use observations;and 3)winter fish capture.The pilot study will evaluate the feasibility of using different instruments,methods,and approaches for winter data collection in preparation for a more developed effort during the winter 2013-2014 study period.The 2012-2013 pilot study will also provide preliminary data and information regarding intergravel temperature and water quality conditions,site-specific fish habitat use and behavior and species richness and size class composition among sampled habitats.These studies will be coordinated with the study leads for fish,geomorphology, groundwater,and ice processes. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-57 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The 2012-2013 pilot study will be conducted at two areas in the Middle River Segment that contain a diversity of habitat types with groundwater influence,have documented fish utilization, and are accessible to and from Talkeetna during winter.The tentative areas for the 2012-2013 pilot study are habitat complexes near Whiskers Slough (RM 104.8-106.0)and Skull Creek (RM 128.1-129.7),which are also proposed Focus Areas that will be used across resource disciplines (Figure 8.5-28 and Figure 8.5-29).Within each proposed study area,potential sampling locations have been identified;however,adjustments to each location may be made depending on field conditions and site selection processes described below (Figure 8.5-28 and Figure 8.5-29).The initial work on the 2012-2013 pilot study will consist of a focused review of literature from 1980s studies and more recent research to identify potential methods for each component of 2012-2013 pilot studies. For the 2012-2013 study component focused on intergravel temperature,dissolved oxygen,and water level monitoring,sites will be selected using a stratified random sampling approach.The Whiskers Slough and Skull Creek study areas will be stratified by habitat type (Beaver complex, backwater,side slough,upland slough,tributary mouth,main channel)and areas in which salmon were observed spawning in 2012.A total of 8-12 monitoring sites will be randomly selected among strata.Depending on individual site characteristics,temperature monitoring devices will be installed at locations of 1)groundwater upwelling,2)bank seepage and lateral flow from mainstem,3)mixing between upwelling and bank seepage,4)no apparent intergravel discharge,fish spawning,and 5)main channel Susitna River flow. Intergravel temperature will be measured at each monitoring site and surface temperature probes will be co-located at a subset of the monitoring sites to allow for surface and intergravel comparisons.For intergravel temperature measurement,Hobo Tidbit temperature probes will be deployed at three separate gravel depths (5 cm,20 cm,and 35 cm)corresponding to observed burial depth ranges of chum and sockeye eggs (Bigler and Levesque 1985;DeVries 1997). Probes will be attached to stainless steel cable and inserted into the gravel using a steel installation device (e.g.,Nawa and Frissell 1993;Zimmerman and Finn 2012).Dissolved oxygen (DO)will be measured in conjunction with intergravel temperature at one location at each of the two study areas.The DO sensors (HOBO logger with optical sensor)will likewise be inserted into the gravel to a depth of approximately 20 centimeters using a stainless steel cable.Stage response of surface stream flow and subsurface groundwater to fluctuations in Susitna River main channel stage will be assessed using pressure transducers (Solinst level loggers),deployed in side channel,side slough,and main channel areas,and piezometers deployed subsurface in adjacent floodplain areas.The final number and location of monitoring sites will vary depending on site conditions and safety concerns (Figure 8.5-28 and Figure 8.5-29).Temperature,DO,and stage recording equipment will be deployed in January 2013 following the chum and sockeye salmon spawning period;a subset of temperature loggers and DO loggers will be retrieved prior to ice break-up in April 2012,while remaining temperature and water level recorders will remain at deployment sites through June 2013 to record temperature and water stage patterns through the period of ice break-up.Data from the above-gravel loggers (temperature and stage recorders) will be downloaded on a monthly basis and will occur concurrently with times specified as part of the fish observation study.Accuracy of temperature,DO,and water level loggers will be tested prior to deployment using techniques described in Section 8.5.4.5.1.1.5. Specific tasks for the intergravel temperature,dissolved oxygen,and water level monitoring component of the 2012-2013 pilot study are as follows: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-58 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Monitor intergravel temperature at representative habitats and at 2012 salmon spawning sites at varying gravel depths to encompass salmonid egg burial depths during winter and early spring (January -June);retrieve a subset of loggers prior to ice break-up (April). e Record surface water temperature at a subset of sites to allow comparison between surface and intergravel temperature. e Monitor intergravel DO at one monitoring site in each study area. e Evaluate the potential relationships between water temperature among monitoring sites in off-channel and main channel habitats and Susitna River stage. e Compare water level (stage)response in off-channel and floodplain areas relative to Susitna River main channel stage. e Evaluate available data related to species-specific thermal tolerances of salmonid egg incubation and fry emergence. e Develop recommendations for intergravel temperature monitoring in 2013-2014 studies. The 2012-2013 winter study component focused on observations of fish behavior will use underwater video cameras and DIDSON sonar to monitor fish communities during day and night conditions.Observational studies will be conducted at five to six sites in slough and side channel habitats of the Whiskers Slough and Skull Creek study areas during February -April 2013 (Figure 8.5-28 and Figure 8.5-29).Observation sites will be monitored with an underwater camera on a monthly basis during the sampling period,at randomly selected times during day and night.The DIDSON sonar will be utilized in turbid conditions (>4 NTU)and opportunistically during clear water conditions to gauge the applicability of DIDSON technology for monitoring fish behavior and habitat utilization.Each method will be used in ice-covered and open-water conditions.For ice-covered areas,the video camera or DIDSON unit will be lowered through auger holes drilled through the ice to make 360-degree surveys.Mueller et al.(2006) found that DIDSON cameras were effective in turbid waters for counting and measuring fish up to 52.5 feet from the camera.Mueller et al.(2006)found that video cameras were only effective in clear water areas with turbidity less than 4 NTU,but that video was more effective at identifying species and observing habitat conditions than DIDSON cameras.In addition to fish observations,video cameras will also be used to characterize winter habitat attributes such as the presence of anchor ice,hanging dams,and substrate type. In addition to fish observations,measurements of site-specific habitat characteristics (velocity, water depth,substrate,cover,etc.)will be measured at observed fish locations using HSC sampling methods (see Section 8.5.4.5.1.1).Water velocity and depth measurements will be made either through the ice (ice holes)or in open-water leads using a topset wading rod and Price AA meter.HSC measurements will only be collected at those fish observation points where positive fish species identification and estimates of total length can be made.Instantaneous measurements of water temperature and dissolved oxygen will be recorded using hand-held probes to describe water quality conditions in the area of fish observations. Specific tasks for fish behavior observation and habitat use component of the 2012-2013 pilot study are as follows: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-59 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Utilize underwater cameras and DIDSON sonar to record juvenile and adult fish behavior during day and night conditions to identify potential diurnal patterns in habitat utilization during February -April 2013. e Obtain measurements of site-specific habitat utilization data for juvenile and adult fish species in support of HSC and HSI development. e Develop recommendations for 2013-2014 winter fish behavior observation studies. The results of the 2012-2013 pilot winter study will be used to develop the sampling methods for the 2013-2014 winter studies and will be finalized and distributed to TWG participants by Q3 2013.Proposed study methods for 2013-2014 winter fish distribution studies will be completed during Q3 2013 following analysis of data collected during 2012-2013. 8.5.4.5.1.2.2.Stranding and Trapping Fluctuations in river flow will cause portions of the channel along the margins to alternate between wet and dry conditions,an area referred to as the varial zone.Flow fluctuations can be the result of precipitation falling as rain or the result of snowmelt and glacial meltwater,but the frequency,timing,and magnitude of flow fluctuations will change under proposed Project operations.In addition to altering the availability of suitable habitat,flow fluctuations associated with Project operations have the potential to cause strand or trap of fish and other aquatic organisms on dewatered portions of the channel bed.While the physical and hydraulic processes associated with stranding and trapping are related,aquatic organisms have different responses to stranding and trapping.Stranding occurs where fish become beached on dewatered streambed areas as water levels recede and is generally associated with shoreline areas having low gradient and/or dewatered areas having sufficient cover to attract fish (Figure 8.5-30).Trapping occurs where fish in channel depressions become isolated from flowing water as water levels recede and are subjected to stress or mortality from predation,reduced dissolved oxygen,water temperature fluctuations,or subsequent stranding if trapping areas drain. The incidence and severity of stranding and trapping effects will be influenced by a suite of biological and hydrological/geomorphological factors.Stranding susceptibility varies with fish size,time of day,and season. Based on a review of studies conducted in Washington State,Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (Hunter 1992)concluded that salmonid fry smaller than 50 mm in length are most susceptible to stranding. The following excerpts and synopses support Hunter's (1992)hypothesis that salmonid fry smaller than about 50 mm in length are more vulnerable to direct impacts from ramping events than larger fish. Source River Location Comment Bauersfeld 1977 Columbia River,Washington Reporting on stranding of trout,Chinook,coho,and chum salmon,Bauersfeld noted that 86 percent of all stranded fish were between 30 and 50 mm.The majority of fish stranded (78 percent)were Chinook salmon. Bauersfeld 1978 Cowlitz River,Washington "A size comparison of Chinook stranded ...versus fish available ...shows that stranding was size selective, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-60 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN impacting the small (35 to 45 mm)recently emerged fry, even though larger fish were present.” Olson 1990 Sultan River,Washington "Susceptibility to stranding was particularly evident for salmon fry less than 50 mm long and for steelhead less than 40 mm long.”All Chinook salmon fry observed (n=44)during downramping trials were 48 mm or less and all but one coho fry were less than 46 mm (n =12). All steelhead fry stranded were less than 40 mm in length. R.W.Beck 1989 Skagit River,Washington "Once [steelhead]fry size increased above 4.0 cm, vulnerability decreased rapidly ...Above a fry size of 4.0 cm the percentage of the main-channel population is always found to be much greater than the associated stranded fry of corresponding size.”R.W.Beck and Assoc.reported that the mean size of Chinook fry stranded was 4.3 cm.Ninety-nine percent of Chinook fry stranded were less than 50 mm. Stober et al.1982 Skagit River,Washington "The 1992 observations indicate that while the fry may be present in the nearshore area,they appear to be less susceptible to stranding once they reach a length of about 40 mm.” Related to this,size (or life stage)periodicity will dictate the seasonal timing during which vulnerable size classes may be present in the varial zone.Stranding and trapping susceptibility may also vary by species based on differences in periodicity,as well as species-specific habitat preferences and behavior.Recolonization rates,or how quickly organisms return once a dewatered area is rewetted,will also influence cumulative susceptibility to stranding and trapping. Hydrological/geomorphological factors also affect stranding and trapping rates.Streambed areas with low gradient represent the greatest risk to stranding.Bauersfeld (1978)reported that stranding occurred primarily on bars with less than 4 percent gradient;other studies also reported high incidence of juvenile salmonids stranding on bars with low gradient slope (Hilgert and Madsen 1998;R.W.Beck 1989). The density ofjuvenile salmonids may be higher in the vicinity of woody debris and emergent or submergent macrophytes,which contributes to a higher incidence of stranding should those areas become dewatered.At existing hydroelectric projects,site-specific trapping and stranding criteria can be developed through experimental manipulation of flow conditions through project operations.The current pre-Project conditions of the Susitna River preclude this approach.Thus, stranding and trapping criteria for the Susitna River will need to be determined based on a combination of observations under natural flow variations as well as literature-based information derived from other regulated systems where stranding and trapping studies have been conducted. The general susceptibility of target species and life stages to stranding and trapping will initially be identified based on their life stage periodicity,length frequency,habitat utilization, distribution,and abundance in the Middle and Lower segments,as determined by fish distribution studies (see Section 9.6)and the downstream extent of Project effects.This Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-61 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN information will then be used to identify areas for potential field investigations of stranding and trapping.Under existing,unregulated conditions,the frequency,magnitude,and rate of water level fluctuations in the Susitna River will be less than the rate of change associated with load- following operations at existing hydroelectric projects.However,flow reductions under unregulated flows in the Susitna River have the potential to cause stranding and trapping of aquatic organisms.Field surveys of potential stranding and trapping areas will be conducted immediately following flow reduction events.Immediately following such an event,a field crew will conduct a survey of potential stranding and trapping areas following field protocols to be developed in consultation with the TWG.Field surveys will follow a stratified random sampling strategy at potential stranding areas to estimate the number,size,and species of fish stranded or trapped.Field surveys will be conducted at potential stranding and trapping areas on an opportunistic basis following up to three flow reduction events during 2013 and up to three flow reduction events during 2014.The goal of these surveys will be to provide a relative indication of those species,life stages,and sizes susceptible to stranding and trapping to corroborate literature-derived criteria.In addition,the mechanisms through which each stranding or trapping occurs will be identified (e.g.,streambed gradient,emergent vegetation,etc.)and reviewed to ensure that subsequent modeling efforts accurately reflect the relevant processes.The risks of fish stranding and trapping will be assessed through the development of models developed to evaluate each process separately.While stranding and trapping are both related to reductions in water surface elevations,the specific mechanisms through which they occur are different, requiring discrete models for each process.Time step increments,used to calculate stage changes,will be identified during calibration of the mainstem open-water flow routing model in Q4 2012 (see Section 8.5.4.3).Depending on the initial calibration results,time steps as short as three minutes may be needed to match predicted to measured stage changes in the open-water flow routing model.In 2014,the calibrated open-water flow routing model will be used to evaluate the effects of Project operations on stranding and trapping using one-hour time steps unless the TWG determines that shorter time steps are needed to evaluate specific fisheries resources.Each model will incorporate relevant criteria,developed as described above,and provide indices to quantify the extent of stranding/trapping for individual events.The stranding index will reflect the area of potential stranding and is conceptually depicted as follows,where SI =stranding index,AS =stranding area in square feet,and CS =cover factor for stranding: SI =As *Cs The trapping index will reflect the area of potential trapping and is conceptually depicted as follows,where TI =trapping index,AT =trapping area (square feet),TT(D)=duration of trapping factor,and CT =cover factor: TI =Ar *Tr(D)*Cr These indices will then be considered in relation to the monthly frequency of potential stranding/trapping events for a given Project operational scenario such as the example provided in Table 8.5-18. 8.5.4.5.1.2.3.River Productivity Development of HSC/HSI for macroinvertebrates and algae will follow a similar general approach,which includes a literature search for available information,conducting field studies to supplement literature-based information and to provide site-specific data,and use of a panel of Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-62 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN TWG participants to finalize the HSC/HSI curves.A complete presentation of the development of the HSC/HSI for macroinvertebrates and algae is provided in Section 9.8.A summary of the methods for developing HSC/HSI for both macroinvertebrates and algae is presented below. Literature-based draft HSC/HSI curves will be developed for benthic macroinvertebrate and algae communities.Potential sources of information include the Internet,university libraries, peer-reviewed periodicals,and government and industry technical reports.Special emphasis will be given to the existing 1980s study (Hansen and Richards 1985)for applicable information and methodology.Because benthic macroinvertebrate and algae communities are comprised of numerous taxa,the HSC/HSI curves will be developed for commonly used benthic metrics or guilds (e.g.,functional feeding groups,taxa habits,habitat preference,diversity,biomass,or dominant taxa)selected to summarize and describe the communities. Macroinvertebrate sampling will be stratified by reach and mainstem habitat type defined in the Project-specific habitat classification scheme (mainstem,tributary confluences,side channels, and sloughs).To accomplish this objective,sampling will occur at six stations,each with three sites (one mainstem site and two off-channel sites associated with the mainstem site),for a total of 18 sites.Measurements of depth,mean water column velocity,and substrate composition will be taken concurrently with benthic macroinvertebrate sampling at the sample location for use in HSC/HSI development in the instream flow studies (see Section 9.8.4.2).Efforts will be made to locate sampling stations at Focus Areas established by the Instream Flow Study team (see Section 8.5)in an attempt to correlate macroinvertebrate data with additional environmental data (flow,substrates,temperature,water quality,riparian habitat,etc.)for statistical analyses,and HSC/HSI development.Station and site locations will be determined during Q1 2013. For use in the mainstem aquatic habitat model,HSC/HSI curves will also need to be developed to describe the response of aquatic organisms to cyclic inundation and dewatering of varial zone areas (see Section 8.5.4.6.1.6).For instance,algae (algae growing on substrates)will colonize a site if it contains suitable depth,velocity,and substrate,but colonization may not occur until the area has been inundated for a period of time.Conversely,the effects of dewatering of the site on algae production will depend on the duration of dewatering and conditions at the time of the dewatering (see Section 9.8.4.9). Next,a histogram (i.e.,bar chart)will be developed for each of the habitat parameters (e.g., depth,velocity,substrate,frequency of dewatering)using site-specific field observations.The histogram developed using field observations from 2013 will then be compared to the literature- based HSI curve to validate applicability of the literature-based HSI curve for aquatic habitat modeling.This stage will be conducted by Q3 2014. 8.5.4.5.1.3.Periodicity A species and life stage periodicity table will be developed applicable to the different segments of the Susitna River.Information presented in the 1980s reports will be used to generate a draft periodicity table that will be included in the HSC/Periodicity TM scheduled for completion in December 2012.Specifically,the TM will summarize fish habitat utilization in terms of periodicity of use among main channel and off-channel macro-habitats in the Upper,Middle and Lower Susitna River based on relevant literature from the 1980s studies.Periodicity and macro- habitat use will be described by species and life stage (e.g.,migration,spawning,incubation, emergence,rearing)for target species.An example of the draft periodicity table for Chinook Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-63 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN salmon is presented in Table 8.5-2.Periodicity information for target fish species will be obtained from 1980s study results;if necessary,information from other literature sources representing similar regions and fish populations (e.g.,Morrow 1980,etc.)and TWG members will be used.Updates and/or revisions to the draft periodicity table will be completed in cooperation with the TWG during proposed meetings to be held in the Q1 2013 and Q4 2014 (Table 8.5-14).The final periodicity table will be developed following the 2014 field season and will incorporate the findings of the 2012,2013,and 2014 fisheries studies (Table 8.5-14). Climatic and hydrologic patterns are important considerations in determining salmon distribution and abundance.Large-scale climatic changes (e.g.,Pacific Decadal Oscillation)affect regional weather conditions that subsequently influence hydrologic conditions (Hartmann and Wendler 2005).Changes in river hydrology can influence the stability and persistence of aquatic habitats and can determine fish distribution and abundance (Connor and Pflug 2004).Long-term adult salmon escapement data will be examined to identify relationships between temporal patterns in environmental conditions and salmon distribution,abundance,and migration.Analyses of flow- dependent biological cues,such as possible relationships between climatic,hydrologic,and fish habitat indices and salmon abundance and migration timing,will be based on available long-term datasets for Deshka River Chinook salmon and Yentna River sockeye salmon.Other Susitna River basin long-term data sets pertaining to salmon migration timing and abundance will be included if available.Implementation details will be developed in consultation with the TWG in Q2 2013,initial study results discussed with the TWG in Q4 2013,and reported in the ISR in QI 2014 (Table 8.5-14). 8.5.4.5.2.Work Products The HSC/HSI Development Study component will include the following work products: e Draft HSC curves based on information collected during the 1980s studies of the Susitna River and other regional data sources.Data gaps will also be identified as part of this effort. e Map displaying the number and distribution of HSC sampling locations based on a stratified random sampling approach. e Summary of site-specific HSC curve data collected for the target fish species and life stages as a function of depth,velocity,and substrate. e Histogram plots displaying results of site-specific data collection. e Results of bootstrap analysis used to assess variability and confidence intervals around each of the HSC curves developed from site-specific data. e HSI curves developed from site-specific data to describe the response of aquatic organisms to groundwater upwelling,turbidity,colonization rates,winter habitat use,and stranding and trapping criteria. e Analysis of potential relationships between climatic,hydrologic,and fish habitat indices and salmon abundance and migration timing in the Deshka and Yentna rivers. These work products and other results of the HSC/HSI analyses will be compiled and presented in initial and updated study reports. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-64 December 2012 REviseED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.6. Habitat-Specific Model Development This study component develops the core structures of the aquatic habitat-specific models. Development of these models will require careful evaluation of existing data and information as well as focused discussions with technical representatives from the TWG.These models will rely in part on information and technical analyses performed in other study components as a basis for developing model structures (e.g.,Habitat Mapping;other riverine process studies).Physical habitat models are often used to evaluate alternative instream flow regimes in rivers (e.g.,the Physical Habitat Simulation [PHABSIM]modeling approach developed by USGS;Bovee 1998; Waddle 2001).Methods available for assessing instream flow needs vary greatly in the issues addressed,their intended use,their underlying assumptions,and the intensity (and cost)of the effort required for the application.Many techniques have been used,ranging from those designed for localized site or specific applications to those with more general utility.The summary review reports of Wesche and Rechard (1980),Stalnaker and Arnette (1976),EA Engineering,Science and Technology (1986);the proceedings of the Symposium on Instream Flow Needs (Orsborn and Allman eds.1976);Electric Power Research Institute (2000);and more recently the Instream Flow Council (Annear et al.2004)provide more detailed information on specific methods.The methods proposed in the IFS include a combination of approaches that vary depending on habitat types (e.g.,mainstem,side channel,slough,etc.)and the biological importance of those types,as well as the particular instream flow issue (e.g.,connectivity/fish passage into the habitats,provision of suitable habitat conditions in the habitats,etc.). 8.5.4.6.1._|Proposed Methodology Development of the models will involve completion of a series of tasks as noted below. e Transect/Study Segment Selection -In coordination with the TWG and riverine process study leads,use the results of the Characterization of Aquatic Habitats (see Section 9.9) component to select transects/study segments within each of the selected habitat types identified in the Susitna River to describe habitat conditions based on channel morphology and major habitat features.Additional habitat transects/segments will be selected to describe distinct habitat features such as groundwater areas,spawning and rearing habitats,overwintering habitats,distinct tributary mouths/deltas,and potential areas vulnerable to fish trapping/stranding.The transects used for defining the open-water flow routing model will also be integrated into this analysis. e TWG Site Reconnaissance -Conduct a site reconnaissance with personnel from agencies,Alaska Native entities,and other TWG members to review river reaches,select proposed Focus Areas and potential transect/study segment locations,and discuss options for model development.This reconnaissance trip has been scheduled for early-mid September and will encompass a three-to four-day effort.The first day will be an office- based meeting during which specific methods will be reviewed and their applicability to addressing specific questions will be discussed,and the field itinerary reviewed.This will be followed by a one-to two-day field reconnaissance of representative habitat types including but not limited to mainstem channel,side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs.Stops will be made at each of these habitat types and assessment methods will be discussed,with the goal of reaching consensus on which methods will be applied for Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-65 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN evaluating flow-habitat relationships.Participants will reconvene in the office on the final day of the trip to discuss observations and reach agreement on assessment methods. e Model Selection:Field Surveys and Data Collection -Once study areas and transects/study segments have been identified,detailed field surveys will begin.These will be tailored based on habitat types to be measured and the selected models to be used. It is likely this will involve a combination of 1-D and 2-D modeling approaches as well as application of empirically-based methods such as the RJHAB model applied in the 1980s studies (Hale et al.1984).The RJHAB model was used to assess/model the effects of flow alterations on juvenile fish habitat for off-channel areas.At this time,it is anticipated that two-dimensional modeling will be applied to one or more representative reaches in the Middle River Segment.For this,a multi-stepped approach will be used so that after each field data collection effort,topographic data will be projected via computer analysis to identify locations requiring the collection of more data points.Table 8.5-19 provides a listing of potential models/methods that will be considered as part of the IFS. The most appropriate methods for selected study areas will be determined via careful review of site conditions and the underlying questions needing to be addressed.Methods selection will be done as a collaborative process within the IFS-TWG. Regardless of specific method,field surveys will involve measurement of water velocities,water depths,water surface elevations,bottom profiles/topography,substrate characteristics,and other relevant data (e.g.,upwelling,water temperature)under different flow conditions.One of the tasks for 2012 is to evaluate and determine specific flow targets for these field surveys. 8.5.4.6.1.1.Habitat Model Selection Identifying and quantifying the predicted changes in aquatic habitat in the Middle and Lower segments of the Susitna River under the proposed Project operational scenarios will require the use of several different hydraulic and biological models.Each of the models proposed for use has been selected to assist in the evaluation of the physical,and biological effects of the proposed Project. The mainstem aquatic habitat model integrates hydraulic modeling,channel bathymetry,and biological information on the distribution,timing,abundance,and suitability of habitat to estimate metrics (such as varial zone area and frequency of inundation and dewatering)that will be used to compare the effects of the proposed operational scenarios.The following section provides an overview of the habitat and hydraulic models proposed as part of the evaluation of Project-related effects including boundary conditions transects,2-Dimensional (2-D)modeling, single transect PHABSIM,stranding and trapping,and fish passage/connectivity. 8.5.4.6.1.1.1.Boundary Condition Transects The upstream and downstream boundaries as well as the lateral extents of the Focus Areas have been chosen so that appropriate boundary conditions can be established for the hydraulic and bed evolution modeling.Considerations included encompassing potential inflow and outflow points to preserve the mass balance and minimize difficulties and assumptions associated with inflow points.Potential upstream connections for side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs were also identified and included in the modeling domain.The upstream and downstream limits on the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-66 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN main channel were identified to either provide relatively uniform flow conditions or sufficient distance upstream and downstream from areas of interest so that flow conditions in the area of interest are not significantly affected by the flow directions at the boundary. Water levels measured during the cross-section and bathymetric surveys for each boundary condition transect will be used to assist in calibrating the 2-D models for each Focus Area.In addition to water surface elevations,the depths and velocities measured at the boundary transects will be used to assist with hydraulic modeling for the single transect PHABSIM sites. 8.5.4.6.1.1.2.2-D Modeling Determining the relationship between river flow and the physical and hydraulic characteristics of a river system as dynamic as the Susitna River is a complex undertaking that requires considerable investigation and coordination.This is especially true for assessing project-related impacts to small,local-scale channel areas containing unique morphology and habitat features (e.g.,fish spawning,groundwater upwelling,stranding and trapping,fish passage/connectivity). To assist with this effort,2-D hydraulic modeling will be used to evaluate the detailed hydraulic characteristics of the Susitna River on smaller,more local scales where it is necessary to consider the more complex flow patterns to understand and quantify project effects under various Project operation scenarios.The 2-D model will be applied to specific Focus Areas that are representative of important habitat conditions and the various channel classification types.These sites will be chosen in coordination with the TWG and the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow, Riparian Instream Flow,Ice Processes,and Fish studies to facilitate maximum integration of available information between the studies (see Section 8.5.4.2).A detailed discussion of the 2-D modeling is presented in Section 6.6. Selection of the appropriate mesh size for the 2-D bed evolution mode is dictated by several factors including the size and complexity of the site feature(s);the desired resolution of output information such as water surface elevation,velocity,depth,and bed material gradation;and any limitations on the maximum number of elements that the model can simulate. One approach to reduce the trade-offs between model complexity and physical limitations of the 2-D model is to utilize a variable mesh (also referred to as flexible mesh).A variable mesh allows a finer mesh to be used in areas where either the information desired or the condition being modeled requires higher spatial resolution (RSP 6.6.4).The 2-D models being considered for this study are formulated with a flexible mesh,allowing the size of the model element to be varied.Figure 8.5-31 provides examples of a relatively coarse and relatively fine mesh applied to the potential Focus Area at Whiskers Slough in the Middle River Segment. Examples of areas that may require finer mesh sizes include sloughs,smaller side channels, spawning areas,stranding and trapping areas,hydraulic control features,and tributary mouths. Areas where lower spatial resolution may be appropriate include main channel,floodplains,and large side channels.In the areas of higher resolution,the mesh size will be on the order of several feet to 25 feet.In areas where lower spatial resolution is appropriate,the mesh size may be in the range of 25 to 100 feet (RSP 6.6.4). At some Focus Areas,two model meshes may need to be developed.One mesh would be for executing the bed evolution model,which requires orders of magnitude more time to execute than the 2-D model without the moveable bed options running.The other mesh would be Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-67 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN associated with a fixed bed representation of the site that would be used to output the hydraulic conditions at a finer resolution for development of aquatic habitat indices. 8.5.4.6.1.1.3.Single Transect PHABSIM Another model that will be considered for evaluating Project-related effects on fish habitats is the single transect Physical Habitat Simulation (PHABSIM)modeling.The PHABSIM model (Milhous et al.1981)will be applied to some or all of the open-water flow routing model transects to develop relationships between main channel flow and habitat for the spawning and rearing life stages of the target fish species.Supplemental main channel transects will be established as needed to more fully characterize main channel habitats,either as part of the Focus Area analysis or at separate locations associated with specific habitat types.The need for and exact number of the supplemental transects will be determined based on results of the habitat mapping (see Section 9.9)that will be completed in Q1 2013.PHABSIM-based models will also be applied to selected habitat types within the Focus Areas where 2-D modeling is not warranted. PHABSIM is part of an analytical framework for addressing flow management issues called the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology (IFIM)(Bovee et al.1998).PHABSIM is used to predict physical habitat changes associated with flow alterations by describing the flow- dependent characteristics of physical habitat in light of selected biological responses of target species and life stages.The stream hydraulic component predicts depths and water velocities at specific locations on a cross-section of a stream.Field measurements of depth,velocity,substrate material,and cover at specific sampling points on a cross-section or transect are taken at different flows.Hydraulic measurements,such as water surface elevations,are also collected during the field survey.These data are used to calibrate the hydraulic models,which are then used to calculate depths and velocities at flows different from those measured.The habitat component weights each stream cell using indices (HSC/HSI)that assign a relative value between 0 and 1 for each habitat attribute,indicating how suitable that attribute is for the life stage under consideration.In the last step of the habitat component,the hydraulic estimates of depth and velocity at different flow levels are combined with the suitability values for those attributes to weight the area of each cell at the simulated flows.The weighted values for all cells are summed -thus the term weighted usable area (WUA). 8.5.4.6.1.1.4.Stranding and Trapping The purpose of this analysis is to develop indices that provide a relative quantification between proposed Project operational scenarios and the potential for stranding and trapping of aquatic organisms.More specifically,the effort is targeted to evaluating the stranding and trapping potential for juvenile fish.Stranding involves the beaching of fish as the water level recedes and is typically associated with low gradient (<4 percent)shoreline areas or cover conditions that result in fish remaining in an area as it is dewatered.Mortality occurs in stranding as fish are left beached on the dewatered shoreline.Trapping is the retention of fish in pools formed by depressions as the water level recedes.Stress and potential mortality to trapped fish occur from several mechanisms including temperature fluctuations,reduction in dissolved oxygen, predation,and stranding as the water in the pool infiltrates into the substrate.Both the stranding and trapping analyses utilize results of hourly water surface elevation determinations from the Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model to track water level fluctuations and calculate Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-68 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN numerical indices representing the potential for stranding and the potential for trapping of aquatic organisms. Indices for predicting stranding and trapping are based on equations that relate physical characteristics of the stranding and trapping areas to the potential for stranding and trapping to occur.The information for the physical site characteristics is derived from the bathymetry and mapping through the application of GIS.The hourly water surface elevations provide the basis for identifying when a stranding or trapping site becomes dewatered or disconnected from the mainstem channel as well as the duration.A detailed description of the criteria and methods for identifying potential stranding and trapping areas is presented in Sections 8.5.4.5.1.2.2 and 8.5.4.6.1.6. 8.5.4.6.1.1.5.Breaching Flows The breaching or topping of off-channel habitat features by mainstem river flows not only affects the quantity of water within these features but water quality (turbidity and temperature)and habitat quality as well.During the 1980s study of the Susitna River,researchers reported that although breaching flows typically increase the availability of juvenile rearing habitat in small off-channel areas,as mainstem discharge increases the quality of rearing habitat declines as velocities in nearshore areas increase (Schmidt et al.1985).A similar finding was reported for the effect of water turbidity.Although some turbidity did increase off-channel use by juvenile Chinook salmon,high turbidity resulting from mainstem flows topping reduced juvenile fish use (Steward et al.1985).Vining et al.1985,reported that the winter topping of cold mainstem river water into off-channel habitats was the most significant factor contributing to high levels of embryo mortality in habitats used for chum salmon incubation in the Middle River Segment. Determining the relationship between mainstem river flow and overtopping or breaching of sensitive off-channel features will allow for the assessment of potential impacts of proposed winter Project operation scenarios. 8.5.4.6.1.1.6.Fish Passage/Connectivity Several environmental variables may affect fish passage and connectivity with sloughs and side channels and tributary deltas.In general,at a given passage area the water conditions (primarily depth)interact with conditions of the channel (length and uniformity,substrate size)to characterize the passage conditions that a particular fish encounters when attempting to migrate into,within,and out of a slough,side channel,or tributary delta.The likelihood of a particular fish successfully navigating through a difficult passage reach will depend on the environmental conditions as well as the individual capabilities and condition of the fish. Depth passage in sloughs,upland sloughs,side channels,and at tributary delta mouths will be assessed following the methods of Sautner et al.(1984a)that focus on salmon passage in sloughs and side channels.Two-dimensional modeling,not available in the 1980s,will also be applied. Although salmon passage remains a key concern,the passage methods are generally applicable to other species where depth passage criteria are known or can be developed.The main goal of the fish passage and off-channel connectivity is to evaluate the potential creation of fish passage barriers within existing habitats (tributaries,sloughs,side channels,off-channel habitats)related to future flow conditions and water surface elevations. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-69 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.6.1.2..Physical and Hydraulic Data Collection As part of the 2013-2014 IFS,physical and hydrologic data collection will include hydraulic boundary conditions,stage and discharge measurements,cross-sectional and areal bathymetric surveys,velocity mapping,and roughness (channel substrate)determinations.The IFS will also incorporate hydrologic data collected by other studies,including water quality (see Section 5.0), water temperature,and ice processes data (see Section 7.6).A summary of the data collection effort for each of these study components is provided below. 8.5.4.6.1.2.1.Boundary Conditions Transect Much of the data collection performed in this task will be shared with and used by other studies including Fluvial Geomorphology (see Section 6.6),Riparian Instream Flow (see Section 8.6), Groundwater (see Section 7.5),and Ice Processes (see Section 7.6)studies.The majority of this data collection effort is to be conducted during the 2013 field season and will be used to support development of single transect PHABSIM and 2-D modeling efforts.The primary field data to be collected at each of the boundary a condition transects will include the following: e Cross-section survey to define channel topography and hydraulic controls at the upstream-and downstream-most portion of each Focus Area using RTK GPS instrumentation. e Velocity and discharge measurements collected using an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP)system consisting of a Sontek M9 equipped with RTK GPS positioning to generate the necessary discharge and velocity distribution data.Price AA current meter to be used for all velocity measurements for areas where the ADCP cannot be used. e Measurement of the water surface elevation during discharge measurements,and documentation of the substrate type,groundcover,habitat type,and woody debris in the flood-prone area for the purposes of developing roughness estimates. e Measurement of stage and discharge during high and low flows,with the potential addition of an intermediate flow measurement. Data collected at each of the boundary condition transects will be used to compute the energy slope,velocity,depth,and other hydraulic variables at each cross-section in the Focus Areas and to provide boundary conditions for localized 2-D models. 8.5.4.6.1.2.2.Bathymetry Within the Focus Areas,bathymetric surveys will be required for 2-D hydraulic and other IFS models.Cross-sectional bathymetric surveys will be performed as part of discharge measurements completed in 2012 and 2013 using the Sontek M9 ADCP and vertical-beam depth sounder and RTK GPS positioning systems.The results of these surveys will be used to prepare a digital elevation model of the streambed.Together with shore-based RTK GPS surveys,the digital elevation model will also be used to develop cross-sections for use in the open-water flow routing model. It is anticipated that both multi-beam and single-beam sonar systems will be needed to complete the bathymetric surveys in deep and shallow water areas.As a result,single-beam sonar surveys Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-70 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN will be conducted along pre-planned survey lines throughout each Focus Area.The planned survey lines will be developed using recent imagery and hydrographic data acquisition software (e.g.,HyPack).The density of survey lines will be commensurate with the minimum model grid spacing needed for 2-D hydraulic or other IFS models. In several of the Focus Areas,water depths and velocities will preclude boat surveys throughout the entire wetted area.Areas of shallow,fast water may require land-based surveying during low water conditions using RTK GPS methods. Roughness determinations will be made by solving Manning's equation using field measurements of discharge and water surface slope.These results will be compared against visual estimates based on handbook values.Bathymetric data will be post-processed using hydrographic data processing software (e.g.,HyPack)to obtain a digital terrain model.The digital terrain model can be used to develop cross-sections or as input for 2-D hydraulic and other instream flow models.ADCP files will be post-processed using velocity mapping software (e.g.,VMS)to develop cross-sectional or plan-view velocity maps for calibration of hydraulic models. 8.5.4.6.1.2.3.Fish Passage/Connectivity/Breaching Flows The physical and hydraulic data collection process used to evaluate potential fish passage,off- channel connectivity,and breaching flows will include but not be limited to the following: e Identifying fish species to be included in the Fish Passage Barriers Study (see Section 9.12). e Defining the passage criteria for the identified fish species. e Defining potential fish passage barriers and hydraulic connectivity points within each of the Focus Area to be sampled. e Conducting field data collection. e Coordinating with other interdependent studies. e Evaluating potential effects of altered river flows on fish access to off-channel habitats and breaching flows. Data collection for determining potential for fish passage and off-channel connectivity will involve establishing cross-sectional and water surface elevation transects at one or more locations to represent the shallowest conditions (hydraulic control feature)fish may encounter while moving upstream.The basic criteria for defining and modeling fish passage and connectivity to off-channel areas for this study will be water depth as it relates to mainstem flow level.Depth criteria will establish the minimum water depth and the maximum distance (at the minimum depth)through which a fish can successfully pass.Depth requirements for successful passage increase with an increase in the length of passage.Depth criteria will be used to assess access into,within,and out of side channels and sloughs.The ability of fish to enter or exit slough and side channel habitats from the mainstem Susitna River and access spawning or rearing areas within these habitats is primarily a function of water depth and the length of a reach when the water is shallow (Sautner et al.1984a). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-71 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Stage (water surface elevation)and discharge will be monitored at a minimum of one fish passage/connectivity site within each of the Focus Areas.Monitoring of stage and discharge will assist in determining the influence that mainstem river flow has on hydraulic characteristics of off-channel habitats and fish passage potential.To monitor changes in stage resulting from changes in mainstem flow,pressure transducers (Solinst level loggers)will be deployed at the upper and lower ends of selected side channel and slough habitats and in adjoining areas of the main channel Susitna River.The stage and discharge data will be used to develop a stage vs. flow rating curve for use in modeling or predicting the depth across the control feature to aid in determining the mainstem flow required to maintain minimum fish passage depth,off-channel connectivity,and breaching flows. As noted in Section 9.12,there are 12 major tributaries with names,approximately 50 unnamed tributaries,and approximately 50 sloughs located within the Middle River Segment.Passage evaluation studies in the Middle River Segment will therefore begin in 2013 within each of the Focus Areas that support spawning habitats and center on the associated tributary mouths,side channels,and side sloughs.This will include Focus Area-173,Focus Area-171,Focus Area-151, Focus Area-144,Focus Area-141,Focus Area-138,Focus Area-128,and Focus Area-104 (Table 8.5-6)and with those tributaries and sloughs that will be physically characterized by the ISF and geomorphic study teams.In 2014,barrier surveys will be expanded to include select tributaries, meaning those determined to have fish present based on historic and 2013 data.Surveys will extend from the mouth to the upper extent of Project hydrologic influence.The upper limit of hydrologic influence will be determined from supporting studies including the open-water flow routing model and the geomorphic mapping,among others. 8.5.4.6.1.2.4,__Focus Area Depth,Velocity,and Substrate Characterization for Single Transect PHABSIM Modeling The collection of physical and hydraulic measurements at each of the Focus Area single transect sampling sites will be completed following the procedures for PHABSIM studies outlined by Bovee and Milhous (1978),Bovee (1982),and Trihey and Wegner (1981).The establishment of 1-D PHABSIM transects will be completed as follows: e Locations of Transects -Transect positions will be recorded using a hand-held GPS unit and mapped in a field book and on low elevation aerial photographs.The position of each transect will be temporarily established using wooden stakes pounded solidly into the ground. e Establishment of Site Benchmark -A semi-permanent benchmark will be established at each transect.All survey measurements,including water surface and bed elevations,will be referenced to this benchmark.Each benchmark (large boulder or rebar)will be placed above the floodplain of the river and marked with fluorescent flagging for high visibility. The elevation of each transect benchmark will be tied to elevation markers established as part of the open-water flow routing modeling (see Section 7.0,Hydrology-Related Resources). e Installation of Head Pins -Head pins (rebar)will be installed on the side of the side channel or off-channel area near the starting point of each transect.These head pins serve as a secondary vertical reference point for water surface and bed elevation measurements collected across the stream channel.Differences between transect benchmark and head Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-72 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN pin elevations will be used as a quality control check for surveying accuracy.The head pins are also intended to serve as a backup benchmark in case the transect benchmark is disturbed. Establishment of Working Pins -Working pins (wooden stakes)will be established on either end of a transect.These working pins will be positioned in such a way that the line connecting these points is perpendicular to the main flow of the side channel or off- channel area.A surveying tape or incremented Kevlar line will be stretched across the channel and connected to these points during the collection of instream flow data.The survey tape will be tied to the working pin at the same position (e.g.,2 ft on the tape) during each sampling so that velocities can be measured at the same positions across the transect. Survey of Benchmark Elevations and Completion of Level Loop -Following the installation of the benchmarks at each transect,a level loop survey will be completed to establish benchmark elevation in relationship to elevation markers established during the open-water flow routing model data collection effort (see Section 7.0).The elevation data will be obtained using an Auto Level and stadia rod (0.01 ft accuracy).The level loop will be considered accurate if closed to within 0.02 ft of the initial benchmark elevation. Water surface elevations will be measured at the right bank,mid-channel,and left bank of each transect under all of the specified "calibration”discharges.Velocity profiles will then be obtained across each transect at the same tape positions under each of the "calibration”flow measurements. Data will be collected at established intervals across each transect following the protocols recommended by USGS.The following data were collected at each measurement point (verticals)across each transect: Water Depth (measured to nearest 0.1 ft)-Depths will be measured using a top setting rod.Measured water depths are not used during the hydraulic modeling process because the IFG4 model calculates depths by subtracting bed elevations from water surface elevations.Depth measurements,however,can provide a useful quality control check of water surface elevations at each calibration flow. Mean Column Water Velocity (measured to nearest 0.1 fps)-Velocities will be measured using a spin-tested Price AA velocity meter';velocities will be measured at 6/10ths depth in the water column for depths less than 2.5 feet,and 2/10ths and 8/10ths depth in the water column for depths greater than 2.5 feet. Substrate (dominant and sub-dominant)-Substrate types will be recorded at each transect vertical under clear water conditions.Substrate size (dominant,sub-dominant, and percent dominant)will be characterized in accordance with a modified Wentworth grain size scale. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-73 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.6.1.3.Hydraulic Model Calibration 8.5.4.6.1.3.1.River Corridor Stage vs.Discharge Susitna River mainstem flow routing models (HEC-ResSim;HEC-RAS;CRISSP1D;and/or other routing models)will provide hourly flow and water surface elevation data at numerous locations longitudinally distributed throughout the length of the river extending downstream from RM 184.Two different flow routing models will be developed:an open-water model (HEC-RAS)and Ice Processes Model to route flows under ice-covered conditions (CRISSP1D). Output from the flow routing models will provide the fundamental input data to a suite of habitat-specific and riverine process models that will be used to describe how the existing flow regime relates to and has influenced various resource elements (e.g.,salmonid spawning and rearing habitats,invertebrate habitat,sediment transport processes,ice dynamics,large woody debris [LWD],and the composition and structure of riparian floodplain vegetation).These same models will likewise be used to evaluate fish habitat responses to alternative Project operational scenarios.As an unsteady flow model,the open-water flow routing model will be capable of providing flow and water surface elevations on an hourly basis and therefore Project effects on flow can be evaluated on multiple time steps (hourly,daily,monthly)as necessary to evaluate different resource elements.During the development and calibration of the HEC-RAS model,the drainage areas of ungaged tributaries will be quantified and used to help estimate accretion flows to the Susitna River between locations where flows are measured.The flow estimates developed for ungaged tributaries will be refined based on flows measured in those tributaries in 2013 and 2014. 8.5.4.6.1.3.2.Focus Area Stage vs.Discharge Calibration and validation of the stage vs.discharge relationships developed for cross-sections within each of the Focus Areas will follow a stepwise process.First,the hydraulic components of the models will be calibrated by adjusting roughness and loss coefficients to achieve reasonable agreement between measured and modeled water surface elevations,and between measured and modeled velocities.Discharges along the study reach will be obtained from the three USGS gages.These gages will also provide a continuous record of stages and water surface elevations at the gage locations.These data will be supplemented with stage data from at least 10 pressure- transducer type water level loggers that have been or will be installed as part of various studies being conducted in the Middle and Lower River segments.Water levels measured during the cross-section and bathymetric surveys will also be used to calibrate the models.In addition to water surface elevations,the depths and velocities predicted by the 2-D model should be compared with measured data from ADCP measurements at the Focus Areas.Depending on the range of conditions and spatial coverage of the depth and velocity data from the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study,additional data may be needed for calibration specifically for this study.Specific calibration criteria will be established for both the 1-D and 2-D models during the model selection phase.The 2-D water surface elevations will also be compared against water surface elevations generated by the 1-D model and the open-water flow routing model to ensure that the models are producing consistent results. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-74 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.6.1.3.3.Focus Area Depth,Velocity,and Substrate Analysis of the physical and hydraulic data collected at each of the Focus Area 1-D sampling sites will include several steps for the development,calibration,and use of the hydraulic modeling output.Hydraulic and habitat simulation modeling will be conducted using the latest version of the PHABSIM computer software (Milhous et al.1989).The 1-D hydraulic model calibration process will be completed in accordance with the following steps: 1.Raw field data will be entered into Excel spreadsheets,reviewed,and reduced into a form ready for creation of hydraulic data decks.Any data entry errors will be identified,noted in a copy of the review sheet,and corrected.These computer spreadsheets will then be used to generate data input files for the PHABSIM 1-D hydraulic simulation program, IFG4. 2.Stage versus discharge relationships will be developed using one or more hydraulic simulation procedures.Depending upon the hydraulic characteristics of a given transect, a stage-discharge relationship will be developed using one of three methods:a log-log regression method (rating curve developed using the IFG4 program),a channel geometry and roughness method (rating curve developed using the Manning's Equation-based program MANSQ),or a step-backwater method (rating curve developed using the program WSP). 3.Velocities across each transect will be calibrated to provide a realistic distribution of mean column velocities across the river channel for the entire range of flows employed in the habitat simulations. Stage and discharge measurements were performed in 2012 at 88 cross-sections between RM 76 and RM 184.Twelve of these cross-sections are located at or near gaging stations operated by USGS or AEA.Stage and discharge measurements were also performed at inactive USGS gaging stations in the Lower River Segment (Susitna River at Susitna Station [ESS20],RM 20) and in the upper basin (Susitna River near Cantwell [ESS80],RM 224).Gaging equipment was re-installed at these locations,as well as at two tidal monitoring stations in the Susitna delta. Water level,water temperature,camera images,and meteorological data from these stations are shared online via an internal project website. Depending on results of the 2012 open-water flow routing model and analysis from other studies, additional cross-sections may be surveyed in 2013 and 2014.Sections of the river that have stable cross-sections will likely not require additional cross-section measurements.Sections of the river that demonstrate changes in cross-section profiles seasonally or event-based (floods) may require additional cross-section measurements.Stage and discharge measurements will be used to calibrate the open-water flow routing models,and to develop or confirm ratings for new and existing gaging stations. 8.5.4.6.1.4.|Weighted Usable Area Habitat Metrics The methods proposed in the IFS include a combination of approaches depending on habitat types (e.g.,mainstem,side channel,slough,etc.)and the biological importance of those types,as well as the particular instream flow issue (e.g.,connectivity/fish passage into the habitats, provision of suitable habitat conditions in the habitats,etc.).During the 1980s studies,methods were designed to focus on both mainstem and off-channel habitats,although mainstem analysis Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-75 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN was generally limited to nearshore areas.PHABSIM-based 1-D models,juvenile salmon rearing habitat models,fish passage models,and others were employed and will be considered as part of the IFS plan.As part of the 2013-2014 study efforts,more rigorous approaches and intensive analyses will be applied to habitats determined as representing especially important habitats for salmonid production.This will include both 1-D and 2-D hydraulic modeling that can be linked to habitat-based models. As part of the Geomorphology Modeling Study (see Section 6.6),several 2-D models are being considered including the Bureau of Reclamation's SRH2-D,USACE's Adaptive Hydraulics ADH,the USGS's MD_SWMS suite,DHI's MIKE 21,and the suite of River2D models (see Section 6.6 for a description of various 2-D model attributes and references).The River2D model is a two-dimensional,depth-averaged finite-element hydrodynamic model developed at the University of Alberta and is capable of simulating complex,transcritical flow conditions. River2D also has the capability to assess fish habitat using the PHABSIM weighted usable area approach (Bovee 1982).Habitat suitability indices are input to the model and integrated with the hydraulic output to compute a weighted useable area at each node in the model domain.While evaluation of habitat indices is directly incorporated into the River2D suite of models,other 2-D models are also complementary to habitat evaluations.Selection of potential 2-D models for fish and aquatics evaluations will be coordinated with other pertinent studies and the TWG in Q1 2013 and revisited in Q1 2014. The models noted above will be used to translate changes in water surface elevation/flow at each of the measured transects/study segments into changes in depth,velocity,substrate,cover,and other potential habitat (e.g.,turbidity,upwelling).Linking this information with HSC/HSI curves will allow for translation of changes in hydraulic conditions resulting from Project operations into indices of habitat suitability.This will allow for the quantification of habitat areas containing suitable habitat indices for target species and life stages of interest for baseline conditions and alternative operational scenarios. In response to the effect of potential load-following operations,habitat modeling using weighted usable area indices may need to be developed using both daily and hourly time steps.Evaluating the effects of changes in habitat conditions on an hourly basis may require additional habitat- specific models such as effective habitat and varial zone modeling. 8.5.4.6.1.5.|Effective Spawning/Incubation Habitat Analyses Operation of the Project has the potential to influence the quantity and quality of spawning habitat by altering stream flow in the main channel and off-channel areas of the Susitna River. While changes in physical conditions (i.e.,depth,velocity,and substrate)will determine the suitability of habitat for salmon spawning,the subsequent survival of eggs and alevins can be influenced by a different suite of flow-related processes.The eggs of Pacific salmon are laid in nests,or egg pockets,dug by the female in the gravel of the streambed.The female then covers the egg pockets with several inches of gravel by vigorous body and tail movements.Eggs within the spawning site (redd)incubate through the winter and depending on water temperature,hatch in late winter through spring,then remain within the redd as alevin until emergence.Mortality during the incubation period,which includes the egg and alevin stages,is generally high and can be caused by scour associated with flood flows or dewatering and freezing during low flow conditions.The location of redds within the river channel may have a major influence on redd survival.If redds are constructed toward the center of the channel when mainstem flows are low, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-76 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN redds may be scoured by winter flood events.If redds are constructed along the channel margins or in off-channel areas when mainstem flows are high,redds are at risk of dewatering or freezing when flows drop during the winter incubation season.In the Susitna River,as elsewhere, upwelling areas provide stable intergravel conditions and warmer temperatures during the winter incubation period,providing some protection from dewatering or freezing. Flow changes can influence the prevalence of groundwater upwelling,which in turn can affect the rate of survival and development for eggs and alevins.In the Susitna River,Vining et al. (1985)suggested that upwelling is the single most important feature in maintaining the integrity of incubation in slough habitat as well as localized areas in side channel habitats.Upwelling and intergravel flow also play an important role in determining the water quality at redd sites, particularly with respect to temperature and dissolved oxygen concentrations.Winter increases in mainstem flow or stage may affect upwelling by: e Decreasing the rate of groundwater upwelling from the adjacent floodplain. e Diluting relatively warm,stable,upwelling habitats when side channels are breached by mainstem flow. e Changing the rate of intergravel flows associated with hydraulic gradients between main channel and off-channel habitats. The risks posed by flow-related processes on salmonid redds and egg/alevin incubation will be assessed by developing an effective spawning/incubation model that incorporates separate but integrated analyses for each process.The spawning/incubation model will be based on identifying potential use of discrete channel areas (cells)by spawning salmonids on an hourly basis.Use of each cell by spawning fish will be assumed to occur if the minimum water depth is suitable and velocity and substrate suitability indices are within an acceptable range defined by HSC/HSI.Species-specific HSC/HSI information used to identify potential use of a cell by spawning fish will be developed as described in Section 8.5.4.5.If suitable spawning conditions exist,that cell will then be tracked on an hourly time step from the initiating time step through emergence to predict whether eggs and alevin within that cell were subject to interrupted upwelling,dewatering,scour,freezing,or unsuitable water quality (e.g.,Figure 8.5-32). This process will be repeated for each hour of the potential spawning period based on the periodicities shown in Table 8.5-2.If sufficient site-specific periodicity information is available, each hour can be weighted depending on whether it occurs during the peak or off-peak of the spawning period.If hydraulic conditions during the spawning season were considered suitable for spawning in a particular cell during the initiating time step,and conditions remained suitable for egg viability every hour through emergence,then the cell area at the initiating time step would be considered effective spawning/incubation habitat.This process is repeated for each cell within the habitat unit containing suitable spawning habitat at time step 1,and the entire process repeated for each time step through the end of incubation.The resulting areas will then be summed to determine the cumulative total effective spawning/incubation area for the habitat unit under existing conditions and alternative operational scenario for each hydrologic year under consideration.The duration of spawning to emergence will be calculated for each target species based on temperature units within the intergravel environment.Shorter incubation periods would be expected with warmer water temperatures and longer incubation periods would be expected with colder water temperatures.The incubation period will be divided into an egg phase and an alevin phase.After salmon eggs hatch,they remain within the gravel environment as alevins, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-77 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN maturing while they absorb their yolk sac.During this post-hatching but pre-emergence period, the alevins are particularly susceptible to dewatering.Assumptions regarding the start,peak,and end of spawning,and duration of egg incubation and alevin life stage,will be developed from previous studies of the Susitna River,meetings with the TWG (Q1 2013),and validated through site-specific biological surveys conducted as part of the licensing effort. To assess the vulnerability of eggs and alevin to flow-related processes,losses due to dewatering, freezing,or water quality,will be tracked based on the continued presence of upwelling within the cell area.If a cell is exposed to factors that cause mortality,the cell is lost for that initiating hour.If a loss occurs,cell accounting is re-started if the next hour time step is within the potential spawning period.Cumulative spawning activity within each cell will be accounted for on an hourly basis for each target species,using the hourly flow hydrograph determined from the open-water flow routing model. As shown in Figure 8.5-32,the model will first consider whether upwelling has been reduced during a given time step.During winter low flows,the aquifer discharges relatively warm groundwater from the floodplain into off-channel habitats via upwelling and provides a stable environment for incubation.Increased winter flows can alter the hydraulic gradient of the floodplain,changing the direction of groundwater flow and affecting the prevalence of upwelling.Reduced upwelling may not lead to direct mortality of eggs and alevin.However,the resulting colder water temperatures would prolong the period of incubation,thereby potentially increasing the risk of dewatering,scour,or freezing events.Reduced upwelling could also increase the risk of dewatering or freezing by eliminating sustained flows of warmer water to the redd.Reduced upwelling could also affect dissolved oxygen concentrations within a redd by altering intergravel flow.Some redds may be constructed in areas of upwelling that originate from the hydraulic gradient between main channel and off-channel habitats.Depending on intergravel transit time,this upwelling may mimic the temperature of main channel open-water flow,or may reflect the temperature of the aquifer.Higher main channel river stages may increase this type of upwelling,having either a positive or negative effect on redds depending on the nature of the upwelling.A pilot study is proposed for 2012-2013 to monitor intergravel water temperature and dissolved oxygen levels in off-channel habitats with and without the presence of groundwater upwelling (see Section 8.5.2.1.6).Results of this study will be used to investigate the relationship between mainstem river flow and intergravel water quality conditions. Persistent upwelling would presumably be mutually exclusive with dewatering,scouring flows, freezing,or unsuitable water quality.However,as described above,it is assumed that the quality (i.e.,temperature,dissolved oxygen)and quantity of groundwater upwelling for incubation will be influenced by mainstem flow and stage.Criteria will be developed such that a reduction of upwelling would include any adverse change in water quality below a critical level even if upwelling persisted.The analysis for upwelling will rely on the results of groundwater modeling to predict whether upwelling is reduced for a given cell and time step.If upwelling is not reduced,the area represented by that cell would be carried forward through subsequent time steps.If upwelling persists through emergence,that cell would be tallied as part of the cumulative effective spawning/incubation habitat.If,however,upwelling is reduced at any point during the incubation period,the potential for dewatering,scour,freezing,or unsuitable water quality will be considered. In a worst case scenario,it could be assumed that all eggs or alevin will be lost if the surface substrate in the cell became scoured,the cell became dewatered or frozen,or water quality fell Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-78 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN below critical levels.This assumption is probably overly conservative for several of the potential impact parameters.For example,salmon eggs can survive short periods of dewatering provided that the eggs remain damp (Becker et al.1983),whereas once intergravel temperature reaches freezing or below,it is assumed that 100 percent mortality occurs.Therefore,separate criteria will need to be defined to assess the degree to which the spawning area is no longer effective (i.e.,percent of spawning area rather than a binary result)depending on the severity of the impact.The final criteria for assessing the degree of impact will be developed in collaboration with the TWG during Q1 2013. All of the analyses associated with the effective spawning/incubation model will be performed at each of the Focus Areas with suitable spawning habitat.The results of the effective spawning/incubation analysis will be a reach-averaged area calculated by weighting the effective spawning area derived for each Focus Area by the proportion of Focus Area within the geomorphic reach (see Section 8.5.4.7).The results are calculated in terms of weighted area (similar to PHABSIM results)and do not represent actual area dimensions.The results cannot be used to calculate numbers of emergent fry but instead provide habitat indicators that will be used to conduct comparative analyses of alternative operating scenarios under various hydrologic conditions. 8.5.4.6.1.6.|Varial Zone Modeling Fluctuations in flow will cause shallow portions of the river channel to alternate between wet and dry conditions;this area of alternating wet and dry is referred to as the varial zone (Figure 8.5-33).Flow reductions along the channel margins can cause stranding and trapping of juvenile fish and benthic macroinvertebrates within the varial zone.Repeated dewatering of the varial zone can result in reduced macroinvertebrate and algae density,diversity,and growth (Fisher and LaVoy 1972;Dos Santos et al.1988). Analyses of Project effects on the downstream varial zone can be quantified as the frequency, magnitude,and timing of downramping events exceeding specified downramping rates;the frequency,number,and timing of downramping events that occur following varying periods of inundation;and the frequency,timing,and magnitude of potential stranding and trapping of aquatic organisms. The proposed load-following operations of the Project will affect hourly flow fluctuations downstream of the Watana Dam site.Based on analyses of studies of the effects of hydropower load-following operations in Washington State,it is generally assumed that faster rates of water surface elevation reduction are correlated to an increased risk of stranding of aquatic organisms (Hunter 1992).Salmonid fry are particularly susceptible to stranding and the daily and seasonal timing of downramping events will influence the potential risk to aquatic organisms. The goal of the downramping analysis will be to quantify the frequency,magnitude,and timing of downramping rates by downramping event by geomorphic reach downstream of the Watana Dam site.The objectives of this analysis will be to quantify reach-averaged downramping events by rate under existing conditions and under alternative operating scenarios for selected hydrologic years.Using the results of the mainstem flow routing models,a post-processing routine will be used to identify those specific hourly time periods when the water surface elevations are decreasing (i.e.,downramping).For those time periods,the hourly reduction in water surface elevation will then be computed and expressed in units of inches per hour.A Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-79 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN frequency analysis will be conducted on the hourly downramping hours by downramping event by geomorphic reach.The frequency analysis will determine the number of downramping events exceeding selected numeric categories.These categories will be selected in collaboration with the TWG,but for planning purposes,the following categories are proposed: e Greater than 0 but less than 1 inch per hour e Greater than |but less than 2 inches per hour e Greater than 2 but less than 4 inches per hour e Greater than 8 inches per hour e Exceeding downramping guidelines developed by Hunter (1992)(Table 8.5-20) The number of events where downramping rates exceed these categories will be tabulated by month and by annual total under existing conditions and for alternative operating scenarios. The frequency,number,and timing of downramping events that occur following varying periods of inundation will be quantified to evaluate the effects of downramping events on organisms exhibiting a range of colonization rates.This varial zone analysis can be conducted by total Focus Area or can be conducted by discrete habitat types within a Focus Area (e.g.,main channel,side channel,sloughs)using an hourly time step integrated over a specified period that considers antecedent fluctuations in water surface elevations. The selection of time periods to define the upper and lower extent of the varial zone for the Project will be coordinated with the TWG.However,for planning purposes,three time scales are being considered:12 hours,7 days,and 30 days.A 12-hour time series may provide an indication of the effects of water level changes on aquatic biota that rapidly colonize a previously dewatered area.Salmonid fry and some benthic macroinvertebrates may rapidly recolonize or occupy a previously dewatered area when they are moving downstream from upstream areas during out-migration or as a result of displacement from upstream areas.A 7-day time series may be used as an indicator of the risk of dewatering due to hourly and daily changes in load- following operations,such as weekday versus weekend generation.Some aquatic organisms may require several days to colonize an area (algae),or the density of organisms may increase rapidly over the first several days of access to a previously dewatered area.A 30-day time series can be used as an indicator of the risk of dewatering associated with weekly to monthly changes in flow patterns,such as changes in minimum flow requirements or seasonal runoff.A complex assemblage of benthic macroinvertebrates may require weeks to months to become established along channel margins.Information on the rate of colonization,dewatering mortalities,and conditions supporting suitable habitats for organisms of interest will be developed as part of the HSC/HSI study component.Figure 8.5-34 illustrates the concept of a varial zone analyses under antecedent flow conditions. 8.5.4.6.1.6.1.Fish Stranding and Trapping Though stranding and trapping are related processes,there are differences that require two separate analyses for the effects.Both analyses develop indices that represent the potential effect of reductions in water levels during downramping events on fish and other aquatic organisms. Stranding involves the beaching of fish as the water levels recede and is typically associated with low gradient shoreline areas or cover conditions that attract fish to areas where dewatering Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-80 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN occurs.Mortality occurs when stranded fish are beached on dewatered portions of the channel bed.As water levels recede,some fish may become trapped in channel depressions or pools. Although trapped fish may survive for short periods of time,the potential for mortality increases based on factors including temperature fluctuations,reduction in dissolved oxygen,predation, and stranding as the water in the pool infiltrates the substrate. The approach to the stranding and trapping analyses is similar to other analyses involving the evaluation of the effects of water surface elevation fluctuations in the varial zone.Stranding and trapping indices utilize results of the mainstem flow routing models to determine the water surface elevations on an hourly basis within Focus Areas.Stage fluctuations are applied within Focus Areas using the digital terrain models to quantify the frequency,timing,and magnitude of stranding events under existing conditions and alternative operational scenarios.The results of the mainstem flow routing models and the digital terrain models are also combined to quantify the frequency,timing,and duration of trapping events for discrete channel features within Focus Areas.The stranding and trapping analyses determine evaluation indices based on each water level fluctuation cycle. The stranding and trapping analyses track the period of dewatering (stranding)or the period of disconnection (trapping).Fish are assumed to return to potential stranding and trapping areas shortly after the water surface elevation rises to once again inundate/connect the side channel areas.Stranding and trapping indices are not treated as values that are summed on an hourly basis;instead,stranding and trapping are viewed as a series of events,and part of the index expression includes this frequency of events.Therefore,the results are computed at the end of an event based on the duration of the event,and then results are summed over the series of events. Downramping rates will be determined as part of the stranding analyses including the exceedance of specific numeric categories ranging from 1 inch per hour to over 8 inches per hour.For trapping analyses,ramping rates will not be directly incorporated as a factor in the calculation of the indices.Strong relationships between ramping rate and incidence of trapping are not consistently demonstrated in previous studies (Hunter 1992;Higgins and Bradford 1996; R.W.Beck and Associates 1989).The results of both stranding and trapping evaluation indicators can be quantified under existing conditions and alternative operational scenarios for selected hydrologic conditions. The indices for stranding and trapping are based on equations that relate physical characteristics of the stranding and trapping sites to the potential for stranding and trapping to occur.The information for the physical site characteristics will be derived from the bathymetry and mapping through the application of GIS.The index equations have physical factors related to site area, depth,and cover conditions.The observations and data collected during the stranding and trapping field surveys will assist in developing the ratings for several of these factors (see Section 8.5.4.5). For planning purposes,potential stranding areas are defined as areas with a bed slope of 4 percent or less,excluding depression areas that are included in the trapping area analysis. Stranding areas are also defined as areas with features,such as emergent vegetation found alongside slough margins,which are observed to contribute to an increased risk of stranding regardless of bed slope based on the results of site-specific surveys.Specific stranding zones are defined at elevation intervals to allow for tracking of dewatering of stranding areas as the water surface elevation rises and falls.Stranding areas are also defined as contiguous areas of 1,000 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-81 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN square feet or greater.The potential presence of fish in a stranding site is assumed to be directly proportional to the size of the stranding area. The resulting equation for stranding is: SI=As *Cs Where: SI =stranding index As =stranding area in square feet Cs =cover factor for stranding The stranding index (SI)is calculated once for each stranding event.It is assumed that the 1-hour time interval of the modeling is sufficient to cause mortality for fish stranded for this length of time.It was also assumed that once the stranding area is again inundated,it reaches its full potential for stranding;that is,the fish population is replenished. For planning purposes,the equation for quantifying evaluation indicators for trapping has been formulated as: TI =Ar *Tr(D)*Cr Where: Tl =trapping index At =trapping area (square feet) Tr(D)=duration of trapping factor Cr =cover factor representing the influence of emergent vegetation and other cover The factors Ar and Cr represent the risk that fish will be trapped in the pool.The larger these factors,the higher the potential for trapping fish in the pool.T;(D)represents the potential for mortality of fish trapped in a pool once it becomes isolated from the mainstem;it is the ratio of fish mortalities to total fish trapped.The trapping factors are not species-specific.The results of the trapping index calculations require review of fish periodicity to determine whether species of interest and associated life stages susceptible to trapping are present during a particular period. The trapping index (TI)is calculated once per trapping event and contains factors that describe the likelihood that fish will be trapped in the pool when the pool becomes disconnected from the mainstem flow.The TI is calculated for each individual trapping depression.Each pool has an effective elevation assigned to its outlet,which allows for determination of trapping duration based on application of the hourly elevations available from the open-water flow routing model. It is only necessary to calculate the index at the end of the event,not at intermediate points.It is assumed that once the trapping area is reconnected,it reaches its full potential for trapping within the one hour that elapses before the next time interval.This assumption represents a 100 percent recolonization within one hour.These and other details of the stranding and trapping analyses will be developed in collaboration with the TWG during Q2 2013 and reviewed in Q2 2014. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-82 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4,.6.1.6.2.River Productivity The production of freshwater fishes in a given habitat is constrained both by the suitability of the abiotic environment and by the availability of food resources (Wipfli and Baxter 2010).Algae are an important base component in the lotic food web,being responsible for the majority of photosynthesis in a river or stream and serving as an important food source to many benthic macroinvertebrates (see Section 9.8).In turn,benthic macroinvertebrates are an essential component in the processes of an aquatic ecosystem due to their position as consumers at the intermediate trophic level of lotic food webs.The significant functional roles that macroinvertebrates and algae play in food webs and energy flow in the freshwater ecosystem make these communities important elements in the study of a stream's ecology. The operations of the proposed Project would likely affect the abundance and distribution of algae and benthic macroinvertebrate populations,which could ultimately affect fish growth and productivity in the system.The degree of impact on the benthic communities and fish resulting from hydropower operations will necessarily vary depending on the magnitude,frequency, duration,and timing of river flows.The overall goal of the River Productivity Study is to collect baseline data to assist in evaluating the effects of Project-induced changes in flow and the interrelated environmental factors (temperature,substrate,water quality)upon the benthic macroinvertebrate and algal communities in the Susitna River (see Section 9.8). Both benthic macroinvertebrate and algal communities are groups of organisms that spend most or all of their lives in the channel substrate.These groups of organisms respond to inundation and dewatering of the river channel resulting from fluctuations in water surface elevation caused by Project operations,as well as variation in river flow.To assess the relative impact or change in the quality and quantity of available habitat and colonization rates for both of these groups of organisms,HSC/HSIs representing the influence of habitat quality and the duration of inundation and dewatering will be developed.The HSC/HSI will provide depth,velocity,substrate,cover, colonization,and dewatering criteria for both algae and benthic macroinvertebrates.The HSC/HSI results will be used in the aquatic habitat and varial zone modeling to translate physical characteristics present for different Project operations scenarios to indices of the amount and distribution of potential habitat that is suitable for the selected communities,and the duration of inundation and dewatering of varial zone areas. The various indices of Project effects on mainstem aquatic habitats will be summarized and tabulated to allow ready comparison of the effects of an existing operations scenario to alternative operational scenarios.It is anticipated that the varial zone analysis will be used as a primary indicator of the effects of operational scenarios on algae and macroinvertebrates in the mainstem Susitna River.Analyses of usable habitat area will be developed for each guild or metric,but the results may be of primary interest in identifying the spatial distribution of potential habitats.Each indicator of environmental effect will be tallied separately,and the relative importance of the effects of Project operations on various aquatic resources may be determined independently by interested parties. 8.5.4.6.1.7..Fish Passage/Off-channel Connectivity The extent to which mainstem flows dictate connectivity to off-channel habitats will be evaluated via development of models that consider the depth,velocity,and substrate requirements of adult salmon upstream migrations as well as juvenile downstream movements. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-83 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN This analysis will be initiated in 2013 in the Middle River Segment within each of the Focus Areas that support spawning habitats and center on the associated tributary mouths,side channels,and side sloughs.This will include Focus Area-173,Focus Area-171,Focus Area-151, Focus Area-144,Focus Area-141,Focus Area-138,Focus Area-128,and Focus Area-104 (Table 8.5-6).In 2014,barrier surveys may be expanded to include both additional locations within the Middle River Segment that,based on results from fish distribution (see Section 9.5)and escapement studies (see Section 9.7),indicate are used for spawning,and that based on geomorphic analysis (see Section 6.5)would be susceptible to flow changes resulting from Project operations,as well as locations in the Lower River Segment.To the extent applicable,the analysis will utilize information and modeling results developed during the 1980s studies,but will also collect and analyze entirely new data as a means to test the results of the earlier studies, as well as to apply new technologies in making this evaluation (e.g.,possible application of 2-D modeling). 8.5.4.6.2.Work Products The hydraulic and habitat modeling study components will include the following work products: e Map displaying hydraulic and habitat sampling areas for each Focus Area including boundary condition transects,2-D modeling areas,single transect PHABSIM transects, stranding and trapping areas,fish passage/connectivity,and breaching flow hydraulic control features. e Electronic copies of all physical and hydraulic field data collected at each Focus Area including field notes,photographs,site maps,and datasheets. e Hydraulic modeling calibration results including cross-sectional profiles,stage vs. discharge relationships,velocity calibrations,2-D grid (coarse and fine),PHABSIM hydraulic models,and digital terrain modeling. e Results of flow vs.habitat relationship modeling for each target species and life stage for both single transect and 2-D PHABSIM. e Results of downramping analysis summarized by month and annually for each hourly change rate in water surface elevation for each habitat transect. e HSC/HSI curves for macroinvertebrates and algae related to suitability of water velocity and depth,substrate preference,and colonization rates. e Results of varial zone modeling including effective spawning/incubation area,stranding and trapping analysis,and river productivity for each Focus Area. e Tabular summary for comparison of the results of habitat modeling for each of the proposed Project operations scenarios. These work products and other results of the hydraulic and habitat modeling will be compiled and presented in initial and updated study reports. 8.5.4.7.|Temporal and Spatial Habitat Analyses The IFS will result in the collection of data and development of different types of habitat-flow relationships from spatially distinct locations within each of the Focus Areas,and from selected Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-84 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN cross-sectional transects outside of the Focus Areas that contain a variety of habitat types.Types of relationships will include but not be limited to those founded on PHABSIM that depict WUA or habitat versus flow by species and life stage;effective habitat versus discharge relationships that define how spawning and incubation areas respond to flow changes;varial zone analysis that quantifies areas of stranding and trapping relative to flow change;and groundwater-surface water flow relationships relative to upwelling and spawning habitats.Additional components that will factor into the habitat -flow relationships will include those associated with breaching flows, upwelling,water temperature,and turbidity.These relationships will be part of the analytical framework and conceptual models that will be used in evaluating the operational effects of the Project (see Section 8.5.4.8)on different habitats.This will require both a temporal analysis that focuses on how the various habitat response variables change with flow over biologically important time periods (i.e.,periodicity),and a spatial analysis that can be used not only for evaluating specific relationships on a site/transect specific or Focus Area basis,but also for expanding or extrapolating results from measured to unmeasured habitats within the river.This latter analysis is needed in order to assess system-wide Project effects. 8.5.4.7.1.Proposed Methodology 8.5.4.7.1.1.Temporal Analysis Temporal analysis will involve the integration of hydrology,Project operations,the Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model,and the various habitat-flow response models to project spatially explicit habitat changes over time.Several analytical tools will be utilized for evaluating Project effects on a temporal basis.This will include development and completion of habitat-time series that represent habitat amounts resulting from flow conditions occurring over different time steps (e.g.,daily,weekly,monthly),as well as separate analysis that address effects of rapidly changing flows (e.g.,hourly)on habitat availability and suitability. The Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing Model and habitat models will be used to process output from the Project operations model.This will be done for different operating scenarios, hydrologic time periods (e.g.,ice free periods:spring,summer,fall;ice-covered period:winter [will rely on Ice Processes Model -Section 7.6]),Water Year types (wet,dry,normal),and biologically sensitive periods (e.g.,migration,spawning,incubation,rearing)and will allow for the quantification of Project operation effects on the following: e Habitat areas (for each habitat type -main channel,side channel,slough,etc.)by species and life stage;this will also allow for an evaluation of the effects of breaching flows on these respective habitat areas and biologically sensitive periods (e.g.,breaching flows in side channels during egg incubation period resulting in temperature change). e Varial zone area (i.e.,the area that may become periodically dewatered due to Project operations,subjecting fish to potential stranding and trapping and resulting in reduced potential invertebrate production). e Effective spawning areas for fish species of interest (i.e.,spawning sites that remain wetted through egg incubation and hatching). e Other riverine processes that will be the focus of the Geomorphology (see Sections 6.5 and 6.6),Water Quality Modeling (see Section 5.6),and Ice Processes (see Section 7.6) studies including mobilization and transport of sediments,channel form and function, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-85 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN water temperature regime,and ice formation and decay timing.The IFS studies will be closely linked with these studies and will incorporate various model outputs in providing a comprehensive evaluation of instream flow-related effects on fish and aquatic biota and habitats. As an example,using the habitat versus flow relationships (based on HSC and HSI metrics described in Sections 8.5.4.5.1.1 and 8.5.4.5.1.2)developed within the different Focus Areas and at selected cross-sections,an evaluation of habitat change over time can be completed using habitat time series analysis.The basic premise of a habitat time series analysis is that the physical habitat in a stream at any given time can be calculated from the stream flow using the equation: HA()=WUA{Q(D} where WUA =physical habitat versus flow relationship for a given species and life stage; Q(t)=stream flow at time t;and HA(t)=habitat area for time t. The basic steps to calculating a habitat time series are illustrated in Figure 8.5-35,where the habitat versus flow relationship (WUA)is integrated with the daily flow records to derive habitat availability over time.In this form,time series analysis provides a method for assessing the relative impacts from changes in the flow regime resulting from different operational scenarios. The results of the time series analysis can be compared under baseline (unregulated)conditions with one or more Project Operational Scenarios.This type of analysis will be done for each biologically relevant period (e.g.,adult migration and holding,spawning,incubation,juvenile rearing,and others)for a given species and life stage,and for different Water Year types (e.g., wet,normal,dry).Consideration will also be given to identifying year types that reflect cold, normal,and above average air temperatures.The analysis will include development of habitat- duration curves that depict habitat exceedances based on the hydrologic record. Other types of temporal analysis have been previously described in this RSP (see Section 8.5.4.6.1.5 -Effective Spawning Habitat Analyses;and Section 8.5.4.6.1.6 -Varial Zone Modeling).These analyses will be coordinated with other resource studies that will evaluate among other things,temporal changes in physical habitats (e.g.,changes in channel form, substrate composition,embeddedness (spawning gravel quality and quantity)etc.)(see RSP Geomorphology -Sections 6.5 and 6.6),and temporal changes in water quality characteristics (temperature -effects on growth and incubation,turbidity,etc.)(see RSP Water Quality Modeling-Section 5.6).The final approach and details concerning the methods that will be used for conducting the temporal analysis,including the time steps (hourly,daily,monthly,etc.), indicator parameters (spawning period,incubation,substrate composition,water temperature, and other biologically relevant indicators),and Project operational scenarios will be worked out in consultation with the TWG in Q4 2013. 8.5.4.7.1.2.Spatial Analysis How the data and habitat-flow relationships collected and developed from one location relate to other unmeasured locations is the focus of the spatial analysis.This analysis is crucial to providing an overall understanding of how Project operations may affect habitats and riverine Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-86 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN processes on a system-wide basis and will feed directly into the Integrated Resource Analysis (see Section 8.5.4.8).This analysis will be completed in Q2 through Q4 2014 after all data are collected and respective models have been developed.Just like the temporal analysis,the final procedure(s)for completing spatial analysis will be developed collaboratively with the TWG and with input from other resource disciplines. Completion of spatial analyses of the Susitna River will be challenging given its length,widely variable size (width),diverse geomorphologies,and complex habitat types.This variability is readily apparent in the Middle River Segment and becomes even more pronounced in the Lower River Segment with the addition of flow from the Talkeetna and Chulitna rivers and resulting expanded floodplain.This will require the development of an approach that considers the distinctiveness of the different habitat types within a given area and at the same time the similarity of these habitat types to other areas.Development of habitat -flow relationships for specific habitat types (e.g.,side channel,side slough)and mesohabitat types (riffle,run,pool, etc.)from one area should then,with appropriate adjustment for dimensional differences and other distinguishing factors,be expandable to unmeasured areas containing similar characteristics. A substantial effort was already advanced toward development of a spatial habitat analysis approach as part of the 1980s studies (Aaserude et al.1985;Klinger-Kingsley et al.1985; Steward et al.1985).Inspection of those studies indicates that although the tools and computational techniques that were applied may be outdated,the general principles and precepts that served to guide development of the approach remain sound today.As a result,they provide a good starting point from which to build a more contemporary approach founded on new sampling technologies and more sophisticated models that will provide for a more robust spatial analysis,including procedures for extrapolation of habitat-flow relationships from measured to unmeasured areas. Importantly,the 1980s studies made a clear distinction regarding extrapolation approaches that are suited for single thread channel versus those for multi-thread channels.Aaserude et al.(1985) correctly noted that for single thread channels,it is appropriate and is routinely done today to utilize extrapolation procedures that are based on proportional lengths of mesohabitat types that are identified as part of a habitat mapping exercise.This approach was originally fostered by Morhardt et al.(1983)and has remained in use since.Indeed,this approach,or some modification thereof,will be utilized for extrapolating PHABSIM-based habitat-flow relationships derived from main channel mesohabitat specific transects (e.g.,riffle,run,pool, etc.)as identified from the Characterization of Aquatic Habitats Study (see Section 9.9)to unmeasured mesohabitats within a given geomorphic reach.This will be done in a series of steps that include the following: e Completion of habitat mapping (see Section 9.9)that will delineate main channel mesohabitats into categories of cascades,riffle,pool,run,and glide as described in Section 8.5.4.2.1.1. e Determination of percentages of each mesohabitat type within each geomorphic reach. e Assignment of existing transects (those already established as input to the open-water flow routing model (see Section 8.5.4.3)and new main channel transects established either as part of the detailed Focus Area studies (see Section 8.5.4.6.1.2)or added to Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-87 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN capture a specific main channel habitat not represented by the existing transects to a specific mesohabitat category. e Weight each of the transects within a given geomorphic reach based on the percentages of mesohabitats represented in the reach (e.g.,in a reach that is 30 percent riffle with 6 riffle transects;each transect would be assigned a weighting factor of 5 percent (30 percent/6)of the total reach length). e Apply additional transect weighting based on location to account for tributary and accretion flow. e Derive habitat-flow relationships (by species and life stage)for a given geomorphic reach based on transect specific habitat-flow relationships by mesohabitat type weighted by the percentages of the reach (based on lineal distance)containing each mesohabitat type (as determined from habitat mapping). This latter step will then result in a composited habitat-flow relationship that considers all mesohabitat types within a given geomorphic reach.Further compositing of relationships for all geomorphic reaches (with consideration for flow accretion,etc.)will allow for the derivation of habitat-flow relationships (by species and life stage)for the entire segment of the main channel Susitna River.Coupled with the open-water flow routing model,these relationships can then be used to evaluate how main channel habitats may vary under different operational scenarios and will provide one of the tools necessary for completing the spatial analysis.It should be noted that due to sampling and modeling limitations,main channel mesohabitat mapping was not completed in the 1980s studies nor was there any development of main channel habitat-flow response relationships. A different approach will be needed for multi-thread channels because they contain multiple habitat types (e.g.,side channel,side slough,upland slough,etc.)within which each may contain multiple mesohabitat types (e.g.,riffle,run,pool,etc.).In addition,flows within some of the habitat types may be governed by groundwater-surface water interactions that cannot be modeled directly by PHABSIM.The framework for evaluating multi-channel habitats described in Aaserude et al.(1985)provides a logical construct for achieving this and as noted above,is the starting point for the current Instream Flow Study.Unlike the approach for a single thread channel where a reasonable assumption is that habitat-flow response relationships will generally be similar among mesohabitat types,the diversity of habitats within a multi-thread channel means that habitat-flow responses are dynamic and highly variable.In addition,multi-thread channels are spatially discontinuous and disconnected so that it is not possible to extrapolate entire multi-channel units to others.As noted by Aaserude et al.(1985),the braided river environment is too dynamic and variable for the development of quantitative relationships between discharge and physical habitat variables such as depth,velocity,and channel structure on a river corridor-wide basis for use in extrapolation.Instead,an approach for evaluating habitat is needed that focuses on portions of the river corridor but then relates the findings of those portions to other areas of similar character. The method presented by Aaserude et al.(1985)was based on the provision of two separate databases,the first containing habitat-flow response relationships for the full range of habitat and mesohabitat types found within selected portions of the river,the second an expansive database consisting of aerial imagery and targeted measurements of a select number of habitat response variables from essentially all of the habitat types found within the primary multi-threaded Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-88 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN channels in the Middle River Segment.Input to the first database was provided largely by a number of site-specific studies that included application of PHABSIM (IFG),DIHAB,and RJHAB models to define habitat-flow response relationships in different habitat types,as well as surveys to determine breaching flows.However,the "one size fits all”concept that may be valid for expansion of mesohabitat types does not apply to the multi-thread network of channels in the Susitna River.Consequently,further stratification of the habitat types (side channel,side slough, upland slough,etc.)was needed and resulted in the designation of 10 "representative groups” that provided a sub-level of categorization to the habitat types (Steward et al.1985;Aaserude et al.1985).These 10 groups consisted of "identifiable combinations of flow -related attributes” (Steward et al.1985)that were deemed readily distinguishable and included the following: e Group I -Predominantly upland sloughs.Areas are highly stable due to persistence of non-breached conditions.Area hydraulics characterized by pooled clear water with velocities frequently near 0 fps and depths >1 ft.Pools commonly connected by short riffles with velocities <1 fps and depths <0.5 ft. e Group II -Side sloughs that are characterized by relatively high breaching flows (>19,500 cfs),clear water caused by upwelling groundwater and large channel length to width ratios (>15:1). e Group III -Areas with intermediate breaching flows and relatively broad channel sections.These areas consist of side channels which transform into side sloughs at mainstem discharges ranging from 8,200 to 16,000 cfs.These areas are distinguishable from Group II by lower breaching flows and smaller length to width ratios.Upwelling water is present. e Group IV -Side channels that are breached at low flows and possess intermediate mean velocities (2-5 fps)at a mainstem discharge of approximately 10,000 cfs. e Group V -Mainstem and side shoal areas that transform to clear water side sloughs as mainstem flows recede.Transformations generally occur at moderate to high breaching flows. e Group VI -Similar to Group V.Sites within this group are primarily overflow channels that parallel the adjacent mainstem,usually separated by sparsely vegetated gravel bar. Upwelling may or may not be present.Habitat transformations within this group are variable in type and timing. e Group VII -Side channels that breach at variable yet fairly low mainstem discharges and exhibit characteristic riffle/pool sequence.Pools are frequently large backwater areas near the mouth of the sites. e Group VIII -Area that dewater at relatively high flows.Flow direction at the head of the channels tends to deviate sharply (>30 degrees)from the adjacent mainstem. e Group IX -Secondary mainstem channels that are similar to the primary mainstem channels in habitat character,but distinguished as being smaller and conveying a lesser proportion of the total discharge.Areas within this group have low breaching discharges and are frequently similar in size to large side channels,but have characteristic mainstem features,such as relatively swift velocities (>Sfps)and coarser substrate. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-89 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN e Group X -Large mainstem shoals and margins of mainstem channels that show signs of upwelling. Another element of the method described by Aaserude et al.(1985)that was used as part of the representative group designation was its consideration of habitat transformation wherein mainstem areas may functionally transition from side channels to side sloughs and ultimately become dewatered as flows recede.A total of 11 habitat transformation categories were defined and considered when comparing flow conditions;these included comparative categories of clear vs.turbid water,upwelling present vs.absent,and distinct vs.indistinct side channel formation. Model development from which to base habitat-flow response relationships within each of the groups relied upon the site-specific models applied at different study areas.In addition to traditional metrics of weighted usable area (WUA),a number of other metrics were derived that included Wetted Surface Area (WSA),Gross Habitat Area (GHA),a Habitat Availability Index (HAI),a Habitat Distribution Index (HDI),and a Habitat Quality Index (HQI).These relationships were then applied to un-modeled areas assigned to different "representative groups” taking into account two important distinguishing characteristics-structural habitat quality and breaching flow.Structural habitat quality was evaluated for each site based on field data that considered cover type,percent cover,dominant substrate size,substrate embeddedness,channel geometry,and riparian vegetation.From this,a Structural Habitat Index (SHI)was computed for each un-modeled area.Breaching flows were likewise determined for each unmeasured area. These two elements were then used as adjustment factors for defining the derived non-modeled habitat -flow response relationship;this process is conceptually shown in Figure 8.5-36.Once relationships were derived from un-modeled areas,it was then possible to integrate results into an overall assessment of habitat-flow responses within each representative group;these were presented in Steward et al.(1985).The next step in the process would have been to conduct a system-wide (at least for the Middle River Segment)evaluation of habitat-flow responses that would have aggregated the responses into a system-wide habitat-flow response relationship. However,this step was never completed as part of the 1980s studies. Review and inspection of Aaserude et al.(1985),Steward et al.(1985),and Klinger and Trihey (1984)clearly indicate that the challenges of model extrapolation from measured to unmeasured areas had received substantial attention and had resulted in a carefully designed and logical approach for application on the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River.This same approach will serve as the starting point for consideration of the spatial analysis that will be completed for multi-channel areas as part of the 2013-2014 Instream Flow Study.However,even though some of the same steps may be applicable for the current studies (e.g.,habitat mapping,use of aerial imagery,field data collection,derivation of certain habitat-flow response relationships),the analytical tools that are available (e.g.,2-D modeling,LiDAR,digital orthophotos and videography,Forward Looking Infrared [FLIR],GIS,Real Time Kinematic [RTK]-GPS surveys, etc.)and that will be used are much more sophisticated and will result in a more detailed and robust assessment.Moreover,the analysis will also rely on inputs from other inter-related resource studies,including,in particular Geomorphology (see Sections 6.5 and 6.6), Groundwater (see Section 7.5),Water Quality (see Sections 5.5 and 5.6),and Characterization of Aquatic Habitats (see Section 9.9)(Figure 8.5-1).The Focus Areas identified in this RSP (see Section 8.5.4.2)were purposely selected based,in part,on the diversity of habitat types they contained and their representativeness of other areas in the river.The inter-related resource studies that will be completed at each of these areas will provide a strong base of information, Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-90 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN data,and flow-sensitive models that can be used,with proper adjustment,for expanding results to un-measured areas. However,as noted in Section 8.5.2.2,the 1980s project assumed a two-dam scenario,with the lower dam serving as a re-regulating structure to smooth out load-following effects from the upper dam.Thus,the flow changes assumed to occur in the Middle and Lower River segments were more focused on shifts in the seasonal/monthly timing and magnitude of flows rather than on daily flow fluctuations.The extrapolation methods were therefore narrowly focused on being able to evaluate those effects as they occurred at different locations of the river.The spatial analysis for the Susitna-Watana Project will need to consider both those types of effects as well as the daily flow fluctuations associated with load-following.Methods for expanding the results of the varial zone modeling (see Section 8.5.4.6.1.6)and effective habitat modeling (see Section 8.5.4.6.1.5)will therefore need to be developed and integrated into the extrapolation process. In addition,decisions regarding whether and the extent to which detailed studies will be extended into the Lower River Segment will be discussed pending results of the open-water flow routing modeling in Q2 2013.If needed,these studies would be scheduled to occur commencing in Q3 2013 and extend into Q3 2014.Temporal and spatial analytical techniques applicable to the Lower River Segment would be developed in Q4 2014. 8.5.4.7.1.3.Finalization of Analytical Methods The results of the temporal and spatial analyses will include tabular listings of habitat indicator values under existing and alternative flow regimes.Model results will be developed for representative hydrologic conditions and a multi-year,continuous hydrologic record to evaluate annual variations in indicator values.The availability of indicator values over a multi-year record will support sensitivity analyses of the habitat indicators used to evaluate proposed reservoir operations.Sensitivity analyses of individual components of the habitat modeling efforts are a standard technique in model construction,calibration,and assessment and are envisioned as implicit steps in the IFS.For instance,selection of draft HSC/HSI (Section 8.5.4.5.1.1.2)will be subject to sensitivity analyses to identify those inputs where additional data may be required to improve model output,or where the use of available values leads to uncertainty in model outputs.Integrating the level of uncertainty in the various model components will provide the TWG with an overall understanding of the robustness of individual habitat indicators.Analysis of habitat indicators over a multi-year record will identify the sensitivity of indicators to hydrologic conditions and the level of certainty associated with decisions regarding alternative instream flow regimes.The design of the sensitivity analyses for habitat indicators will be developed by AEA and reviewed in consultation with the TWG in Q4 2013 and implemented in Q3 through Q4 2014 (Table 8.5-14). It will be important to reach consensus with licensing participants and the TWG on the final methods that will be applied for both the temporal and spatial analysis.These methods will be reviewed and discussed during one or more TWG meetings that will occur in Q3 2013.Based on input and comments from the TWG,the method will be finalized and described in the Initial Study Report prepared in Q1 2014.Application of the method will occur in Q4 2014 and be included as part of the Instream Flow Study Integration (see Section 8.5.4.8). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-91 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.4.7.2.Work Products Results of the temporal and spatial analysis will be provided in tabular and graphical formats and described in a detailed report.This will include a summarization of the various indices of Project effects on aquatic habitats to allow ready comparison of the effects of alternative operational scenarios. Work products associated with the analysis will include but not be limited to the following: e Tabular listing of habitat quantities under different flows at different times by species and life stage. e Time series plots depicting habitats over time by species and life stage under unregulated conditions and under different operational scenarios;separate time series will be developed for different Water Year types. e Habitat -duration curves based on time series analysis. e Development of extrapolation methods and the application of those methods that will provide an estimate of system-wide effects of Project operations on various habitat indices for both single thread and multiple thread channels. e Preparation of sections within the Initial Study Report that describe temporal and spatial analytical methods. 8.5.4.8.Instream Flow Study Integration 8.5.4.8.1.Proposed Methodology Construction and operation of the proposed Project will change downstream flow conditions on an hourly,daily,and seasonal basis.Load-following operations will increase the frequency, timing,and magnitude of hourly and daily flow fluctuations,and increased flow releases during winter months will be followed by decreased flow releases as the reservoir refills.The effects of such flow changes will vary depending on the operational rules guiding power generation.The suite of Project operational rules governing hourly,daily,and seasonal dam releases are termed operational scenarios.Scenarios developed to benefit one specific resource may have a detrimental effect on another resource.For instance,maintaining high flow releases during the spring salmon smolt out-migration period may delay reservoir refill and could affect Project releases for late summer coho rearing.An operational scenario designed to benefit one resource, such as cottonwood germination,may have an unintended detrimental effect on another resource. Constraints on Project flow releases to benefit one natural resource may affect the ability of AEA to meet its energy needs.Identifying an operational scenario that satisfies the interests of all parties requires an evaluation of multiple resource benefits and risks. Tools to inform the evaluation of flow scenarios have been developed in support of other water control decisions.A Decision Support System (DSS)was developed to support the evaluation of alternative flow regimes on resources of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park (Auble et al.2009).The DSS developed by Auble was intended to provide decision-makers with the tools to manage large data sets of simulated flow alternatives and evaluate the relative desirability of those alternatives with respect to natural resources.The intent was not to evaluate alternatives,but to provide a tool for informing the evaluation of alternatives.The basic approach Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-92 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN was to array differences among alternative flow regimes by calculating values of indicator variables representing different habitat characteristics or processes of the riverine ecosystem. Auble noted that the scientific understanding and quantitative relations between flow and the physical and biological responses of riverine systems are complex and may be imperfectly represented by the indicators.Disagreement about the relative importance or weighting of multiple resource concerns can delay or derail the decision-making process.Ideally,a DSS requires a balance between simplification of assumptions to reduce complexity and oversimplification that does not reflect the constituent variables and calculations.Auble produced a set of indicators grouped into several areas of natural resources concerns.The indicators were replicable calculations that reflected conditions or processes within each area of concern.Alternatives were compared directly in terms of these indicators,each of which could be individually understood and challenged in terms of the assumptions involved in the calculations.Different users could make different decisions using this system because they might weight the importance of multiple indicators differently or value different aspects of the system. Thus,the goal of the DSS was not to make a decision,but rather to reduce the complexity of information and focus attention on trade-offs involved in the decision. The Yakima River DSS (Bovee et al.2008)was designed to quantify and display the consequences of alternative water management scenarios to provide water releases for fish, agriculture,and municipal water supply.Output of the Yakima River DSS consisted of a series of conditionally formatted scoring tables that compiled changes in evaluation indicators. Increases in the values of selected indicators were reflected in a color-coded scoring matrix to provide decision-makers with a quick visual assessment of the overall results of an operating scenario.The scoring matrix required that evaluation indicators used to describe resources be rated as comparative values.A variety of weighting strategies were provided during the decision- making process to reflect the relative importance of different indicators. In support of relicensing decisions for the Baker River Hydroelectric Project,FERC No.2150,a DSS-style matrix was developed to evaluate multiple resource concerns under alternative operational scenarios (Hilgert et al.2008).The focus of the operations and aquatic habitat analyses was to identify a mode of operation that would protect aquatic resources while meeting multiple licensing participant interests.Aquatic habitat analyses were run concurrent with analyses of economic,flood control,and other resources.Various licensing participants championed different approaches to the relationships between minimum and maximum flow releases,minimum and maximum reservoir pool levels,and downramping rates.Through study and analysis,some scenarios were proven infeasible and abandoned,others were modified,and others were dissected and recombined with other approaches.Alternative operational scenarios were evaluated using a matrix that presented indicators of resource concerns without applying comparative weighting factors.Collaboration among licensing participants gradually led to consensus on a preferred flow management plan that contributed led to a Settlement Agreement. Evaluation of Project effects on Susitna River resources will require inventive modeling approaches that integrate aquatic habitat modeling with evaluation of riverine processes such as groundwater-surface water interactions,water quality,and ice processes.The number of reaches, habitat types,target species and life stages,and resource-specific models will result in large data sets for multiple resources that will be difficult to comprehend when evaluating alternative operational scenarios.A DSS-type process will be needed to evaluate the benefit and potential impacts of alternative operational scenarios.For illustration purposes,an example matrix was Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-93 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN developed (Table 8.5-21)to display a range of potential indicator variables including the following: e Power e Hydrologic e Reservoir e Ramping rates e Stranding and trapping e Salmon spawning and incubation e Salmon rearing e Other fish species e Riparian e Recreation e Other aquatic conditions As habitat-specific models are developed,they will be used to evaluate existing conditions and the effects of alternative operational scenarios for multiple resources and riverine processes.A Project operations model (see Section 8.5.4.3.2)will be used to simulate Project inflow,outflow, power generation,and reservoir pool levels for alternative operational scenarios under a range of hydrologic years.The operations model will be used to quantify revenue from power generation based on operational constraints selected for each alternative scenario.Types of constraints may include maximum and minimum instream flow releases,ramping rates,and reservoir levels. These constraints may be varied within a hydrologic year according to schedules specified for each alternative.Operations model output may include simulated reservoir elevations,turbine, spill,and total outflow,as well as hourly stream flow immediately below the powerhouse. Output from the operations model will be used as input for the downstream habitat models. Hourly flows immediately below the powerhouse will be routed downstream using the mainstem open-water flow routing models (see Section 8.5.4.3)and Ice Processes Model (see Section 7.6). Each habitat and riverine processes model can be used to develop large data sets of hourly habitat conditions.The DSS-type process will be used to focus attention on those attributes that the TWG believes are highest priority in evaluating the relative desirability of alternative scenarios with respect to natural resources.Evaluation indicators selected for a DSS-type matrix represent a preliminary analysis to identify the most promising scenarios.When discussion of alternatives focuses on only a few remaining scenarios,those final scenarios will be evaluated using the larger data set of habitat indicators to ensure that environmental effects are consistent with the initial analyses. The selection of indicator variables will be developed in collaboration with the TWG.For planning purposes,it is assumed that values for each evaluation indicator will be developed and presented for a range of alternative operational scenarios without rating or comparative weighting of various resources.Although incorporating a relative weighting system similar to the Yakima River DSS (Bovee et al.2008)would simplify the evaluation process,reaching consensus on weighting factors may divert attention from understanding and discussing the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-94 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN merits of constituent variables.Table 8.5-21 represents one option to present Project decision- makers with information on the effects of alternative operational scenarios on resource values. Development of a DSS-type process,and supporting software to efficiently process data analyses,will be initiated in collaboration with the TWG after the initial results of the various habitat modeling efforts are available in 2014 (Table 8.5-14).The intent is to prepare the DSS- type evaluation process by Q1 2015 to assist scenario evaluations in support of the License Application. 8.5.4.8.2.Work Products Work efforts in support of Instream Flow Study integration will be described in the ISR and USR (Table 8.5-14)to be prepared at the end of each year of study.A DSS-type program will developed in collaboration with the TWG to support decision-makers with the evaluation of alternative operational scenarios.Specific work products for the study integration efforts will consist of the following: e Summary of any study integration efforts in 2013 to be included in the ISR e Summary of study integration efforts in 2014 to be included in the USR e DSS-type matrix with supporting documentation 8.5.5.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice The proposed IFS,including methodologies for data collection,analysis,modeling,field schedules,and study durations,is consistent with generally accepted practice in the scientific community.The study plans were collaboratively developed with technical experts representing the applicant,state and federal resource agencies,Alaska Native entities,non-government organizations,and the public.Many of these technical experts have experience in multiple FERC licensing and relicensing proceedings.The IFS is consistent with common approaches used for other FERC proceedings and the IFS references specific protocols and survey methodologies,as appropriate. 8.5.6.Schedule The schedule for completing all components of the Mainstem Aquatic Habitat Model is provided in Table 8.5-14.The TWG will have opportunities for study coordination through regularly scheduled meetings,reports,and,as needed,technical subcommittee meetings.Initial and Updated Study Reports will be issued in December 2013 and 2014,respectively.Preparation of reports is planned at the end of 2013 and 2014 for each of the study components.Workgroup meetings are planned to occur on at least a quarterly basis,and workgroup subcommittees will meet or have teleconferences as needed. 8.5.7.Level of Effort and Cost Based on a review of study costs associated with similar efforts conducted at other hydropower projects,and in recognition of the size of the Project and logistical challenges and costs associated with the remoteness of the site,study costs associated with the Instream Flow Study are expected to be approximately $5,000,000 to $6,000,000.Estimated study costs are subject to review and revision as additional details are developed. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-95 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Portions of this study will be conducted in conjunction with water resource,geomorphology, water quality,operational modeling,and fisheries and aquatic resource studies;however,specific costs of those studies will be reflected in those individual study plans. 8.5.8.Literature Cited Aaserude,R.G.,J.Thiele,and D.Trudgen.1985.Characterization of aquatic habitats in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon segment of the Susitna River,Alaska.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority by Trihey and UAF (Trihey Associates and University of Alaska Fairbanks),Anchorage,Alaska.144 pp.APA Document 2919. ADF&G (Alaska Department of Fish and Game).1983.Aquatic Studies Procedures Manual: Phase II -Final Draft 1982-1983.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Su-Hydro Aquatic Studies Program.Anchorage,Alaska.257 pp.APA Document 938. ADF&G (Alaska Department of Fish and Game).1984.ADF&G Su Hydro Aquatic Studies May 1983 -June 1984 Procedures Manual Final Draft.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Su-Hydro Aquatic Studies Program.Anchorage,Alaska.APA Documents 885 and 886. AEA (Alaska Energy Authority).2011.Pre-Application Document.Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241.Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage, Alaska. Ahmadi-Nedushan,B.,St-Hilaire,A.,Bérubé,M.,Robichaud,E.,Thiémonge,N.&Bobée,B. 2006.A review of statistical methods for the evaluation of aquatic habitat suitability for instream flow assessment.River Research and Applications 22,503-523. Alderdice,D.F.,and F.P.J.Velsen.1978.Relation between temperature and incubation time for eggs of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha).Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 35:69-75. Annear,T.,I.Chisholm,H.Beecher,A.Locke and 12 other authors.2004.Instream flows for riverine resource stewardship,revised edition.Instream Flow Council,Cheyenne,WY. 268 pp. Ashton,W.S.,and S.A.Klinger-Kingsley.1985.Response of Aquatic Habitat Surface Areas to Mainstem Discharge in the Yentna to Talkeetna Reach of the Susitna River.Final Report to Alaska Power Authority by R&M Consultants,Inc.,and Trihey and Associates, Anchorage,Alaska.201 pp.APA Document 2774. Auble,G.T.,Wondzell,M.,and Talbert,C.2009.Decision support system for evaluation of Gunnison River flow regimes with respect to resources of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park:U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009-1126,24 p. B.Efron &R.J.Tibshirani (1993):An introduction to the bootstrap.Chapman &Hall,New York. Barrett,B.,M.,F.M.Thompson,and S.N.Wick.1985.Adult salmon investigations.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies Report No.6.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.528 pp.APA Document 2748. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-96 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Barrett,B.M.,F.M.Thompson,S.Wick,and S.Krueger.1983.Adult Anadromous Fish Studies, 1982.Phase II data report,Volume 2.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.275 pp.APA Document 588. Bauersfeld,K.1977.Effects of peaking (stranding)of Columbia River dams on juvenile anadromous fishes below the Dalles Dam,1974 and 1975.Washington Department of Fisheries,Technical Report 31.111 pp. Bauersfeld,K.1978.Stranding of juvenile salmon by flow reductions at Mayfield Dam on the Cowlitz River 1976.Washington Department of Fisheries Technical Report No.36. Prepared for the City of Tacoma,Department of Public Utilities.36 pp. Becker,C.D.,Neitzel,D.A.,&Abernethy,C.S.(1983).Effects of dewatering on Chinook salmon redds:tolerance of four development phases to one-time dewatering.North American Journal of Fisheries Management,3(4),373-382. Bigler,J.,and K.Levesque.1985.Lower Susitna River Preliminary Chum Salmon Spawning Habitat Assessment.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.140 pp.APA Document 3504. Bovee,K.D.1982.A guide to stream habitat analysis using the Instream Flow Incremental Methodology.Instream Flow Paper No.12.Washington DC:U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS/OBS-82/26). Bovee,K.D.1986.Development and evaluation of habitat suitability criteria for use in the instream flow incremental methodology.Washington DC:U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (Biological Report 86[7]).235pp. Bovee,K.D.,B.L.Lamb,J.M.Bartholow,C.B.Stalnaker,J.Taylor,and J.Henriksen.1998. Stream habitat analysis using the instream flow incremental methodology.U.S. Geological Survey,Biological Resources Discipline Information and Technology Report USGS/BRD-1998-0004.viii +131 pp. Bovee,K.D.,and R.Milhous.1978.Hydraulic Simulation in Instream Flow Studies:Theory and Techniques.Instream Flow Information Paper No.5.Cooperative Instream Flow Service Group,US Fish and Wildlife Service,Ft.Collins,Colorado.156 pp. Bovee,K.D.,Waddle,T.J.,Talbert,C.Hatten,J.R.,and Batt,T.R.2008.Development and Application of a Decision Support System for Water Management Investigations in the Upper Yakima River,Washington:U.S.Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1251, 289 p. Buckwalter,J.D.2011.Synopsis of ADF&G's Upper Susitna Drainage Fish Inventory,August 2011.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Division of Sport Fish,Anchorage,Alaska. 27 pp. Burgner,R.L.1991.Life history of sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka).Pages 1-118 in C. Groot and L.Margolis,eds.,Pacific Salmon Life Histories.UBC Press,Vancouver. C.C.Estes and D.S.Vincent-Lang.1984.Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Investigations (May-October,1983).Prepared by Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Alaska Department of Fish &Game.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Documents 1930,1931,1932,1933,1934,1935,1936,1937,1938. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-97 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Chen,F.Shen,H.T.,and Jayasundara,N.2006.A One-Dimensional Comprehensive River Ice Model,Proceedings of the 18th IAHR International Symposium on Ice,Sapporo,Japan. Cochran,W.G.1977.Sampling techniques (3rd ed.).New York:John Wiley &Sons Connor,E.&Pflug,D.2004.Changes in the distribution and density of pink,chum,and Chinook salmon spawning in the upper Skagit River in response to flow management measures.North American Journal of Fisheries Management,24(3),835-852. Curran,J.H.2012.Streamflow Record Extension for Selected Streams in the Susitna River Basin,Alaska.U.S.Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2012-5210.36 p. Delaney,K.,D.Crawford,L.Dugan,S.Hale,K Kuntz,B.Marshall,J.Mauney,J.Quinn,K. Roth,P Suchanek,R.Sundet,and M.Stratton.1981a.Resident Fish Investigation on the Upper Susitna River.Prepared by Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,AK.157 pp.APA Document 316. Delaney,K.,D.Crawford,L.Dugan,S.Hale,K Kuntz,B.Marshall,J.Mauney,J.Quinn,K. Roth,P Suchanek,R.Sundet,and M.Stratton.1981b.Resident Fish Investigation on the Lower Susitna River.Phase I final draft report.Prepared by Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage,AK.311 pp.APA Document 318. Delaney,K.,D.Crawford,L.Dugan,S.Hale,K.Kuntz,B.Marshall,J.Mauney,J.Quinn,K. Roth,P.Suchanek,R.Sundet,and M.Stratton.1981c.Juvenile Anadromous Fish Study on the Lower Susitna River.Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Anchorage,Alaska 200 pp.APA Document 1310. DeVries,P.,B.Kvam,S.Beck,D.Reiser,M.Ramey,C.Huang,and C.Eakin.2001.Kerr Hydroelectric Project,Lower Flathead River ramping rate study.Prepared by R2 Resource Consultants,for Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation,Montana. Dos Santos,J.M.,J.E.Darling,and D.Cross.1988.Lower Flathead system fisheries study:Main river and tributaries.Volume II.Final Report FY 1983-87.Bonneville Power Administration,Contract No.DE-A179-83BP39830.June. Dugan,L.J.,D.A.Sterritt,and M.E.Stratton.1984.The distribution and relative abundance of juvenile salmon in the Susitna River drainage above the Chulitna River confluence. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Completion Report.Susitna Hydroelectric Studies. Anchorage,Alaska.APA Document 1784. Dunham,J.,G.Chandler,B.Rieman,and D.Martin.2005.Measuring stream temperature with digital data loggers:A user's guide.General Technical Report.RARSGTR-150WWW. Fort Collins,CO:U.S.Department of Agriculture,Forest Service,RMRS. EA Engineering,Science,and Technology,Inc.1986.Instream flow methodologies.Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).EPRI EA-4819,Project 2194-2,Final Report. Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).2000.Instream flow assessment methods:guidance for evaluating instream flow needs in hydropower licensing.Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).Report number 1000554. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-98 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Estes,C.,and D.Schmidt.1983.Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Studies,1982.Prepared by Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies for the Alaska Power Authority.470 pp.APA Documents 585,586,587. Estes,C.,D.Lang,A.Bingham,T.Quane,and A.Hoffman.1981.Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Project.Prepared by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies for the Alaska Power Authority.272 pp.APA Documents 1307,311, 312. FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission).1984.Draft Environmental Impact Statement: Susitna Hydroelectric Project.FERC No.7114 -Alaska.Applicant:Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska.APA Documents 1653,1654,1655,1656,1657,1658, 1659. Fisher,S.G.,and A.LaVoy.1972.Differences in littoral fauna due to fluctuating water levels below a hydroelectric dam.Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 29:1472- 1476. Hale,S.S.,P.M.Suchanek,and D.C.Schmidt.1984.Part 7.Modeling of Juvenile Salmon and Resident Fish Habitat.In:Schmidt,D.C.,S.S.Hale,D.L.Crawford,and P.M.Suchanek. (eds.)Report No.2.Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fish Investigations (May - October 1983).Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies, Anchorage,Alaska.52 pp.APA Document 1784. Hansen,T.F.,and J.C.Richards.1985.Availability of Invertebrate Food Sources for Rearing Juvenile Chinook Salmon in Turbid Susitna River Habitats.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies Report No.6.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.139 pp.APA Document 2846. HDR.2011.Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project;Railbelt Large Hydro;Aquatic Resources Data Gap Analysis.Prepared for Alaska Energy Authority,Anchorage,Alaska. Higgins,P.S.,and M.J.Bradford.1996.Evaluation of a large-scale fish salvage to reduce the impacts of controlled flow reduction in a regulated river.North American Journal of Fisheries Management 16:666-673. Hilgert,P.J,S.M.Beck,and S.W.Madsen.2008.Instream Flow Summary Report,A-09,Baker River Hydroelectric Project,FERC No.2150,Aquatic Resource Working Group, prepared for Puget Sound Energy,Bellevue,Washington. Hilgert,P.J.and S.W.Madsen.1998.Evaluation of potential stranding and trapping of juvenile salmonids as a result of flow fluctuations in the lower White River,Washington.White River Hydroelectric Project,FERC No.2494,prepared for Puget Sound Energy, Bellevue,Washington. Hilliard,N.D.,S.Williams,E.W.Trihey,R.C.Wilkinson,and C.R.Steward,III.1985. Hydraulic relationships and model calibration procedures at 1984 study sites in the Talkeetna-to-Devil Canyon segment of the Susitna River,Alaska.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.303 pp.APA Document 2898. Hoffman,A.,L.Vining,J.Quinn,R.Sundet,M.Wenger,and M.Stratton.1983.Winter Aquatic Studies (October,1982-May,1983).Alaska Department of Fish and Game Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Anchorage,Alaska.269 pp.APA Document 397. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-99 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN Hunter,M.A.1992.Hydropower flow fluctuations and salmonids:a review of the biological effects,mechanical causes,and options for mitigation.Washington Department of Fisheries,Technical Report No.119.46 pp. Jennings,T.R.1985.Fish Resources and Habitats in the Middle Susitna River.Instream Flow Relationships Series,Technical Report No.1.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority. Woodward-Clyde Consultants and Entrix,Inc.175 pp.APA Document 2744. Klinger,S.and E.W.Trihey.1984.Response of aquatic habitat surface areas to mainstem discharge in the Talkeetna-to-Devil Canyon reach of the Susitna River,Alaska.E. Woody Trihey and Associates.Report for Alaska Power Authority,Susitna Hydroelectric Project,Anchorage,AK.APA Document 1693.1 vol. Klinger-Kingsley,S.A.,L.Reynolds,and E.W.Trihey.1985.Response of Aquatic Habitat Surface Areas to Mainstem Discharge in the Talkeetna-to-Devil Canyon Segment of the Susitna River,Alaska.Final Report to Alaska Power Authority by Trihey and Associates, Anchorage,Alaska.231 pp.APA Document 2945. Marshall,R.P.,P.M.Suchanek,and D.C.Schmidt.1984.Juvenile salmon rearing habitat models.1984 Report 2,Part 4.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.51pp.APA Document 1784. Milhous,R.T.,D.L.Wegner,and T.Waddle.1981.User's Guide to the Physical Habitat Simulation Model.Instream Flow Information Paper:No.11.Cooperative Instream Flow Group,US Fish and Wildlife Service,Fort Collins,Colorado 258 pp. Milhous,R.T.1989.Physical Habitat Simulation System Reference Manual -Vers 2.Instream Flow Information Paper No.26.U.S.Department of the Interior,Fish and Wildlife Service. Moore,K.M.S.,K.K.Jones,and J.M.Dambacher.2006.Aquatic Inventories Project:Methods for Stream Habitat Surveys.Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,Corvallis,Oregon. Morhardt,J.E.,D.F.Hanson,and P.J.Coulston.1983.Instream Flow Analysis:Increased Accuracy Using Habitat Mapping.Waterpower 83-An International Conference on Hydropower.Conference Proceedings Vol 3:1294-1304. Morrow,J.E.1980.The freshwater fishes of Alaska.Alaska Northwest Publishing Co., Anchorage,AK.248 pp. Mueller,D.S.2012.Review and rating of moving-boat ADCP Q measurements.USGS HydroAcoustics Webinar available at http://hydroacoustics.usgs.gov/training/webinars.shtm] Mueller,D.S.and Wagner,C.R.2009.Measuring discharge with acoustic Doppler current profilers from a moving boat:U.S.Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 3A-22, 72 pp. Mueller,R.P.,R.S.Brown,H.Hop,and L.Moulton.2006.Video and acoustic camera techniques for studying fish under ice:a review and comparison.Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 16:213-226. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-100 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Nawa,K.R.,C.A.Frissell.1993.Measuring scour and fill of gravel streambeds with scour chains and siding-bead monitors.North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13: 634-639. Olson,F.W.1990.Downramping regime for power operation to minimize stranding of salmonid fry in the Sultan River.Prepared by CH2M HILL for PUD No.1,Snohomish County.48 Pp. Orsborn,J.F.and C.H.Allman (editors).1976.Proceedings of the symposium and specialty conference on instream flow needs.American Fisheries Society,Bethesda,Maryland 20014.Volumes I &II. Payne,T.R.,S.D.Eggers,and D.B.Parkinson.2004.The Number of Transects Required to Compute a Robust PHABSIM Habitat Index.Hydroecol Appl.14(1):458-465. Quane,T.,P.Morrow,and I.Queral.1985.Hydrological investigations at selected lower Susitna River study sites.Task 14 Support Technical Report.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.533 pp.APA Document 2736. R.W.Beck and Associates.1989.Skagit River salmon and steelhead fry stranding studies. Report prepared for Seattle City Light,Environmental Affairs Division by R W.Beck and Associates,Seattle,WA. Rantz,S.E.and others.1982.Measurement and computation of streamflow:Volume 1. Measurement of stage and discharge.U.G.Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 2175, 284 p. Roth,K.J.and M.E.Stratton.1985.The migration and growth of juvenile salmon in Susitna River,1985.Susitna Aquatic Studies Program Report No.7,Part 1.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.202 pp.APA Document 2836. Roth,K.J.,D.C.Gray,J.W.Anderson,A.C.Blaney,J.P.McDonell.1986.The migration and growth of juvenile salmon in Susitna River,1985.Susitna Aquatic Studies Program Report No.14.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.130 pp.APA Document 3413. Sandone,G.D.Vincent-Lang,and A.Hoffman.1984.Evaluations of chum salmon spawning habitat in selected tributary mouth habitats of the Middle Susitna River.Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Investigations (May-October,1983),Report 3,Chapter 8.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.83 pp.APA Document 1937. Sautner,J.S.,L.J.Vining,and L.A.Rundquist.1984.An evaluation of passage conditions for adult salmon in sloughs and side channels of the middle Susitna River.In:Estes,C.C., and D.S.Vincent-Lang.(eds.)Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Investigations (May - October 1983).Alaska Dept.Fish and Game.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Anchorage, Alaska.148 pp.APA Document 1935. Schmidt,D.C.,S.S.Hale,and D.L.Crawford.1985.Resident and juvenile anadromous fish investigations (May -October 1984).Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies Report Series. Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Anchorage,Alaska.483 pp.APA Document 2836. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-101 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Seagren,D.R.,and R.G.Wilkey.1985.Summary of water temperature and substrate data from selected salmon spawning and groundwater upwelling sites in the middle Susitna River. ADF&G Susitna River Aquatic Studies Program Technical Data Report No 12.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska.90 pp.APA Document 2913. Stalnaker,C.and J.Arnette (eds).1976.Methodologies for the determination of stream resource maintenance flow requirements:an assessment.U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Western Water Allocation. Stalnaker,C.,B.L.Lamb,J.Henriksen,K.Bovee,and J.Bartholow.1995.The instream flow incremental methodology,a primer for IFIM.National Biological Service,U.S. Department of the Interior.Biological Report 29. Steward,C.R.,R.C.Wilkinson,and A.R.Milner.1985.Response of Juvenile Chinook habitat to mainstem discharge in the Talkeetna to Devil Canyon Segment of the Susitna River, Alaska.Final Report to Alaska Power Authority by Trihey and Associates,Anchorage, Alaska.183 pp.APA Document 2909. Stober,Q.J.,and six others.1982.Effects of hydroelectric discharge fluctuations on salmon and steelhead in the Skagit River,Washington.Final report for period December 1979 to December 1982,prepared for Seattle City Light.University of Washington Fisheries Research Institute FRI-U W-8218.302 pp. Stratton,M.E.1986.Summary of Juvenile Chinook and Coho Salmon Winter Studies in the Middle Susitna River,1984-1985.Report to Alaska Power Authority by Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Anchorage,Alaska.148 pp.APA Document 3063. Sturges,H.A.1926.The Choice of a Class Interval.Journal of the American Statistical Association 21(153):65-66. Suchanek,P.M.,K.J.Kuntz,and J.P.McDonell.1985.The relative abundance,distribution, and instream flow relationships of juvenile salmon in the lower Susitna River.Report 7, Part 2.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game. 243pp.APA Document 2836. Suchanek,P.M.,R.L.Sundet and M.N.Wenger.1984a.Resident fish habitat studies.1984 Report 2,Part 6.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.40pp.APA Document 1784. Suchanek,P.M.,R.P.Marshall,S.S.Hale,and D.C.Schmidt.1984b.Juvenile salmon rearing suitability criteria.1984 Report 2,Part 3.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority. Alaska Department of Fish and Game.49pp.APA Document 1784. Sundet,R.L.1986.Winter Resident Fish Distribution and Habitat Studies Conducted in the Susitna River Below Devil Canyon,1984-1985.Report to Alaska Power Authority by Alaska Department of Fish and Game,Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Anchorage, Alaska.80 pp.APA Document 3062. Sundet,R.L.,and S.D.Pechek.1985.Resident Fish Distribution and Life History in the Susitna River Below Devil Canyon.Pages 97 In:Schmidt,D.C.,S.S.Hale,and D.L.Crawford. (eds.)Resident and Juvenile Anadromous Fish Investigations (May-October 1984). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-102 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Prepared by Alaska Department of Fish and Game.Prepared for Alaska Power Authority, Anchorage,AK.APA Document 2837. Thompson,F.M.,S.N.Wick,and B.L.Stratton.1986.Adult salmon investigations,May - October 1985.Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies Report No.13,Volume 1.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.173 pp.APA Document 3412. TNC (The Nature Conservancy).2009.Indicators of hydrologic alteration,Version 7.1,User's Manual,April. Trihey &Associates and Entrix.1985a.Instream Flow Relationships Report,Volume 1.Final Report to Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska.228 pp.APA Document 3060. Trihey &Associates and Entrix.1985b.Instream Flow Relationships Report,Volume 2.Final Report to Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage,Alaska.228 pp.APA Document 3061. Trihey,E.W.and D.L.Wegner.1981.Field data collection procedures for use with the physical habitat simulation system of the instream flow group,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service, Nat].Ecol.Res.Center,Fort Collins,CO:139 pp. Trihey,E.W.1982.1982 Winter Temperature Study.Prepared for Acres American,Inc.by E.W. Trihey,Anchorage,Alaska.151 pp.APA Document 526. Trihey,LW.1979.The IFG incremental methodology.Pages 24-44 in G.L.Smith,ed.Workshop in instream flow habitat criteria and modeling.Colorado Water Resources Research Institute,Colorado State University,Fort Collins,CO.Information Series No.40. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).2007.HEC-ResSim Reservoir System Simulation, User's Manual.Hydrologic Engineering Center.Version 3.0.512 p. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.2001.UNET One-dimensional unsteady flow through a full network of open channels,User's manual,CPD-66. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.2010a.HEC-RAS River Analysis System User's Manual,CPD- 68. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.2010b.HEC-RAS River Analysis System Hydraulic Reference Manual,CPD-69. U.S.Army Corps of Engineers.2010c.HEC-RAS River Analysis System Applications Guide, CPD-70. U.S.Geological Survey.1997.Full Equations (FEQ)model for the solution of the full,dynamic equations of motion for one-dimensional unsteady flow in open channels and through control structures,Water-Resources Investigations Report 96-4240. U.S.National Weather Service.1998.NWS FLDWAV model:theoretical description and user documentation,November 28. USFWS (U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service).1980.Habitat evaluation procedures (HEP).ESM 102. U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,Division of Ecological Services,Washington,D.C. March 31,1980. USGS.1999.Care and Maintenance of Vertical-Axis Current Meters.Office of Surface Water Technical Memorandum 99.06. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-103 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Vincent-Lang,D.,A.Hoffman,A.E.Bigham,and C.C.Estes.1984.Habitat suitability criteria for Chinook,coho,and pink salmon spawning in tributaries of the middle Susitna River. Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Investigations (May-October,1983)Report No.3, Chapter 9.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies Anchorage,Alaska.79 pp.APA Document 1938. Vincent-Lang,D.,A.Hoffman,A.E.Bigham,C.C.Estes,D.Hilliard,C.Stewart,E.W.Trihey, and S.Crumley.1984b.An evaluation of chum and sockeye salmon spawning habitat in sloughs and side channels of the Middle Susitna River.Aquatic Habitat and Instream Flow Investigations (May-October,1983)Report No.3,Chapter 7.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies Anchorage,Alaska.339 pp.APA Document 1936. Vincent-Lang,D.,and I.Queral.1984.Eulachon spawning habitat in the lower Susitna River.In: Estes,C.C.,and D.S.Vincent-Lang.(eds.)Aquatic habitat and instream flow investigations (May -October 1983).Chapter 5.Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Susitna Hydro Aquatic Studies,Anchorage,Alaska.77 pp.APA Document 1934. Vining,L.J.,J.S.Blakely,and G.M.Freeman.1985.An evaluation of the incubation life-phase of chum salmon in the middle Susitna River,Alaska.Winter Aquatic Investigations, September 1983 -May 1984,Report No.5,Volume 1.Prepared for the Alaska Power Authority.Alaska Department of Fish and Game.232 pp.APA Document 2658. Waddle,T.J.(Ed.).2001.PHABSIM for Windows:User's Manual and Exercises.U.S. Geological Survey,Fort Collins,CO,288 pp. Wangaard,D.B.and C.V.Burger.1983.The effects of various water temperature regimes on the egg and alevin incubation of Susitna River chum and sockeye salmon.United States Fish and Wildlife Service,National Fishery Research Center,Alaska Field Station, Anchorage,Alaska,USA. Wentworth,C.K.1922.A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments:The Journal of Geology,v.30,p.377-392. Wesche,T.A.,and P.A.Rechard.1980.A summary of instream flow methods for fisheries and related research needs.Eisenhower Consortium Bulletin 9.Water Resources Research Institute,University of Wyoming,Laramie,Wyoming.122 p. Williams,G.P.1978.Bank-full discharge of rivers.Water resources research,14(6),1141-1154. Williams,J.G.1996.Lost in space:minimum confidence intervals for idealized PHABSIM studies.Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 125:458-465. Wipfli,M.S.,and C.V.Baxter.2010.Linking Ecosystems,Food Webs,and Fish Production: Subsidies in Salmonid Watersheds.Fisheries 35(8):373-387. Zimmerman,C.and J.Finn.2012.A simple method for in situ monitoring of water temperature in substrates used by spawning salmonids.Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 3(2):xx-xx;€1944-687X;doi:10.3996/032012-JFWM-025. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-104 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.9.Tables Table 8.5-1.Summary of HSC curves developed during 1980s Susitna Studies. Species Life Stage ;Depth |Velocity |Substrate |Upwelling |Cover |Turbidity' Coho Juvenile v v v .Spawning v v v Chinook Juvenile a v v v Spawning v v v Sockeye Juvenile v v v Spawning v v v Y Chum -7JuvenileY v Y Pink Spawning v v v Y Rainbow Trout Spawning v v v Dolly Varden Adult ve v v v Arctic Grayling Adult ve v v v Humpback Whitefish |Juvenile v v v v Round Whitefish Adult Y v v v Longnose Sucker |Adult Y v v Y Burbot Adult v v v v Notes: 1,2 Depth curves for multiple species combined 3 Integrated with substrate suitability 4 Separate curves developed for clear vs.turbid water for one or more parameters Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-105 December 2012 REVISED S.__.PLAN Table 8.5-2.Periodicity of Pacific salmon habitat utilization in the Middle Segment (RM 184-98.5)of the Susitna River by species and life history stage.Shaded areas indicate timing of utilization and dark gray areas represent peak use. Species Life Stage Jan May Jun Dec Chinook Salmon Adult Migration Spawning Incubation Fry Emergence Rearing (0+) Rearing (1+) Juvenile Migration (0+) Juvenile Migration (1+) Chum Salmon Adult Migration Spawning Incubation Fry Emergence Rearing (0+) Juvenile Migration (0+) Coho Salmon Adult Migration Spawning tremeIncubation Fry Emergence Rearing (0+) Rearing (1+) Rearing (2+) Juvenile Migration (0+) Juvenile Migration (1+) Juvenile Migration (2+) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-106 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Species Life Stage Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sockeye Salmon! Adult Migration' Spawning! Incubation Fry Emergence Rearing (0+) Rearing (1+) Juvenile Migration (0+) Juvenile Migration (1+) Pink Salmon? Adult Migration Spawning Incubation Fry Emergence Juvenile Migration (0+) - iLb i, AE Fia 1 Early-run and late-run sockeye salmon exhibit distinct timing of adult migration and spawning,and utilize separate areas for spawning.Periodicity presented here represent that of late-run sockeye,as early-run sockeye do not utilize the Middle Susitna River. 2 No rearing period for age 0+pink salmon is identified because this species migrates to the estuary soon after emergence. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Pre lo.14241 Pa 07 Alaska Enerav Authority De er 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-3.Instream flow sites and habitat modeling methods used during the 1980s in the Middle and Lower Susitna River (Marshall et al.1984;Sandone et al.1984;Vincent-Lang et al.1984;Hilliard et al.1985;Suchanek et al.1985). River Susitna No.of Year(s)Mile Site Name Seqment Habitat Type Site Type _|Transects |Measured 35.2 _|Hooligan Side Channel Lower |Side Channel RJHAB 5 1984 36.2 _|Eagles Nest Side Channel Lower _|Side Channel RJHAB 4 1984 36.3 _|Kroto Slough Head Lower _|Side Slough RJHAB 5 1984 39.0 |Rolly Creek Mouth Lower |Tributary Mouth RJHAB 6 1984 42.9 |Bear Bait Side Channel Lower |Side Channel RJHAB 5 1984 44.4 |Last Chance Creek Side Channel Lower |Side Channel RJHAB 6 1984 59.5 |Rustic Wilderness Side Channel Lower |Side Channel RJHAB 5 1984 63.0 |Caswell Creek Lower |Tributary Mouth RJHAB 8 1984 63.2 |Island Side Channel Lower |Side Channel IFG-4,RJHAB 9 1984 74.4 _|Mainstem West Bank Lower _|Side Slough IFG-4 7 1984 74.8 |Goose 2 Side Channel Lower |}Side Channel RJHAB 6 1984 75.3 |Circular Side Channel Lower _|Side Channel IFG-4 6 1984 79.8 |Sauna side channel Lower |Side Channel IFG-4 4 1984 84.5 |Sucker side channel Lower |Side Channel RJHAB 6 1984 86.3 |Beaver Dam side channel Lower Side Channel RJHAB 5 1984 86.3 |Beaver Dam Slough Lower _|Side Slough RJHAB 5 1984 86.9 |Sunset side channel Lower |Side Channel IFG-4 7 1984 87.0 |Sunrise side channel Lower _|Side Channel RJHAB 7 1984 88.4 |Birch Slough Lower |Side Slough RJHAB 8 1984 91.6 |Trapper Creek side channel Lower _|Side Channel IFG-4,RJHAB 5 1984 1041.2 |101.2 R,Whiskers East Middle |Side Channel IFG-4 9 1984 101.4 |Whiskers Slough Middle |Side Slough RJHAB 8 1983 101.5 |101.5 L,Whiskers West Middle |Side Channel IFG-2 5 1984 101.7 |101.7L Middle |Side Channel DIHAB 4 1984 105.8 |105.8L Middle |Mainstem DIHAB 4 1984 107.6 |Slough 5 Middle |Upland Slough RJHAB 9 1983 112.5 |Slough 6A Middle |Upland Slough RJHAB 8 1983 112.6 |112.6 L,Side Channel 6A Middle _|Side Channel IFG-2 9 1984 Habitat 113.6 |Lane Creek mouth Middle |Tributary Mouth Mapping 7 1983 113.7 |Slough 8 Middle |Side Slough RJHAB 5 1983 114.1 |114.1R Middle _|Side Channel DIHAB 3 1984 115.0 |115.0R Middle |Side Channel DIHAB 4 1984 118.9 |118.9L Middle _|Mainstem DIHAB 3 1984 119.4 |119.1L Middle |Mainstem DIHAB 3 1984 119.2 |119.2R,Little Rock side channel Middle |Side Channel IFG-2 5 1984 125.2 |125.2R Middle |Side Channel DIHAB 2 1984 125.3 |Skull Creek Middle |Side Slough IFG-4 11 1983 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-108 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN River Susitna No.of Year(s)Mile Site Name Segment Habitat Type Site Type _|Transects |Measured 128.8 |Slough 9 Middle _|Side Slough IFG-4 10 1983 130.2 |130.2R Middle |Side Channel DIHAB 3 1984 Habitat 131.1 |4th of July Creek mouth Middle |Tributary Mouth Mapping 8 1983 131.3 |134.31 Middle {|Side Channel DIHAB 4 1984 131.7 |134.7L Middle |Side Channel IFG-4 7 1984 132.6 |132.6 L,Side channel 10A Middle _|Side Channel IFG-4,RJHAB 9 1983-84 133.8 |133.8R Middle |Mainstem DIHAB 3 1984 133.8 _|Side channel 10 Middle _|Side Channel IFG-4 4 1983 134.9 |Lower Side channel 11 Middle |Side Channel IFG-2 6 1983 136.0 |136.0L,Slough 14 Middle |Side Channel IFG-4 6 1984 136.3__|Upper Side channel 11 Middle |Side Channel IFG-4 4 1983 137.5 |137.5R Middle _|Side Channel DIHAB 3 1984 138.7 |138.7L Middle |Mainstem DIHAB 3 1984 139.0 |139.0L Middle |Mainstem DIHAB 4 1984 139.4 |139.4L Middle |Side Channel DIHAB 3 1984 141.2 |Side channel 21 Middle |Side Channel IFG-4 5 1983 141.8 |Slough 21 Middle |Side Slough IFG-4 5 1983 144.4 |Slough 22 Middle _|Side Slough RJHAB 8 1983 147.1 |147.11,Fat Canoe SC Middle |Side Channel IFG-2 6 1984 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-109 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-4.Geomorphic reach designations for the Upper River (UR)Segment,Middle River (MR)Segment,and Lower River (LR)Segment of the Susitna River as described in Section 6.5.4.1.2.2. Reach Reach Upstream Downstream _j Classifi-SlopeDesignation|Limit RM)Limit (RM)cation (fmi)Lateral Constraints Upper River Segment (UR) UR-1 260 248 $C2 NIA Quaternary Basin Fill UR-2 248 233 SC1 N/A Quaternary Basin Fill UR-3 233 223 SC1 N/A Quaternary Basin Fill UR-4 223 206 SC2 N/A Granodiorite UR-5 206 201 Sieg N/A Quaternary Basin Fill UR-6 201 184 $C2 N/A Quaternary Basin Fill Middle River Segment (MR) MR-1 184 182 $C2 9 Gneiss MR-2 182 166.5 $C2 10 Quaternary Basin Fill MR-3 166.5 163 $C2 17 Granites MR-4 163 150 SC1 30 Granites MR-5 150 145 SC2 12 Moraine and Turbidites MR-6 145 119 SC3 10 Moraines MR-7 119 104 $C2 8 Moraines MR-8 104 98.5 mc1/sc2 18 Holocere Lacustrine and Alluvial Terraceeposits Lower River Segment (LR) Upper Pleistocene Outwash,Moraine andLR-1 98.5 4 MCt 5 Lacustrine deposits Upper Pleistocene Outwash,Moraine andLR28461MC15Lacustrinedeposits LR-3 61 40.5 MC3 4 Glaciolacustrine and Moraine deposits LR-4 40.5 28 MC3 2 Glaciolacustrine and Moraine deposits LR-5 28 20 $C2 2 Glaciolacustrine and Moraine deposits LR-6 20 0 MC4 1.4 Glaciolacustrine and Holocene Estuarine deposits Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-110 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-5.Nested and tiered habitat mapping units,categories,and definitions. Level Unit Category Definitions Defined Segment Breaks Upper River -RM184-248 (habitat mapping will only extend up to mainstem RM 233 and will 1 Major Hydrologic Segment Upper,Middle,Lower River include the Oshetna River. Middle River -RM 98.5-184 Lower River -RM 0-98.5 Upper River Segment Geomorphic Reaches 1-6 .Middle River Segment Geomorphic |Geomorphic reaches that uniquely divide the Major Hydrologic Segments based on geomorphic2GeomorphicReachReaches1-8 characteristics. Lower River Segment1 Geomorphic Reaches 1-6 Main Channel Habitat: Main Channel -Single dominant main channel. Split Main Channel -Three or fewer distributed dominant channels. Multiple Split Main Channel -Greater than 3 distributed dominant channels. Side Channel -Channel that is turbid and connected to the active main channel but represents non-dominant proportion of flow'. Tributary Mouth -Clear water areas that exist where tributaries flow into Susitna River main Main Channel Habitat stor).or side channel habitats (upstream Tributary habitat will be mapped as a separateeffort). 3 Mainstem Habitat Off-Channel Habitat Types2 Off-Channel Habitat: Tributary Habitat Side Slough:Overflow channel contained in the floodplain,but disconnected from the main channel.Has clear water.34 Upland Slough:Similar to a side slough,but contains a vegetated bar at the head that is rarely overtopped by mainstem flow.Has clear water34 Backwater:Found along channel margins and generally within the influence of the active main channel with no independent source of inflow.Water is not clear. Beaver Complex -Complex ponded water body created by beaver dams. Tributary Habitat: Tributaries will be mapped to the upper limit of Susitna River hydrological influence. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Pa 111 Decembe 2 RL.STUDY PLAN Level Unit Category Definitions Main Channel Mesohabitat Pool -slow water habitat with minimal turbulence and deeper due to a strong hydraulic control. Glide -An area with generally uniform depth and flow with no surface turbulence.Low gradient;0-1%slope.Glides may have some small scour areas but are distinguished from pools by their overall homogeneity and lack of structure.Generally deeper than rifles with few major flow obstructions and low habitat complexity. Run -A habitat area with minimal surface turbulence over or around protruding boulders with generally uniform depth that is generally greater than the maximum substrate size.*Velocities are on border of fast and slow water.Gradients are approximately 0.5%to less than 2%. Main Channel and Tributary Generally deeper than riffles with few major flow obstructions and low habitat complexity.”4 Main Channel and Tributary Mesohabitat Riffle -A fast water habitat with turbulent,shallow flow over submerged or partially submerged gravel and cobble substrates.Generally broad,uniform cross-section. Low gradient;usually 0.5-2.0%slope.5 Rapid -Swift,turbulent flow including small chutes and some hydraulic jumps swirling around boulders.Exposed substrate composed of individual boulders,boulder clusters,and partial bars.Lower gradient and less dense concentration of boulders and white water than Cascade. Moderate gradient;usually 2.0-4.0%slope.§ Tributary Mesohabitat: Tributary mesohabitats within the hydrologic zone of influence will be typed using the classification system described in Table 9.9-3,above. 5 Edge Habitat Length of Shoreline Habitat Calculatiorr will be determined by doubling the length of the mapped habitat unit. 1.For the purposes of this RSP,classification of the Lower River segment will stop at Level 2.A classification system for the Lower River segment is still in development pending determination of Project effects in the Lower River. 2.All habitat within this designation will receive an additional designation of whether water was clear or turbid within the database. 3.The terms Side Channel,Slough,and Upland Slough are similar but not necessarily synonymous with the terms for macrohabitat type as applied by Trihey (1982)and ADF&G (1983). 4.All slough habitat will have an associated area created during the mapping process to better classify size.A sub-sample of side sloughs and upland sloughs will be mapped to the mesohabitat level using the tributary habitat classifications system shown in Table 9.9-3 5.Adapted from Moore et al.2006. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-112 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-6.Locations,descriptions and selection rationale of proposed Focus Areas for detailed study in the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River.Focus Area identification numbers (e.g.,Focus Area 184)represent the truncated Project River Mile (PRM)at the downstream end of each Focus Area. Habitat Types Present .2Location(PRM)2/=Fishusein | Instream Flow2|2)|=|S&S |1980s __|Studies in 1980s 5 2);2)/2/2/s]27] E 2 s|s/|5/ep]/2/0/18]2PyaAea|GO/S/1S5|8la}]z2zls|el]2 m |2FocusCommonGeomorphicryzLength|2]3/3 a]3 =S &S |o ==Area ID Name Description Reach >a (mi)=(=|o;,F}/a|/a]a}wo o *a c |Rationale for Selection Focus Area approximately 1.4 ....Area-|WatanaDam__|miles downstream of dam MR-1 195.7 |1847]10 |x]x |x wa |wa |wa |ava |ava |Focus Area-184 length comprises 50%of MR-1 reach length (2 miles long)and contains split 184 site main channel and side channel habitat present in this reach. ,Focus Area-173 contains a complex of main channel and off-channel habitats within wideFocusStephanLake,|Wide channel near ;Paeneen :.Area-|Complex Stephan Lake with MR-2 1754 |1736 |18 |x x |x|x WA |WA |N/A}NWA |NA foocnan Apres ers eae compren'y wen WN?React MR is eerie long173Channelcomplexofsidechannelsandchannelisgenerallystraightwithfewsidechannelsandmoderatefloodplainwi(2-3 main channel widths). Focus Stephan Lake Area with single side The single main channel with wide bars,single side channel and moderate floodplain channel Area-Simple Channel channel and vegetated MR-2 173.0 |171.6 1.4 X X |X N/A |NVA |N/A |NYA |NAA |width in Focus Area-171 are characteristic of MR-2.Reach MR-2 channel morphology is generally 171 island near Stephan Lake straight with few side channels and moderate floodplain width (2-3 main channel widths). Focus Single channel area at Focus Area-151 is a single main channel and thus representative of the confined Reach MR-5. nee Portage Creek Portage Creek confluence MR-5 152.3 |151.8 0.5 X X X X Portage Creek is a primary tributary of the Middle Segment and the confluence supports high fish Focus Side channel and side Focus Area-144 contains a wide range of main channel and off-channel habitats,which are : Side Channel slough complex : common features of Reach MR-6.Side Channel 21 is a primary salmon spawning area.Reachwe21approximately2.3 miles MR 145.7 |144.4 13 X x X |x|x x x x x MR-6 is 26 miles long (30%of Middle Segment length)and is characterized by a wide floodplain upstream Indian River and complex channel morphology with frequent channel splits and side channels. .tan Di Focus Area-141 includes the Indian River confluence,which is a primary Middle Susitna RiverFocusAreacoveringIndianRiver;;,f Area-Indian River and upstream channel MR-6 443.4 441.8 16 X X X X X X X X X tributary,and a range of main channel and off-channel habitats.Channel and habitat types 444 complex present in Focus Area-141 are typical of complex Reach MR-6.High fish use of the Indian River mouth has been documented and DIHAB modeling was performed in main channel areas. Focus Channel complex including we Focus nea:pamary reali S a wompex ore channe'se slosh ae ae ouArea-|Gold Creek Side Channel 11 and MR-6 140.0 |138.7 1.3 x |x ]x x}|x}]x]|x]x]x abliats,ach oF which suppor”high adult and pavente lish use.Lomprex channet srucnre © 438 Slough 14 Focus Area-138 is characteristic of Reach MR-6.IFG modeling was performed in side channel:habitats. ::Focus Area-128 consists of side channel,side slough and tributary confluence habitat featuresFocusSkullCreekChannelcomplexincludingthatarecharacteristicofthebraidedMR-6 reach.Side channel and side slough habitats supportArea-Slough 8A and Skull Creek MR-6 129.7 |128.1 1.6 X|X]X]X]xX X X X X aria :.ns :Complex F high juvenile and adult fish use and habitat modeling was completed in side channel and side128sidechannelsloughhabitats. :Focus Area-115 contains side channel and upland slough habitats that are representative of MR-Focus Area 0.6 miles downstream ....:Area.|LaneCreek |of Lane Creek,including MR-7 65 |1153}12 |x|xx x |x x |x Re eeeeee ee et nedel FT an eo ata slough115UplandSlough6Apomaryhabitatforjuvenilefishandhabitatmodelingwasdoneinsidechannelanduplandsloug Focus Whiskers Focus Area-104 contains diverse range of habitat,which is characteristic of the braided, Area-Whiskers Slough Complex MR-8 106.0 |104.8 12 X|xX |X {|X}xX]X X X X X X |unconfined Reach MR-8.Focus Area-104 habitats support juvenile and adult fish use and a rangeSlough::a :104 of habitat modeling methods were used in side channel and side slough areas. Focus Area-TBD Lower Susitna River (TBD)TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-113 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-7.Partial list of river cross-sections,and flow and water surface elevations measured in 2012 on the Susitna River between River Miles 75 and 184.The list does not include additional measurements in late September/October. Those measurements had not been processed at the time this study plan was prepared. River High Q Trip Medium Q Trip Low Q Trip Mile2 Date Q,cfs?|Gold Ck4 Date Q,cfs?|Gold Ck'Date Q,cfs?|Gold Cké 184.1 6/17/12 27,698 32,800 8/6/12 14,707 19,300 9/15/12 7,838 10,800 183.4 6/18/12 24,493 32,200 8/6/12 14,419 19,300 9/15/12 7,630 10,800 182.8 6/18/12 25,389 32,300 8/6/12 |stage only5 9/15/12 |stage only5 182.6 6/19/12 26,676 34,400 8/6/12 |stage only®9/15/12 |stage only® 182.2 6/19/12 27,619 35,500 8/6/12 14,239 19,100 9/15/12 7,714 11,000 181.7 6/19/12 27,886 35,500 8/7/12 14,775 18,300 9/15/12 8,353 11,100 180.3 6/20/12 29,426 36,300 8/7/12 14,183 18,200 9/15/12 8,310 11,300 179.8 6/20/12 29,128 36,400 8/7/12 |stage only5 9/15/12 |stage only® 178.9 6/20/12 29,645 36,200 8/7/12 14,705 18,200 9/15/12 8,689 11,500 176.8 6/21/12 30,866 37,500 8/7/12 14,345 18,100 9/14/12 8,361 10,100 176.1 6/16/12 29,756 36,900 8/7/12 14,799 18,000 9/14/12 8,738 10,000 173.9 6/21/12 31,240 37,500 8/8/12 14,559 17,300 9/16/12 10,768 16,500 172.0 6/21/12 31,163 37,300 8/8/12 |stage only®9/16/12 |stage only® 170.0 6/21/12 30,571 37,000 8/8/12 |stage only®9/16/12 11,082 17,200 167.0 6/22/12 31,121 36,700 8/8/12 14,568 17,200 9/16/12 11,137 17,600 164.5 6/22/12 32,265 36,700 8/8/12 14,655 17,300 9/17/12 14,619 20,200 150.2 6/25/12 32,162 35,900 8/10/12 14,588 16,800 149.5 6/26/12 30,487 35,800 8/10/12 |stage only® 148.7 6/26/12 30,036 36,000 8/10/12 15,351 16,800 9/29/12 18,488 20,000 147.6 6/25/12 33,180 36,400 8/10/12 |stage onlys 144.8 6/26/12 32,114 35,600 |8/10/12 14,941 16,600 143.2 6/27/12 |31,030 34,400 8/12/12 |stage only5 142.3 6/27/12 31,396 34,500 8/12/12 17,354 18,100 9/29/12 18,131 19,800 142.1 6/27/12 31,868 34,800 8/12/12 |stage only5 141.5 6/27/12 31,949 35,100 8/12/12 |stage only5 140.8 6/27/12 31,121 35,000 8/12/12 |stage only5 140.2 6/28/12 30,330 32,900 8/12/12 17,006 18,100 139.4 6/28/12 |29,492 32,900 8/12/12 |stage only® 138.9 6/28/12 29,753 33,200 8/12/12 16,798 18,100 9/29/12 18,301 19,800 138.5 6/28/12 30,583 33,200 8/12/12 16,803 18,000 138.2 6/28/12 30,555 33,300 8/12/12 |stage onlys 136.7 6/29/12 30,378 32,300 8/13/12 16,350 17,800 9/30/12 17,619 17,800 136.4 6/29/12 |29,071 32,200 8/13/12 |stage only5 135.7 6/30/12 28,039 31,000 8/13/12 16,449 17,700 135.4 6/30/12 28,230 31,000 8/13/12 16,344 17,700 134.7 6/30/12 |28,203 31,000 8/13/12 |stage only5 134.3 6/30/12 |27,893 31,000 8/13/12 16,409 17,600 9/30/12 17,382 17,700 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-114 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN River High Q Trip Medium Q Trip Low Q Trip Mile?Date Q,cfs?|Gold Ck!Date Q,cfs?|Gold Ck'Date Q,cfs?|Gold Ck4 133.3 THANM2 26,756 30,000 |8/13/12 |stage only5 132.9 THAMN2 26,943 30,000 |8/13/12 |stage only® 131.8 THAMN2 26,526 29,700 8/13/12 15,627 17,400 131.2 7/212 25,463 28,000 8/13/12 |stage only®10/1/12 15,568 15,500 130.9 7/2/12 26,166 27,900 8/14/12 16,491 17,400 130.5 7/22 29,715 28,000 8/14/12 16,275 17,300 130.0 7/22 25,678 27,900 8/14/12 |stage only5 129.4 7/212 29,046 27,800 |8/14/12 16,039 17,300 428.1 713/12 28,628 31,200 8/14/12 |stage only5 126.6 73/12 28,243 30,900 |8/14/12 16,330 17,300 124.4 7/42 26,748 30,000 8/15/12 15,926 17,600 123.3 7/412 27,608 29,900 8/15/12 16,078 17,600 10/1/12 15,582 15,400 122.6 7/5/12 27,248 28,800 8/15/12 |stage only5 121.8 7/5/12 26,427 28,500 8/15/12 |stage only5 120.7 7/5/12 26,132 27,900 8/15/12 16,161 17,600 10/1/12 15,582 15,300 120.3 762 23,875 24,700 8/15/12 |stage onlys 119.3 7/62 23,331 24,100 8/15/12 |stage only® 119.2 7/62 22,890 24,000 |8/15/12 16,287 17,600 117.2 7/6/12 22,687 23,400 8/15/12 |stage only§ 116.4 T7H2 20,715 21,600 8/16/12 16,005 17,600 10/3/12 13,998 13,500 115.0 TITHMN2 20,656 21,600 8/16/12 |stage only® 114.0 WTN2 20,747 21,100 8/16/12 |stage only§ 113.0 TTM2 20,665 21,000 |8/16/12 16,136 17,600 10/3/12 14,323 13,400 112.7 7/8/12 23,766 28,600 8/16/12 |stage onlys 112.2 7/8/12 25,006 28,900 |8/16/12 |stage only® 111.8 7/8/12 25,958 29,100 |8/16/12 |stage onlys 110.9 7/8/12 25,860 29,100 8/16/12 |stage only5 110.0 7/9/12 28,329 31,900 8/16/12 16,311 17,500 10/3/12 13,476 13,400 108.4 7/9/12 28,296 31,900 |8/17/12 stage only® 106.7 7/9/12 28,825 31,800 8/17/12 15,254 18,000 10/3/12 14,172 13,400 104.8 8/17/12 16,394 17,900 103.0 7/9/12 28,409 31,600 8/18/12 15,508 16,300 10/4/12 14,558 13,700 102.4 8/18/12 15,278 16,100 101.5 8/18/12 15,362 16,000 101.0 8/18/12 15,377 16,000 100.4 8/19/12 15,345 16,400 99.8 7102 |26,635 26,900 8/19/12 |stage only5 99.6 10/4/12 14,575 13,700 95.0 7TA1M2 |46,499 22,600 |8/20/12 |40,623 16,600 10/5/12 |39,065 43,800 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-115 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN River High Q Trip Medium Q Trip Low Q Trip Mile2 Date Q,cfs3 |Gold Ck!Date Q,cfs}|Gold Ck!Date Q,cfs?|Gold Ck4 94.0 7/112 45,118 21,800 8/20/12 40,261 17,400 87.7 8/21/12 46,330 18,500 86.9 72/12 44,469 20,100 8/21/12 46,197 18,500 84.6 8/22/12 41,697 18,200 83.0 71212 42,550 19,700 8/22/12 |stage only® 82.0 713/12 41,895 18,800 8/22/12 |stage only5 81.2 8/22/12 |40,468 17,600 80.0 8/23/12 36,933 16,100 79.0 THA3N2 |41,975 18,700 |8/23/12 |stage only' 78.0 8/23/12 37,947 15,800 76.0 8/24/12 36,503 16,200 1 Data are provisional pending final review and approval 2 Approximate river mile to be superseded by new river mile system 3 Provisional measured flow at cross-section location 4 Provisional online flow data for USGS gaging station no.15292000 (Susitna River at Gold Creek) 5 Only stage was measured at these cross-sections. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-116 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-8.Summary of gaging stations established on Susitna River in 2012. Approximate River Gaging Station Mile Segment Susitna River near Cantwell (ESS80)223.2 Upper Susitna River Susitna River below Deadman Creek (ESS70)184.0 Middle Susitna River (above DevilSusitnaRiverbelowFogCreek(ESS65)173.9 Canyon)@ Levis Susitna River above Devil Creek (ESS60)164.3 Susitna River above Portage Creek (ESS55)148.6 Susitna River at Curry (ESS50)120.7 .... Susitna River below Lane Creek (ESS45)113.0 conyea)River (below Devils Susitna River above Whiskers Creek (ESS40)103.3 y Susitna River at Chulitna River (ESS35)98.1 Susitna River below Twister Creek (ESS30)95.9 Susitna River at Susitna Station (ESS20)20.7 Lower Susitna RiverSusitnaRivernearDinglishnaHill(ESS15)19.9 Susitna River below Flat Horn Lake (ESS10)13.7 Notes: 1.ESS=AEA Susitna River Surface-Water Station. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-117 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-9.Susitna Real-Time Reporting Network Stations. Site Name Short Name Parameters Upper Segment AEA Gaging Stations 15291500 Susitna River Near Cantwell ESS80 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Middle Seqment AEA Gaging Stations Susitna River Below Deadman Creek ESS70 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Below Fog Creek ESS65 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Above Devil Creek ESS60 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Below Portage Creek ESS55 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River at Curry ESS50 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Below Lane Creek ESS45 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Above Whiskers Creek ESS40 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River at Chulitna River ESS35 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Below Twister Creek ESS30 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Lower Segment AEA Gaging Stations 15294350 Susitna River at Susitna Station ESS20 discharge,water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Near Dinglishna Hill ESS15 water level,water and air temperature,camera Susitna River Below Flat Horn Lake ESS10 water level,water and air temperature,camera Repeater Stations Mount Susitna Near Granite Creek ESR1 air temperature Repeater,East of ESM1,First Potential Site ESR2 air temperature Repeater,Dam Site to Glacial Repeater ESR3 air temperature Curry Ridge near McKenzie Creek Repeater ESR4 air temperature Curry Pt.To State Park Repeater ESR5 air temperature,camera State Park over Devils Canyon Repeater ESR6 air temperature,camera Portage Creek Repeater ESR7 air temperature ESR2 to ESS80,ESM2 link ESR8 air temperature Base Stations Talkeetna Base Station ESB2 N/A Notes: 1.ESS=AEA Susitna River Surface-Water Station. 2.ESR=AEA Susitna River Repeater Station 3.ESB=AEA Susitna River Base Station Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-118 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-10.Period of record of flows measured by the USGS on the Susitna River. Drainage Elevation Gage Approximate |Area (ft,NGVD |Period of Record Number |Site River Mile (mi?)Latitude Longitude |29)of Measured Flows Susitna River near 27 years:1957-1976;15291000 Denali 290.6 950 63.10389 147.51583 2,440 1978-1986 Susitna River near 17 years:1961-1972;15291500 Cantwell 223.2 4,140 62.69861 147.54500 1,900 4980-1986 Susitna River at 57 years:1949-1996;15292000 Gold Creek 136.6 6,160 62.76778 149.69111 677 2001-2044 Susitna River at ;15292780 Sunshine 83.9 11,100 62.17833 150.17500 270 5 years:1981-1986 15294350 | Susitna River at 25.8 19,400 |61.54472 |150.51250 40 19 years:1974-1993SusitnaStation.,,.years: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-119 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-11.Period of record of flows measured by the USGS on tributaries of the Susitna River. Approximate River Mile in Susitna Drainage Elevation Gage River at Area (ft,NGVD |Period of RecordNumber|Site Confluence |(mi?)Latitude Longitude |29)of Measured Flows 15291200 Maclaren River near)959.7 280 6311944 |14652917 |2,866 |28 years:1958-1986 Chulitna River near 20 years:1958-1972;15292400 Talkeetna 98.0 2,570 62.55861 150.23389 520 4980-1986 Talkeetna River .15292700 near Talkeetna 97.0 1,996 62.34694 150.01694 400 47 years:1964-2011 Willow Creek Near 25 years:1978-1993;15294005 Willow 48.4 166 61.78083 149.88444 350 9001-2011 15294345 |Yentna River near 276 6180 |61.9861 |150.65056 80 6 years:1980-1986SusitnaStation Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-120 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-12.List of 33 Index of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA)parameters (The Nature Conservancy 2009). IHA Parameter Group Hydrologic Parameters Ecosystem Influences 1.Magnitude of |Mean or median value for each e Habitat availability for aquatic organisms monthly water calendar month ¢Soil moisture availability for plantsconditionseAvailabilityofwaterforterrestrialanimalsSubtotal12parameterseAvailabilityoffood/cover for forbearing mammals e Reliability of water supplies for terrestrial animals ¢Access by predators to nesting sites e Influences water temperature,oxygen levels,photosynthesis in water column 2.Magnitude |Annual minima,1-day mean e Balance of competitive,ruderal,and stress-tolerant organisms and duration |Annual minima,3-day means e Creation of sites for plant colonization of annual |Annual minima,7-day means e Structuring of aquatic ecosystems by abiotic vs.biotic factorsextremewater|Annual minima,30-day means e Structuring of river channel morphology and physical habitat conditionsconditionsAnnualminima,90-day Means e Soil moisture stress in plants ;e Dehydration in animalsAnnualmaxima,1-day mean e Anaerobic stress in plantsAnnualmaxima,3-day means e Volume of nutrient exchanges between rivers and floodplainslinevane30cdymeanseDurationofstressfulconditionssuchaslowoxygenandconcentrated _chemicals in aquatic environmentsAnnualmaxima,90-day means e Distribution of plant communities in lakes,ponds,floodplainsNumberofZero-flow days e Duration of high flows for waste disposal,aeration of spawning beds inBaseflow:7-day minimum flow/mean channel sedimentsflowforyear Subtotal 12 parameters 3.Timing of |Julian date of each annual 1-day e Compatibility with life cycles of organisms annual maximum ¢Predictability/avoidability of stress for organismsextremewater|Julian date of each annual 1-day Access to special habitats during reproduction or to avoid predationconditionsminimumeSpawningcuesformigratoryfish e Evolution of life history strategies,behavioral mechanismsSubtotal2parameters 4.Frequency |Number of low pulses within each e Frequency and magnitude of soil moisture stress for plants and duration Water Year e Frequency and duration of anaerobic stress for plantsofhighand|Mean or median duration of low e Availability of floodplain habitats for aquatic organismslowpulsespulses(days)a e Nutrient and organic matter exchanges between river and floodplainNumberofhighpulseswithineach©Soil mineral availabilityMeannea,duration of high e Access for waterbirds to feeding,resting,reproduction sites pulses (days)e Influences bedload transport,channel sediment textures,and duration ofsubstratedisturbance(high pulses) Subtotal 4 parameters 5.Rate and |Rise rates:Mean or median of all e Drought stress on plants (falling levels) frequency of positive differences between e Entrapment of organisms on islands,floodplains (rising levels)water consecutive daily values e Desiccation stress on low-mobility streamedge (varial zone)organismsconditionFallrates:Mean or median of all changes negative differences between consecutive daily values Number of hydrologic reversals Subtotal 3 parameters Grand total 33parameters Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-121 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-13.List of 34 Environmental Flow Component (EFC)parameters (The Nature Conservancy 2009). EFC Type Hydrologic Parameters Ecosystem Influences 1.Monthly Mean or median values of low flows during each |e Provide adequate habitat for aquatic organisms low flows calendar month Maintain suitable water temperatures,dissolved oxygen,and water chemistry e Maintain water table levels in floodplain,soil moisture for plants Subtotal 12 parameters e Provide drinking water for terrestrial animals e Keep fish and amphibian eggs suspended e Enable fish to move to feeding and spawning areas e Support hyporheic organisms (living in saturated sediments) 2.Extreme Frequency of extreme low flows during each e Enable recruitment of certain floodplain plant species low flows Water Year or season e Purge invasive,introduced species from aquatic and riparian communities Mean or median values of extreme low flow Concentrate prey into limited areas to benefit predators event: e Duration (days) e Peak flow (minimum flow during event) Timing (Julian date of peak flow) Subtotal 4 parameters 3.High flow |Frequency of high flow pulses during each Water |e Shape physical character of river channel,including pools,rifflespulsesYearorseasoneDeterminesizeofstreambedsubstrates(sand,gravel,cobble) e Prevent riparian vegetation from encroaching into channelMeanormedianvaluesofhighflowpulseevent:|»Restore normal water quality conditions after prolonged low flows, flushing away waste products and pollutantseDuration(days)«Aerate eggs in spawning gravels,prevent siltationePeakflow(maximum flow during event) e Timing (Julian date of peak flow) e Rise and fall rates Subtotal 6 parameters 4,Small Frequency of small floods during each Water Applies to small and large floods: floods Year or season e Provide migration and spawning cues for fish e Trigger new phase in life cycle (i.e.,insects) Mean or median values of small flood event:«Enable fish to spawn in floodplain,provide nursery area for juvenile fish e Duration (days)*Provide new feeding opportunities for fish,waterfowl e Peak flow (maximum flow during event)e Recharge floodplain water table ©Timing (Julian date of peak flow)Maintain diversity in foodplain forest types through prolonged e Rise and fall rates inundation (i.e.,different plant species have different tolerances) e Control distribution and abundance of plants on floodplain Subtotal 6 parameters e Deposit nutrients on floodplain 5.Large Frequency of large floods during each Water Applies to small and large floods: floods Year or season e Maintain balance of species in aquatic and riparian communities Mean or median values of large flood event: e Duration (days) e Peak flow (maximum flow during event) Timing (Julian date of peak flow) e Rise and fall rates Subtotal 6 parameters Grand total 34 parameters e Create sites for recruitment of colonizing plants e Shape physical habitats of floodplain e Deposit gravel and cobbles in spawning areas e Flush organic materials (food)and woody debris (habitat structures) into channel e Purge invasive,introduced species from aquatic and riparian communities e Disburse seeds and fruits of riparian plants e Drive lateral movement of river channel,forming new habitats (secondary channels,oxbow lakes) e Provide plant seedlings with prolonged access to soil moisture Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-122 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-14.Schedule for implementation of the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study. .2012 2013 2014 2015 Activity Q1}Q2/Q3/]Q4}Q1/Q2)Q3}Q4)Q1}Q2 |Q3}Q4}Q1{|Q2 8.5.2 Existing Information and Need for Additional Information &A 8.5.4.2 River Stratification and Study Area Selection Compile aquatic habitat (RSP Sec 9.09)and geomorphology (see Section 6.8.4)characterization study results Identify proposed Focus Areas Refine Focus Areas and identify supplementary areas if needed for any _|a ee underrepresented habitats TWG confirmation of study areas ---o Review available data and modify or add Focus Areas and 4 Asupplementarysamplingareas TWG review of proposed area weighting factors to extrapolate modeled to non-modeled areas > TWG meeting on area weighting >----|A 8.5.4.3 Hydraulic Flow Routing > Review 2012 transect data RM 184 to 75 Develop draft mainstem (open-water)flow routing model Model verification using stage recorder data --op Identify need for additional data Distribute draft mainstem (open-water)routing model to TWG for review Collect additional channel and hydraulic data as needed Refine draft mainstem (open-water)flow routing model A Use draft model to support IFS,water quality,geomorphology,and fisheries 2013-2014 study efforts Refine mainstem (open-water)routing model using 2013 and 2014 data Distribute final mainstem (open-water)routing model to TWG for review --|A Use final mainstem (open-water)routing model for scenario evaluations > Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F Project No.14241 Pa 123 Decembe ? RL...STUDY PLAN 2012 2013 2014 2015 Q1|Q2]Q3/Q4/Q1|Q2}|Q3;Q4/Q1}Q2 {Q3/Q4jQ1{Q2Activity 8.5.4.4 Hydrologic Data Analysis Obtain existing daily flow records from USGS Obtain basin area calculations from GINA-UAF Calculate estimated trib accretion flows TWG review of hydrologic record of daily flow _- TWG review of representative years for modeling -A Collect 15-min stage records from mainstem,tribs and Focus Areas Develop hourly flow record for Focus Areas /other mainstem locations Develop hourly inflow for select tributaries Develop list of potential and recommended IHA-type parameters TWG review of selected IHA-type parameters -- Examine 2014 stage data and refine hydrologic record to support scenario evaluations TWG meeting to review complete hydrologic record --|A Use hydrologic record for scenario evaluations Vv8.5.4.5 Habitat Suitability Criteria Development Use 1980s Susitna data and other existing HSC curves to develop draft species/life stage HSC curves for the Lower and Middle Susitna River Propose target HSC species,life stages,substrate and cover -- TWG meeting on HSC/HSI and data collection study details -__--T Conduct HSC/HSI summer surveys (snorkel,seining,electrofishing) Conduct fish HSC/HS!winter surveys (underwater camera,b-- electrofishing) Conduct aquatic biota stranding and trapping surveys +-on Coordinate and review adult/spawning HSC data collected by Fish and Aquatic biotelemetry (see Section 9.06) Distribute preliminary findings of winter surveys to TWG --_-- Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-124 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2012 2013 2014 2015 Q1/Q02/03/]Q4/Q1/}Q2/Q3|Q4)/Q1);Q2 ;Q3}Q4}QI |Q2Activity Distribute preliminary results of HSC/HSI surveys and changes to draft HSC/HSI| TWG meeting on species and life stage HSC/HS|+-+---b--A Periodicity Review draft species and life stage periodicity data developed under Fish Distribution and Abundance (see Section 9.06) Identify specific HSC/HSI periodicity data needs -- Distribute HSC/HSI periodicity to TWG -_-i A -_-- TWG meeting on HSC/HS!periodicity used to mode!scenarios -|A Review and discuss implementation details of flow-dependent biological cue study Distribute initial study results to TWG Report on flow-dependent biological cues A 8.5.4.6 Habitat-Specific Model Development Habitat Model Selection Propose habitat models for Focus Areas and supplemental area -- TWG review and meeting on habitat model selection A----- Physical and Hydraulic Data Collection Collect data for digital terrain model L-- Collect x-section and stage:discharge data at Focus Areas and supplemental areas Collect substrate/cover data at Focus Areas and supplemental areas -_oop Provide summaries of data collection efforts A Hydraulic Model Calibration Aquatic Habitat Modeling -_A 8.5.4.7 Temporal and Spatial Habitat Analyses >>)>|>VvDevelop proposed methods for completing temporal and spatial Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F Project No.14241 Pa 25 Decembe 2 RL...STUDY PLAN 2012 2013 2014 2015 Q1/Q2}Q3/Q4]Q1/Q2]Q3 |Q4;Q1{Q2 |Q3}Q4{QI |Q2Activity analyses Review and discuss temporal and spatial analytical methods with TWG Distribute temporal and spatial analyses to TWG A VvApply temporal and spatial analytical methods A Develop proposed methods for overall sensitivity analyses of habitat indicators Review methods for sensitivity and analyses with TWG Conduct overall sensitivity analyses of modeling outputs A >Vv8.5.4.8 Instream Flow Study Integration -_ Reporting =A A Integrated Resource Analyses Legend: -Planned Activity ------Follow up activity (as needed) A Initial Study Report A Updated Study Report VvSusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy AuthorityFERCProjectNo.14241 Page 8-126 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-15.Common names,scientific names,life history strategies,and habitat use of fish species within the Lower, Middle,and Upper Susitna River,based on sampling during the 1980s (from HDR 2011). Common Name Scientific Name Life History Susitna Usage Arctic grayling Thymallus arcticus F 0,R,P Dolly Varden Salvelinus malma A,F 0,P Humpback whitefish Coregonus pidschian AF O,R,P Round whitefish Prosopium cylindraceum F O,M2,P Burbot Lota lota F O,R,P Longnose sucker Catostomus catostomus F R,P Sculpin Cottid spp.M1,F P Eulachon Thaleichthys pacificus A M2,$ Bering cisco Coregonus laurettae A M2,$ Threespine stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus A,F M2,S,R,P Arctic lamprey Lethenteronjaponicum AF O,M2,R,P Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha A M2,R Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch M2,S,R Chum salmon Oncorhynchus keta A M2,S Pink salmon Oncorhynchus gorbuscha A M2 Sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka A M2,$ Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss F O,M2,P Northern pike Esox lucius F P Lake trout Salvelinus namaycush F U Pacific lamprey Lampetra tridentata AF U Alaska blackfish Dalia pectoralis F U Notes: A=anadromous M1 =marine F =freshwater O=overwintering R=rearing P=present M2 =migration S=spawning U=unknown Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-127 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-16.Site-specific habitat suitability measurements recorded during 2012 at Middle and Lower Susitna River sampling sites,by fish life stage. Susitna River |River Fish Life Number of Segment Mile Site Name Habitat Type Stage Observations Middle 178.3 178.3R Side Channel Fry 6 Juvenile 4 Adult 5 Middle 176.6 Fog Creek mouth Tributary Mouth Fry 4 Adult 1 Middle 174.2 174.2L Mainstem N/A 0 Middle 144.4 Slough 22 Side Slough Fry 5 Adult 1 Middle 141.8 Slough 21 Side Slough N/A 0 Middle 141.2 Side Channel 21 Side Channel Fry 9 Adult 7 Middle 138.6 Indian River Mouth Tributary Mouth Fry 11 Adult 8 Middle 135.6 Slough 11 Side Slough Adult 8 Middle 133.9 Slough 10 Upland Slough N/A 0 Middle 133.7 Slough 9A Side Slough Adult 19 Middle 131.2 Unnamed Side Channel Side Channel Adult 11 Middle 131.1 4th of July Creek Mouth Tributary Mouth Fry 3 Adult 8 Middle 128.8 Slough 9 Side Slough Adult 15 Middle 125.3 Skull Creek Side Slough Adult 26 Middle 122.5 Slough 8B Side Slough N/A 0 Middle 121.0 Tulips Creek mouth Tributary Mouth N/A 0 Middle 115.0 115.0R Side Channel Fry 2 Middle 113.7 Slough 8 Side Slough Fry 4 Juvenile 1 Middle 113.6 Lane Cr Mouth Tributary Mouth Fry 2 Adult 1 Middle 112.5 Slough 6A Upland Slough Fry 15 Middle 101.4 Whiskers Slough Side Slough Fry 13 Adult 3 Middle 101.4 Whiskers Creek Mouth Tributary Mouth Fry 12 Lower 95.4 Cache Creek slough Side Slough Fry 6 Juvenile 1 Lower 95.4 Unnamed Side Channel Side Channel Fry 4 Juvenile 1 Lower 93.5 Unnamed Side Channel Side Channel Fry 4 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-128 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Susitna River |River Fish Life Number of Segment Mile Site Name Habitat Type Stage Observations Juvenile 1 Lower 91.6 Trapper Creek Side Channel Side Channel Fry 12 Juvenile 4 Lower 91.5 Trapper Creek Tributary Mouth Fry 4 Lower 91.5 Birch Slough Side Slough Fry 2 89.2 Birch Slough Side Slough Fry Lower 85.2 Sunshine Creek Side Channel Side Channel Fry 13 Juvenile 3 Lower 85.1 Sunshine Creek Tributary Mouth Fry 18 Lower 83.1 Rabideux Creek Tributary Mouth N/A Lower 77.0 Montana Creek Tributary Mouth Adult Side Channel Adult 10 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-129 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-17.Proposed substrate classification system for use in development of HSC/HSI curves for the Susitna-Watana Project (adapted from Wentworth 1922). Substrate Code Substrate Type Size (Decimal Inches)Size (mm) 1 Silt,Clay,or Organic <0.01 <0.1 2 Sand 0.01-0.10 0.1-2.0 3 Small Gravel 0.10-0.30 2.0-8.0 4 Medium Gravel 0.30-1.25 8.0-32 5 Large Gravel 1.25-2.50 32-64 6 Small Cobble 2.50-5.0 64-128 7 Large Cobble 5.0-10.0 128-256 8 Boulder >10.0 >256 9 Bedrock Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-130 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-18.Example of table that will be developed as part of the stranding and trapping analyses to illustrate the frequency of potential stranding and trapping events by month for a given Project operational scenario. Existing Condition Operating Scenario 1 Operating Scenario 2 Evaluation;zim igiei>ziaiMio Bi Pliolzimi@tielixizini@iaiheiolzim€xi i>iziai®MiaitiBio >1"/hour >2"/hour >4"/hour Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy AuthorityDecembeCyFOrrestNo.14241 Pa)31 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-19.Assessment of physical and biological processes and potential habitat modeling techniques. Habitat Types Physical and Tributary Biological Processes Mainstem Side Channel Slough Mouths Spawning PHAB/VZM PHAB PHAB/HabMap PHAB/RFR Incubation RFR/VZM PHAB PHAB/HabMap PHAB/RFR Juvenile Rearing PHAB/RFR PHAB PHAB/HabMap PHAB/RFR Adult Holding RFR RFR PHAB/HabMap PHAB/RFR Macroinvertebrates VZM/WP VZM/WP PHAB/HabMap/WP N/A Standing/Trapping VZM VZM VZM/WP VZM/WP Upwelling/Downwelling FLIR HabMap/FLIR HabMap/FLIR HabMap/FLIR Temperature WwQ WQ WQ Ice Formation IceProcesses/WQ/RFR_|IceProcesses/WQ/RFR_|HabMap/Open leads N/A Notes: 1.PHAB-Physical Habitat Simulation Modeling (1-D,2-D,and empirical);VZM-Effective Spawning and Incubation/Varial Zone Modeling;RFR-River Flow Routing Modeling;FLIR -Forward-looking Infrared Imaging;HabMap-Surface Area Mapping;WQ- Water Quality Modeling;WP-Wetted Perimeter Modeling. Table 8.5-20.Seasonal daylight and night downramping guidelines (Hunter 1992). Season Daylight Rates*Night Rates February 16 to June 15 (salmon fry)No Ramping 2 inches/hour June 16 to October 31 (steelhead and trout fry)1 inch/hour 1 inch/hour November 1 to February 15 2 inches/hour 2 inches/hour Notes: 1.*Daylight is defined as 1 hour before sunrise to 1 hour after sunset. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-132 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.5-21.Conceptual Comparison of Multiple Resource Indicators of the Effects of Alternative Operational Scenarios for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project.Indicators to be coordinated with resource-specific working groups. (Indicators providedfor illustration purposes only) Existing Conditions (EC-01) Scenario 1 (Ver.1/20/15) (OS-01) Scenario 2 (Ver.02/14/15) (OS-02) Scenario 3 (Ver.02/14/15) (OS-03) Average monthly MIF(cfs) Max generation Nov-Mar (cfs) Min generation Nov-Mar (cfs) Max generation Apr-Oct (cfs) Min generation Apr-Oct (cfs)RunDescriptionRamping Rates Evaluation Indicators Weighted average generation Nov-Mar (MWh)@ PowerWeighted average generation Apr-Oct (MWh)® Weighted annual dependable capacity (MWh)® Max 1-day flow (cfs)wet/avg /dry wet /avg /dry wet /avg {dry wet /avg /dry wet /avg /dry Min 2-day low,Nov-Mar (cfs) Min 2-day low Jul-May as %of 2-day max Jul-Sep Freshets (Apr-Jun){Qc]>1.5*[Qc-1+Qc2+Qc-3}/3 HydrologicWater Particle Travel Time,25%exceedance,Apr- Jun Other IHA statistics Average reservoir volume (KAF)wet /avg /dry wet /avg /dry wet/avg /dry wet/avg /dry Min 2-day reservoir volume (KAF)ReservoirWeighted annual euphotic zone (KAF) Other Biological/recreation indicators RampingWeighted avg annual total,Middle Susitna,reach- averaged (ra)downramping events >1-inch pr hour® Weighted average annual total,Middle Susitna, reach-averaged downramping events >2-inch per hour® Weighted average annual total,Middle Susitna, reach-averaged downramping events >4-inches per hour ©VarialZoneMedian annual,MS,reach-averaged (ra)channel width-ft © Total varial zone,MS,12-hr/12-hr,ra,median annual channel width-ft © Total varial zone,MS,12-hr/7-day,ra,median annual channel width-ft © Total varial zone,MS,12-hr/30-day,ra,median annual channel width-ft © Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-133 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Evaluation Indicators Existing Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 (Indicators provided for illustration purposes only)Coo Oso ')(5.02).4/5)OS03).4/18) Chum spawning habitat,Devils Canyon to Three Rivers Confluence (DCto3R)reach-averaged(ra), gross channel width,(ft)© Chum effective spawning/incubation,DCto3R- reach-averaged (ra),channel width accounting for dewatering,groundwater/surface water interactions, water quality effects,net width (ft}© Coho effective spawning/incubation,DCto3R-ra,net width,(f}© Sockeye effective spawning and incubation, DCto3R-ra,slough/side channel,net width (ft}© Pink effective spawning/incubation,DCto3R-ra, slough/side channel,net width (ft}® Coho juvenile habitat,open-water,DCto3R-ra, channel width (ft)@ Coho juvenile habitat,ice-period,DCto3R-ra, channel width (ft)© Chinook juvenile habitat,ice-period,DCto3R-ra, slough/side channel width (ft)©PotentialSalmonHabitatGrayling average minimum spawning,Watana Dam to Devils Canyon (DtoDC),reach averaged WUA, (ft2)® Northern pike effective spawning and incubation, DCto3R-reach averaged slough/side channel net width (f}®OtherFishWet meadow area,reach averaged,DC to3R,post- licensing yrs 10-20 (acres) Scrub thickets,reach averaged,DC to 3R,post- licensing yrs 10-20 (acres)@ Floodplain plant community colonization area,reach averaged,DC to 3R,post-licensing yrs 10-20 (acres)® Other riparian indicatorsRiparian Devils Canyon to 3R,tour boat accessible,May to Sep (days) Three Rivers to Sunshine,days channel exceeds minimum boating depth,May to Sep Devils Canyon to 3 R,upstream extent of January ice cover for snow machine travel Other recreation/access indicatorsRecreation Other potential indicators of Project effects such as: =minimum slough area, 2 percent of river length mobilized-Das downstream extent of ice-free zone, 2 30-day wetted euphotic streambed, «other reaches,seasons,life stages,mesohabitats to be determined in consultation with TWGOtherAquatics Notes: 1.Average of five select years weighted by likelihood of occurrence (Dry Year*0.077,Somewhat Dry Year*0.231,Average Year * 0.462,Somewhat Wet Year *0.115,Wet Year*0.115)(values are for illustration purposes only) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-134 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.5.10.Figures STUDY _INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR FISH AND AQUATICS INSTREAM FLOW STUDY Glacier and Fish DistributionGeomorphologyIceProcessesAquaticHabitatsGroundwaterRiparianInstreaaterQualiRunoffChangesandAbundance Study (Sec 6.0)(Sec 7.6)(Sec ite Study (Sec 9.09)Study (Sec 7.5)Flow (Sec 8.6)(Sec 5.0)(Sec 9.06) oo SSS ----=;-_-- .;Confirm Focus Hydraulic Distribution,seh 1}Mainstem Geomorphic Mainstem .: ,Early Fish Life (ice Processes)Delineation of Mesohabitat S Areasand |and Habitat Ms emeity and History,Timing, Flow Routing Mainstem Reaches Delineations "e.empling a svenhn Abundance Data and Movement -2014 --t 4-2014(Q1-2014)(Q4-2012)(Q4-2012)(Q2-2013)(02-2013)(a4-2014)Data (Q ) aeCol bwater],Hydraulic Data at,: t Routing Wg Focus Areas atid,logy 'Supplemental Areas .'ipl |oO Index Executable Varial Zone Effective Multiple . Hydrologic (SMainstem (stranding and Spawning and spre.and Fish passageAlterationFlteRouting)>trapping)>Incubation W Sahted C @ fi it(Q1-2014)OM del Modeling Analyses eighte onnectivity ode (04-2014)(24-2014)Usable Area (Q4-2014) (Q1-2013)(Q4-2014) ee é :.Project Other ResourceMainstem:River instream Flow .:oe ate(Open-water)a asses Productivity Study (Fish and Cperauens Studies (Wildlife Flow Routing (Sec 9.12)Y Study Riparian)(Sec Modeling (Sec [Sec 10), Model (Sec 8.5),(Sec 9.08)8.5 and 8.6)B54 33)see 19],eteon.Integrated eC Ae],€lc. Resource =Analysis (Sec 8.5.4.8} Figure 8.5-1.Study interdependencies for Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F Project No.14241 Pa 135 Decembe 2 RL...)STUDY PLAN DDGa@& ky EY FH ED (EY EY Side StoughwyWw©|S Figure 8.5-2.Relative amounts of habitat types in different areas of the Susitna River at seven mainstem discharges.Source:Klinger-Kingsley et al.(1985). :n .°;°2 LEG EGmsGG Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-136 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Tributary Tibutary Hyporheic Zone Figure 8.5-3,Habitat types identified in the middle reach of the Susitna River during the 1980s studies (adapted from ADF&G 1983;Trihey 1982). Chinook Juvenile oStoy)1oOfos)1L1wweSeemmeen,°>lSuitabilitySoNDnwwee ee T ooree Susitna River (Turbid) -----Susitna River (Clear)adoO2.0 Velocity (ft/s)oSoO2|oiee ee 2.5 Figure 8.5-4,Example HSC curves for rearing juvenile Chinook salmon in the Middle Susitna River developed during the 1980s instream flow studies.Source:Suchanek et al.1984b. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-137 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN TEMPERATUREC& iINTERGRAVEL _WATER TEP.m % oe #@ ©@ a 4 _ -he SURFACS PWATERTEMP.C 3 ne eee a C 2 eel C a : C nm rr.1 be wa ”f= - "® fs)USER RUEEE CEES REO E ESSE RES ROR SEES ee ee 1 8 1 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 8/1/82 8/16/82 4/1/82 4/16/82 Dey 1 =2/27/82 Figure 8.5-5.Mean daily intergravel and surface water temperature data from a spawning site in Skull Creek.Source: Trihey (1982). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-138 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN hy Ses. 6,Os:Prey 4 fe : a 6,4"a.fg sexPESRNanes Legend weet OOM Proposed |.Instream Flow Transect €Flow Arrow Re Aare vfacana,Dann anDIHAB©Project River Mile 1 0 1,000 a sae .ee eee Feet-=IFG ©Breach Location of ewe RIHAS Side Channel or Slough a(with associated breaching discharge)Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983DataSources:See Map References ;;;Map Author R2 ,joatte ZablotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_(FS_HistStudies.mxd Figure 8.5-6.Locations of instream flow transects and model types applied during the 1980s Su-Hydro studies in lower and upper Side Channel 11 and in Slough 11, located near Gold Creek.Breaching flows based on those studies are also depicted for various side channel and side slough habitats. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Autharitv Fl >roject No.14241 Pac 39 Decembel ; Rt ..--)STUDY PLAN mes3cosPsgenRieetariesPielienyeersT3Ee,toskdaks«.GPonWearepesaefeedWgSahl wyiHeetl>SeASGcSie7,oywage FN,JNeeohiLas(fe iaiteeeefonisaSi aeekoyeater Ce) @@agE>ENERGY AUTHORITY instream Flow Transect Proposer€Flow Arrow 1 angi bam aDIHABOProjectRiverMile01,000 ar ee .eee Feet ede-=IFG ©Breach Location of EE of MM IFS Site; mm RJHAB Side Channel or Slough{with associated breaching discharge)Projection;Alaske Albers NAD 1983 .Date Created:11/27/2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author R2 -Joetta ZablotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File.Map_RSP_IFS_HistStudies.mxd Figure 8.5-7.Locations of instream flow transects and model types applied during the 1980s Su-Hydro studies in the Whiskers Slough complex.Breaching flows based on those studies are also depicted for various side channel and side slough habitats. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-140 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 5)GR SO FootCeisUnit- i Area Sampled FloyLerr BANK TRANSECT 7 TRANSECT 6 TRANSECT 5 TRANSECT 4 GRIDTypically1000FaetTRANSECT 3 TRANSECT 2 TRANSECT 1 Figure 8.5-8.Transects and shoreline and mid-channel sampling cells associated with RJHAB modeling (Marshall et al. 1984). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-141 December 2012 RL..-.STUDY PLAN 1s4ew 153°W 152°W 151°W 150°W 149°W 148°1470TTT,oe ' :. '{v ydbe ve Mckinley Park %,a ee S Legend a Oe a & wee,'.-).1 Denali National):|7 .F3x«Proposed Watana DamSite |yi i Boe aan 'p yee t pte des "§.° z F :rs Park an reserve ;;/.Cantwell|4dgSusitnaRiverSegmentsee;oo hp re : "||etge Upper Z "aeveMiddle. es "ueioe.zagoLower{i re '' 'g di,4 ;_-1 5 ¢i) Susitna Basin 7 i 1 a<>|a?pe &r Ley e actChutitna |Susitna p,i ..el v4 fle,"|a ae ,ea ae - "s Gold Creek a "; ; vo Ge ety z \.Sherman Ps .:1: .a r=} RL &© . | dEonSodwo ao z 'oeFLath ."4 1 OT yeet mz 3 GME ENERGY AUTHORITY BE Sy caer To "os . . 3 Ao,ok a Data Sources:See Map References %one Sg .: 0 30 N"Susitna Flats ee mi "Lak Cla ki ..°State Game - : Provection Aine em AD 1983 . e Clark 'i rr 7 a te Created:141,1 RE ?N:lyayvtongate Ba a A Refuge |i :Map Author R2-Joatts Zablotney z=ationa oe ;"Anchorape File:Map_RSP_IFS_RiverSegments.mxd 13ParkandPreserve'ry apes 7,peatwieran:i ue slet Figure 8.5-9.Map depicting the Upper,Middle and Lower Segments of the Susitna River potentially influenced by the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-142 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Dam/Reservoir Operations Model (8.5.4.3.2) Unregulated and Alternative Operational Scenarios Reach (6.5)/Hydrology (8.5.4.4) Habitat Type (9.9)/Focus Area Selection (F,G,WQ, WR,B,W) Representative Water Years Seasonal Storage &Release Hourly Dam Releases Flood Flows Biological Information ®Periodicity (9.6,8.5.4.5) *Distribution (9.6,9.12,8.5.4.5) =Abundance (9.6) =Seasonal Habitat Utilization (9.6, 8.5.4.5) HSC/HSI(8.5.4.5,9.6) ®Riparian (8.6,11.0) Vv Mainstem Flow Routing HEC-RESSim,HEC-RAS (7.6,8.5.4.3) =Accretion _..--+ | I Habitat Specific Models i (8.5.4.6)(see next page) i ] ®Habitat vs.Flow (1D /2D) ®Connectivity and Passage (9.12) =Effective Spawning/IncubationI.Riparian Vegetation [=Varial Zone (12-hr,7-day,30-day) y™Stranding 1 Trapping =Attenuation =Celerity Hourly Q,WSE by River Mile *. . +2,rae .*te 2 =«te *a ve \ Riverine Processes =Geomorphology (6.0) *Sediment Transport *Future Channel Changes ®Ice Processes (7.6) ®Large Woody Debris (LWD)(6.6) s Groundwater (7.5) =Water Quality /Temperature (5.0, * .* .*|7. 5%.**,eieSe Off-channel Sloughs (8.5) =Riverine Processes =Backwater/Overtopping ®Habitat Specific Modeling =Fish Passage (9.12) Main Channel / Split Channels (8.5) =Riverine Processes ®Habitat Modeling ®Fish Passage (9.12) Tributary Deltas (6.6,8.5) =Riverine Processes ®Habitat Modeling =Fish Passage (9.12) Riparian (8.6) =Riverine Processes =Vegetation Modeling Hourly /Daily /Monthly Habitat by Unregulated and Alternative Operational Scenarios Integrated Resource Analysis (8.5.4.8) ®Fish Habitat (F) =Water Quality (WQ)# =Geomorphology (G)# =Riparian (B). =Wildlife (W). =Cultural (C) Recreation (R) Aesthetics (A) Subsistence (S) Project Economics Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-143 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN |Habitat Specific Models (8.5.4.6) I Fish and Aquatic Indicators I=Habitat (WUA)vs.Flow (2-D/1-D) I*Breaching flows (connectivity) I Inputs I =Flows at Dam Site (RSP 7.7) \®Accretion (RSP 8.5) ®Mainstem Physical/Hydraulics (RSP 7.5,8.5}!=Mainstem Open-water Flow Routing (RSP 8.5) f=Fish Passage (9.12)1 =Mainstem Ice Process Flow Routing (RSP 7.6)--_>>=Effective Spawning/Incubation t-""]=Reach-Scale Habitat Distribution (RSP 9.9) 1 =Reach-Scale Fish Distribution (RSP 9.6) I «Fish Distribution by Habitat Type (RSP 9.6) I =Sediment (RSP 6.5) ,=Large Woody Debris (RSP 6.5) \®Focus Area Physical/Hydraulics(RSP 8.5) =Winter rearing =Varial Zone Analyses (12-hr,7-day,30-day) #Stranding ®TrappingIEE p=== Unregulated Flows Alternative Operational Scenarios (8.5.4.3.2) (Representative Water Years)(Representative Water Years)(8.5.4.4.1.1.2 Geomorphology Modeling (Reach Scale)(6.0) ¢Aggradation «Degradation ¢Channel Change *Turbidity *Habitat Unit Distribution and Abundance | i | Existing Time Step 1 Time Step 2 Channel Conditions Channel Conditions Channel Conditions l j | l i || Geomorphology (6.0)Ice Processes (7.6)Groundwater/Surface Water Quality (5.0) "Reach Scale *Reach Scale Water Interactions (7.5)||"Reach Scale ¢Aggradation *Ice Cover ®Reach Scale *Surface Water Temp *Degradation *Ice Dam Formation *Geohydrologic Processes *Dissolved Oxygen ¢Channel Change *Winter Flow Routing *Regional Aquifers ¢Metals *Turbidity *Focus Area =Focus Area *Nutrients *Habitat Unit Change *Habitat Unit Water Level *Upwelling =Focus Area =Focus Area *Breaching Flows *Downwelling *Surface Water Temp *Scour and Fill *Ice Dam Formation *Intergravel Water Quality *Intergravel Water Quality «Large Woody Debris *Habitat Unit Change Figure 8.5-10.Conceptual framework for the Susitna-Watana Instream Flow Study depicting integration of habitat specific models and riverine processes to support integrated resource analyses;and integration of riverine processes to develop fish and aquatic habitat specific models. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-144 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN ot }.po wee BE ';he a a me ne -* Legend DE ; e .Get,gE vie woh,a a wot c «1 .' >I ] a nF ae :yee Ee ” . te ee a 7.) Susitna River Segments OF oy:po fer 6t ye """Proposed.%:a Ba,©Sey . "'SitKoreUppera-3 a nr ot Ro Watana Dam Site Q Asc Middle Pe ev .;a4 s ry -' ,.!Roere Lower ceo ny , ° . |oo ¢"of.MRSS iDwuGeomorphicReach"4 RY =- MR-4Z\instream Flow Focus Area |,:*&YN MR-3 MR-1 fa /\!oO -ae Q @ mo : 4 :3 your x cr ",'Bo gy ©Gold creek i 3 Fog '.my ky 9 MR-2 , .'G Ad °aot ve So i he PG °ao '!ee *a *...Sherman ""o ;yet ''". .(')an .rs -&so. .° . ' .we '.>'ar ;aan ,im a . no . :'ff€MR6 2.4)--ee . a ee .@ LS ao eos .ot .t t °AY oll i 4 é eo.':<* pes es >)ia "Ye,:a sored -i we "f-ao ¢'-i ua ”-; :' :r).an i ':' :OL NGXSo"a :oo 2 ,:". t fr ; v.' i '*2 : '2 oa :\ves . 1L\. : L)Petersville . MR-7 a 3) g ' o o x at *4 .,=.Jt=.°oe MR-8 ee " a 4 " °fi a a Tapper Creek |,YA Talkeetna ::"(Nye |Betton ttre{3 ee .;a '|Map Author R2-Joetta Zabloiney H 4 ;re ne File:Map_RSP_IFS_GeomorphReach_MRmxd Figure 8.5-11.Map of the Middle Segment of the Susitna River depicting the eight Geomorphic Reaches and locations of proposed Focus Areas.No Focus Areas are proposed for in MR-3 and MR-4 due to safety issues related to sampling within or proximal to Devils Canyon. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Alaska Energy Authority Pa 145 Decembe 2 Ri )STUDY PLAN MR-8 oe,;Legend ;: ”4 Susitna River Segments 7 p- i Talkeetna Loe oe Reres Middle i Trapper »: Creek er Lower LR-1 . . 7 {a , wu Geomorphic Reach a x 7 Z\__Instream Flow Focus Area fey at /ae s¥uR2 .!7.. aS a,&os >i ee,%\”a)'+S 0)Ct Need ? 3 ge OAT NS ps8aof:Pe ie2]<we hot,wooom)9°#nd aSkwentnaRB):,i Be ; Ad }; . . - Sy a roofs i r Y CL 5 *re St a?: a ¥'fp.lr rer an eran iywillowCr”02 yt '.s } :r {'"i "ot t Z 4)Willow a ie ht 4 a8pypatyWasillafswe o hey t wes ' ox)f=abéskiENERGYITY , 0 fe Data Sources:See Map References a 0 10 N +4 ret ror -i4EN *"fey '4,7 £2 |projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983eatoe"oo Date Created:11/27/2012 :a ee Map Author R2-Joetia Zablotney P ae the Men File:Map_RSP_IFS_GeomorphReach_LR.mxd cry Cook Inlet.o Anchorage 12.3)ee”-- Figure 8.5-12.Map of the Lower Segment of the Susitna River depicting the six Geomorphic Reaches.Focus Areas have not been identified in this segment but will be considered pending results of open-water flow routing modeling. Alaska Energy AuthoritySusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project December 2012FERCProjectNo.14241 Page 8-146 Op:ty >, miteB)sf:at, 4pase,"yt Std aa&- . a . -3" oe «gilTee MEG'45.- womae|6Bay SS ae e'sS307 ESfacyyayivaoh : " ”ey ® z gt E oS S-% = &34a$s|$33| SN3 I §es8#28on!S828Fru! h gets|eee3éasry<<Page o Ofu imo” 2 _ o < e o oO -_- Le) =<i E oO 8 s a o < = 9 2 3£ Bi): 5 Sy é 2 9 Pa s 2 EY Ps 8 n3 8% 52 ez uw= 2s Fy 2a2oe=ik=2 az eee oO co<¢ =” Sz &$8222 36 £&£ua BH89ae Vo 8ge©ao REVISED STUDY PLAN 2 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe47 13.Map showing Focus Area 184 that begins at Project River Mile 184.7 and extends upstream to PRM 185.7.The Focus Area is located about 1.4 miles downstream of the proposed Watana Dam site near Tsusena Creek. PaProjectNo.14241Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Figure 8.5 F RL ..--)STUDY PLAN VAR ie ; ;tn 8!Ais cose Sine :see NCE ey aime ONES RETESETceSES Sa,'s ae BEaesiPee otwe'i \TINS yeh aA tes aCoNBeWeRONoeeenPAEaEEMOT ax>Te=>og @MME>ENERGY AUTHORITY -_cnq@umee=instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)yitapuaede yf 7 oie!Yacaua Damn"°€=FlowArrow 0 4,000 ipso s aeeFeet©ee O _s Project River Mile fede Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 ee "Data Sources:See Map References Map Autor R2 ,joatte Zablotney :rad mond HN OOH =Map;Key".Orthophoto Source:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd _ae ora Wa id Figure 8.5-14.Map showing Focus Area 173 beginning at Project River Mile 173.6 and extends upstream to PRM 175.4.This Focus Area is near Stephan Lake and consists of main channel and a side channel complex. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-148 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN a setay:> AEE TN whl Oe ak ( oR ER BAngieeatass.bY Fak,BAIS q aERAa Ny BS ¢oat Bete shaBe AU oy3COE7Reies2bd,Fh elsreOMee Ree ee UP ILRI Sn i,Sax age : Aik AAMC W'S OI et at bi peste y ryay'ar ;<7.”gy Se Re 'i Hecate te ren eee 2 pay:ee ne pe-oy"q SisBAIASPSSHORSE , seeeISREee ¥ae oDLegend exe =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)nu Hrupusuile*uand Dan :€Flow Arrow ae:,.a rede "4AX07MEFSFocus Area,Oo Project River Mile aging f oodogLIALFeProjection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Seated 1S Data Sources:See Map References Men.Rites R2 _petta Zabletney ers Ma ,Key: Orthophoto Source:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fite:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd rhea EA pt Figure 8.5-15.Map showing Focus Area 171 beginning at Project River Mile 171.6 and extends upstream to PRM 173.This Focus Area is near Stephan Lake and consists of main channel and a single side channel with vegetated island. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F "roject No.14241 Pa 49 Decembe! RL...)STUDY PLAN ang ane.Aes,©faa).: RPh pe atteSagINS lg KS,SERRE oral BeraneveryeDNsrereereas - ya,SELES x "S rN f co PoLipa+3 eae '4 KS ee |f :|ey Reever 'ae Led aMRRteanceae. =at ae==>a AP So 4 (NE ENERGY AUTHORITY J i equ»ZzInstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)yy ie : € -sFlowArrow ve O Project River Mile Propuseely |s)YWiatand Dain7pae .ote SG aeae-TA -(ian31a7M*IES Focus Area,camel wideweOSeTProjection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 rel earl:*,Data Sources:See Map References veRaton R2 penta Zebiotney a Map;Key'Orthophoto Source:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fite:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd taie§oh 4 Figure 8.5-16.Map showing Focus Area 151 beginning at Project River Mile 151.8 and extends upstream to PRM 152.3.This single main channel Focus Area is at the Portage Creek confluence. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-150 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN ea tel Svs Sele S tee te )nor ies Ree en PRUE ERG=SCA aN an SET ae oe ER EE SOCAN6RateCREOEsPayeeROCCOanaee 145 0 ESAT ER ES,Teva U:Ay ids aye Raa ; *Reo avet anes eer pean, "ke =D Be wg 4=>ane aL fp(NEE ENERGY AUTHORITY biet ep,euwew =|nstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)ie Proposed. 4 .bye Yiatand Dusn' a te gone wy -€FlowArrow 0 1,000 Ae Ca ae .;:--Feet "fg ORNS Oe aOoProjectRiverMile.,'POLIS,pee"2),OF ML ™IFS Focus Area ;cn ae oe bt id.now ie Mere 4 -Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 PID yDataSources:See Map References Meo ee aera eablotn ey 4%Map:Key'Orthophoto Source:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR mxd wt2 fama Figure 8.5-17.Map showing Focus Area 144 beginning at Project River Mile 144.4 and extends upstream to PRM 145.7.This Focus Area is located about 2.3 miles upstream of Indian River and includes Side Channel 21 and Slough 21. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authoritv Fl roject No.14241 Pac 51 Decembe!: RL...)STUDY PLAN Hea bE y"y es7sRNsEekRt BOYBa:NONE,of naFe ;att .wae a Ne eeLAT ms a Pay og wea ns Ny R Ne af 'feSRAWagHaeeewate» meme [nstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)Ni ye Propyoed gfFPWatOamn:.€Flow Arrow 0 1,000 age. fe)Project River Mile a was Feet _27 MES IFS Focus Area, Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 } Data Sources:See Map References Map Author R2 _Joutta ZablotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure 8.5-18.Map showing Focus Area 141 beginning at Project River Mile 141.8 and extends upstream to PRM 143.4.This Focus Area includes the Indian River confluence and a range of main channel and off-channel habitats. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-152 December 2012 REvisep STuDY PLAN aax) 2a Seinen ge ey Be heassaSoewt*th ¥: Tea esgeal.SeraeBe .ws ON aeSe,Resi nae pad!*%,ae"a Pr es 'Ue . ' Z '=ie | eee:eG 7 5RAYeeesAPODF124periSreeseypictoie Propusus,,fsYWaandDan? wet . ede.a)27 ME"IFS Focus Area,oe nd . q@uueee =instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) €=Flow Arrow t 0 1,000 ©__s-Project River Mile >Feet Projection:Alaske Albers NAO 1983 .Date Created:11/27/2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author.R2 -Joetta ZabloineyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fite:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd te,r Figure 8.5-19.Map showing Focus Area 138 beginning at Project River Mile 138.7 and extends upstream to PRM 140.This Focus Area is near Gold Creek and consists ofa complex ofside channel,side slough and upland slough habitats including Upper Side Channel 11 and Slough 11. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F,?roject No.14241 Pa 53 Decembe:) RL.STUDY PLAN i a bow Aey PYLg,pbows :uv",Pyeerie:Tass ae oddPon:tk Ney FaeSffltIe'ee 3st Be 'Die ANE ;pct ae Soe TE Boe Rates Diether aces"DP AE ERO.f LOT Ay fey ¥NEN MAO Ra vay 2 1Legendtya>ENERGY AUTHORITY 1 i,@umme =|nstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)N 4 Hropuseder 4VlatanuDaan:€Flow Arrow 0 1,000 ar fe)Project River Mile :nna Feet .<7 MM IFS Focus Area,EL atProjection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Nel aeDataSources:See Map References :vegAathoe 2 _Joctta zablotney rn 'sha Map;Key'.Orthophoto Source:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fite:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd (aN Aetht oh Figure 8.5-20.Map showing Focus Area 128 beginning at Project River Mile 128.1 and extends upstream to PRM 129.7.This Focus Area consists of side channel,side slough and tributary confluence habitat features including Skull Creek. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-154 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Re en eae ee eT OL ey Fit Cage OTR Op Ol hhg Me ODL POR hii be:Sih Fite gd Be NeySProtaDateyNay2201aeReaeeRitedin!Nie nt <4 Ah toy aoe SRS ae Debt taL Ta tort eek eatinreir EOERN ie Ree bone eas eat |TOO ag SM ye Tg ine ae ary ratght Sy Sr West et Pe ee PS ot uf ral,600 eters clang GooseoeiiaRAT Ee AY Bee a ates eT Pe Ae on TE a.)Ci roese ae ier ok t¢,adh Pees : ae preg te eS Ee)DO MEK SIE ak pacPEED olG :te vod Sy&One wy al .We LEA A ah ES,é'5 vine eo yt* rapeys We I aeDEWeENGESheCeAmnaeeaex re ete :fa.eon tScaatlieen,n et ;hae CENCE SAL ahs AEGEAN EH Pipe tT gy TB Ah i Ne ee :Sp ee RAGS ¥EDL NS paeRioee vale haere too bis doy a ovens Oe As YT,ey _nS rte,8 eet)SORae Dake ed Son cee +eS Ae ey TES UNE ROS REC Ie aa rf'(=assem@ME>ENERGY AUTHORITY eumep instream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent) € -sFlowArrow 0 1,000 F ::-e a ee ee FeetOoProjectRiverMile Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Data Sources:See Map References Men eet ee vtoineyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure 8.5-21.Map showing Focus Area 115 beginning at Project River Mile 115.3 and extends upstream to PRM 116.5.This Focus Area is located about 0.6 miles downstream of Lane Creek and consists of side channel and upland slough habitats including Slough 6A. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F Project No.14241 Pa 95 Decembe 2 RL.STUDY PLAN en ehS67Erin:nt ataemeLONEROTE A aoe geen1 Cea -aieai'ae, f "asya "aaes"UN;iy, eyamsyTTD iran§L”*Sere.eaeeeeeAe osAgOTs"aeeeeOeTaN=a sen te:3.wat ae'a8NSIShaanasyas Legend j (BME ENERGY AUTHORITY foe "eeq@umee=[nstream Flow Focus Area (Upper and Lower Extent)c ;qe ON Hrupodetl"F1 . :P : ,Viatani bam'€=Flow Arrow a 0 1,000 te)Project River Mile "=a Feet Projection:Alaska Albers NAO 1983 Data Sources:See Map References wap halter R2 Jere ZablotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project Fite:Map_RSP_IFS_FocusAreas_MR.mxd Figure 8.5-22.Map showing Focus Area 104 beginning at Project River Mile 104.8 and extends upstream to PRM 106.This Focus Area covers the diverse range of habitats in the Whiskers Slough complex. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-156 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Elevation(feet,NAVD88)Q =31,000 cfs Average V =8.0 fps Average D =6.9 ft 0 500 Station (feet) River Mile 170.0,June 21,2012 FS 260+«2SO 2404-a x2A 220RS >)=200 0 1000 River Mile 76.0,August 24,2012 Q =36,900 cfs Average V =4.9 fps Average D =6.5 ft 2000 3000 Station (feet) 4000 5000 Figure 8.5-23.Examples of cross-sections established on the Susitna River in 2012 at River Miles 170 and 76. Figure 8.5-24.Output from ADCP from one pass across the Susitna River at River Mile 170 on June 21,2012. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-157 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 RL...STUDY PLAN Generated:2012-10-25 21:37 (ADT) Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Data Network Diagnostics The following information ard links to data is for internaluse for Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Data Network staff and project cooperatozs.Real-time data is preliminary and may xot be final.Proper use,QA/QC,and citation is the responsibility of each war andproject.This site is monitored for access.For more information,please contact Austin McHugh at 360-441-2023 or Michael Lilly at 907-479-3891. All times below and in date aquisition syste exein Alaska Standard Time (AST) [Legend|Graphs |Hourly Averages Station Name /Location Raw Data tieponies Days Old |Battery |Jol Pam Data Looe Voltage Voltage Temperature Upper Sasitma Watershed Meteorological S |ESGI (Seasonal Station,No Telamatry)[iA Ee Wives OW Ferconens WRcamoecrlt Proce cand Pesrvavas smn eraek fueweestomrlllAwenereol Off-Ice Glacial Site (ESG2)|rw |2012-10-25 20:00:00 |att (Le,J eed b vias |-1enemas| Upper Susitna Watershed Gazing Stations Susitne River Naas Cantrell (ESS2D)tae i 2012-10-25 20:00:00 Keel ireered Read ctdstcn ll Kereanaerd0'Lamnscotl Remnsventiecdsnevereal |Susitna River Below Deadman Creek (ESS7 aw |2012-10-25 20:00:00 alam fiF tenn QS ell Middle Susitra Watershed Gaging Stations usitna Rive |2012-10-25 20:00:00 Susitna River Above Devil Creek (£5960)2012-10-25 20:00:00 Susitna River Below Port ek (ES 2012-10-25 20:00:00 Bia,at mob:hon hives ik we ine ar eg an Fanty+8 ae Susitna River at ©ESS50 2012-10-25 20:00:00 Eee feejusitnaRiverBelowLreek(E5S4 2012-10-25 20:00:00 Susitna River Above Whiskers Creek (ESS40)2012-10-25 20:00:00 Susitna River at Cloilitna River (E9935)2012-10-25 20:00:00 Susitna River Below Twister Creek (£5530 mit ay ray way { raw |aH | ra { my I 2012-10-25 20:00:00 |on Tie.a i ee Fo Nis)kf amy ate Of 08 a 'Wwe my i «a lane | Lower Susitna Watershed Gaging Stations ee.om 1 Re emRAAAS AIA TA Ae An Anan Figure 8.5-25.Susitna Network Stations Diagnostics Screen.Data fields are color coded to allow quick scans for evaluating station conditions.Email and text messaging are used to communicate warning conditions and non-reporting stations. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-158 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN =SUSITNA-WATANA HYDROELECTRIC PROJECTi_-__SUSITNA RIVERATCURRY Currest Conditions HE trical Data Station htomation mages Susitna River at Curry (ESS50) Current Conditions Location:Mkt BastbCoordinates:N 62617 18°,W 150.01500°Be vation:509 Feet Conditions at Susitna River at Curry (ESS50)as of 2012-10-26 08:00:00 AST Remote Camera Images "Diagnostic Data Weather Dota. -HourlyAwe rage Hotriy Aue rageSagREEsovieweena stfy'vortage ta Alr Temperature va HSolarPatecatguta7V(iol) Data Logger 19°F 4 "Water Data aTeinperatreae:i Cureat nae i Hourly Awe rage :impli;Water He lghtoverweTihewLat34noun'(Pet)2 Sensor PTH {3t Note:Camera mages tpdat eve ty i xr bowrdurhg davighth the wheter (et):|Nae Temperatare oc seaton.Rebr tb tmestamp os currentmagesHrtectInbmation. -24 Hour Summary (Most recent readings first)- Tme aeimtetistara Watr Helgit PTD Wate r Tempe ratare Figure 8.5-26.Typical AEA gaging station current conditions reporting page. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-159 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 RL...STUDY PLAN "«,-coy eyLegendpf"ae ,arart:'eg a ,"sy :.te wo r . .e wn Susitna River Segments y :og ve '””Praposed %,oy 4 ° .x may .>News Upper pag mee 3 oe ¥Watana Dam Site ] Wee Middle . ef - Ste 4 :: . 2'. :Neem Lower ew @ :awmGeomorphicReachaMR-5 MR-4..,c '©@ Winter Habitat Use Sampling Site § ,MR-3 )MR-1 7 Yr -e .me :'y f Q -'f : ;, ;we . '!Z.cr "a yw 3 -°Gold Creek 3 3 ;Fog .-8)x : ;ro MR-2woe-i ey )i {° ;,3c S.. an aiid hg g a Go 2 fe)a woe,we :J ,Is ar)”Ja ee, Sherman -i "4 yal .*<r '° ' A MR6 ;* ry Rd ¥top)tn Fe e "aa ''.da 'ek¢f Slough8A Le "4 on 9 ee vo.ea oe,fyfe\P |., 2 & o a te &x 7". ; 5 <ad ' ¥ru 2 %:-ae » : _f " \.Cy @ ,"fy RY we ;:: -t fy f°med Q Petersville MR-7 en ery fs :aa io, 3 as 4 ?},Pf i ;.}., .,a 4 \ e Whiskers -a "' -g Loe 2)=WA Slough Bo (BE ENERGY AUTHORITY ry ,6 .'we Data Sources:See Map References.MR-8 'i ei Lg 10 ON'4mad:f St te aee ml ”f 3 'jection:Trapper Creek \__4 Talkeetna -"-a7 "s Dew Crewe 1272012 ''f 3 "3 Map Author.R2 -Joetta Zablotney ;4 : .a File:Map_RSP_IFS_WinterHabUse_MR.mxd Fe ik oi aa Figure 8.5-27.Geomorphic Reaches and winter habitat use sampling areas in the Middle Susitna River Segment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-160 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN si as;Bs Fahey he Sere fasbartORESCEsigsaoeabaFaiaacaekLictho tad'on eae ie a;Tienes ee 084 Aeaki - *Noa oe ." .7 ayieneSEESete aresa om *,uo " "qs ht ae a8 'a Ba Oe bEbgt,9a TE Eawea,&f,'.oes i.sf.; Syee"1.%,(i.a +?wf alityCog». ip 'PGi 2 He aeSeateA,ty "==Legend ee j j i Propussil.@ Surface and Intergravel Temperature ©Project River Mile 4 %neorn gp!:@ 00 and Intergravei Temperature ew Active Fish Sampling :1e _wedsrerun a©Piezometer &Under-Ice Fish Sampling oe 'a7 MAIES Focus Area) A\Stage Recorder @)Underwater Fish Observation Camera Projection;Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Date Created:11/27/2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author.R2 -Joetia ZablotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_IFS_WinterHabUseSites.mxd Figure 8.5-28.Location of proposed winter fish habitat use sampling sites at Whiskers Slough in the Middle Susitna River Segment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority F Project No.14241 Pa 61 Decembe 2 RL...STUDY PLAN er,EY:.tine ony eae "s .5 ce .*'th ho aten ”.om in "os mes '64 .4 ys 'Acre:SP,wee a.wee Af FEN hata a Rate eRe wayMe.o fie}pw,2 AT we A ae oe ok ateeesae,:BAAN BUCS y "er Reels eat RN is)Bae at Sel Lone er ta cadalpia %8yy.:ry 33,Ge ea 4 =ve 2 ¢,:Can er =D 4 'w id iP}'oaaLat'f a :f 4 nah Ie 7 A Lg i J ae "tet PneetbeebeAEASapiaA).ve :33a yl beaeaed)7 a *"et S.F ae ES oe 5 ed BRO OF 3d D AAs pyran toes st ”"rary rarLegend=>Ses go ea.Mbjet @ Surface and Intergravel Temperature ©Project River Mile y . @ DO and Intergravel Temperature awe Active Fish Sampling 0 1,000 © Piezometer i)Under-Ice Fish Sampling Feet AA Stage Recorder @)Underwater Fish Observation Camera Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Date Created:11/27/2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author.R2 -Joetta ZabloinayOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File:Map_RSP_IFS_WinterHabUseSites.mxd Figure 8.5-29.Location of proposed winter fish habitat use sampling sites at the Skull Creek Complex in the Middle Susitna River Segment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-162 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Stranding Area: gradient <critical valuegradient<critical value|ryand coverVyWy 3 | Streambed Trapping Area Stranding Area: , Figure 8.5-30.Cross-sectional conceptual diagram illustrating stranding and trapping areas. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-163 December 2012 RL..-_)STUDY PLAN LAhsieyBeesfortepebeesresmay ;vig S48 ar&.4ies:Nd Soff ;Bey "paths %!aap Pr we 'oyiat'i serraaPdegetbeeeCNteKaheEnereins.:Aft LOR aries4tPay4S,GSEMoheltba PETA oh sceRiRhe0 +oseSwe<¥=e<yeSes"5sayyouFrBi.ee,3..?wayoxseNyaNeee)Fit:arsiae,?ta:oyaoeizKren2-D Fine Mesh €=Flow Arrow ey 2-D Coarse Mesh ©Project River Mile a o -_4,0002-D Coarse Mesh (Upland)Feet Oo Breach Location of Side Channel or Slough Proposyd«faYouurDam:3 Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1983 Date Created:11/28/2012DataSources:See Map References Map Author:R2 -Joetta ZabiotneyOrthophotoSource:2011 Matanuska-Susitna Borough LIDAR &Imagery Project File.Map_RSP_IFS_ModelingExample mid 4 : Figure 8.5-31.Conceptual layout of 2-D coarse and fine mesh modeling within the proposed Whiskers Slough Focus Area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-164 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Potential spawning poacctccccccscs >cell at time step Tx (suitable D,V,&substrate) Cell does not count towards Assess cell conditions effective habitat.Restart at Tx+1 based on cell accounting for next time mainstem flow/stage step unless spawning period complete.* Upwelling No presentat Tx+1 Yes Cell dewatered at Tx+1 Upwelling decreased at Tet H-Yes Yes No Cell scouredH-Yese at Ty41 Incubation period complete at Tx+2,3,4.. No No Cellfrozenr--Yes at Ty+1 No y Potential spawning cell at time step Ty, Assess cell conditions at Tx+2,3,4.,based on mainstem flow/stage Cell water quality unsuitable at Tx+1 No ->W--Yes Cellarea initiating at T,contributes to total effective spawning/incubation within habitat unit.Process repeated for each cell area within habitat unit at Ty and each hour time step of spawning period. *If subsequenttime stepis still within the spawning period and the cell still meets criteria for the duration of incubation period,effective habitat forthiscellwouldbeweightedaccordingtothedurationoftheremainingspawningperiod. Figure 8.5-32.Conceptual diagram depicting the Effective Spawning/Incubation Model. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-165 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Dry Zone Maximum stage during previous 12 hours Varial Zone Minimum stage during previous 7 days Continuously Wetted Zone Figure 8.5-33.Conceptual framework of the varial zone model. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-166 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Flow(cfs)=oSSoSo1|/12-Hour Maximum 7-Day Minimum 30-Day Minimum 12-Hour Minimum WettedWidth(feet)wifoessSoS612-Hour Maximum | |30-Day Minimum 12-Hour Minimum 7-Day Minimum 10/1/1994 11/1/1994 100 +12-Hour/12-Hour Varial Zone954aa90\ 85 5 80 + 100 +12-Hour/7-Day _Varial Zone Transect 5 3 955 =oh290"t== Eyyn 8-4 a80+ q 12-Hour/30-Day Varial Zone95Lo \90 \ 0 200 400 600 Station (feet) Figure 8.5-34.Illustration of 12-hour/12-hour,12-hour/7-day,and 12-hour/30-day varial zones modeling scenarios assuming single transect analyses (adapted from Hilgert et al.2008). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-167 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN sooo,-Monthly Flow Time Series Flow/Habitat Relationship 60000 +Steelhead Spawning Flow(cfs)FS340000 7 oe 9 +, J F M AM J J A S O N OD MonthWUA(ft/1000ft)20000 7 Habitat Time Series op 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Flow (cfs)TotalHabitatArea(acres)_»oOAverage Year07TT-¥7 T T T T Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Baseline -------Scenario 1 Figure 8.5-35.Example time series analysis. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-168 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN BREACHING FLOW ADJUSTMENT HABITATAVAILABILITYINDEX(WUA/WSA)MAINSTEM OISCHARGE zr .STRUCTURAL HABITAT QUALITY ADJUSTMENT a8 a<3=222 |--___aoa n ees,;zis SS Ala,=HAlus sorts eo peetecc-ee SHlus Gz "='SA \7 "\ MAINSTEM DISCHARGE > -2%az MODELED SPECIFICaaAREA(M)CURVEzoze\hexzu DERIVED NON-MOOELED a z x SPECIFIC AREA (SA)CURVE= MAINSTEM DISCHARGE Figure 8.5-36.Conceptual figures illustrating procedure used for deriving non-modeled specific area (sa)Habitat Availability Index curve using a modeled curve,as applied during the 1980s Su-Hydro Studies (see Steward et al.1985; Aaserude et al.1985).The procedure included lateral shifts (upper figure)due to adjustments from differences in breaching flows (Qms Qsa)as well as vertical shifts (middle figure)proportional to structural habitat indices (SHIsa/SHIms)to account for differences in structural habitat quality.The lower figure shows final hypothetical modeled and non-modeled specific area curves. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-169 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.Riparian Instream Flow Study 8.6.1.General Description of the Proposed Study 8.6.1.1.Riparian IFS Goal and Objectives The goal of the 2013-2014 Riparian Instream Flow Study (hereafter Riparian IFS)is to provide a quantitative,spatially-explicit model to predict potential impacts to downstream floodplain vegetation from Project operational flow modification of natural Susitna River flow,sediment, and ice process regimes.To meet this goal,a physical and vegetation process modeling approach will be used (Figure 8.5-10).First,existing Susitna River groundwater and surface water (GW/SW)flow,sediment and ice process regimes will be measured and modeled relative to floodplain plant community establishment,recruitment,and maintenance requirements. Second,predictive models will be developed to assess potential Project operational impacts to floodplain plant communities and provide operational guidance to minimize these impacts. Third,the predictive models will be applied spatially in a Geographic Information System (GIS) to the riparian vegetation map produced by the Riparian Botanical Survey Study to produce a series of maps of predicted changes under alternative operational flow scenarios. The Riparian IFS approach and format have been written to address,and to parallel,the study format proposed in the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)Riparian IFS Request (May 31, 2012). Riparian IFS objectives are as follows: 1.Synthesize historic physical and biological data for Susitna River floodplain vegetation, including 1980s studies,studies of hydro project impacts on downstream floodplain plant communities,and studies of un-impacted floodplain plant community successional processes. 2.Delineate sections of the Susitna River with similar environments,vegetation,and riparian processes,termed riparian process domains,and select representative areas within each riparian process domain,termed Focus Areas,for use in detailed 2013-2014 field studies. 3.Characterize seed dispersal and seedling establishment groundwater and surface water hydroregime requirements.Develop a predictive model of potential Project operational impacts to seed dispersal and seedling establishment. 4.Characterize the role of river ice in the establishment and recruitment of dominant floodplain vegetation.Develop a predictive model of potential Project operational impacts to ice processes and dominant floodplain vegetation establishment and recruitment. 5.Characterize the role of erosion and sediment deposition in the formation of floodplain surfaces,soils,and vegetation.Develop a predictive model of Project operations changes to erosion and sediment deposition patterns and associated floodplain vegetation. 6.Characterize natural floodplain vegetation groundwater and surface water maintenance hydroregime.Develop a predictive model to assess potential changes to natural hydroregime and potential floodplain vegetation change. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-170 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 7.Develop floodplain vegetation study,Focus Area to riparian process domain scaling and Project operations effects modeling. 8.6.1.2.Riparian IFS Analytical Framework and Study Interdependencies Figure 8.5-10 depicts the overall analytical framework of the Instream Flow Studies commencing with the Reservoir Operations Model (ROM)that will be used to generate alternative operational scenarios under different hydroregimes.The ROM will provide the input data that will be used to predict hourly flow and water surface elevation data at multiple points downstream,taking into account accretion and flow attenuation.A series of biological and riverine processes studies will be completed to supplement the information collected in the 1980s,to define relationships between mainstem flow,riverine processes,and biological resources.This will result in development of a series of flow-sensitive models (e.g.,models of selected anadromous and resident fish habitats by species and life stage,models to describe invertebrate habitats,temperature model,ice process model,sediment transport model,turbidity model,large woody debris (LWD)recruitment model,riparian vegetation groundwater and surface water interaction model)that will enable the translation of effects of alternative Project operations on the respective riparian processes and biological resources.While there is likely to be a cumulative effect that translates throughout the entire length of the Susitna River,many of the resource and process effects will be location-and habitat-specific (e.g.,responses are expected to be different in side sloughs versus mainstem versus side channel versus tributary delta versus riparian habitats).Additionally,alternative Project operations will likely affect specific habitats and processes differently,both spatially and temporally.Therefore,the habitat and process models will be spatially discrete (e.g.,by site,reach)and yet able to be integrated across the entire study area to allow for a holistic evaluation of each alternative operational scenario.This will allow for an Integrated Resource Analysis of separate operational scenarios that includes each resource element,the results of which can serve in a feedback capacity leading to new or,modifications of,existing scenarios. The Riparian IFS is an interdependent effort coordinated with a range of other study disciplines, and these interdependencies are depicted in Figure 8.6-1.Studies providing input to the Riparian IFS include Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow (see Section 8.5),Groundwater Study (see Section 7.5),Ice Processes Study (see Section 7.6),Fluvial Geomorphology Study (see Section 6.6),and Riparian Vegetation Study (see Section 11.6).The Riparian IFS will provide data and results to the Geomorphology Study (see Section 6.0),Ice Processes Study (see Section 7.6),Wildlife Studies (see Section 10.0),River Productivity Study (see Section 9.8),Riparian Vegetation Study (see Section 11.6),and to Project operational flow design.The Riparian IFS is a modeling effort designed to evaluate potential Project operations effects on downriver floodplain plant communities.The modeling design incorporates both floodplain plant community succession models and physical process models (fluvial geomorphology,sediment transport,ice processes, and groundwater and surface interaction.Together,the vegetation and physical models comprise a hydrogeomorphic approach to modeling the physical floodplain boundary conditions controlling the establishment,recruitment,and maintenance of characteristic riparian floodplain plant communities (Figure 8.6-land Figure 8.6-2).These vegetation and physical models represent the core tools that will be used for assessing changes in floodplain physical characteristics (flow,sediment and ice process regimes)and associated floodplain plant Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-171 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN community composition,succession,and spatial distribution under alternative Project operational scenarios. 8.6.1.3.|Existing Information and Need for Additional Information Information for the study area includes,but is not limited to,1)recent and historic aerial photography;2)riparian vegetation surveys and characterizations from recent and early 1980s studies;3)riparian vegetation succession conceptual models developed from the 1980s data as part of the original Susitna Hydroelectric Project (SHP)Phase I vegetation mapping studies conducted along the Susitna River from the downstream end of Devils Canyon to Talkeetna,and 4)vegetation succession studies conducted in the Susitna River floodplain between Gold Creek and the Deshka River (McKendrick et al.1982;UAFAFES 1985).The riparian sites visited in the 1980s studies were re-sampled in 1992-1993 (Collins and Helm 1997;Helm and Collins 1997).Of primary importance to the Riparian IFS is the previous vegetation mapping and successional dynamics studies by McKendrick et al.(1982),Collins and Helm (1997),and Helm and Collins (1997).These previous works will serve to inform the development ofa stratified sampling protocol for both the Riparian IFS and Botanical Riparian Study vegetation surveys. The riparian study modeling efforts will build upon the Collins and Helm (1997)riparian vegetation succession conceptual model (Figure 8.6-2). Although substantial data and information concerning riparian vegetation were collected in the 1980s,those data are approximately 30 years old and therefore additional information needs to be collected to provide a contemporary understanding of the riparian conditions existing in the Susitna River.Moreover,previous studies (McKendrick et al.1982;Collins and Helm 1997; Helm and Collins1997)were largely descriptive of riparian vegetation composition,structure, and forest succession,and as such,do not provide an analytical framework sufficient for assessing potential impacts to floodplain vegetation that may result from Watana Dam operations,nor do they provide the ability to model and develop alternative flow scenarios.In addition,the configuration and proposed operations of the Project have changed and must be evaluated within the context of the existing environmental setting.This includes consideration of potential load-following effects on riparian ecosystems downstream of the Watana Dam site (including the Lower River Segment,as appropriate).Therefore,additional riparian studies are necessary to adequately address the effects of potential Project operations on the riparian floodplain plant communities. 8.6.2.Study Area The study area includes the Susitna River active floodplain that would be affected by the operation of the Project downstream of Watana Dam.The active floodplain is the valley bottom flooded under the current climate.The longitudinal extent of the formal Riparian IFS study area currently extends to river mile (RM)75.Determining how far downstream Project operational effects will extend will depend largely on the results of the Open-water Flow Routing Model (see Section 8.5.4.3),which is scheduled to be completed in Q1 2013.Thus,an initial assessment of the downstream extent of Project effects will be developed in Q2 2013 with input from the TWG.This assessment will include a review of information developed during the 1980s studies and study efforts initiated in 2012,such as sediment transport (see Section 6.5),habitat mapping (see Sections 6.5 and 9.9),operations modeling (see Section 8.5.4.2.2),and the Mainstem Open- water Flow Routing Model (see Section 8.5.4.3).The assessment will guide the need to extend Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-172 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN studies into the Lower River Segment and if needed,will identify which geomorphic reaches will be subject to detailed instream flow analysis in 2013.Results of the 2013 studies would then be used to determine the extent to which Lower River Segment studies should be adjusted in 2014. During the 1980s studies,the Susitna River was characterized into three segments extending above and below the two proposed dam sites.After researching potential Project configurations, AEA is proposing a single dam configuration at the Watana Dam site at RM 184.The proposed study characterizes the Susitna River as three segments (Figure 8.5-9).The Upper River Segment represents that portion of the watershed above the Watana Dam site at RM 184;the Middle River Segment (extending from RM 184 downstream to the Three Rivers Confluence at RM 98.5);and the Lower River Segment (extending from the confluence of Chulitna and Talkeetna rivers (Three Rivers)to Cook Inlet (RM 0).Potential Project effects to the Upper River Segment above the Watana Dam site are addressed in Section 9.0,Fish and Aquatic Resources;Section 10.0,Wildlife Resources;Section 11.0,Botanical Resources;and other studies.Potential Project effects to the Upper River Segment will not be addressed in the Instream Flow Study.The study area of the Instream Flow Study is focused on the two lower segments of the river,the Middle River Segment and the Lower River Segment. The Middle River Segment encompasses approximately 85 miles between the proposed Watana Dam site (at RM 184)and the Three Rivers Confluence,located at RM 98.5.The river flows from Watana Canyon into Devils Canyon,the narrowest and steepest gradient reach on the Susitna River.In Devils Canyon,constriction creates extreme hydraulic conditions including deep plunge pools,drops,and high velocities.The Devils Canyon rapids appear to present a partial barrier hindering upstream passage at some flow conditions to the migration of anadromous fish;only a few adult Chinook salmon have been observed upstream of Devils Canyon.Downstream of Devils Canyon,the middle Susitna River widens but remains essentially a single channel with stable islands,occasional side channels,and sloughs.For purposes of the study,the Middle River Segment was further divided into eight reaches. The Lower River Segment consists of an approximate 98-mile section between the Chulitna River confluence and Cook Inlet (RM 0).An abrupt change in channel form occurs where the Chulitna River joins the Susitna River near the town of Talkeetna.The Chulitna River drains a smaller area than the Middle River Segment at the confluence,but drains higher elevations (including Denali and Mount Foraker)and many more glaciers.The annual flow of the Chulitna River is approximately the same as the Susitna River at the confluence,though the Chulitna contributes much more sediment than the Susitna.For several miles downstream of the confluence,the Susitna River becomes braided,characterized by unstable,shifting gravel bars and shallow subchannels.For the remainder of its course to Cook Inlet,the Susitna River alternates between single channel,braided,and meandering planforms with multiple side channels and sloughs.Major tributaries drain the western Talkeetna Mountains (the Talkeetna River,Montana Creek,Willow Creek,Kashwitna River),the Susitna lowlands (Deshka River), and the Alaska Range (Yentna River).The Yentna River is the largest tributary in the Lower River Segment,supplying about 40 percent of the mean annual flow at the mouth. Further refinements to the classification system being applied to the Susitna River have been made since the Proposed Study Plan (PSP),but the major divisions associated with the middle and lower segments have been retained.However,these are now incorporated into a more refined hierarchical classification system that scales from relatively broad to more narrowly defined categories as follows: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-173 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN Segment -Geomorphic Reach -Mainstem Habitat Type Mesohabitat Types (Main channel only)+Off-channel Habitat Types. The highest level category is termed Segment and refers to the Middle River Segment and the Lower River Segment. The Geomorphic Reach level is next and consists of eight categories (MR-1 through MR-8)for the Middle River Segment and four categories (LR-1 through LR-6)for the Lower River Segment.The geomorphic reach breaks were based in part on the following five factors:1) planform type (single channel,island/side channel,braided);2)confinement (approximate extent of floodplain,off-channel features);3)gradient;4)bed material /geology;and 5)major river confluences. This is followed by Mainstem Habitat Types,which include the same categories applied during the 1980s studies -Main Channel,Side Channel,Side Slough,Upland Slough,Tributary Mouth, and Tributary. The next level in the hierarchy is Mesohabitat Type,which at this time is reserved for classifying main channel habitats into categories of Riffle,Pool,Run,and Glide. The last level in the hierarchy is referred to as Off-channel Habitats consisting of a number of descriptive categories and quantitative indices including Turbid/Clear,Beaver Presence (Y/N), Gross Area (Off-channel Habitats),Shoreline Length (includes both Main Channel and Off- Channel Habitats).These are more fully described in the Fish and Aquatics Instream Flow Study (see Section 8.5),with further information provided in both the Geomorphic Study Plan (see Section 6.0),and the Habitat Characterization Study Plan. 8.6.3.Study Methods The Riparian IFS will first develop a process-based model of riparian vegetation succession and dynamics driven by riverine hydrogeomorphic processes.The modeling approach will use geomorphic,hydraulic,ice process,and GW/SW interaction models coupled with riparian vegetation succession models based upon riparian vegetation surveys and previous Susitna River riparian forest research (Helm and Collins 1997).Objectives of the modeling approach are as follows: 1.Measure and model riparian vegetation physical process relationships under the natural flow,sediment,and ice regimes. 2.Model potential impacts to riparian vegetation resulting from proposed Project operational changes to natural flow,sediment,and ice regimes. 3.Provide guidance for Project operation scenarios to minimize potential riparian vegetation impacts. The Riparian IFS methods section is presented in the following format addressing each of the seven Project components and objectives.First,each study component and associated objectives are described.Second,study methods,with appropriate literature citations,are presented.Third, Data Input to the Riparian IFS from other Project studies,and Data Output from Riparian IFS to other Project studies,are detailed.Fourth,expected work products are presented.The Riparian IFS Project schedule is presented in Section 8.6.9 (Table 8.6-1)and a glossary of relevant terms is presented in Attachment 8-1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-174 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.3.1.Synthesize Historic Physical and Biologic Data for Susitna River Floodplain Vegetation,Including 1980s Studies,Studies of Hydro Project Impacts on Downstream Floodplain Plant Communities,and Studies of Un-impacted Floodplain Plant Community Successional Processes The goal of this study is to critically review and synthesize historic Susitna River riparian vegetation studies within the context of physical process investigations conducted in the 1980s including ice processes,sediment transport,GW/SW,and herbivory.Studies of downriver floodplain vegetation response to hydroregulation on other hydro projects (both North American and circum-polar)will be incorporated into the review to develop a current state-of-the-science analysis of potential Project operational flow effects to Susitna River riparian floodplain vegetation.Additionally,studies of un-impacted temperate and boreal floodplain plant community successional processes will be incorporated into the study as appropriate.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-2. The objectives of this study task are as follows: 1.Conduct a critical review of previous Susitna River 1980s floodplain vegetation studies. 2.Place potential Susitna River Project operational effects within context of studies from other hydroregulated rivers in North America. 3.Review,and include relevant findings of,current research concerning temperate and boreal floodplain forest succession and dynamics under natural flow regimes. 8.6.3.1.1.|Methods A critical literature review of all appropriate Susitna 1980s studies,historic and current hydro project floodplain effects studies,and temperate and boreal floodplain forest scientific literature will be conducted.The synthesis of findings will focus on elements relevant to evaluating potential Project operation effects on downstream floodplain vegetation.An annotated, searchable bibliography will be developed. 8.6.3.1.2.|Data Input From Other Studies Data input from other studies will include 1980s Susitna River floodplain study literature,hydro project studies of downstream floodplain vegetation,and studies of un-impacted temperate and boreal floodplain plant community succession. 8.6.3.1.3.|Data Output to Other Studies Output to other studies will include data for Geomorphology and Ice Processes studies,literature review findings concerning Susitna River riparian vegetation and physical process,identification of critical issues from hydro project floodplain vegetation impact analyses,and relevant findings from natural flow regime floodplain vegetation research. The results of this study will also provide Project operational design guidance. 8.6.3.1.4.Work Products 1.ISR chapter with an annotated,searchable,bibliographic appendix. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-175 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 2.Product deliverable date:Q4 2013. 8.6.3.2.Focus Area Selection-Riparian Process Domain Delineation Floodplain plant communities within mountain river corridors are dynamic in that channel and ice processes annually disturb floodplain vegetation resulting in the characteristic patchwork of floodplain vegetation composition,structure,and age together reflecting time since most recent vegetation disturbance (Naiman et al.1998).Vegetation disturbance can be defined as those processes that remove or otherwise impact plant communities and soils,often setting the system back to an earlier successional state.Floodplain vegetation disturbance types found within the study area include channel migration (erosion and depositional processes),ice processes (shearing impacts,flooding,and freezing),herbivory (beaver,moose,and hare),wind,and,to an infrequent extent,fire.Floodplain disturbance regimes (type,magnitude,frequency,duration and timing)vary systematically throughout river networks and,therefore,their geographic distribution may be mapped (Montgomery 1999). Process domains define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern habitat attributes and dynamics (Montgomery 1999).Within the mountain river network, temporal and spatial variability of channel,ice,and sediment disturbance processes can be classified and mapped,allowing characterization of specific riparian process domains with similar suites of floodplain disturbance types.The riparian process domain approach is hierarchical in structure allowing for river network stratified sampling to statistically describe elements and processes within each process domain.Riparian study sites,including those located within Focus Areas,will be selected to capture the variability in floodplain vegetation types,and geomorphic terrains,within each riparian process domain.The number of Focus Areas necessary to capture process domain variability will be determined through a power analysis.The hierarchical stratification of the Susitna River Study Area into riparian process domains will facilitates both representative sampling and the 'scaling-up'of Focus Area modeling results to the larger Study Area. The issue of pseudoreplication (Hurlbert 1984),and number of adequate sample sites necessary to perform robust statistical analyses,is addressed in the hierarchical riparian process domain sampling design and integration of the Riparian Botanical Survey design.Focus Area sites will be representative of specific riparian process domains and their channel /floodplain characteristics (ice process domains,channel plan form,channel slope,channel confinement). Focus Area physical and vegetation processes will be modeled and floodplain vegetation-flow response relationships statistically described in probabilistic models (Rains et al.2004).The Riparian Botanical Survey (see Section 11.6 for vegetation statistical sampling protocols)is designed to provide Study Area -wide representative sample replicates of floodplain vegetation, soils,and alluvial terrain relationships.Furthermore,the surface water flood regime for the Study Area will be modeled,and mapped,providing flow regime plant community relationship analysis replicates throughout the greater Study Area,in addition to those modeled at each Focus Area.The riparian process domain and Study Area -wide sampling of the Riparian Botanical Survey are specifically designed to address the question of pseudoreplication.Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-3.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-3. The objectives of the Focus Area selection and riparian process domain delineation are as follows: Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-176 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 1.Develop a riparian process domain stratification of the Study Area. 2.Select Focus Areas representative of each riparian process domain for physical process and vegetation survey sampling and modeling. 8.6.3.2.1.|Methods Riparian process domain delineation,and riparian Focus Area selection is an iterative process (Figure 8.6-3 and Figure 8.6-4).First,in Q1 21013 the results of the 2012 geomorphology study and channel classification (Section 6.6),ice processes study (Section 7.6),riparian botanical survey (Section 11.6)will be used to classify channel,floodplain and floodplain vegetation types.The Lower River (RM 0 to RM 98),the Middle River (RM 98 to RM 184),and the Upper River to the Maclaren River confluence (RM 184 to RM 260)were delineated into large-scale geomorphic river segments (few to many miles)with relatively homogeneous characteristics, including channel width,entrenchment,ratio,sinuosity,slope,geology/bed material, single/multiple channel,braiding index,and hydrology (inflow from major tributaries)for the purposes of stratifying the river into study segments (Figure 8.5-11 and Figure 8.5-12).This type classification data will be used in a spatially constrained cluster analysis process (Brenden et al.2008)to group Study Area channel reaches and segments into riparian process domains. Second,process domain type variability will be statistically described and a power analysis performed to determine the number of Focus Areas necessary to capture process domain variability in the stratified sampling approach.Third,candidate Focus Areas previously identified through the expert-opinion process for both Aquatic and Riparian IFS will be reviewed (Figures 8.5-13 through 8.5-22).Fourth,results of the cluster analysis,power analysis and expert-opinion process will be presented to the TWG for final selection of Focus Areas. Additionally,ice process floodplain vegetation interactions will be measured thorough tree ice- scar mapping to be conducted in Q2 and Q3 2013.A preliminary tree ice-scar survey was begun in October 2012.Additional tree ice-scar mapping is being conducted by snow machine in Q4 2012.The preliminary 2012 tree ice-scar mapping data will be processed,mapped and presented with the results of the riparian process domain and Focus Area selection analyses results to the TWG in Q1 2013. When the ice process mapping is completed in Q4 2013,the riparian process domain analysis and Focus Area selection process will be performed a second time to assess whether additional Focus Areas are necessary to measure and model ice process effects on floodplain vegetation.If the results of this analytical process conclude that additional Focus Areas are necessary they will be selected with input from the TWG for 2014 field sampling. 8.6.3.2.2.|Data Inputs from Other Studies The Geomorphology Study has provided the geomorphic reach classification and stratification. The Ice Process Study will provide further modeling and observational data for refining riparian process domains. 8.6.3.2.3.|Data Output to Other Studies The riparian process domain map will be provided to geomorphology,riparian botanical,ice processes,and fish and wildlife studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-177 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.3.2.4.Work Products 1.ISR chapter,describing the approach and methodology used to develop the riparian process domain map and Focus Area selection process. 2.Map of Susitna River riparian process domains and Focus Area locations. Final Focus Areas,of riparian study concern,selection will be finished with input from the Technical Workgroup (TWG)in Q2 2013. 8.6.3.3.Characterize Seed Dispersal and Seedling Establishment Groundwater and Surface Water Hydroregime Requirements.Develop Predictive Model of Potential Project Operational Impacts to Seedling Establishment Floodplain plant seed dispersal and seedling establishment are critical processes in floodplain plant community succession that may be affected by hydroproject operations (Braatne et al. 1996;Cooper et al.1999;Rood et al.2003).In this study dominant woody species seed dispersal and seedling establishment hydrologic requirements will be determined through field surveys and groundwater and surface water interaction measurement and modeling.The study has two subtasks:(1)seed dispersal,hydrology,and local Susitna River valley climate synchrony study,and (2)seedling establishment study. 8.6.3.3.1.Synchrony of Seed Dispersal,Hydrology,and Local Susitna River Valley Climate Susitna River pioneer riparian tree and shrub species in the family Salicaceae,Balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera),and willows (Salix spp.)are adapted to seasonal snowmelt-driven spring peak flows,in terms of timing of seed dispersal,newly deposited mineral colonization substrates, and concordant near-surface floodplain groundwater conditions,all necessary conditions for poplar and willow seedling establishment and recruitment (Figure 8.6-5;Braatne et al.1996; Mahoney and Rood 1998;Mouw et al.2012).Project operations may result in a reduction of June/July peak flows,and associated floodplain groundwater conditions,necessary to dispersal and establishment of cottonwood and willow trees and shrubs.The timing of snowmelt spring flows,and of tree and shrub seedling release and dispersal,is critical to successful establishment and maintenance of riparian floodplain forests (Figure 8.6-6;Braatne et al.1996;Mahoney and Rood 1998).An empirical model,the "Recruitment Box Model”that captures cottonwood and willow seed dispersal,flow response and recruitment requirements has been successfully demonstrated on rivers throughout North America (Figure 8.6-6;Mahoney and Rood 1998;Rood et al.2003).The model characterizes seasonal flow pattern,associated river stage (elevation), and flow ramping necessary for successful cottonwood and willow seedling establishment (Figure 8.6-5 and Figure 8.6-6).A recruitment box model for balsam poplar and select willow species for the Susitna River will be developed.Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-7.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-4. Objectives of the seed dispersal,hydrology,and climate synchrony study are as follows: 1.Measure cottonwood and select willow species seed dispersal timing. 2.Model local Susitna River valley climate,and associated seasonal peak flows,relative to cottonwood and willow seed dispersal. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-178 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 3.Develop a recruitment box model of seed dispersal timing,river flow regime,and cottonwood and willow seed dispersal and establishment. 8.6.3.3.1.1.Methods To evaluate the natural synchrony of balsam poplar,and select willow species (Salix alaskensis and S.barclayi)seed release,and Susitna River natural flow regime,the following tasks will be undertaken:(1)conduct a two-year survey of seed release of balsam poplar and select willow species (Q2-3 2013;Q2-3 2014),(2)develop a "degree-day'climate model for the onset of seed release relative to local temperature conditions using methods developed by Stella et al.(2006), and (3)analyze the historic climate and Susitna River flow regime relationship.The results of this study will identify flow regime timing conditions necessary to support riparian cottonwood and willow establishment on the Susitna River. Four floodplain sites near existing meteorological stations in the Middle and Lower Susitna (Figure 8.6-8)will be selected for balsam poplar and select willow species seed release surveys. At each site,10 to 15 dominant female balsam poplar trees and willows will be surveyed weekly during the months of June,July,and the first two weeks of August,2013-2014.Seed release will be measured during each survey by counting open catkins for each tree or shrub using methods developed by Stella et al.(2006).Floodplain riparian plant community characteristics will be sampled for each floodplain seed dispersal site using the riparian botanical survey vegetation sampling techniques (see Section 11.6).Tree data and seed release timing will be analyzed using protocols developed by Stella et al.(2006).At all field sites,local air temperature measurements will be collected from adjacent weather monitoring stations (Figure 8.6-8).A degree-day model using seed release observations and continuous temperature records from the monitoring stations will be developed (Stella et al.2006). A recruitment box model (Figure 8.6-6;Mahoney and Rood 1998;Rood et al.2003)will be developed to evaluate the potential effects of various proposed spring operational flows on cottonwood and willow establishment. 8.6.3.3.1.2..Data Input From Other Studies The IFS Flow Routing (see Section 8.6)and Geomorphology (see Section 6.6)studies will provide flow modeling (frequency,magnitude,duration,and seasonal timing)for development of the "recruitment box model”of seed dispersal timing and flood regime. 8.6.3.3.1.3._Data Output to Other Studies The modeling results of the synchrony study will be used to guide Project operations design such that seasonal flow regime supports identified cottonwood and willow seeding establishment requirements. 8.6.3.3.1.4.Work Products 1.ISR and USR chapters detailing study methods,results,and conclusions. 2.Degree-day model of peak seed release window using seed release observations and continuous temperature records from each floodplain sample site. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-179 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 3.Recruitment box model of cottonwood and select willow species. 4.Model of peak runoff /seed release temporal synchrony for operational flow guidelines. 5.Model of critical summer flow regime necessary to support seedling establishment. The seed dispersal study fieldwork will be conducted in Q2 and Q3 during both 2013 and 2014. Model development will be conducted during Q1-4 2014. 8.6.3.3.2.|Seedling Establishment and Recruitment Study Riparian vegetation in mountain river networks is adapted to a dynamic physical disturbance regime including flooding,summer desiccation,erosion,sediment burial,ice shearing and freezing,wind,herbivory and,infrequently,fire (Naiman et al.1998).Seedling establishment, survival,and recruitment are critical phases in the development of floodplain plant communities within this dynamic physical environment (Walker and Chapin 1986;Walker et al.1986; Karrenberg et al.2002;Muow et al.2009,2012;Rood et al.2007).The goal of the seedling establishment and recruitment study is to identify,measure,and model potential impacts of Project operational changes to the groundwater,surface water,sediment,and ice regimes,and to assess the effects on seedling establishment and recruitment within the active channel margin / floodplain environment. Identifying the spatial locations,and groundwater,surface water,and sediment requirements under which new cohorts of dominant riparian plant seedlings establish,survive,and recruit on the Susitna River floodplain is a critical element in evaluating potential floodplain vegetation effects of Project operational alterations of the natural flow and sediment regimes.River ice seedling interactions,an additional critical physical disturbance factor,will be investigated in the ice process modeling study (see Section 8.6.3.4.2). Seedling recruitment in the Susitna floodplain occurs not only on new flood-deposited sediments along channel and floodplain margins-the primary sites of balsam poplar,willow,thinleaf alder (Alnus tenuifolia),and Sitka alder (Alnus sinuata)colonization-but also on sediment deposits within the developing and mature floodplain forest (Helm and Collins 1997).Helm and Collins (1997)noted that within the floodplain forest,white spruce (Picea glauca)and paper birch (Betula papyrifera)seedlings were found to establish,and recruit,on mineral soils associated with both floodplain surface sediment deposits,ice-influenced sediment deposits,and tree wind throw mound soils.Also,during the 2012 Riparian Botanical Survey,white spruce and paper birch seedlings were observed growing on mounds of gravel and sand apparently pushed onto the floodplain interior by ice flows. Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-9.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-5. A two year study using woody seedling dendrochronology to date the year of seedling year of establishment is adequate to characterize seedling establishment hydrologic conditions.Seedling year of establishment will be used,with the historic discharge record,to model the flood regime at the sample site 1-D or 2-D hydraulic models. While not included within this study plan,to address a USFWS request,AEA will conduct a longitudinal three-year second-peak seedling cohort establishment and survival analysis to inform the adaptive management components of future Project instream flow regimes.This Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-180 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN analysis is described in Attachment 8-2.Specifically,the objective of the analysis is to identify, and measure,seedling and flow regime characteristics in a longitudinal seedling cohort analysis as compared to the two-year study. The seedling cohort establishment analysis will be initiated in summer 2013 and carried through for three years 2014 to 2016;final results will be presented in a technical memorandum to be prepared Q4 2016.The technical memorandum is not necessary for the environmental analysis supporting AEA's License Application because the anticipated results are not necessary to assess overall Project effects.Instead,AEA anticipates relying upon the technical memorandum for adaptive management of future Project operations. Objectives of the seedling recruitment study are as follows: 1.Map the spatial locations of seedlings of dominant woody riparian species including balsam poplar,white spruce,paper birch,thinleaf and Sitka alder,feltleaf willow,and Barclay's willow throughout the Focus Area,and Riparian Vegetation Study sites,active channel margins,and floodplain. 2.Use a stratified random sampling approach,with variable plot sizes (Mueller-Dombois and Ellenburg 1974),to sample mapped seedling polygons. Identify seedlings to species,and measure seedling heights and density. Describe and measure seedling site soil characteristics (see Section 8.6.3.7 for methods). Measure and model seedling site GW/SW hydroregimes.nvPYMeasure seedling xylem water source through isotopic analysis (see Section 8.6.3.6 for methods). 7.Investigate ice process seedling site interactions through empirical observations and ice process modeling. 8.Develop a probabilistic model of seedling hydrologic,sediment,and ice regime processes. 8.6.3.3.2.1.Methods Dominant riparian woody species will be sampled in this study,including balsam poplar,white spruce,paper birch,thinleaf and Sitka alder,feltleaf willow,and other willow species.In addition to the target woody seedlings,all herbaceous seedlings within the woody species seedling plots will be identified and measured. Seedlings are defined as those plants established within the current year of sampling,and all plants with stems <1m in height.At select Riparian Botanical Survey reaches,and at all Focus Areas,seedling patches will be mapped and sampled using a stratified random sampling protocol to obtain statistically representative samples of select woody species (Elzinga et al.1998; Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974). The survey sampling approach is as follows.First,a helicopter survey of each reach will be conducted to locate and map observable seedling areas.Second,four to eight transects will be placed systematically throughout the reach normal to main channel,extending across the adjacent floodplain intersecting observed seedling sites.Each transect will be traversed and all remotely observed,and newly identified on-the-ground seedling locations will be mapped with Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-181 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN GPS.Third,seedling site polygon boundaries will be mapped with GPS.Fourth,seedling patches will be sampled using a stratified random approach to locate sample plots.Seedling species will be identified,or collected for herbarium identification,and abundance (density)and height measured using variable plot size and shapes (Elzinga et al.1998;Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974).Fifth,at each plot two to three seedlings of each species will be excavated and rooting depth measured.Excavated woody seedlings will be aged at the root collar in the laboratory and annual rings counted to provide seedling age.Substrate texture and depth to cobbles will be described and measured in soil pits excavated to 50 cm in depth or to gravel/cobble refusal layer.Sixth,a sub-sample of Focus Area site seedlings will be used for xylem isotopic analyses to identify source of water (see Section 8.6.3.6).Results of seedling mapping and characterization will be used to assess groundwater,surface water,and ice regime relationships using 1-D /2-D,MODFLOW and ice process modeling results from the Groundwater,Geomorphology,and Ice Processes studies. A probabilistic model of seedling and GW/SW,sediment,and ice regime will be developed using techniques and methods described in Franz and Bazzaz (1977),Rains et al.(2004), Henszey et al.(2004),Baird and Maddock (2005),and Maddock et al.(2012). The results of the Focus Area modeling will be scaled-up to the riparian process domains using spatially explicit GIS models as described in Section 8.6.3.7. 8.6.3.3.2.2.Data Input from Other Studies Data input will include groundwater,surface water,and sediment regime characteristics of seedling sites developed in the Groundwater (Section 7.5)and Fluvial Geomorphology (Section 6.6)studies.The Ice Processes Study (Section 7.6)will provide modeled ice influence vertical and horizontal zones. 8.6.3.3.2.3.Data Output to Other Studies Data output will include groundwater,surface water,and sediment regime seedling requirements to Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Scaling and Model Project Operations Effects Section 8.6.3.7 and Project operations design. 8.6.3.3.2.4.Work Products 1.ISR and USR chapters detailing study methods,results,and conclusions. 2.Probabilistic seedling hydrologic,sediment,and ice regime model. The seedling establishment and recruitment study fieldwork will be conducted in Q2 and Q3 during both 2013 and 2014.Results analysis will be conducted during Q1-4 2014. 8.6.3.4.Characterize the role of river ice in the establishment and recruitment of dominant floodplain vegetation.Develop predictive model of potential Project operational impacts to ice processes and dominant floodplain vegetation establishment and recruitment. Although the role of fluvial disturbance (erosion and sediment deposition)in the development of floodplain vegetation has been well investigated (Naiman et al.1998;Rood et al.2007),the role Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No,14241 Page 8-182 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN of river ice processes has seen little study (Engstrom et al.2011;Prowse and Beltaos 2002; Prowse and Culp 2003;Rood et al.2007).The results of river ice disturbance of floodplain vegetation have been observed in the Susitna River,and reported anecdotally,in Helm and Collins (1997).The 2012 Riparian Botanical Survey Team observed extensive evidence of ice disturbance to floodplain trees,and soils,in the form of tree ice-scars,mechanically disturbed soil stratigraphy,and floodplain gravel deposits throughout the Middle and Lower Susitna River surveys (Figure 8.6-10,Figure 8.6-11,and Figure 8.6-12). Impacts of ice-related processes to riparian habitat typically occur during break-up when ice scours channel and floodplain surfaces (Prowse and Culp 2003).During break-up,ice accumulation in meander bends can create ice dams elevating backwater surfaces,forcing meltwater to bypass the bend and scour a new meander cutoff,generating new side channels (Prowse and Culp 2003).Elevated backwater,resulting from ice dams,may also float ice blocks onto and through vegetated floodplain surfaces,causing mechanical shearing effects including tree ice-scarring and abrasion,removal of floodplain vegetation,and disturbance of floodplain soils (Engstrom et al.2011;Rood et al.2007;Prowse and Culp 2003). 8.6.3.4.1._|Empirical Studies of River Ice and Floodplain Vegetation Given the paucity of studies concerning river ice and floodplain vegetation interactions,multiple lines of evidence will be used to inform a final research study design to address the question of vegetation response to ice shearing influence on the Susitna River floodplain.First,ice vegetation impacts (tree ice-scars)will be observed,mapped,and aged (using dendrochronologic techniques),and gravel floodplain deposits will be mapped throughout the Study Area to develop a Study Area map of river ice floodplain vegetation interaction domains.Preliminary tree ice- scar mapping was begun during the 2012 Riparian Botanical Survey,and early October 2012 Focus Area reconnaissance.Mapping will continue in Q2 and Q3 2013 and throughout the 2013 and 2014 riparian field seasons.Second,local residents will be interviewed (e.g.,Mike Wood, who lives across from Whiskers Slough)concerning their knowledge of spatial locations of historic ice dams,years of significant ice occurrence,and other anecdotal historical information concerning ice on the Susitna River.From these two sources of information,a map will be created of Susitna River ice process floodplain vegetation effect domains.The ice process map will be used to:(1)inform riparian process domain delineation (see Section 8.6.3.2)and (2) develop a floodplain vegetation study to compare floodplains affected by ice with those un- impacted by ice,similar to the approach of Engstrom et al.(2011). Floodplain vegetation surveys will be conducted to quantitatively measure (stratified random sampling of mapped floodplain vegetation ice shear process zones)and statistically describe and compare vegetation characteristics associated with floodplains experiencing ice shear events and floodplain vegetation without observed ice influence.The vegetation study design will build on the design and results of Engstrom et al.(2011)where they studied and assessed the effects of anchor ice on riparian vegetation.Engstrom and others found that species richness was higher at sites affected by anchor ice than at sites where anchor ice was absent,suggesting that ice disturbance plays a role in enhancing plant species richness (Engstrom et al.2011). The objective of the ice effects vegetation study will be to quantitatively describe floodplain plant community composition,abundance,age,and spatial pattern to assess the role and degree of influence ice processes have on Susitna River floodplain vegetation.The results of the study will be used to assess how floodplain vegetation pattern and process may change with Project Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project .Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-183 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN operation alterations of the natural ice process regime.The final study design will be completed in Q2-3 2013,as additional tree ice-scar field data become available. 8.6.3.4.2.Ice Process Modeling Studies The ice process study will develop and calibrate a dynamic thermal and ice processes model (see Section 7.6 for details).The model will provide maps of ice cover progression and decay,ice cover extent and thickness,and effects of Project operational flow fluctuation on ice cover development and stability.Additionally the model will provide flow routing capability.Ice and flow routing effects on floodplain vegetation and channel morphology will be assessed.The Ice Processes study will also provide videography of ice formation and ice break-up at a number of locations throughout the Study Area.The ice process modeling study will provide the riparian ice vegetation study with estimated horizontal and vertical zones of ice formation,ice thickness, and floodplain impact zones.Model output will be used in conjunction with the empirical survey data to (1)empirically test model output with mapped riparian domains of ice floodplain vegetation interaction,and (2)model changes in locations and types of ice formation processes due to Project operational flow regime.Together,the empirical mapped ice influence zones, empirical studies of vegetation/ice interactions,and modeling confirmation and prediction will be used to understand and predict the influence of Project operational flows on ice and floodplain vegetation interactions. Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-13.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-6. The objectives of the ice processes floodplain vegetation interaction and modeling study are as follows: 1.Develop an integrated model of ice process interactions with floodplain vegetation. 2.Conduct primary research to identify the effects of ice on floodplain vegetation within mapped Susitna River ice floodplain impact zones. 3.Provide Project operational guidance on potential effects of operations flow on ice formation and floodplain vegetation development. 8.6.3.4.2.1.Methods 1.Mapping of ice floodplain vegetation interactions and soil disturbance throughout the Study Area. 2.Interviews of local Susitna River residents concerning knowledge of ice dam locations and ice process effects. 3.Comparative quantitative vegetation study of ice effects on identified ice floodplain impact and un-impacted zones.Methods will build on those presented in Engstrom et al. (2011). 4.Final ice vegetation field sampling methodology will be developed in Q2,Q3 2013 as tree ice-scar field data become available and ice effect domains are delineated. 5.Integration of ice process modeling results with empirical ice vegetation mapping and ice vegetation interaction studies. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-184 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.3.4.2.2.Data Input From Other Studies Data inputs including ice process modeling results concerning spatial location of ice,vertical extent of ice,and potential ice dam locations will be available beginning Q4 2013 extending through Q4 2014. 8.6.3.4.2.3.Data Output to Other Studies Data outputs will include Project operation guidance on minimizing alteration of ice processes and subsequent effects to floodplain vegetation. 8.6.3.4.2.4..Work Products 1.ISR and USR chapters detailing study methods,results,and conclusions. The river ice seedling establishment and recruitment study fieldwork will be conducted in Q2 and Q3 during both 2013 and 2014.Results analysis and technical memorandum,or chapter, will be conducted during Q1-4 2014. 8.6.3.5.|Characterize the role of erosion and sediment deposition in the formation of floodplain surfaces,soils,and vegetation.Develop a predictive model of Project operations changes to erosion and sediment deposition pattern and associated floodplain vegetation. The dynamic of channel migration-sediment transport,and resulting floodplain erosion and sediment depositional patterns-is a critical physical process directly affecting floodplain soil development,and vegetation establishment,recruitment,and spatial location,throughout alluvial segments of the river network (Richards et al.2002).The life history strategies and establishment requirements of floodplain plant species are adapted to natural flow and sediment regimes (Braatne et al.1996;Naiman et al.1998;Karrenberg et al.2002).As such,alterations of natural hydrologic and sediment regime seasonal timing,magnitude,frequency,and duration may have effects on plant species establishment,survival,and recruitment (Braatne et al.1996). The goal of this study is to characterize the role of erosion and sediment deposition in evolution of floodplain plan form,soil development,and trajectory of plant community succession, especially vegetation establishment stage.This study,in coordination with the Fluvial Geomorphology Study (see Section 6.6),will investigate the geomorphic evolution of the Study Area floodplain with an emphasis on floodplain sediment deposition,stratigraphy,soil development,and associated plant community succession.Historic sediment deposition rates will be measured throughout the Study Area river network and variations in floodplain forming processes will be assessed.Finally,a predictive model will be developed with the Fluvial Goemorphology Study (see Section 6.6)to assess Project operational effects on hydrologic and sediment regimes,and effects on soil and floodplain plant community development. In a river that meanders through a wide valley,such as the Susitna River,erosion on one side of the channel will be balanced by deposition on the opposite site as the river migrates laterally. Disturbance to riparian habitat on the eroding bank will be balanced by opportunities for recruitment on the point bar.This type of geomorphic process maintains the characteristic range of floodplain surface elevations and vegetation age classes contributing to the diversity of floodplain vegetation composition and structure (Naiman et al.1998).The rate of channel Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-185 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN migration may be impacted by Project operations with secondary impacts on the riparian community.The Fluvial Geomorphology Study will assess Project alterations to downstream channel bed and floodplain surface elevations through sediment transport modeling and analyses. These potential changes will be provided to the Riparian IFS.Development of the study design, modeling,and methods has been coordinated closely with Geomorphology,Ice Processes,and Riparian Vegetation study teams (Figure 8.6-1). The fluvial geomorphology modeling approach (see Section 6.6)is based upon (1)1-D /2-D modeling of river discharge and stage,(2)1-D /2-D sediment transport model,(3)geomorphic reach analyses (aerial photographic analyses of historic channel change),and (4)flow routing model. Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-14.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-7. The objectives of the study are as follows: 1.Measure the rates of channel migration,and floodplain vegetation disturbance or turnover,throughout the Study Area. 2.Measure the rates of sediment deposition,and floodplain development,throughout the Study Area. 3.Assess /model how Project operations will effect changes in the natural sediment regime,floodplain depositional patterns,and soil development throughout the Study Area. 4.Assess /model how Project operations changes in sediment transport and soil development will affect floodplain plant community succession. 8.6.3.5.1.Methods 1.Floodplain soils and stratigraphy will be sampled throughout the Study Area using a stratified random approach,including pits located in all Focus Areas. 2.Floodplain soil pits will be excavated from the surface to gravel /cobble layer (historic channel bed)and soil stratigraphy will be described and measured using standard NRCS field techniques (Schoeneberger et al.2002).Standard sediment grain size sieve analysis will be conducted on the entire sediment profile. 3.Direct dating of fluvial sediments will be conducted using isotopic techniques,including,but not limited to,'°'Cs and 7'°Pb measurements as described in Stokes and Walling (2003). 4.Dendrochronologic techniques (Fritts 1976)will be used to age trees and current floodplain surfaces at each soil pit. Woody species will be sampled,and aged,at all mapped Focus Area plant communities, including seedlings,to determine year of origin.Standard dendrochronologic techniques will be applied for tree and shrub sampling and growth ring measurements (Fritts 1976). For each Focus Area mapped stand,two to three trees and shrubs per species will be sampled for age determination.Tree and shrub samples will be taken with either an increment borer or by cutting the shrub or sapling stem and removing a stem section for laboratory analysis.Increment Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-186 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN cores (two per tree)will be collected from each tree.For each tree sampled,floodplain sediment will be excavated to uncover the stem root collar and depth of sediment aggradation will be measured for further age estimation.Woody species seedlings for each dominant species will be excavated,heights measured,stems sectioned at the root collar,and annual rings measured under a dissecting microscope.A regression analysis will be conducted to assess the relationship between stem age and seedling height.The results will be used to add additional years to trees to account for height of core sample above the root collar. Tree cores will be taken as close to the ground surface as possible,generally 30 centimeters or less above ground surface.Total height of tree core sample above the root collar will be calculated and used to estimate additional years to estimate tree year of origin.Increment cores will be mounted on pieces of 1-inch by 2-inch wood and sanded with variable grades of sandpaper following standard methods described in Fritts (1976).Ring width measurements will be made,and annual years counted,for both the tree cores and stump sections using a dissecting microscope.Individual trees will be cross-dated,if possible,using standard methods (Fritts 1976). 8.6.3.5.2.|Data Input From Other Studies Geomorphology Study (see Section 6.6)will provide for all Focus Areas:(1)historic channel migration rates,floodplain vegetation disturbance or turnover rate;(2)flood frequency, magnitude,duration,and timing;(3)sediment transport and depositional spatial model. Instream Flow Study (IFS)flow routing:Study Area -wide flood frequency,magnitude,duration, and timing. The Riparian Botanical Survey (see Section 11.6)will conduct the sediment and soils fieldwork including stratigraphic description,strata measurements,and floodplain sediment dating for all Focus Areas and Study Area -wide sampling. 8.6.3.5.3.|Data Output to Other Studies To Geomorphology Study:(1)dating of floodplain stratigraphy and surfaces using direct isotopic and dendrochronologic techniques,and (2)floodplain stratigraphic descriptions and grain size analyses. To Section 8.6.3.7 Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Scaling and Project Operations Effects Modeling:(1)dating of floodplain stratigraphy and surfaces using direct isotopic and dendrochronologic techniques,and (2)floodplain stratigraphic descriptions and grain size analyses. 8.6.3.5.4.Work Products 1.ISR and USR chapters detailing study methods,results,and conclusions. Fieldwork will be conducted in Q2 and Q3 during both 2013 and 2014.Analyses will be conducted during Q2-4 2013 and Q1-4 2014. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-187 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.3.6.|Characterize natural floodplain vegetation groundwater and surface water maintenance hydroregime.Develop a predictive model to assess potential Project operational changes to natural hydroregime and floodplain vegetation. Water sources for the establishment and maintenance of floodplain vegetation include precipitation,groundwater,and surface water (Cooper et al.1999;Rood et al.2003).Identifying both floodplain plant water sources and the GW/SW hydroregime associated with critical riparian plant species life stages is necessary to (1)characterize natural floodplain vegetation establishment and maintenance hydrologic requirements,and (2)evaluate effects of Project operations on these hydroregimes and associated plant communities. The goal of the floodplain vegetation GW/SW interaction modeling effort is to statistically characterize the relationship between floodplain groundwater and surface water hydroregime and associated floodplain plant communities and to use this model to predict Project operation effects on floodplain vegetation throughout the Study Area.This investigation will (1)characterize dominant floodplain woody plant species establishment and maintenance life stage water sources through stable isotope analyses of groundwater,soil water,and xylem water;(2)develop a floodplain GW/SW model;and (3)develop floodplain vegetation-flow response models. Riparian woody species establishment has been associated with both surface water flooding and precipitation (Braatne et al 1996;Cooper et al.1999;Rood et al.2003).Riparian floodplain vegetation maintenance relies to a large extent on groundwater as a water source (Cooper et al. 1999;Rood et al.,2003;Henszey et al.2004).Floodplain groundwater depths have been demonstrated to control floodplain plant community composition,species richness,and structure (Henszey et al.2004;Baird et al.2005;Mouw et al.2009).Project operations will alter,on a seasonal basis,the flows in the Susitna River,and on a shorter time scale,flows associated with potential load-following operations potentially affecting floodplain shallow aquifer water elevations.The results of this study will be scaled-up from the Focus Areas,to their respective riparian process domains,to provide a model of the entire Study Area. 8.6.3.6.1.|Groundwater and Surface Water Interaction Modeling A physical model of GW/SW interactions will be developed for all Focus Area sites to model floodplain plant community GW/SW relationships.Developing conceptual model and numerical representations of the GW/SW interactions,coupled with important processes in the unsaturated zone,will help evaluate natural variability in the Susitna River riparian floodplain plant communities,and assesses how various Project operations may potentially result in alterations of floodplain plant community types,as well as improve the understanding of what controlled fluctuations of flow conditions would result in minimal riparian changes. Regional and local groundwater flow systems are important to floodplain vegetation (Figure 8.6-15).Seasonal river stage fluctuations generate transient GW/SW interactions at a local scale under and adjacent to the river,including side channels,side sloughs,and upland sloughs (Figure 8.6-16 and Figure 8.6-17).A typical system representing several types of surface water features is shown in the Whiskers Slough proposed Focus Area (Figure 8.6-16).This plan view shows both the potential orientation of mainstem and side channel surface water features,along with typical riparian floodplain plant community types found in the Middle River Segment of the Susitna River.A schematic cross-section of a typical profile across the river floodplain from Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-188 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN main channel through floodplain,secondary channel and adjacent hillslope is shown in Figure 8.6-18.This figure depicts the relative relationships between surface water stage levels, groundwater levels,land surface elevations,and riparian floodplain plant community types. Developing conceptual model and numerical representations of the GW/SW interactions, coupled with important processes in the unsaturated zone,will help evaluate natural variability in the Susitna River floodplains,and how various Project operations could result in alterations of floodplain plant community types,as well as improve the understanding of what Project operational fluctuations of flow conditions would result in minimal riparian changes. 8.6.3.6.2._Floodplain Vegetation-GW/SW Regime Functional Groups Floodplain vegetation-GW/SW regime functional groups are assemblages of plants that have established and developed under similar GW/SW hydrologic regimes.Metrics will be developed for quantitatively describing the relationship between floodplain plant communities and the GW/SW hydroregime.Probabilistic response curves will be developed for select plant species and all riparian plant community types using techniques described in Rains et al.(2004)and Henszey et al.(2004).The results of the response curve analyses will be used to develop floodplain vegetation-GW/SW regime functional groups (Merritt et al.2010;Rains et al.2004). These techniques and analyses will form the basis for development of a statistically modeled relationship between individual riparian species,floodplain plant community types,and natural GW/SW hydroregime that will be used to analyze potential effects of Project operations on Susitna River floodplain plant communities.These floodplain vegetation-GW/SW regime statistical relationships will provide a defensible basis for recommended flow prescriptions necessary to support floodplain vegetation establishment,recruitment,and maintenance throughout the Study Area. The physical modeling and spatial mapping of riparian vegetation conducted in the Botanical Riparian Study will be integrated to analyze the extent and characteristics of riparian vegetation change under various simulated Project operational flows (Pearlstine et al.1985). Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-19.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-8. 8.6.3.6.3.|Methodology MODFLOW (USGS 2005),the most widely used groundwater model in the U.S.and worldwide, will be used.Additionally,RIP-ET (riparian-evapotranspiration MODFLOW package; Maddock et al.2012),developed to help better represent plant transpiration processes in the unsaturated zone,will be utilized to more accurately calculate evapotranspiration,separating out plant transpiration from evaporation processes. Focus Area GW /SW sampling is designed to measure,and model,GW/SW hydroregime for all floodplain plant community types and successional stages including plant establishment,plant recruitment,and mature forest vegetation.The sampling approach and design will include transects and arrays of groundwater wells and surface water stage stations (Figure 8.6-16 and Figure 8.6-17).Complete sampling design details can be found in the Groundwater Study, Section 7.5. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-189 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN The groundwater and surface water data collection period will begin early July 2013 and continue through September 2014.This will include the fall 2013 winter transition period, winter 2013-2014 conditions,spring 2014,and summer 2014.Physical weather and climate conditions are not the same from year to year,so data collected during summer 2013 cannot be combined with data from 2014. Field data on riparian plant communities will be collected in coordination with Riparian Vegetation Study (see Section 11.6).Riparian floodplain plant community and soils sampling approach and design is detailed in the Riparian Vegetation Study Section 11.6. Woody species source of water will be directly determined from stable isotope analyses of groundwater,soil water,precipitation,and xylem water hydrogen and oxygen.Xylem water has been demonstrated to reflect isotopic composition of the source water taken up by roots (Flanigan and Ehleringer 1991;Dawsen and Ehleringer 1991).Stable isotope analysis ofdeuterium(7H)and oxygen ('80)ratios will be conducted for dominant woody species using standard methods (Cooper et al.1999;Flanigan and Ehleringer 1991;Dawsen and Ehleringer 1991). It is critical to measure the depth of the root zone of dominant floodplain plants for accurately modeling groundwater,capillary fringe,and floodplain plant relationships.The rooting depth of dominant floodplain plants will be measured through excavation of trenches within each Focus Area floodplain plant community type in coordination with soil stratigraphic excavations and well point soil pits.Depth and width of dominant plant root systems will be measured,sketched, and photographed.Excavation plot elevations will be surveyed.Additionally,a riverbank survey will be conducted by boat to utilize recently exposed root systems for measurement.The riverbank survey will provide a much greater sample size than possible through trench excavations alone.Root zone excavation and riverbank root zone survey data will be statistically summarized to provide individual plant species and plant community type root zone depth characterization for use in GW/SW modeling The riparian vegetation GW/SW interactions study approach and design will be integrated with the findings of the riparian plant community succession,geomorphology,and ice processes modeling to characterize physical processes and riparian plant community relationships.The results of these studies will be used to assess (1)changes to physical processes due to dam operations,and (2)response of riparian plant communities to operations alterations of natural flow and ice processes regimes. The results of the Focus Area modeling will be scaled-up to the riparian process domains as described in Section 8.6.3.7 Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Scaling and Project Operations Effects Modeling The detailed GW/SW interaction study approach and methods are presented in the Groundwater Study,Section 7.5. 8.6.3.6.4.|Data Input from Other Studies The Groundwater Study Section 7.5 will provide GW /SW interaction modeling results including a range of GW/SW regime seasonal statistics including frequency,timing and duration of surface-water and groundwater levels.Groundwater monitoring data will be provided to the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-190 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Riparian IFS in real time throughout Q3,Q4 2013 and Q1-Q4 2014.MODFLOW results and report will be provided in Q3 and Q4 2014. 8.6.3.6.5.|Data Output to Other Studies Modeling results will be provided to:Riparian Vegetation Study Section 11.6;Fluvial Geomorphology Study Section 6.6;Wildlife Study Section 10.0;and Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Project operations design Section 8.6.3.7. 8.6.3.6.6.Work Products 1.ISR and USR chapters detailing study methods,results,and conclusions summarizing Focus Area GW /SW modeling results including quantification of frequency,timing and duration of surface water and groundwater levels required to establish,maintain and promote floodplain and riparian plant communities.Fieldwork will be conducted Q2-Q4 2013 and Q2-Q4 2014. 8.6.3.7.Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Model Scaling and Project Operations Effects Modeling. The results of floodplain vegetation and soils mapping,forest succession models,seed dispersal study,seedling establishment studies,ice processes study,floodplain erosion and sediment transport study,and groundwater and surface water interaction study will be integrated into a conceptual ecological model of Susitna River floodplain vegetation and physical processes, including flow,sediment and ice process regimes.The results of these studies will be used to develop a dynamic floodplain vegetation model for simulating floodplain vegetation response to Project operation modification of the natural flow,sediment and ice processes regimes (Franz and Bazzaz 1976;Benjankar et al.2011;Springer et al.1999). Fluvial Geomorphology Section 6.6,Ice Processes Section 7.6,and Groundwater Section 7.5 modeling studies will provide modeling results of both existing conditions and Project operation scenarios.Together riparian botanical forest succession models (see Section 11.6),floodplain vegetation GW/SW flow response curve analyses and physical process models (geomorphology, groundwater,ice processes)will be used to model floodplain vegetation transition dynamics (Walker and del Moral 2008)resulting from Project operation scenarios. Study interdependencies are presented in Figure 8.6-20.Study objectives,methods and expected results are summarized in Table 8.6-9. Study objectives are to: 1.Develop conceptual ecological model of Susitna River floodplain vegetation establishment and recruitment based on synthesis of Riparian Vegetation Study and Riparian IFS results. 2.Scale-up results of Focus Area floodplain vegetation and physical process modeling results to riparian process domains. 3.Develop a dynamic spatially-explicit floodplain vegetation model for simulating floodplain vegetation response to Project operation modification of the natural flow, sediment and ice processes regimes. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-191 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 4.Develop spatially explicit maps of modeled Project operations effects throughout the Study Area. 5.Provide guidance to environmental analysis of Project operations. 8.6.3.7.1.Methods The results of the Focus Area modeling will be scaled-up to the riparian process domains using spatially explicit GIS-based models (Benjankar et al.2011;Chacon-Moreno et al.2007).The goal is to model both natural riparian flow-response functional groups and natural Susitna River physical process regimes to measure and map Project operational impacts to floodplain vegetation and riparian ecosystem processes throughout the Study Area.Recent developments in GIS,LiDAR-driven digital terrain models (DEMs),and geo-spatial analytical tools (ARCMAP, ESRI)have provided modelers the capacity to use the results of reach-scale analyses to scale-up to larger geospatially defined areas or domains (Benjankar et al.2011;Chacon-Moreno et al. 2007).Modeling riparian vegetation response,over a 185-mile Susitna River valley,to alterations of natural flow regimes,is inherently a geospatial analytical problem.Current state- of-the-art and science practice will be utilized to integrate modeling of physical processes (HEC- RAS,MODFLOW),and riparian vegetation-flow response functional groups with GIS geospatial analysis and display (ARCMAP,HEC-GEORAS). The objectives of the Focus Area scaling model are as follows: 1.Scale-up Focus Area modeling results to riparian process domains. 2.Assess potential impacts of Project operational flows on downriver floodplain plant communities and ecosystem processes. 3.Provide guidance to environmental analysis of Project operations. 8.6.3.7.2.Work Products 1.USR chapter detailing study methods,results,and conclusions summarizing:(1) floodplain vegetation study synthesis,physical process modeling studies,and vegetation succession models,(2)scaling results of floodplain and physical process Focus Area to riparian process domain modeling,and (3)spatially explicit maps of modeled Project operations effects throughout the Study Area. The modeling synthesis and Project operations modeling will be conducted Q4 2013 and Q1-Q2 2015.Modeling,results analysis,and USR chapter,will be developed in Q2 through Q4 2014 and Q1-2 2015. 8.6.4.Consistency with Generally Accepted Scientific Practice The proposed Riparian IFS,including methodologies for data collection,analysis,modeling, field schedules,and study durations,is consistent with generally accepted practice in the scientific community.The Riparian IFS is consistent with common approaches used for other FERC proceedings and references specific protocols and survey methodologies,as appropriate. Specifically,riparian vegetation mapping and measurement,the classification of riparian plant communities,and dendrochronologic techniques will follow standard methods generally accepted by the scientific community.Proposed GW/SW models have been widely used Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-192 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN throughout the discipline (Baird and Maddock 2005;Maddock et al.2012;Franz and Bazzaz 1977;Rains et al.2004). Current state-of-the-art and science practice will be utilized to integrate modeling of physical processes and riparian vegetation-flow response guilds with GIS geospatial analysis and display (Benjankar et al.2011;Chacon-Moreno et al.2007;Van de Rijt et al.1996). 8.6.5.Schedule The schedule for completing all components of the Riparian IFS is provided in Table 8.6-1. Licensing participants will have opportunities for study coordination through regularly scheduled meetings,reports,and,as needed,technical subcommittee meetings.Reports will be prepared at the end of 2013 (Initial Study Report)and 2014 (Updated Study Report)for each of the study components.Licensing participants will have the opportunity to review and comment on these reports.Workgroup meetings are planned to occur on at least a quarterly basis,and workgroup subcommittees will meet or have teleconferences as needed. 8.6.6.Level of Effort and Cost The Riparian Instream Flow Study is planned as a 2+year effort,with field sampling conducted spring through summers and fall of 2013-2014.The Initial Study Report will be delivered in late 2013 and updated in early 2015. Riparian Instream Flow Study elements and their estimated levels of effort include the following: 1.Spring/summer 2013 fieldwork investigating eight or more Focus Areas.Field effort will involve approximately two teams of two ecologists one to two weeks per Focus Area to map and sample riparian vegetation. =$400,000 2.Spring/summer 2014 fieldwork investigating up to eight Focus Areas.Field effort will involve approximately a team of three ecologists one to two weeks per study site to map and sample riparian vegetation. =$310,000 3.Modeling forest succession and physical processes (GW/SW,hydraulic,ice processes, operational flow simulations). =$440,000 4.Statistical analyses and report development,meetings,and presentations. =$440,000 5.GW/SW interaction study. =Costs provided in Groundwater Study,Section 7.5. The total approximate effort/cost is $1.6 million (not including costs for riparian GW/SW interaction study instrumentation,field installation and monitoring,and MODFLOW modeling). -Details and level of field effort will be based upon approved of overall study objectives and design.Field surveys will be conducted for 40 to 50 days in each year,depending on the needs for additional ground-verification data.The Riparian IFS Study will involve extensive,office- Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-193 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN based activities including remote sensing interpretation,physical modeling,vegetation modeling, statistical modeling,geospatial analyses,and study report preparation. The final types and level of physical process modeling will be determined in coordination with the Instream Flow,Geomorphology,Ice Processes,Botanical Riparian,and Groundwater Study teams.Estimated study costs are subject to review and revision as additional details are developed. 8.6.7.Literature Cited Baird,K.J.and T.Maddock.2005.Simulating riparian evapotranspiration:a new methodology and application for groundwater models.Journal ofHydrology 312:176-190. Benjankar,R.,G.Egger,K.Jorde,P.Goodwin and N.F.Glenn.2011.Dynamic floodplain vegetation model development for the Kootenai River,USA.Journal of Environmental Management 92:3058-3070. Braatne,J.H.,S.B.Rood and P.E.Heilman.1996.Life history,ecology,conservation of riparian cottonwoods in North America.In:Biology of Populus and its Implications for Management and Conservation (Eds.R.F.Stettler,H.D.Bradshaw,P.E.Heilman and T.M.Hinckley),pp.57-86.NRC Research Press,Ottawa. Brenden,T.O.,L.Wang,P.W.Seelbach,R.D.Clark Jr.,M.J.Wiley and B.L.Sparks-Jackson. 2008.A spatially constrained clustering program for river valley segment delineation from GIS digital river networks.Environmental Modeling &Software 23:638-649. Chacon-Moreno,E.,J.K.Smith,A-K.Skidmore,H.H.T.Prins and A.G.Toxopeus.2007. Modeling spatial patterns of plant distribution as a consequence of hydrological dynamic processes in a Venezuelan flooding savanna.Ecottopicos 20:55-73. Collins,W.B.,and D.J.Helm.1997.Moose,Alces alces,habitat relative to riparian succession in the boreal forest,Susitna River,Alaska.Canadian Field-Naturalist 111:567-574. Cooper,D.J.,D.M.Merritt,D.C.Anderson and R.A.Chimner.1999.Factors controlling the establishment of Fremont cottonwood seedlings on the upper Green River,USA. Regulated Rivers:Research &Management 15:419-440. Dawson,T.E.and J.R.Ehleringer.1991.Streamside trees that do not use streamside water. Nature 350:335-337. Elzinga,C.L.,D.W.Salzer,and J.W.Willoughby.1998.Measuring and Monitoring Plant Populations.USDI,Bureau of Land Management.492 pp. Engstrom,J.,R.Jansson,C.Nilsson and C.Weber.2011.Effects of river ice on riparian vegetation.Freshwater biology 56:1095-1105. 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 5:270-277. Franz,E.H.and F.A.Bazzaz.1977.Simulation of vegetation response to modified hydrologic regimes:a probabilistic model based on niche differentiation in a floodplain forest. Ecology 58:176-183. Fritts,H.C.1976.Tree Rings and Climate.New York:Academic Press. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-194 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Helm,D.J.,and W.B.Collins.1997.Vegetation succession and disturbance on a boreal forest floodplain,Susitna River,Alaska.Canadian Field-Naturalist 111:553-566. Henszey,R.J.,K.Pfeiffer,and J.R.Keough.2004.Linking surface and ground-water levels to riparian grassland species along the Platte River in Central Nebraska,USA.Wetlands 24: 665-687. Hurlbert,S.H.1984.Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments. Ecological Monographs 54:187-211 Jorgenson,M.T.,J.-E.Roth,M.Emers,S.F.Schlentner,D.K.Swanson,E.R.Pullman,JS. Mitchell,and A.A.Stickney.2003.An ecological land survey in the Northeast Planning Area of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska,2002.ABR,Inc.,Fairbanks,AK.128 Pp- Karrenberg,S.,P.J.Edwards and J.Kollmann.2002.The life history of Salicaceae living in the active zone of floodplains.Freshwater Biology 47:733-748. Mahoney,J.M.and S.B.Rood.1998.Stream flow requirements for cottonwood seedling recruitment-an integrative model.Wetlands 18:634-645. Maddock,Thomas,III,Baird,K.J.,Hanson,R.T.,Schmid,Wolfgang,and Ajami,Hoori.2012. RIP-ET:A riparian evapotranspiration package for MODFLOW-2005:U.S.Geological Survey Techniques and Methods 6-A39,76 p. Merritt,D.M.,M.L.Scott,N.L.Poff,G.T.Auble and D.A.Lytle.2010.Theory,methods and tools for determining environmental flows for riparian vegetation:riparian vegetation- flow response guilds.Freshwater Biology 55:206-225. McKendrick,J.D.,W.Collins,D.Helm,J.McMullen,and J.Koranda.1982.Susitna Hydroelectric Project environmental studies Phase I final report,Subtask 7.12-Plant ecology studies.Report by University of Alaska,Agricultural Experiment Station, Palmer,for Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage.124 pp.+appendix. Montgomery,D.1999.Process domains and the river continuum.Journal of the American Water Resources Association 35 (2):397-410. Mouw,J.B.,J.A.Stanford,and P.B.Alaback.2009.Influences of flooding and hyporheic exchange on floodplain plant richness and productivity.River Research and Applications 25:929-945. Mouw,J.E.B.,J.L.Chaffin,D.C.Whited,F.R.Hauer,P.L.Matson and J.A.Stanford.2012. Recruitment and successional dynamics diversify the shifting habitat mosaic of an Alaskan floodplain.River Research and Applications.Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com)DOI:10:10.1002/rra.2569. Mueller-Dombois,D.and H.Ellenberg.1974.Aims and Methods of Vegetation Ecology. Wiley,New York. Naiman,R.J.,K.L.Fetherston,S.J.McKay,and J.Chen.1998.Riparian forests.Chapter 12 Jn Naiman,R.J.and R.E.Bilby,River Ecology and Management,Lessons from the Coastal Pacific Northwest.Springer,New York. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-195 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Pearlstine,L.,H.McKellar,and W Kitchens.1985.Modeling the impacts of a river diversion on bottomland forest communities in the Santee River floodplain,South Carolina. Ecological Modeling 29:283-302. Prowse,T.D.and S.Beltaos.2002.Climatic control of river-ice hydrology:a review. Hydrological Processes 16:805-822. Prowse,T.D.and J.M.Culp.2003.Ice break-up:a neglected factor in river ecology.Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering 30:128-144. Rains,M.C.,J.F.Mount,and E.W.Larsen.2004.Simulated changes in shallow groundwater and vegetation distributions under different reservoir operations scenarios.Ecological Applications 14:192-207. Richards,K.,J.Brasington and F.Hughs.2002.Geomorphic dynamics of floodplains: ecological implications and a potential modeling strategy.Freshwater Biology 47:559- 579. Rood,S.B.,J.H.Braatne and F.M.R.Hughes.2003.Ecophysiology of riparian cottonwoods: stream flow dependency,water relations and restoration.Tree Physiology 23:1113- 1124. Rood,S.B.,L.A.Goater,JM.Mahoney,C.M.Pearce and D.G.Smith.2007.Floods,fire,and ice:disturbance ecology of riparian cottonwoods.Canadian Journal of Botany 85:1019- 1032. Schoeneberger,P.J.,D.A.Wysocki,E.C.Benham,and W.D.Broderson (editors).2002.Field book for describing and sampling soils,Version 2.0,Natural Resources Conservation Service,National Soil Survey Center,Lincoln,NE. Springer,A.E.,J.M.Wright,P.B.Shafroth,J.C.Stromberg and D.T.Patten.1999.Coupling groundwater and riparian vegetation models to assess effects of reservoir releases.Water Resources Research 35:3621-3630. Stella,J.C.,J.J.Battles,B-/K.Orr,and J.R.McBride.2006.Synchrony of seed dispersal, hydrology and local climate in a semi-arid river reach in California.Ecosystems 9:1200- 1214. Stokes,S.and D.E.Walling.2003.Radiogenic and isotopic methods for the direct dating of fluvial sediments.Chapter 9 Jn:Kondolf,G.M.and H.Piegay (eds)Tools in Fluvial Geomorphology.Wiley,West Sussex,England. UAFAFES (University of Alaska Fairbanks Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station). 1985.Susitna Hydroelectric Project,riparian vegetation succession report.Draft report by University of Alaska-Fairbanks Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Pre-Application Document Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4-263 December 2011 Station,Palmer,for Harza-Ebasco Susitna Joint Venture and Alaska Power Authority,Anchorage.169 pp. Van de Rijt,C.W.C.J.,L.Hazelhoff and C.W.P.M.Blom.1996.Vegetation zonation in a former tidal area:a vegetation-type response model based on DCA and logistic regression using GIS.Journal of Vegetation Science 7:505-518. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-196 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Viereck,L.A.,C.T.Dyrness,A.R.Batten,and K.J.Wenzlick.1992.The Alaska Vegetation Classification.Pacific Northwest Research Station,U.S.Forest Service,Portland,OR. Gen.Tech.Rep.PNW-GTR-286.278 pp. Walker,L.R.,and F.S.Chapin III.1986.Physiological controls over seedling growth in primary succession on an Alaskan floodplain.Ecology 67:1508-1523. Walker,L.R.,and R.del Moral.2008.Transition dynamics in succession:implications for rates,trajectories and restoration.Jn Suding,K.and R.J.Hobbs (eds)New Models for Ecosystem Dynamics and Restoration.Island Press. Walker,L.R.,J.C.Zasada,and F.S.Chapin,III.1986.The role of life history processes in primary succession on an Alaskan floodplain.Ecology 67:1243-1253. Winter,T.C.2001.The concept of hydrologic landscapes.Journal of the American Water Resources Association 37:335-349. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-197 December 2012 RL..- STUDY PLAN 8.6.8.Tables Table 8.6-1.Schedule for implementation of the Riparian Instream Flow Study. Activity 2012 2013 2015 1Q 2Q |3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q |3Q 4Q 1Q 4Q 1Q4;2Q Refine and Finalize Study Plan Focus Area Study Site Selection Critical review of 1980s Susitna River data;current scientific research concerning hydro project floodplain vegetation effects;and unimpacted,natural floodplain vegetation research Finalize Riparian Groundwater /Surface Water Field Design Implement Riparian Groundwater/Surface Water Installation and Sampling Riparian Vegetation:Field data collection Seed dispersal study Tree ice-scar mapping Focus Area vegetation mapping and sampling Dendrochronology sampling Soil sampling Sediment Dating:Sampling and Analysis Develop groundwater /surface water models Develop vegetation flow-response models Develop riparian scaling model:reach to riparian process domain Develop vegetation Project operational flow-response mode!VvRiparian vegetation impact analyses VvAlternative operational scenarios VvReporting Legend: --Planned Activity A ----Follow up activity (as needed}A Initial Study Report Updated Study Report Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-198 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REevisep STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-2.8.6.3.1 Floodplain Vegetation and Physical Process Regimes Critical Review,Synthesis and Lessons Learned. STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.Conduct a critical review of previous Susitna River 1980s floodplain vegetation studies. 2.Conduct a critical review,and synthesis of relevant findings,of circumpolar,temperate and boreal regions,scientific research concerning dam effects on downriver floodplain plant communities. 3.Conduct critical review,and synthesis of relevant current scientific research,concerning temperate and boreal floodplain forest succession and dynamics under natural flow regimes. METHODS 1.Search libraries and internet for relevant scientific literature. 2.Develop annotated,searchable bibliography. 3.Develop critical review paper with thematic format:a.__first,identify critical floodplain ecological processes effected by dams,b.second,compare Project dam operations under current design and compare with scientific literature reported effects, c.__third,identify potential alternative operation scenarios to limit effects. EXPECTED RESULTS 1.State of the science review of scientific findings concerning dam effects on downriver floodplain plant communities. 2.Summary of expected effects of Project operations on Susitna River floodplain plant communities and ecosystems.3._Set of guidelines for limiting Project operations effects based on current science. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-199 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-3.8.6.3.2 Focus Area Selection-Riparian Process Domain Delineation STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.Develop a riparian process domain stratification of the Study Area. 2.Select Focus Areas representative of each riparian process domain for physical process and vegetation survey sampling and modeling. METHODS 1.Riparian process domain delineation,and riparian Focus Area selection is an iterative process. 2.In Q1 21013 the results of the 2012 geomorphology study and channel classification (Section 6.6),ice processes study (Section 7.6),riparian botanical survey (Section 11.6)will be used to classify channel,floodplain and floodplain vegetation types. 3.Constrained cluster analysis will be performed on channel,floodplain and vegetation types. 4.Process domain type variability will be statistically described and a power analysis performed to determine the number of Focus Areas necessary to capture process domain variability in the stratified sampling approach. 5.Candidate Focus Areas previously identified through the expert-opinion process for both Aquatic and Riparian IFS will be reviewed. 6.Results of the cluster analysis,power analysis and expert-opinion process will be presented to the TWG for final selection of Focus Areas. 7.Ice process mapping results,completed in Q4 2013,will be used in a second round of riparian process domain analysis and Focus Area selection. 8.Results of second iterative analysis will be used to assess whether additional Focus Areas are needed to capture ice process effects for 2014 field sampling. EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Hierarchical stratification of Susitna River Study Area into riparian process domains. 2.Statistically robust selection of representative riparian process domain Focus Areas. 3.Study Area floodplain vegetation and physical process sampling and characterization necessary to support model scaling of Focus Area study results to riparian process domain. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-200 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-4.8.6.3.3.1 Synchrony of Seed Dispersal,Hydrology,and Local Susitna River Valley Climate STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.Measure cottonwood and select willow species seed dispersal timing. 2.Model local Susitna River valley climate,and associated seasonal peak flows,relative to cottonwood and willow seed dispersal. 3.Develop a recruitment box model of seed dispersal timing,river flow regime,and cottonwood and willow seed dispersal and establishment. METHODS 1.Conduct a two-year field survey of seed release of balsam poplar and select willow species. 2.Develop a 'degree-day'climate model for the onset of seed release relative to local temperature conditions using methods developed by Stella et al.(2006).3._Analyze the historic climate and Susitna River flow regime relationship. EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Degree-day model of peak seed release window using seed release observations and continuous temperature records from each floodplain sample site.2.-Recruitment box model of cottonwood and select willow species.3.Model of peak runoff/seed release temporal synchrony for operational flow guidelines. 4.Model of critical summer flow regime necessary to support seedling establishment. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-201 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-5.8.6.3.3.2 Seedling Establishment and Recruitment Study STUDY OBJECTIVES Map the spatial locations dominant woody riparian seedlings including balsam poplar,white spruce,paper birch,thinleaf and Sitka alder,feltleaf willow,and Barclay's willow throughout the Focus Area,and Riparian Vegetation Study sites,active channel margins, and floodplain. 2.Use a stratified random sampling approach,with variable plot sizes (Mueller-Dombois and Ellenburg 1974)to sample mappedseedlingpolygons. 3._Identify seedlings to species,and measure seedling heights and density.4.Describe and measure seedling site soil characteristics (see Section 8.6.3.7 for methods). 5.Measure and model seedling site GW/SW hydroregimes. 6.Measure seedling xylem water source through isotopic analysis (see Section 8.6.3.6 for methods). 7.Investigate ice process seedling site interactions through empirical observations and ice process modeling. 8.Develop a probabilistic model of seedling hydrologic,sediment,and ice regime processes. METHODS 1.|Survey sampling approach is as follows.2._First,a helicopter survey of each reach will be conducted to locate and map observable seedling areas.3.Second,four to eight transects will be placed systematically throughout the reach normal to main channel,extending across the adjacent floodplain intersecting observed seedling sites.Each transect will be traversed and all remotely observed,and newly identified on-the-ground seedling locations will be mapped with GPS. 4,Third,seedling site polygon boundaries will be mapped with GPS. 5.Fourth,seedling patches will be sampled using a stratified random approach to locate sample plots.Seedling species will be identified,or collected for herbarium identification,and abundance (density)and height measured using variable plot size and shapes (Elzinga et al.1998;Mueller-Dombois and Ellenberg 1974). 6.Fifth,at each plot two to three seedlings of each species will be excavated and rooting depth measured.Excavated woody seedlings will be aged at the root collar in the laboratory and annual rings counted to provide seedling age.Substrate texture and depth to cobbles will be described and measured in soil pits excavated to 50 cm in depth or to gravel/cobble refusal layer. 7.Sixth,a sub-sample of Focus Area site seedlings will be used for xylem isotopic analyses to identify source of water (Section 8.6.3.6). 8.Seedling establishment model will be developed using techniques and methods described in Franz and Bazzaz (1977),Rains et al. (2004),Henszey et al.(2004),Baird and Maddock (2005),and Maddock et al.(2012). EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Probabilistic model of seedling establishment requirements based on GW/SW interaction model,sediment transport model,and ice regime model. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-202 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-6.8.6.3.4 Characterize the role of river ice in the establishment and recruitment of dominant floodplain vegetation. STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.Develop an integrated model of ice process interactions with floodplain vegetation. 2.Conduct primary research to identify the effects of ice on floodplain vegetation within mapped Susitna River ice floodplain impact zones. 3. Quantitatively describe and compare ice influenced and non-ice-influenced floodplain plant community composition,abundance, age,and spatial pattern to assess the role and degree of influence ice processes have on Susitna River floodplain vegetation. 4,Provide Project operational guidance on potential effects of operations flow on ice formation and floodplain vegetation development. METHODS 1.Multiple lines of evidence will be used to inform a final research study design to address the question of vegetation response to ice shearing influence on the Susitna River floodplain.2._First,ice vegetation impacts (tree ice-scars)will be observed,mapped,and aged (using dendrochronologic techniques),and gravelfloodplaindepositswillbemappedthroughouttheStudyAreatodevelopaStudyAreamapofrivericefloodplainvegetation interaction domains. 3.Second,local residents will be interviewed (e.g.,Mike Wood,who lives across from Whiskers Slough)concerning their knowledge of spatial locations of historic ice dams,years of significant ice occurrence,and other anecdotal historical information conceming ice on the Susitna River. 4.From these two sources of information,a map will be created of Susitna River ice process floodplain vegetation effect domains. 5.Floodplain vegetation surveys will be conducted to quantitatively measure (stratified random sampling of mapped floodplain vegetation ice shear process zones)and statistically describe and compare vegetation characteristics associated with floodplains experiencing ice shear events and floodplain vegetation without observed ice influence.The vegetation study design will build on the design and results of Engstrom et al.(2011)where they studied and assessed the effects of anchor ice on riparian vegetation. Engstrom and others found that species richness was higher at sites affected by anchor ice than at sites where anchor ice was absent,suggesting that ice disturbance plays a role in enhancing plant species richness (Engstrom et al.2011). EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Ice processes domain and floodplain ice interaction geographic,and elevation,map to inform floodplain ice interaction vegetation study design and ice processes modeling,Section 7.6. 2.Develop a floodplain vegetation ice processes interaction study to compare ice disturbed and un-disturbed floodplains,similar to the approach of Engstrom et al.(2011), 3.The results of the study will be used to assess how floodplain vegetation pattern and process may change with Project operation alterations of the natural ice process regime.The final study design will be completed in Q2-3 2013,as additional tree ice-scar field data become available. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-203 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-7.8.6.3.5 Characterize the role of erosion and sediment deposition in the formation of floodplain surfaces,soils, and vegetation. STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.Measure the rates of channel migration,and floodplain vegetation disturbance or turnover,throughout the Study Area. 2.Measure the rates of sediment deposition,and floodplain development,throughout the Study Area. 3.Assess /model how Project operations will effect changes in the natural sediment regime,floodplain depositional patterns,and soil development throughout the Study Area. 4.Assess /model how Project operations changes in sediment transport and soil development will affect floodplain plant community succession. METHODS 1.Floodplain soils and stratigraphy will be sampled throughout the Study Area using a stratified random approach,including pits located in all Focus Areas. 2.Floodplain soil pits will be excavated from the surface to gravel /cobble layer (historic channel bed)and soil stratigraphy will be described and measured using standard NRCS field techniques (Schoeneberger et al.2002).Standard sediment grain size sieve analysis will be conducted on the entire sediment profile. 3.Direct dating of fluvial sediments will be conducted using isotopic techniques,including,but not limited to,'8'Cs and 2Pb measurements as described in Stokes and Walling (2003). 4._Dendrochronologic techniques (Fritts 1976)will be used to age trees and current floodplain surfaces at each soil pit.EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Dating of floodplain stratigraphy and surfaces using direct isotopic and dendrochronologic techniques for development of floodplain evolution model, 2.Floodplain stratigraphic descriptions and grain size analyses for development of floodplain evolution model and sediment transport modeling. 3.Measurement of rate of channel migration disturbance of floodplain vegetation.Measurement of rate of floodplain turnover or disturbance. 4.Model of how Project operations will effect soil development. 5._Model of alteration of riparian seedling establishment floodplain surfaces and floodplain vegetation succession. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-204 December 2012 REvISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-8.8.6.3.6 Characterize natural floodplain vegetation groundwater and surface water maintenance hydroregime. STUDY OBJECTIVES 1.Characterize dominant floodplain woody plant species establishment and maintenance life stage water sources through stable isotope analyses of groundwater,soil water,and xylem water. 2.Measure groundwater and surface water regime at Focus Areas (GW:depth seasonally;SW:river stage) 3.Develop a floodplain GW/SW interaction model (water level frequency,magnitude,depth,duration,timing,interaction response). 4.Develop floodplain vegetation-flow response models. 5.Model Project operational flow effects on floodplain plant communities. METHODS 1.Focus Area GW /SW sampling for all floodplain plant community types and successional stages including plant establishment,plant recruitment,and mature forest vegetation. 2.Sampling design will include transects and arrays of groundwater wells and surface water stage stations see Groundwater Study Section 7.5 for details. 3.Riparian floodplain plant community and soils sampling approach and design is detailed in the Riparian Vegetation Study Section 11.6. 4.Woody species source of water will be directly determined from stable isotope analyses of groundwater,soil water,precipitation,and xylem water hydrogen and oxygen. 5.The rooting depth of dominant floodplain plants will be measured through excavation of trenches within each Focus Area floodplain plant community type in coordination with soil stratigraphic excavations and well point soil pits. 6.Probabilistic response curves will be developed for select plant species and all riparian plant community types using techniques described in Rains et al.(2004)and Henszey et al.(2004). EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Probabilistic response curves for select plant species and all riparian plant community types. 2.-Floodplain vegetation-GW/SW regime functional groups.3.-Statistically modeled relationship between individual riparian species,floodplain plant community types,and natural GW/SW hydroregime. 4.Model of potential effects of Project operations on Susitna River floodplain plant communities. 5.Basis for recommended fiow prescriptions necessary to support floodplain vegetation establishment,recruitment,and maintenance. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-205 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Table 8.6-9.8.6.3.7 Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Model Scaling and Project Operations Effects Modeling STUDY OBJECTIVES Study objectives are to: Develop conceptual ecological model of Susitna River floodplain vegetation establishment and recruitment based on synthesis of Riparian Vegetation Study and Riparian IFS results. 2.-Scale-up results of Focus Area floodplain vegetation and physical process modeling results to riparian process domains.3.Develop a dynamic spatially-explicit floodplain vegetation model for simulating floodplain vegetation response to Project operation modification of the natural flow,sediment and ice processes regimes. 4.Develop spatially explicit maps of modeled Project operations effects throughout the Study Area.5._Provide guidance to environmental analysis of Project operations. METHODS 1.Develop a dynamic spatially-explicit floodplain vegetation model for simulating floodplain vegetation response to Project operation modification of the natural flow,sediment and ice processes regimes (Franz and Bazzaz 1976;Benjankar et al.2011;Springer et al. 1999). 2.Fluvial geomorphology Section 6.6,ice process Section 7.6,and groundwater Section 7.5 modeling studies will provide modeling results of both existing conditions and Project operation scenarios. 3._Riparian botanical forest succession models synthesis. 4.Floodplain vegetation (individual plant species and community types)GW/SW flow response curve analyses and physical process models (geomorphology,groundwater,ice processes)will be used to model floodplain vegetation transition dynamics at riparian process domain scale. 5._Focus Area modeling will be scaled-up to the riparian process domains using spatially explicit GIS models. EXPECTED RESULTS 1.Conceptual ecological model of Susitna River floodplain vegetation establishment and recruitment floodplain vegetation.2.Dynamic spatially-expiicit floodplain vegetation model for simulating floodplain vegetation response to Project operation modification of the natural flow,sediment and ice processes regimes. 3._Riparian process domain scale model of floodplain vegetation and physical processes.4.-Spatially explicit maps of modeled Project operations floodplain vegetation effects throughout the Study Area.5._Project operations guidance to minimize modeled floodplain vegetation effects. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-206 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.6.9. STUDY INTERDEPENDENCIES FOR Figures RIPARIAN INSTREAM FLOW_STUDY SECTION 8.6 IFSF&A 8.5 IFS Riparian 8.6 Groundwater 75 ice Processes 7.6 Fluvial Geomorphology 6.6 \ce Processes 7.6 Riparian Botanical 11.6 Groundwater 7.5 Site Selection Modeling Needs Field Data Sharing (Q 4-2012,Q1-2013) Riparian Process Domain .-Groundwater /Surface Geomorphic ProcessesProjectAreaRiparianWaterInteractionSedimentSupplyRegimeVegetation&Soils Study Model Hist.Channel ChangeMapping&*Groundwater Depth Flood Freq.&Flow DurationQuantitative*Seasonal Statistics (Q4,2013;Q3-4,2014)Description *Project operational(Q 4,2013;4 2014)effects Ice dam regime and river (Q3-4,2014)network location Ice /floodplain interactions Sediment Dating (dendrochronology & Isotopic/Radiogenic) (Q4,2013;Q4 2014) (Q3-4,2014) Potential Changes in Floodplain Vegetation Habitats &Plant Community Succession: -Relative Spatial Distribution -Types of projected change (Q4,2013;Q1,2015) Dendrochronology (tree ice scar) (Q4,2013;Q4 2014) \ Geomorphology 6.0 Geomorphology Large Woody Debris 6.5.4.9 Riparian Botanical 11.6 River Productivity 9.8 Wildlife 10.0 Ice Processes Project Operational Flow Design7.6 Figure 8.6-1.Study interdependencies for Riparian Instream Flow Study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project ?roject No.14241Fl 07 Alaska Energy Authority REVISED STUDY PLAN 'Susitna River Floodplain Forest Succession 0-15 yr 20-50 yr 50-90 yr 100-150yr 170 yr >200 yr y Ice SeouryeBeaver 7 Vv heii es PNP EY <&-=Advance ¢-Flooding <--+-Beaver <--Wind €=-==IceScour ¢-Logging (after Helm and Collins 1997) Figure 8.6-2.Helm and Collins (1997)Susitna River floodplain forest succession.Note:model depicts typical floodplain forests found in the Susitna River Middle River and Three Rivers Confluence segments. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-208 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN RIPARIAN PROCESS DOMAIN DELINEATION 8.6.3.2 Riparian Botanical 11.6 Fluvial Geomorphology 6.6 Ice Processes 7.6 Project Area wide collection of location data for: 1.tree ice-scars, 2.-shrub scars, 3.floodplain ice gravel Geomorphic river segment and reach classification (Q4,2012) and soil shearing 4,plant community types. (Q.4,2013;Q4 2014) <peaond an eeeesc (ek (Q3-4,2014) Q1-2,Q3 2014) Modeling ice dam regime and river network location Ice /floodplain interactions. Annual ice formation and break-up videography surveys (Q2,Q4 2012;Q1-2, Q3-4 2013;Q1-2,Q3-4 2013; 1.Iterative riparian process domain map generation.(Q2-4 2013;Q4 2014) 2.Ice /floodplain interaction map. Figure 8.6-3.Riparian Process Domain Delineation 8.6.3.2. 4 (Q4 2013;Q4 2014)2043), Riparian IFS Ice Processes Riparian Fluvial Scaling &98 Botanical Geomorphology Project .11.6 6.6 Effects -Oe Oe” Modeling 8.6.3.7 Sucitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Fi ?roject No.14241 Pa 09 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe!} Rt..-_)STUDY PLAN RIPARIAN FOCUS AREA SELECTION 8.6.3.2 -Fluvial IFSF&A 8.5 Riparian G hol IFS Riparian8.6BotanicaleomorpnologyGeomorphology6.011.6 6.6 Groundwater 7.5 ice Processes 7.6 - ProjectArea wide collection of location data for:Geomorphic river segment 1.tree ice-scars,and reach classification Team expert-opinion 2.shrub scars,(Q4,2012}selection of candidate Focus 3. floodplainice gravel Areas (Q3-4 2012) and soil shearing, 4.plantcommunitytypes. (Q.4,2013;Q4 2014) Riparian fooclis area,a process dedomattgGisclustefSAalysas,"i fPrel(y Ht lia a '5'foclis rea selectionBBEbtratified'arnptin'PdesieQL201308 2014)Selected riparian Focus Areas (Q1 2013;Q1 2014) Riparian IFS Groundwater Riparian Fluvial Scaling &75 Botanical Geomorphology Project 11.6 6.6 Effects --eee Oe” Modeling 8.6.3.7 Figure 8.6-4.Riparian Focus Area Selection 8.6.3.2. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-210 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN |.SEED DISPERSAL AND GERMINATION enerananeo-ene«or «*ea 5 year or greaterspringflood Summer baseflow Bank slump <-Erosion <-Accretion ll.ESTABLISHED SAPLINGS (5-10 years later)50-100 year stands _vces.,With new seedling cohorttont,10-50 year stands Foy ito S:i goa,3), ae NN Summer baseflow Lateral erosion+ Mortality zones Figure 8.6-5.Cottonwood (Populus)life history stages:seed dispersal and germination,sapling to tree establishment.Cottonwood typically germinates on newly created bare mineral soils associate with lateral active channel margins and gravel bars.Note proximity of summer baseflow and floodplain water table (Braatne et al.1996). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authoritv Fl ?roject No.14241 Pac 11 Decembel , REVISED STUDY PLAN 3504 leaf L----Growth Season ---J leafflushdrop 250 A Seed Release 200 1 Recruitment 150 q---rnNX ile.cottonwoodRecruitment" Bands N\sandbar 50-4 NN willow 1 survivable stage decline 200 2.5 em/d s x 150 4 .1 cmd 1oo-cottonwood [ >.U "a504Soesandbar willow Mea, 0-7 ElevationAboveStageatBaseFlow(cm)350 +Stage 300 5 Hydrograph cottonwood sandbar 50 '=willow 1 '.eebaseflow0-7 MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP Month Figure 8.6-6.The riparian "Recruitment Box Model”describing seasonal flow pattern,associated river stage (elevation), and flow ramping necessary for successful cottonwood and willow seedling establishment (from Amlin and Rood 2002; Rood et al.,2005).Cottonwood species (Populus deltoides),willow species (Salix exigua).Stage hydrograph and seed release timing will vary by region,watershed,and plant species. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-212 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN SEED DISPERSAL,HYDROLOGY AND CLIMATE SYNCHRONY STUDY 8.6.3.3.1 Flow Routing 6.5 Historic peak flow hydrograph analyses (Q2-Q4,2014) seed sui spergal field.Firveys(02 2013/02)i o4ay Model of Poplarandwillow seed ?ea dispersal,hydrology and climate '(Q4 2014) v v Riparian IFS Project Scaling &Operation Project Design Effects Modeling 8.6.3.7 Figure 8.6-7.Seed Dispersal,Hydrology and Climate Synchrony Study8.6.3.3.1. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority Fl ?roject No.14241 Pa '13 Decembe , RiL..--)STUDY PLAN 1s4ew 153°W 152°W 1s1ew 150°149°w T T ” T - T , 'Q z|fo :+'.McKinley Park \, 3 Legend oy ee 8 sa,'Denali National:.9 7;aD, ..,ed rr a)5¥x Proposed Watana Dam Site |.°°-:a,Tauernz.TB Park and Preserve .:/Cantwell:RE Hi Meteorological Station . ;Sone A vB"||Susitna River Segments wet ;we Rers Upper L,an .4 zReseMiddle|ye,8 Ae Lower to G' ;<Y$>Susitna Basin -ip eo;zL Iv gl?(ae 3 :o Lenny ,A ChulltnaeotfeSEas Denali 2;, -,State Park 7:3 udeé5a:+ay§i)'%"4 ° a er) y re \-={Lb i 3 a a 4 , ' -a a '. eo fay 3 rs wf ie vig!: t roéar,2a a lezee:"4 en 8 /¢5 Boje 6 Palmer™,-”yr.-3 .L wa tag le .aeJypeFS/!wea ow (@MEE>ENERGY AUTHORITYzwfiin|j ears BR =ye Fr pose Y Data Sources:See Map ReferencesFsTovedeGishoSel.)30intelve!:1 -j a Susitna Flats Q (eea 1}\en x .L * / .- 2 :col ae I Te,State Game fa '4 Projection:Alaska Albers NAD 1063 .a j jake Clark :\fy ys .Refuge oe -4 iar is ote Created 112072012 zated,”Vay gra te,:es fe Map Author R2-Joette Zabiotn:z 7 o _National :ae vee ie ae (d 7 §Anchorage .:.<File:Map.RSP_IFSR.MetStouore.mad 3Fcw!Park and Preserve \ae pu of me °ope if oy ie os Oe ook MI nlet th ”: Figure 8.6-8.Susitna Study Area meteorological station locations. Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-214 REVISED STUDY PLAN SEEDLING ESTABLISHMENT &RECRUITMENT STUDY 8.6.3.3.2 Fluvial Geomorphology 6.6 River ice floodplain vegetation study Groundwater 75 8.6.3.4 Groundwater/Surface Water Interaction Study Model *Measure and model 1.Focus Area sediment transport modeling. Preliminary map of ice/2.Focus Area hydrograph floodplain vegetation analyses. interaction zones.frequency,magnitude, (Q.2-3 2013)duration &timing of surface &groundwater flux *Model project operational GW/SW effects (03-4,2014) Ge AVES:recalne one ca"B251 aeseedlings arias3-year Seedling eecohort$Mont meht3-ese establishment tohort Bample:biota Probabilistic model of seedling and survival /é falyza'Yeading t'fydros establishment GW/SW hydrologic, study :Fregimétonitions .and soil/sediment requirements . 4 "poneprobabilisticnasih2013,0 42014) 1.Cohort establishment (survival for three years)study results.7 ---sneer 2.Refined Probabilistic model of Project Riparian IFS Riparian seedling establishment GW/SW Operation Scaling &Botanical hydrologic,and soil/sediment Design Project 11.6 requirements .Effects Modeling 8.6.3.7 Figure 8.6-9.Seedling Establishment &Recruitment Study 8.6.3.3.2. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project F Project No.14241 Pa 15 Alaska Energy Authority Decembe > REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 8.6-10.Cottonwood tree ice-scar.Floodplain located immediately above Three Rivers Confluence. Alaska Energy Authority December 2012Page8-216 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 REVISED STUDY PLAN - AEF3 eipry tt Es Figure 8.6-11.Cottonwood forest tree ice-sears.Floodplain located immediately above Three Rivers Confluence. Alaska Energy Authoritv December17Pag Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project *roject No.14241FE REVISED STUDY PLAN go aepeeae Mya Figure 8.6-12.Floodplain ice deposited gravel piles.Floodplain in braided reach below Three Rivers Confluence. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-218 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN RIVER ICE-FLOODPLAIN VEGETATION ESTABLISHMENT AND RECRUITMENT 8.6.3.4 Riparian Botanical 11.6 Botanical survey mapping of: 1.tree ice-scars, 2.shrub scars, 3.floodplain ice gravel and soil shearing , (Q.4,2013;Q4 2014) Ice Processes 7.6 4.plant community types. Seasonal ice formation and break-up videography (Q4 2012,Q1-2,4 2013;Q1-2,4 2014) Summary of 1980's ice process studies. Ice process modeling results (a4 2014) edmpairing tedinfugneed aand dongPlcé-'Influenced:'flobdplain plantLorfimlinity''establishment arid pamethal cteflee t dlei'l fed 7jof ice provertoodplainvegetationRiv 1.Vegetation study design (Q2 2013). 2.Characterization of ice process effects on floodplain vegetation (Q4 2014). | Riparian IFS Riparian IFS Riparian Scaling & 8.6.3.2,Botanical Ice Processes 7.6 Project 8.6.3.3 11.6 Effects Modeling 8.6.3.7 Figure 8.6-13.River Ice-Floodplain Vegetation Establishment and Recruitment 8.6.3.4. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FI >roject No.14241 Alaska Energy Authoritv Decembel Rt..-_.)STUDY PLAN FLOODPLAIN EROSION,SEDIMENT DEPOSITION &FLOODPLAIN VEGETATION STUDY 8.6.3.5 Fluvial Geomorphology 6.6 Riparian Botanical 11.6 Flow Routing Modeling IFS 8.5 1.Focus Areas (FA)channel migration Project Area wide 1-D1.Floodplain sediment &rates. stratigraphy descriptions.2.FA's floodplain disturbance rates.hydraulic modeling of 2.Floodplain soils analyses.3._FA's flood frequency,magnitude,historic flood frequency, 3.Floodplain isotopic duration,timing hydrograph and magnitude,duration and sediment dating.modeling analyses.timing (Q4 2013). 4.Plant community mapping.4.2-D sediment transport and {Q.4,2013;Q4 2014)floodplain sediment deposition modeling. (Q3-4,2013;Q3-4 2014} 1.FAsediment deposition rate characterization and mapping. 2.FA sediment and soil development rate analyses, 3.Floodplain and floodplain vegetation development conceptual model. (Q4 2014) £3.Is Analyses of floodplain plant glEcomimunityataanyhistactétisthes(Cl 04: Riparian IFS Riparian Fluvial Scaling &Botanical Geomorphology Project 11.6 6.6 Effects Modeling 8.6.3.7 Figure 8.6-14.Floodplain Erosion,Sediment Deposition &Floodplain Vegetation Study 8.6.3.5. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-220 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN MOUNTAIN RIVERINE VALLEY <Z table table a Regional upland Flood levelsL. Direction of ground-water flow A a AVLmeDiractionofragionalyLN \pirsction of local weground-water flow ground-water flow Figure 8.6-15.Riverine hydrologic landscape (Winter 2001). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FI ?roject No.14241 Pa 21 Decembel , RtE..._.)STUDY PLAN oe=aanAGUwenikeefeo a te Liit2oe<.etyesAetesa"KeohneZNmk72=?Spruce/Birch {"-]Balsam Poplar ©Monitoring Wells Poplar/Spruce/Birch [-_}Willow/Alder/Wet Meadow _Soil Temperature Poplar/Spruce (_]Willow/Wet Meadow Soil Moisture -y S U S IT N A-WATA N A=Sampling Transects oid Meteorology Station (ET)©Stage Recorders HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Figure 8.6-16.Whiskers Slough typical Focus Area groundwater /surface water study design illustrating monitoring well and stage recorder transect locations.Typical floodplain plant community types found in the middle segment of the Susitna River are shown. Alaska Energy AuthoritySusitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Page 8-222 December 2012FERCProjectNo.14241 REVISED STUDY PLAN e =Shallow well g@ =surface-water stage A=met station Routing Model Section Main Channel XS1 B Slough, copinected at Aigh stage Cross e Section Transects Figure 8.6-17.General schematic of a riparian Focus Area floodplain channel complex bounded by the Susitna River, side slough,and side channel. Three typical riparian plant communities are depicted (A,B,C).Two transects of groundwater wells and stage stations are shown to help measure hydraulic interactions between the groundwater system and adjacent hydrologic boundaries at surface-water features.Additional wells are located to help define (1)the orientation of the groundwater table across the study area,and (2)conditions at specific plant community locations (e.g.,seedling establishment zones).Surface- water stage stations are located to capture main channel,side channel and side slough stage variability.A meteorological station is located in the central study area,Each groundwater well location may include additional subsurface and riparian sensor measurements. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-223 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN a 7 . a a .g g|é Be <3 2/2]§25 3 2 s/2|8 Ed g=z Flood Levels s < po ee ee-- _-oO wsNwvtvaee-Water.a a a Le Stage Fluctuating Recorder Water Table Vs Wells,Soil Temperature,Soil Moisture WV Stage Recorder St Rec WhiteSprucePaperBirchRegional Groundwater Gradient and Fluctuations USGS Susitna River at Gold Creek Gauging Station,15292000 18 16 T T T T T 14 ||--WY 2005 ||--wy 2006 1|--WY 2008 --WY 2007 12 10 NeyMigpS=a DailyMeanGaugeHeight,InFeetApr May Jun Jul Sep --WY 2009 Figure 8.6-18.(A)Transect profile view of typical monitoring well and stage recorder locations looking downriver.(B) Gold Creek Gauge Station,Susitna River April through September 2005-2009. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-224 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN Figure 8.6-19,Floodplain Vegetation Groundwater &Surface Water Study 8.6.3.6. FLOODPLAIN VEGETATION GROUNDWATER &SURFACE WATER STUDY 8.6.3.6 Riparian Botanical 11.6 Groundwater 7.5 Focus Area Vegetation mapping &survey sampling Soils mapping & characterization (Q4,2013;Q4 2014) Groundwater /Surface Water Interaction Study Model Fluvial Geomorphology 6.6 *Measure and model frequency,magnitude, duration &timing of surface & groundwater flux *Model project operational GW/SW effects (Q3-4,2014} Focus Area Surface water flow regime modeling *Stage/discharge regime *1D/2D model (Q4,2013;Q3-4,2014) Probabilistic floodplain vegetation GW/SW regime response curves (Q4 2013;Q4 2014) Analysis of floodplain vegetation water sources (Q4 2013,Q4 2014) Riparian IFS Scaling & Operations Modeling 8.6.3.7 Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Fl ?roject No.14241 25 Alaska Energy Authoritv Decembe!! RL..--)STUDY PLAN FLOODPLAIN VEGETATION STUDY SYNTHESIS,FOCUS AREA TO RIPARIAN PROCESS DOMAIN SCALING &PROJECT OPERATIONS EFFECTS MODELING 8.6.3.7 Riparian Riparian Process Fluvial P Ice ProcessesBotanicalDomainMapGeomorphologyce7611.6 8.6.3.2 6.6 . a ae 1.Study Area Project riparian Geomorphic Processes ,detifloodplainprocessdomainmapSedimentSupplyRegimeceprocessmodiIngvegetation(Q4 2013)Hist.Channel Change 1.existing con itlons mapping.Flood Freq.&Flow Duration 2.project operations 2.Forest (Q4 2014)J)(042014)succession models (Q.4 2014) Floodplain tag abe erosion and Sediment _Rivet.He Projectsedimenttransport&"" :Operational FlowdepositiondepositionratesphbyDesignvegetation(Q4 2014)5 model 8.6.3.5 Floodplain plant isper:Seedling - community GW/SW ting ana flow establishment Floodplain iceregimeregimeflow&sediment :;requirements -regimes interaction {04.201%)ee boot)requirements zones (Q )(04.2014)(Q4 2014) Floodplain vegetation Seed Dispersal,Seedling River ice effectsGW/SW hydrology establishment floodplain interaction climate model study vegetation study odel 8.6.3.8.6.3.48.6.3.3 8.6.3.3.2 Figure 8.6-20.Floodplain Vegetation Study Synthesis,Focus Area to Riparian Process Domain Scaling &Project Operations Effects Modeling 8.6.3.7. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-226 December 2012 REVISED STUDY PLAN 8.7.Attachments ATTACHMENT 8-1.GLOSSARY OF TERMS -INSTREAM FLOW ATTACHMENT 8-2.THREE YEAR SEEDLING COHORT LONGITUDINAL ESTABLISHMENT AND SURVIVAL ANALYSIS Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 8-227 December 2012 ATTACHMENT 8-1 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS -INSTREAM FLOW Revised Study Plan Glossary of Terms and Acronyms Instream Flow Included in this list are definitions obtained from the glossary prepared by the Instream Flow Council (Locke et al.2008)as well as definitions developed for the Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project. Accretion Active floodplain Adaptive management Adfluvial Adult Age-0 juvenile Aggradation Anadromous Annual flow 1.Addition of flows to the total discharge of the stream channel,which may come from tributaries,springs,or seeps. 2.Increase of material such as silt,sand,gravel,water. The flat valley floor constructed by river during lateral channel migration and deposition of sediment under current climate conditions. A process whereby management decisions can be changed or adjusted based on additional biological,physical or socioeconomic information. Fish that spend a part of their life cycle in lakes and return to rivers and streams to spawn. Sexually mature individuals of a species. The description of an organism that,in its natal year,has developed the anatomical and physical traits characteristically similar to the mature life stage,but without the capability to reproduce. 1.Geologic process in which inorganic materials carried downstream are deposited in streambeds,floodplains,and other water bodies resulting in a rise in elevation in the bottom of the water body. 2.A state of channel disequilibrium,whereby the supply of sediment exceeds the transport capacity of the stream,resulting in deposition and storage of sediment in the active channel. Fish that mature in salt water but migrate to fresh water to spawn. The total volume of water passing a given point in one year. Usually expressed as a volume (such as acre-feet)but may be expressed as an equivalent constant discharge over the year, such as cubic feet per second. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 1 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Armoring 1.The formation of an erosion-resistant layer of relatively large particles on the surface of a streambed or stream bank that results from removal of finer particles by erosion,and which resists degradation by water currents. 2.The application of materials to reduce erosion. 3.The process of continually winnowing away smaller substrate material and leaving a veneer of larger ones. Average daily flow The long-term average annual flow divided by the number of days in the year usually expressed as an equivalent constant discharge such as cubic feet per second.In some settings,the value can be used to represent only the portion of the daily flow values in a defined period such as those that occur within a calendar month. Bank The sloping land bordering a stream channel that forms the usual boundaries of a channel.The bank has a steeper slope than the bottom of the channel and is usually steeper than the land surrounding the channel. Bathymetric Related to the measurement of water depth within a water body. Bedload Material moving on or near the streambed and frequently in contact with it. Benthic Associated with the bottom of a body of water. Benthic macroinvertebrates Animals without backbones,living in or on the sediments,a size large enough to be seen by the unaided eye,and which can be retained by a U.S.Standard No.30 sieve (28 openings/inch, 0.595-mm openings).Also referred to as benthos,infauna,or macrobenthos. Braid Pattern of two or more interconnected channels typical of alluvial streams. Breaching flow The mainstem river flow that overtops the inlet elevation of a side channel. Calibration The validation of specific measurement techniques and equipment,or the comparison between measurements.In the context of PHABSIM,calibration is the process of adjusting input variables to minimize the error between predicted and observed water surface elevations. Capillary fringe The subsurface layer in which groundwater seeps up from a water table by capillary action to fill soil pores. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 2 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Catch per unit effort (CPUE) Channel Confidence interval Confinement Confluence Connectivity Cover Cross section Cross-sectional area Cubic feet per second (cfs) Current meter Datum The quantity of fish caught (in number or in weight)with one standard unit of fishing effort.CPUE is often considered an index of fish biomass (or abundance).Sometimes referred to as catch rate.CPUE may be used as a measure of economic efficiency of fishing as well as an index of fish abundance. A natural or artificial watercourse that continuously or intermittently contains water,with definite bed and banks that confine all but overbank streamflows. The computed interval with a given probability that the true value of the statistic -such as a mean,proportion,or rate -is contained within the interval. Ratio of valley width (VW)to channel width (CW).Confined channel VW:CW <2;Moderately confined channel VW:CW 2- 4;Unconfined channel VW:CW >4. The junction of two or more streams. Maintenance of lateral,longitudinal,and vertical pathways for biological,hydrological,and physical processes. Structural features (e.g.,boulders,log jams)or hydraulic characteristics (e.g.,turbulence,depth)that provide shelter from currents,energetically efficient feeding stations,and/or visual isolation from competitors or predators. A plane across a stream channel perpendicular to the direction of water flow. The area of the stream's vertical cross section,perpendicular to flow. A standard measure of the total amount of water passing by a particular location of a river,canal,pipe or tunnel during a one second interval.One cfs is equal to 7.4805 gallons per second, 28.31369 liters per second,0.028 cubic meters per second,or 0.6463145 million gallons per day (mgd).Also called second- feet. Instrument used to measure the velocity of water flow in a stream,measured in units of length per unit of time,such as feet per second (fps). A geometric plane of known or arbitrary elevation used as a point of reference to determine the elevation,or change of elevation,of another plane (see gage datum). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Page 3 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Decision support system Tools developed to evaluate alternative flow scenarios in (DSS)support of water control decisions;can include matrices that array differences among alternative flow regimes by calculating values of indicator variables representing different habitat characteristics or processes of the riverine ecosystem. Degradation 1.A decline in the viability of ecosystem functions and processes. 2.Geologic process by which streambeds and floodplains are lowered in elevation by the removal of material (also see down cutting). Delta A low,nearly flat accumulation of sediment deposited at the mouth of a river or stream,commonly triangular or fan-shaped. Dendrochronology The science of dating woody species (Fritts 1976). Density Number of individuals per unit area. Deposition The settlement or accumulation of material out of the water column and onto the streambed. Depth Water depth at the measuring point (station). Dewater Remove or drain the water from a stream,pond or aquifer. Discharge The rate of streamflow or the volume of water flowing at a location within a specified time interval.Usually expressed as cubic meters per second (cms)or cubic feet per second (cfs). Dissolved oxygen (DO)The amount of gaseous oxygen (O2)dissolved in the water column.Oxygen gets into water by diffusion from the surrounding air,by aeration (rapid movement),and as a waste product of photosynthesis.More than 5 parts oxygen per million parts water is considered healthy;below 3 parts oxygen per million is generally stressful to aquatic organisms. Disturbance regime Floodplain vegetation disturbance types found within the Susitna River Study Area corridor include:channel migration (erosion and depositional processes),ice processes (shearing impacts,flooding and freezing),herbivory (beaver,moose,and hare),wind,and,to an infrequent extent,fire.Floodplain soil disturbance is primarily ice shearing and sediment deposition. Drainage area The total land area draining to any point in a stream.Also called catchment area,watershed,and basin. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 4 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Ecosystem Any complex of living organisms interacting with nonliving chemical and physical components that form and function as a natural environmental unit. Electrofishing A biological collection method that uses electric current to facilitate capturing fishes. Embeddedness The degree that larger particles (boulders,rubble,or gravel)are surrounded or covered by fine sediment.Usually measured in classes according to percent of coverage. Emergent vegetation An emergent plant is one which grows in water but which pierces the surface so that it is partially in air.Collectively, such plants are emergent vegetation. Euphotic zone Surface layer of an ocean,lake,or other body of water through which light can penetrate.Also known as the zone of photosynthesis. FLIR Forward looking infrared (FLIR)is an imaging technology that senses infrared radiation.Can be used for watershed temperature monitoring. Flood Any flow that exceeds the bankfull capacity of a stream or channel and flows out on the floodplain. Floodplain 1.The area along waterways that is subject to periodic inundation by out-of-bank flows. 2.The area adjoining a water body that becomes inundated during periods of over-bank flooding and that is given rigorous legal definition in regulatory programs. 3.Land beyond a stream channel that forms the perimeter for the maximum probability flood. 4.A relatively flat strip of land bordering a stream that is formed by sediment deposition. 5.A deposit of alluvium that covers a valley flat from lateral erosion of meandering streams and rivers. Floodplain vegetation -Assemblages of plants that have established and developed groundwater/surface water under similar groundwater and surface water hydrologic regime functional groups regimes. Flushing flow A stream discharge with sufficient power to remove silt and sand from a gravel/cobble substrate but not enough power to remove gravels. Focus Area Areas selected for intensive investigation by multiple disciplines as part of the instream flow study. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 5 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Fry Gaging station Geographic information system (GIS) Geomorphic mapping Global positioning system (GPS) Gradient Groundwater Habitat guild Habitat suitability criteria (HSC) A recently hatched fish.Sometimes defined as a young juvenile salmonid with absorbed egg sac,less than 60 mm in length. A specific site on a stream where systematic observations of streamflow or other hydrologic data are obtained. An integrated collection of computer software and data used to view and manage information about geographic places,analyze spatial relationships,and model spatial processes.A GIS provides a framework for gathering and organizing spatial data and related information so that it can be displayed and analyzed.In the simplest terms,GIS is the merging of cartography,statistical analysis,and database technology. A map design technique that defines,delimits and locates landforms.It combines a description of surface relief and its origin,relative age,and the environmental conditions in which it formed.This type of mapping is used to locate and differentiate among relief forms related to geologic structure, internal dynamics of the lithosphere,and landforms shaped by external processes governed by the bio-climate environment. A system of radio-emitting and -receiving satellites used for determining positions on the earth.The orbiting satellites transmit signals that allow a GPS receiver anywhere on earth to calculate its own location through trilateration.Developed and operated by the U.S.Department of Defense,the system is used in navigation,mapping,surveying,and other applications in which precise positioning is necessary. The rate of change of any characteristic,expressed per unit of length (see Slope).May also apply to longitudinal succession of biological communities. In general,all subsurface water that is distinct from surface water;specifically,that part which is in the saturated zone of a defined aquifer. Groups of species that share common characteristics of microhabitat use and selection at various stages in their life histories. A graph/mathematical equation describing the suitability for use of areas within a stream channel related to water depth, velocity and substrate by various species/lifestages of fish. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Page 6 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Habitat suitability index (HSD Hydraulic control Hydraulic head Hydraulic model Hydrograph Incised Incremental methodology Instream flow Intergravel Invertebrate Isotopic dating Large woody debris (LWD) LiDAR An HSI is a numerical index that represents the capacity ofa given habitat to support a selected species.HSI model results represent the interactions of the habitat characteristics and how each habitat relates to a given species.The value is to serve as a basis for improved decision making and increased understanding of species-habitat relationships. A horizontal or vertical constriction in the channel,such as the crest of a riffle,which creates a backwater effect. A measure of energy or pressure,expressed in terms of the vertical height of a column of water that has the same pressure difference. A computer model of a segment of river used to evaluate stream flow characteristics over a range of flows. A graph showing the variation in discharge over time. Lowering of the streambed by erosion that occurs when the energy of the water flowing through a stream reach exceeds that necessary to erode and transport the bed material. The process of developing an instream flow policy that incorporates multiple or variable rules to establish,through negotiation,flow-window requirements or guidelines to meet the needs of an aquatic ecosystem,given water supply or other constraints.It usually implies the determination of a habitat- discharge relation for comparing streamflow alternatives through time. The rate of flow in a stream channel at any time of year. Intergravel refers to the subsurface environment within the river bed. All animals without a vertebral column;for example,aquatic insects. Direct dating using analyses of stable isotopes. Pieces of wood larger than 10 feet long and 6 inches in diameter,in a stream channel.Minimum sizes vary according to stream size and region. Light detection and ranging.An optical remote sensing technology that can measure the distance to a target,can be used to create a topographic map. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Page 7 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Life stage Macroinvertebrate Main channel Mainstem Manning's n Mesohabitat Microhabitat Non-native Nose velocity An arbitrary age classification of an organism into categories relate to body morphology and reproductive potential,such as spawning,egg incubation,larva or fry,juvenile,and adult. An invertebrate animal without a backbone that can be seen without magnification. Main Channel Habitat Types Main Channel:Single dominant main channel Split Main Channel:Less than 3 distributed dominant channels Braided Main Channel:Greater than 3 distributed dominant channels Side Channel:Channel that is turbid and connected to the active main channel but represents non-dominant proportion of flow Tributary Mouth:Clear water areas that exist where tributaries flow into the Susitna River main channel or side channel habitats Mainstem refers to the primary river corridor,as contrasted to its tributaries.Mainstem habitats include the main channel, split main channels,side channels,tributary mouths,and off- channel habitats. A measure of channel roughness. A discrete area of stream exhibiting relatively similar characteristics of depth,velocity,slope,substrate,and cover, and variances thereof (e.g.,pools with maximum depth <5 ft, high gradient rimes,side channel backwaters). Small localized areas within a broader habitat type used by organisms for specific purposes or events,typically described by a combination of depth,velocity,substrate,or cover. Not indigenous to or naturally occurring in a given area. Presence is usually attributed to intentional or unintentional introduction by humans.Non-native species are also termed "exotic”species. The velocity at the approximate point vertically in the channel where a fish is located. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 8 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Off-channel Those bodies of water adjacent to the main channel that have surface water connections to the main river at some discharge levels. Off-channel Habitat Types Side Slough:Overflow channel contained in the floodplain,but disconnected from the main channel.Has clear water.” Upland Slough:Similar to a side slough,but contains a vegetated bar and is rarely overtopped by mainstem flow.Hasclearwater.* Backwater:Found along channel margins and generally within the influence of the active main channel.Water is not clear. Beaver Complex:Complex ponded water body created by beaver dams Peak load The greatest of all load demands on an interconnected electric transmission network occurring in a specified period of time. Period of record The length of time for which data for an environmental variable have been collected on a regular and continuous basis. pH A measure of the acidity or basicity of a solution.Pure water is said to be neutral,with a pH close to 7.0 at 25 °C (77 °F). Solutions with a pH less than 7 are said to be acidic,and solutions with a pH greater than 7 are said to be basic or alkaline. PHABSIM (pronounced P-HAB-SIM)The Physical HABitat SIMulation system;a set of software and methods that allows the computation of a relation between streamflow and physical habitat for various life stage of an aquatic organism or a recreational activity. Physical habitat Those abiotic factors such as depth,velocity,substrate,cover, temperature,water quality that make up some of an organism's living space. Pool Part of a stream with reduced velocity,often with water deeper than the surrounding areas,which is usable by fish for resting and cover. Powerhouse A structure that houses the turbines,generators,and associated control equipment. Process domains Define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern habitat attributes and dynamics (Montgomery 1999). Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 9 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Q Radiotelemetry Ramping rate Recruitment Redd Refugia Regime Reservoir Restoration Riffle Riparian Riparian process domain Riparian vegetation Hydrological abbreviation for discharge,usually presented as cfs (cubic feet per second)or cms (cubic meters per second). Flow (discharge at a cross-section). Involves the capture and placement of radio-tags in adult fish that allow for the remote tracking of movements of individual fish. The rate of change in discharge (typically inches per hour) below a hydroelectric facility that is fluctuating flow releases. The number of new juvenile fish reaching a certain size/age class;connotes the process whereby juveniles survive and mature into adults. The spawning ground or nest of various fishes. An area protected from disturbance and exposure to adverse environmental conditions where fish or other animals can find shelter from sudden flow surges,adverse water quality,or other short-duration disturbances. The general pattern (magnitude and frequency)of flow or temperature events through time at a particular location (such as snowmelt regime,rainfall regime). A body of water,either natural or artificial,that is used to manipulate flow or store water for future use. To return a stream,river,or lake to its natural,predevelopment form and function.Restoration typically eliminates the human influence that degraded or destroyed riverine processes and characteristics. A fast water habitat with turbulent,shallow flow over submerged or partially submerged gravel and cobble substrates.Gradients are approximately 2 to less than 4%. Pertaining to anything connected with or adjacent to the bank of a stream or other body of water. Define specific geographic areas in which various geomorphic processes govern floodplain habitat attributes and dynamics. Vegetation that is dependent upon an excess of moisture during a portion of the growing season ona site that is perceptively more moist than the surrounding area. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Page 10 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 Revised Study Plan Riparian zone River River corridor River mile Scour Sediment Side channel Sinuosity Slope Smolt Smoltification A stream and all the vegetation on its banks that is influenced by the presence of the stream,including surface flow, hyporheic flow and microclimate. A large stream that serves as the natural drainage channel for a relatively large catchment or drainage basin. A perennial,intermittent,or ephemeral stream and adjacent vegetative fringe.The corridor is the area occupied during high water and the land immediately adjacent,including riparian vegetation that shades the stream,provides input of organic debris,and protects banks from excessive erosion. The distance of a point on a river measured in miles from the river's mouth along the low-water channel. The localized removal of material from the streambed by flowing water.This is the opposite of fill. Solid material,both mineral and organic,that is in suspension in the current or deposited on the streambed. Lateral channel with an axis of flow roughly parallel to the mainstem,which is fed by water from the mainstem;a braid of ariver with flow appreciably lower than the main channel. Side channel habitat may exist either in well-defined secondary (overflow)channels,or in poorly-defined watercourses flowing through partially submerged gravel bars and islands along the margins of the mainstem. The ratio of channel length between two points on a channel to the straight-line distance between the same two points.The amount of bending,winding and curving in a stream or river. The inclination or gradient from the horizontal of a line or surface.The degree of inclination can be expressed as a ratio, such as 1:25,indicating one unit rise in 25 units of horizontal distance or as 0.04 height per length.Often expressed as a percentage and sometimes also expressed as feet (or inches) per mile. An adolescent salmon which has metamorphosed and which is found on its way downstream toward the sea. The physiological changes anadromous salmonids and trout undergo in freshwater while migrating toward saltwater that allow them to live in the ocean. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority Page 11 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Spawning The depositing and fertilizing of eggs by fish and other aquatic life. Split channel A river having numerous islands dividing the flow into two channels.The islands and banks are usually heavily vegetated and stable.The channels tend to be narrower and deeper and the floodplain narrower than for a braided system. Stage The distance of the water surface in a river above a known datum. Stage of zero flow (SZF)No discharge flowing through the cross-section if water stage is equal or lower than SZF.Usually SZF is the channel invert, the lowest point of the channel. Stage-discharge relationship The relation between the water-surface elevation,termed stage (gage height),and the volume of water flowing in a channel per unit time. Stranding Stranding refers to the beaching of fish and other aquatic organisms on low gradient channel bed as a result of declining river stage. Streambed The bottom of the stream channel;may be wet or dry. Substrate The material on the bottom of the stream channel,such as rocks or vegetation. Proposed substrate classification system for use in development of HSC/HIS curves for the Susitna-Watana Project. Code Substrate Type Size (Inches)Size(mm) 1 Silt,Clay,or Organic <0.01 <0.1 2 Sand 0.01-0.10 0.1-2.0 3 Small Gravel 0.10-0.30 2.0-8.0 4 Medium Gravel 0.30-1.25 8.0-32 5 Large Gravel 1.25-2.50 32-64 6 Small Cobble 2.50-5.0 64-128 7 Large Cobble 5.0-10.0 128-256 8 Boulder >10.0 >256 9 Bedrock Suitability A generic term used in IFIM to indicate the relative quality of a range of environmental conditions for a target species. Temporal variability Pertaining to,or involving the nature of time,occurrence in time,and variability in occurrence over some increment in time (e.g.,diurnally,daily,monthly,annually). Thalweg The deepest channel of a watercourse. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project Attachment 8-1 Alaska Energy Authority FERC Project No.14241 Page 12 December 2012 Revised Study Plan Time step Time-series analysis Transferability Trapping Tributary Turbidity Varial zone Velocity Velocity adjustment factor (VAF) Vertical Weighted usable area (WUA) Wetted perimeter The interval over which elements in a time series are averaged. Analysis of the pattern (frequency,duration,magnitude,and time)of time-varying events.These events may be discharge, habitat areas,stream temperature,population factors,economic indicators,power generation,and so forth. 1.Applicability of a model (e.g.,habitat suitability criteria)to settings or conditions that differ from the setting or conditions under which the model was developed. 2.Applicability of data obtained from a remote source (e.g.,a meteorological station)for use at a location having different environmental attributes. Trapping is the isolation of fish and other aquatic organisms in pockets of water with no access to the free-flowing surface water as a result of declining river stage. A stream feeding,joining,or flowing into a larger stream (at any point along its course or into a lake).Synonyms:feeder stream,side stream. A measure of the extent to which light passing through water is reduced due to suspended materials. The area of river channel bed exposed to frequent inundation and dewatering caused by daily flow fluctuations associated with hydropower load-following operations. The distance traveled by water in a stream channel divided by the time required to travel that distance. Qsimulated/Qtrial,Where Qrria is the discharge computed by PHABSIM. A location along a transect across a river where microhabitat- related data are collected. The wetted area of a stream weighted by its suitability for use by aquatic organisms or recreational activity. The length of the wetted contact between a stream of flowing water and the stream bottom in a plane at right angles to the direction of flow. Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project FERC Project No.14241 Attachment 8-1 Page 13 Alaska Energy Authority December 2012 C -)=and @@=>ENERGY AUTHORITY July 16,2012 Ms.Kimberly Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street,N.E. Washington,D.C.20426 Re:|Alaska Energy Authority Project No.14241 Submission of Proposed Study Plan Dear Secretary Bose: Pursuant to the regulations of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), 18 C.F.R.§5.11,the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA)submits for filing the Proposed Study Plan (PSP)for the original license application for the Susitna-Watana Project No.14241 (Project). AEA is working diligently with participants in the licensing process to develop a comprehensive study plan for the proposed Project.AEA's efforts in this regard include numerous Technical Working Group meetings and individual and follow-up meetings with participants beginning in early 2012,participation in the Commission's environmental scoping process,and the issuance of draft study requests in May 2012 to assist the parties in drafting formal study requests in compliance with the requirements of 18 C.F.R.§5.9.Comments on AEA's Pre-Application Document and study requests were filed by several federal and state resource agencies,Alaska Native entities,utilities,and non-governmental organizations. The PSP includes 58 individual study plans prepared in consultation with licensing participants.They are organized into natural resource sections and by topic within each section. As required by the Commission's regulations at 18 C.F.R.§5.11(e),AEA will hold initial study plan meetings to discuss the PSP on August 8,9,15,16,and 17,2012,at AEA's Susitna-Watana Project office at 411 W.4th Avenue,Suite 1,Anchorage,Alaska,99501.AEA will continue working with the participants in an effort to reach consensus on as many studies as possible prior to the October 12,2012,deadline for filing of comments on the PSP.AEA's Revised Study Plan will be filed on or before November 14,2012. AEA is filing the PSP with the Commission electronically.Participants may access the PSP on the Commission's website (http://www.ferc.gov)by going to the "Library”link and Miinnnakenergyauthority.org! 813 West Northern Lights Boulevard Anchorage,Alaska 99503 T 907.771.3000 Toll Free (Alaska Only)888.300.8534 F 907.771.3044 entering the docket number,P-14241.AEA is also making the PSP available for download on the Project website (www.susitna-watanahydro.org). In addition to this electronic filing with the Commission,the PSP is available to the public for inspection in a form that is readily accessible,reviewable,and reproducible during regular business hours at AEA's Susitna-Watana Project offices.AEA may charge the public the reasonable cost of reproduction and,if applicable,postage,for any hard copies. If you have any questions regarding this matter,please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, Wayne Dyok Project Manager Attachment Cc:Distribution List Susitna-Watana Distribution List Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 1100 Pennsylvania Ave NW Suite 803 Washington,D.C.20004 Kathryn Martin Abtna,Inc. P.O.Box 649 Glennallen,AK 99588 Kaarle Strailey,Energy Alaska Center for the Environment 807 G Street Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Mike Coumbe,Executive Director Alaska Conservation Alliance P.O.Box 100660 Anchorage,AK 99510 David Theriault Alaska Conservation Alliance P.O.Box 100660 Anchorage,AK 99510 Susan K.Bell,Commissioner Alaska Department of Commerce,Community and Economic Development P.O.Box 11080 Juneau,AK 99811-0800 Larry Hartig ADEC,Office of the Commissioner P.O.Box 111800 410 Willoughby Ave Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-1800 Brenda Krauss ADEC,Division of Water P.O.Box 111800 410 Willoughby Ave Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-1800 SUSITNA-WATANA --07/16/2012 -Distribution List Ken Johns,President/CEO Ahtna,Inc. P.O.Box 649 Glennallen,AK 99588 Toby Smith,Executive Director Alaska Center for the Environment 807 G Street Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Louisa Yanes,Energy Organizer Alaska Center for the Environment 807 G Street Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Kate McKeown Alaska Conservation Alliance P.O.Box 100660 Anchorage,AK 99510 Julie Jessum Alaska Conservation Foundation 441 West 5"Street Suite 402 Anchorage,AK 99501-2340 Dan Easton,Director Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 410 Willoughby Ave Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-1800 Bill Griffith ADEC,Division of Water 555 Cordova Street Anchorage,AK 99501-2617 William Ashton,Storm Water &Wetlands Manager ADEC,Division of Water P.O.Box 111800 410 Willoughby Ave Suite 303 Juneau,AK 99811-1800 Page |1 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Joseph "Joe”Buckwalter,Habitat Biologist Alaska Department of Fish &Game 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Jason Mouw ADF&G,Sport Fish Division 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Kate Kanouse,Habitat Biologist ADF&G,Division of Habitat P.O.Box 240020 Douglas,AK 99824-0020 Jackie Timothy,Southeast Regional Supervisor ADF&G,Division of Habitat 802 West 3"Street Douglas,AK 99811 Mike Bethe ADF&G 1800 Glenn Hwy.Suite 6 Palmer,AK 99645 Jack Erickson ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Sarah Hazell ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Ron Benkert ADF&G 1800 Glenn Hwy.Suite 6 Palmer,AK 99645 Tim Peltier ADF&G 1800 Glenn Hwy.Suite 2 Palmer,AK 99645 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Shawn Johnson,Fishery Biologist,Hydropower Coordinator ADF&G,Sport Fish Division P.O.Box 11024 Juneau,AK 99811-0024 Joe Hitselberger ADF&G,Division of Habitat P.O.Box 240020 Douglas,AK 99824-0020 Monte Miller,Hydroelectric Project Coordinator ADF&G,Division of Habitat 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Joe Kelin ADF&G,Sport Fish Division 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Joe Giefer ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Ed Weiss ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Mark Fink ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Todd Rinaldi ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Mike Petrula ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Page |2 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Mark Burch ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Ron Stanek ADF&G,Subsistence Division 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Anne Johnson,Natural Resource Manager Alaska Department of Natural Resources550West7AveSuite650 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Joseph R.Balash,Deputy Commissioner ADNR 550 West 7"Ave Suite 1400 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Wyn Menefee,Director ADNR,Division of Mining,Land and Water550West7"Ave Suite 1070 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Gary Prokosch,Natural Resource Manager ADNR,Division of Mining,Land,and Water550West7"Ave Suite 1020 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Ben Ellis,Director ADNR,Division of Park and Outdoor Recreation 550 West 7"Ave Suite 1380 Anchorage,AK 99501-3561 Kim Sager ADNR 550 West 7”Ave Suite 1020 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Shina duVall ADNR,Office of History &Archaeology550West7"Ave Suite 1310 Anchorage,AK 99501-3565 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Davin Holen ADF&G,Subsistence Division 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Lowell Fair ADF&G 333 Raspberry Road Anchorage,AK 99518 Daniel S.Sullivan,Commissioner ADNR P.O.Box 111000 400 Willoughby Ave,Suite 500 Juneau,AK 99811-1000 Tom Crafford,Director ADNR,Office of Project Management and Permitting550West7"Ave Suite 1430 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Kristina "Krissy”Plett,Natural Resource Manager ADNR,Division of Mining,Land,and Water550West7"Ave Suite 1020 Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Candice Snow,Permits ADNR,Division of Mining,Land,and Water550West7"Ave Suite 900C Anchorage,AK 99501-3579 Judith Bittner,State Historic Preservation Officer ADNR,Office of History and Archaeology550West7"Ave Suite 1310 Anchorage,AK 99501-3565 Jusdi McDonald ADNR 550 West 7"Ave Suite 900C Anchorage,AK 99501-3577 Dave McMahan,Deputy SHPO ADNR,Office of History &Archaeology550West7"Ave Suite 1310 Anchorage,AK 99501-3565 Page |3 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Richard VanderHoek ADNR,Office of History and Archaeology550West7"Ave Suite 1310 Anchorage,AK 99501-3565 Ethan Birkholz,Chief of Planning Alaska Department of Transportation &Public Facilities,Northern Region Planning 2301 Peger Rd.MS -2550 Fairbanks,AK 99709 Bryan Carey Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage,AK 99503 Emily Ford,Public Outreach Liaison 441 West 4th Ave Suite 1 Anchorage,AK 99501 Marilyn Leland,Executive Vice President Alaska Power Association 703 West Tudor Rd.Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99503-6650 Alaska Public Interest Research Group P.O.Box 101093 Anchorage,AK 99510 Alaska Ratepayers P.O.Box 670287 Chugiak,AK 99567 Judy Price Alaska Survival:Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives P.O.Box 602 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Brett Swift American Rivers 320 SW Stark St.Suite 412 Portland,OR 97204 SUSITNA-WATANA --07/16/2012 -Distribution List Rod Combellick ADNR,Division of Geological &Geophysical Surveys 3354 College Rd. Fairbanks,AK 99709 Ben White Alaska Department of Transportation &Public Facilities,Statewide Environmental Met.Office P.O.Box 112500 3132 Channel Drive Juneau,AK 99811-2500 Betsy McGregor Alaska Energy Authority 813 West Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage,AK 99503 Mark Huber Alaska Fly Fishers200West34"Ave.#1233 Anchorage,AK 99503* Crystal Enkvist Alaska Power Association 703 West Tudor Rd.Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99503-6650 Patsy Gunn Alaska Railbelt Energy Authority 3601 C Street Suite 1400 Anchorage,AK 99503 Joseph R.Henri Alaska Ratepayers P.O.Box 210556 Anchorage,AK 99521 John Seebach American Rivers 1101 14th St SW Suite 1400 Washington,D.C.20005 Thomas O'Keefe,Pacific Northwest Director American Whitewater 3537 NE 87"Street Seattle,WA 98115 Page |4 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Jim Posey,General Manager Anchorage Municipal Light &Power (ML&P) 1200 East 1*Ave. Anchorage,AK 99501 Doug Hall,Light and Power Superintendent Anchorage Municipal Light &Power (ML&P) 1200 East 1**Ave. Anchorage,AK 99501 Harold Shephard The Center for Water Advocacy P.O.Box 15332 Anchorage,AK 99603 Cheesh-Na Tribal Council P.O.Box 241 Chistochina,AK 99586 Doug Wade Chickaloon Native Village P.O.Box 1105 Chickaloon,AK 99674 Chitina Traditional Village Indian Council P.O.Box 31 Chitina,AK 99566 Burke Wick Chugach Electric Association,Inc. 5601 Electron Drive P.O.Box 196300 Anchorage,AK Becky Long Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives P.O.Box 320 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Robert Coleman HC 89 Box 8575 Talkeetna,AK 99676 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Jeff Warner Anchorage Municipal Light &Power 1200 East 1°Ave. Anchorage,AK 99501 Caswell Native Association HC 89,Box 83 Willow,AK 99688 Peg Foster Chase Community Council P.O.Box 205 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Chickaloon-Moose Creek Native Association P.O.Box 875046 Wasilla,AK 99674 Chitina Native Corporation P.O.Box 3 Chitina,AK 99566 Brad Evans,General Manager Chugach Electric Association,Inc. 5601 Electron Drive P.O.Box 196300 Anchorage,AK 99519-6330 John Foutz,General Manager City of Seward,Electric Utilities P.O.Box 167 Seward,AK 99664 Richard Leo Coalition for Susitna Dam Alternatives P.O.Box 320 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Gary Fandrei,Executive Director Cook Inlet Aquaculture Association 40610 Kalifornsky Beach Rd. Kenai,AK 99611 Page |5 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Bob Shavelson Cook Inlet Keeper P.O.Box 3269 Homer,AK 99603 Jim Jager,Director CIRI P.O.Box 933330 'Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 Dara Glass,Land Administrator CIRI P.O.Box 933330 Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 Robert A Wilkinson,CEO Copper Valley Electric Association P.O.Box 45 Glennallen,AK 99588 Rachel Day P.O.Box 921 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Charlie Loeb Denali Citizens Council P.O.Box 78 Denali Park,AK 99755 James Mery,Sr.V.P.Land and Natural Resources Doyon,LTD 1 Doyon Place Suite 300 Fairbanks,AK 99701-2941 Eklutna Native Village 26339 Eklutna Village Road Chugiak,AK 99567 Fairbanks Northstar Borough P.O.Box 71267-1267 Fairbanks,AK 99701 Kimberly Bose,Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) 888 First Street,NE Washington,D.C.20426 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Margaret Brown,President and CEO Cook Inlet Region Corporation (CIRI) P.O.Box 933330 Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 Ethan Schutt,Sr.Vice President CIRI,Land &Energy Development P.O.Box 933330 Anchorage,AK 99509-3330 Ruth McHenry Copper Country Alliance HC 60 Box 306T Copper Center,AK 99573 Sharon Corsaro Corsaro Creative Coaching P.O.Box 255 Hermosa Beach,CA 90254 Denali Borough P.O.Box 480 Healy,AK 99743 Dot Lake Native Corporation P.O.Box 2271 Dot Lake,AK 99737 Eklutna,Inc 16515 Centerfield Drive,Suite 201 Eagle River,AK 99577 Tom Lovas Energy &Resource Economics 5840 Azalea Drive Anchorage,AK 99516 Federal Emergency Management Agency130-228"Street SW Bothell,WA 98021-8627 Edward Perez,Regional Engineer FERC,Portland Regional Office 805 SW Broadway,Suite 550 Portland,OR 97205 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Kim Nguyen FERC 888 First Street,NE Washington,DC 20426 Matt Cutlip FERC 805 SW Broadway Suite 550 Portland,OR 97205 James Ferguson P.O.Box 15391 Fritz Creek,AK 99603 Kevin Foster Mile 230.7 Alaska Railroad Talkeetna,AK 99676 Robert Gerlach P.O.Box 23 13666 E2™St Talkeetna,AK 99676 Brian Newton,General Manager Golden Valley Electric Association 758 Illinois Street P.O.Box 71249 Fairbanks,AK 99707-1249 Gulkana Village P.O.Box 254 Gakona,AK 99586 Brad Jaorschke,General Manager Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer,AK 99603 Harvey Ambrose,Director of Power Production & Transmission Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer,AK 99603 SUSITNA-WATANA --07/16/2012 -Distribution List David Turner FERC 888 First Street,NE Washington,DC 20426 Kim Ognisty FERC,Office of General Counsel 888 First Street,NE Washington,DC 20426 William FitzGerald 15537 Cummings Road Talkeetna,AK 99676 Jeremy Millen Friends of Mat-Su 308 East Dahlia St Palmer,AK 99645 Gold Creek-Susitna NIC P.O.Box 847 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Henri Dale Golden Valley Electric Association 758 Illinois Street P.O.Box 71249 Fairbanks,AK 99707-1249 Healy Lake Village P.O.Box 74090 Fairbanks,AK 99706 Bob Day Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer,AK 99603 Jean Schroeder Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer,AK 99603 Page |7 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Jim Kingrey Homer Electric Association 3977 Lake Street Homer,AK 99603 Kenai Natives Association,Inc. 15 Fidalgo Ave #102 Kenai,AK 99611-7795 Joseph Klauder P.O.Box 396 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Tom Harris Knikatnu Inc. P.O.Box 87213 Wasilla,AK 99687 A.J.Merrick Laborers'International Union of North America No 341 2501 Commercial Drive, Anchorage,AK 99501 Jim Brooks Matanuska Electric Association P.O.Box 2929 Palmer,AK 99645 Shannon Post,Director Matanuska-Susitna Borough 350 E.Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Larry Engel Matanuska-Susitna Borough 350 E.Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Mentasta Traditional Council P.O.Box 6019 Mentasta,AK 99780 Mount Sanford Tribal Consortium P.O.Box 357 Gakona,AK 99586 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Jan Konigsberg,Director Hydropower Reform Coalition,Alaska Office 7511 Labrador Circle Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99502 Kenaitze Indian Tribe P.O.Box 988 Kenai,AK 99611 Debra Call Knik Tribal Council P.O.Box 871565 Wasilla,AK 99567 Raymond Theodore,President Knikatnu Native Corporation P.O.Box 872130 Wasilla,AK 99687-7476 Joe Griffith,General Manager Matanuska Electric Association P.O.Box 2929 Palmer,AK 99645 Larry DeVilbiss,Mayor Matanuska-Susitna Borough 350 E.Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Fran Seager-Boss,Archeologist Matanuska-Susitna Borough 350 E.Dahlia Ave. Palmer,AK 99645 Mendas Cha-ag Native Corporation 457 Cindy Drive Fairbanks,AK 99701 Montana Creek Native Association P.O.Box 100379 Anchorage,AK 99510 Municipality of Anchorage632West6"Ave Anchorage,AK 99501 Page |8 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Thomas Meyer,Attorney Advisor NOAA,Office of the Alaska Regional Counsel P.O.Box 21109 709 West 9"Street,Room 909A Juneau,AK 99802-7414 Eric Rothwell NOAA-NMFS,Alaska Regional Office222West7"Ave.Box 43 Anchorage,AK 99513 Susan Walker NOAA-NMEFS,Alaska Regional Office P.O.Box 21668 709 West 9"Street Juneau,AK 99802 Kathryn Kempton NOAA Office of General Counsel 501 W.Ocean Blvd.Suite 4470 Long Beach,CA 90802 Jim Adams National Wildlife Federation 750 West 2"Ave Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99501 Native Village of Cantwell P.O.Box 94 Cantwell,AK 99729 Native Village of Kluti-Kaah P.O.Box 68 Copper Center,AK 99573 Native Village of Tetlin P.O.Box TT Tok,AK 99779 Katherine Poole Natural Resource Defense Council 111 Sutter Street 20"Floor San Francisco,CA 94104 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Mandy Migura NOAA-NMES,Alaska Regional Office222West7"Ave.Box 43 Anchorage,AK 99513 Kate Savage,Energy Coordinator NOAA-NMFS P.O.Box 21668 709 West 9"Street Juneau,AK 99802 Patrick Lavin NOAA-NWF Pacific Regional Center -Alaska750West2"4 Ave.Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 9951-2168 Jan Konigsberg National Heritage Institute 7511 Labrador Circle Anchorage,AK 99502 Pat Lavin National Wildlife Federation 720 West 2"!Ave Suite 200 Anchorage,AK 99501 Native Village of Gakona P.O.Box 102 Gakona,AK 99585 Native Village of Tazlina P.O.Box 87 Glennallen,AK 99588 Native Village of Tyonek P.O.Box 82009 Tyonek,AK 99682 Nenana Native Association P.O.Box 369 Nenana,AK 99760 Page |9 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Gary Oskolkoff,President/CEO Ninilchik Native Association 15730 Sterling Highway P.O.Box 39130 Ninilchik,AK 99639-0130 Noel Wien Public Library 1215 Cowles Street Fairbanks,AK 99701 Northway Natives P.O.Box 401 Northway,AK 99746 John Schandelmeier Paxson Fish and Game Advisory Committee HC 02 Box 7193 Paxson,AK 99586 Point Possession,Inc. 1321 Oxford Drive Anchorage,AK 99503-6941 Denis Ransy P.O.Box 344 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Carl Portman Resource Development Council 121 West Fireweed Lane,Suite 250 Anchorage,AK 99503 Sheryl Salasky P.O.Box 196 Talkeetna,AK 99676 The Honorable John J.Burns Attorney General of Alaska P.O.Box 110300 Juneau,AK 99811-0300 The Honorable Sean Parnell Governor of Alaska P.O.Box 110001 Juneau,AK 99811-0001 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Ninilchik Traditional Council P.O.Box 39070 Ninilchik,AK 99639 Lissa Hughes Northern Alaska Environmental Center 830 College Road Fairbanks,AK 99701 Northway Village P.O.Box 516 Northway,AK 99764 Beth Pike P.O.Box 968 Talkeetna,AK 99676 William Post P.O.Box 271 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Regulatory Commission of Alaska1016West6"Ave.Suite 400 Anchorage,AK 99501 Salamatof Native Association,Inc. P.O.box 2686 Kenai,AK 99611 Seldovia Native Association,Inc. P.O.Drawer L Seldovia,AK 99663 Brian Bjorkquist Attorney General's Office1031WEST4"™Ave.#200 Anchorage,AK 99501 The Honorable Charlie Huggins Alaska State Legislature,State Senate 600 E.Railroad Ave.,Suite 1 Wasilla,AK 99654 Page|10 Susitna-Watana Distribution List Grier Hopkins Office of Senator Joe Thomas 1292 Sadler Way Suite 314 Fairbanks,AK 99701 John Strasenburgh P.O.box 766 15406 E Barge Dr. Talkeetna,AK 99676 Paul Roderick Talkeetna Air Taxi 23125 Comsat Rd Talkeetna,AK 99676 Ellen Wolf Talkeetna Defense Fund P.O.box 371 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Talkeetna Public Library 23151 S.Talkeetna Spur Road Talkeetna,AK 99676 Tanacross Village Council P.O.Box 76009 Tanacross,AK 99776 Tetlin Native Corporation P.O.Box 652 Tok,AK 99780 Corinne Smith The Nature Conservancy 715 L Street Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Shawn Stankowitz Trapper Creek Community Council P.O.Box 13021 Trapper Creek,AK 99683 Kathryn Miller Trout Unlimited 227 SW Pine Street Suite 200 Portland,OR 97201 SUSITNA-WATANA --07/16/2012 -Distribution List The Honorable Mark Neuman Alaska State Legislature,House of Representatives 600 E Railroad Ave.,Suite | Wasilla,AK 99654 Joshua Sonkiss 1024 21*Ave Fairbanks,AK 99701 Sharon Montagnino Talkeetna Community Council P.O.Box 608 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Robert Sheldon Talkeetna Defense Fund P.O.Box 292 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Tanacross,Inc. 22808 Green Garden Road Chugiak,AK 99576 Cathy Teich P.O.Box 56 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Randall Hagenstein,Alaska State Director The Nature Conservancy 715 L Street Suite 100 Anchorage,AK 99501 Toghotthele Corporation P.O.Box 249 Nenana,AK 99760 Tim Bristol,Director Trout Unlimited,Alaska Office 419 6"Street Suite 200 Juneau,AK 99801 Constance Twigg P.O.Box 266 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Page|Il Susitna-Watana Distribution List Steve Taylor,CFO Heidi Firstencel,Field Office Manager Tyonek Native Corporation US.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District 1689 C Street Suite 219 P.O.Box 6898 Anchorage,AK 99501 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Michiel Holley William A Keller U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District U.S.Army Corps of Engineers P.O.Box 6898 P.O.Box 6898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Shannon Morgan Victor Ross U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,Alaska District P.O.Box 6898 P.O.Box 6898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 JBER,AK 99506-0898 Robert N.Jones Eric Marchegiani USDA,Natural Resources Conservation Service USDA -Rural Development 800 W Evergreen Ave Suite 100 800 W.Evergreen,Suite 201 Palmer,AK 99645-6539 Palmer,Alaska 99645 Michael Baffrey Ken Lord U.S.Department of Interior U.S.Department of Interior 1689 C Street,Suite 100 4230 University Dr.Suite 300 Anchorage,AK 99501 Anchorage,AK 99508 Ricky Hoff Dave MushovicUSDOI-Bureau of Indian Affairs USDOI_BLMPOBox21647th222West7°Ave.#13709West9thStreetAnchorage,AK 99507Juneau,AK 99802 , Gary Reimer Renee Fenci USDOI--BLM USDOI-BLM 4700 BLM Road 222 West 7”Ave.#13 Anchorage,AK 99507 Anchorage,AK 99507 Tim Sundlov Mike Sondergaard USDOI --BLM USDOI-BLM P.O.Box 147 P.O.Box 147 Mile Post 186.5 Glen Hwy.Mile Post 186.5 Glenn Hwy. Glennallen,AK 99588 Glennallen,AK 99588 Elijah Waters John Jangala USDOI --BLM USDOI --BLM P.O.Box 147 P.O.Box 147 Mile Post 186.5 Glen Hwy.Mile Post 186.5 Glen Hwy. Glennallen,AK 99588 Glennallen,AK 99588 Page |12 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Susitna-Watana Distribution List Michael Buntjer USDOI -Fish and Wildlife Service 605 West 4"Street,Room G-61 Anchorage,AK 99501 Ann Rappoport USDOI -Fish and Wildlife Service 605 West 4"Street,Room G-61 Anchorage,AK 99501 Jennifer Spegon USDOI -Fish and Wildlife Service 1011 E Tudor Rd Anchorage,AK 99503 Paul Anderson USDOI -National Park Service P.O.Box 9 Denali National Park and Preserve Denali Park,AK 99755 Cassie Thomas USDOI -National Park Service 240 West 5"Ave Anchorage,AK 99501 David Meyer USDOI-USGS 4210 University Drive Anchorage,AK 99508 Pamela Bergmann USDOI -Environmental Policy and Compliance 1689 C Street Room 119 Anchorage,AK 99501-5126 Jennifer Curtis U.S.Environmental Protection Agency 222 West 7"Ave #19 Anchorage,AK 99513 The Honorable Don Young 2314 Rayburn House Office Building Washington,D.C.20515-0201 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List Richard Enriquez USDOI -Fish and Wildlife Service 3000 Vintage Boulevard Suite 201 Juneau,AK 99801 Betsy McCracken USDOI -Fish and Wildlife Service 605 West 4""Ave,Room G-61 Anchorage,AK 99501 Bill Rice USDOI -Fish and Wildlife Service 605 West 4"Ave,Room G-61 Anchorage,AK 99501 Lisa Holzapfel USDOI -National Park Service 240 West 5"Ave Anchorage,AK 99501 USDOI --USGS Alaska Science Center 4210 University Drive Anchorage,AK 99508 Willie Taylor USDOI -Environmental Policy &Compliance 1849 C Street,NW MS 2462 Washington,D.C.20240 Douglas Mutter USDOI -Environmental Policy and Compliance 1689 C Street Room 119 Anchorage,AK 99501-5126 Matthew LaCroix U.S.Environmental Protection Agency222West7"Ave #19 Anchorage,AK 99513 The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 709 Hart Senate Office Building Washington,D.C.20515-0201 Page|13 Susitna-Watana Distribution List The Honorable Mark Begich Village of Dot Lake 111 Russell Senate Office Building P.O.Box 2279 Washington,D.C.20510-0201 Dot Lake,AK 99737 Village of Salamotof Wasilla Meta-Rose Public Library P.O.Box 2682 391 N.Main Street Kenai,AK 99611 Wasilla,AK 99654 Michael Wood Ruth Wood P.O.Box 773 15406 E Barge Dr. Talkeetna,AK 99676 Talkeetna,AK 99676 Frank Yadon Z.J.Locussac Public Library 14152 E Gliska Street 3600 Denali Street Talkeetna,AK 99676 Anchorage,AK 99503 Page |14 SUSITNA-WATANA -07/16/2012 -Distribution List