Response for project 200202700: Hydrodynamics & Water Quality

Comment on proposed FY 2006 budget

The presented budget of $200,000 is consistent with FY2005 funding levels. We have a desire to renew this project for FY2006 in light of ISAB document 2005-3 “Recommendation to Study Effects of Load Following on Juvenile Salmon Migratory Behavior and Survival.” The identified budget is sufficient to implement the scope and nature of proposed project activities during FY2006. In addition, a within-year request to monitor hydraulic/water quality conditions in FY05 has been submitted to CBFWA/BOG. Our project, which studies the hydrodynamics and water quality (temperature and specific conductance) of the Lower Snake River, is uniquely suited in the Lower Snake Subbasin to study flow fluctuations in the Lower Snake River and the hydraulic condition monitoring task discussed in ISAB 2005-3 as part of our current project scope (i.e. Action Step 3 “Fund a project to monitor hydraulic conditions in the [Lower Snake River] reservoirs for the purpose of detecting any unusual patterns of flow that might result from flow fluctuations due to load following”). We see no reason to fund a new project since this Action Step is covered as part of our ongoing project’s scope of work, although we did not originally propose monitoring these fluctuations as one of our previous tasks. To achieve the goal of Action Step 3, modeling and data analysis tasks scheduled for FY2005 should be rescheduled into FY2006 so that data collection can proceed during the summer of 2005 (period of concern, as noted by the ISAB report). Tasks to monitor seiche in the four reservoirs using self-contained acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs) (similar to the field monitoring program described in Cook et al. (2002) which was lead by this project’s PI) will be added. In addition, temperature and pressure loggers should be deployed near the ADCPs. Cook, C.B, G.T. Orlob, and D.W. Huston (2002). “Simulation of wind-driven circulation in the Salton Sea: implications for indigenous ecosystems”, Hydrobiologia, 473:59-75.

Accomplishments since the last review

Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab DataNumerous (~100) water temperature time-series data, ADCP water velocity profiles, and real-time web accessible meteorological data have been collected between April and Nov of 2002 through 2004.
Submit/Acquire DataData collected during 2002 through 2004 has been processed following our QA/QC plan and released to the StreamNet Independent Datasets page and the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Analyze/Interpret Data3-D CFD and 2-D CE-QUAL-W2 models of the entire Lower Snake Reservoirs have been developed. 2-D and 3-D particle tracking (fish surrogate) modeling is ongoing.

During previous years of this project, PNNL collected bathymetric, meteorological (AgriMet Station SILW), hydrodynamic (i.e., boat mounted ADCP data), and water quality (~100 self-contained temperature loggers deployed at various locations and depths, plus conductivity-temperature-depth profiles during logger maintenance trips) data in Lower Granite Reservoir (Snake RM 116.5 thru RM 142 & Clearwater mouth thru RM 2). These data were entered into a database and analyzed using various mathematical tools to better understand the complex three-dimensional hydrodynamics downstream of the Clearwater/Snake River confluence (Cook et al. 2003). This dataset has also been used to develop boundary condition input files and calibration datasets for a three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics model (non-hydrostatic, free-surface, transient, Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes model) of the confluence zone (Cook and Richmond, 2004). Data collected directly by PNNL in LGR and the US Army Corps of Engineers has been used to aide development of numerical models of the four Lower Snake reservoirs. These data were used to construct boundary condition input files for CE-QUAL-W2 (W2), a two-dimensional hydrodynamic and water quality model. W2 models of Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental, and Ice Harbor reservoirs have been calibrated and validated for the spring, summer, and early fall periods of 2002, 2003, and 2004. Cook, CB and MC Richmond (2004). Monitoring and Simulating 3-D Density Currents at the Confluence of the Snake and Clearwater Rivers, in Critical Transitions in Water and Environmental Resources Management, edited by G. Sehike, D. Hayes and D. Stevens, American Society of Civil Engineering Press, 2004. Cook CB, MC Richmond, CL Rakowski, SP Titzler, AM Coleman, and MD Bleich (2003). “Numerically Simulating the Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Environment for Migrating Salmon in the Lower Snake River”, PNNL-14297, Pacific Northwest National Lab.

FY 2006 goals and anticipated accomplishments

Produce/Submit Scientific Findings ReportScientific journal papers will be produced that summarize findings on seiche, impacts of flow augmentation, density currents at the confluence, and the Lower Snake River management models. Completion report on seiche will be submitted to Council.
Collect/Generate/Validate Field and Lab DataCollect and validate water velocity, temperature, and TDS data to determine strength of internal waves (baroclinic and barotropic seiche) in the Lower Snake reservoirs. Study design will be submitted to Council.
Submit/Acquire DataData collected during the survey, once it has been processed following our QA/QC plan, will be submitted to the StreamNet Independent Datasets page and the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Analyze/Interpret DataSeiche data will be analyzed and interpreted. 3-D CFD and 2-D CE-QUAL-W2 models will be calibrated/validated against observed field data. 2-D and 3-D particle tracking (numerical fish surrogate) modeling will be completed.

The recent ISAB documents 2005-3 “Recommendation to Study Effects of Load Following on Juvenile Salmon Migratory Behavior and Survival” and 2003-1 “Review of Flow Augmentation: Update and Clarification” make a compelling argument for seiche in the lowermost three Snake River reservoirs (LGS, LMN, and IHR). Although hydrodynamics, including seiche, are covered under our current scope, we have not studied these impacts; focusing our ADCP efforts in LGR. If approved, we agree with ISAB 2005-3, and suggest that 2005 presents a unique opportunity to answer critical questions concerning the effects of flow interruption. We recommend that water velocity (self-contained ADCP), water temperature, stage (pressure), and turbidity be measured in the Lower Snake Reservoirs this summer under this project. To achieve this, we will reschedule the analysis and modeling tasks until FY06. We will produce an annual report in FY05, however not the final project report. The final project will be produced in FY06, and will cover the analysis of seiche, impacts of flow augmentation on river conditions, density currents at the confluence of the Snake and Clearwater rivers, and summarize application of 2- and 3-D hydrodynamic and water quality models.

Subbasin planning

How is this project consistent with subbasin plans?

Lower Snake Mainstem Subbasin, May 2004 Version, Section 3.7.5 Mainstem Snake River, pg 51-52 “The assessment term considered this area [mainstem] for further assessment work. It was decided that there were not enough resources to do a credible job on the tributaries and to also take on the task of re-summarizing the extensive empirical data that has been gathered on the mainstem. … Given that the mainstem amendment has a vision, set of biological objectives, and strategies, it is recommended by the assessment team that the management plan development group defer to the Mainstem Amendment. The general guidance given in the mainstem amendment should serve as the basis and support for projects, proposals, and funding based in the mainstem.” The mainstem amendment was posted to the federal register on August 6, 2003 (volume 68, number 151, page 46667-8) and a complete listing can be found at, Council Document 2003-11. We feel that this project addresses the following objectives and strategies for the mainstem (pg 6): 1) system water management, and 2) reservoir elevations, operational requirements and habitat conditions to protect resident fish and wildlife, 3) water quality conditions, and 4) research, monitoring, and evaluation.

How do goals match subbasin plan priorities?

The Lower Snake Mainstem Subbasin plan does not discuss specific mainstem priorities, but instead defers to the Mainstem Amendment. The mainstem amendment lists numerous recommendations and then groups these recommendations into broad categories. In the previous Lower Snake Subbasin Summary, August 2001, Fish and Wildlife Needs, Fish, Reservoirs, pg 161 the following need was brought forth “Determine the relation between flow and water temperature in the lower Snake River reservoirs and passage survival of juvenile anadromous salmonid smolts. These investigations should address the effects of flow augmentation and spill.” We believe the spirit of this priority is also voiced in several of the specific recommendations presented in Since only non-specific guidance for the mainstem in provided in the (draft) 2004 Subbasin Summary, specific recommendations cannot be identified. We do feel, however, that this project is still addressing critical Lower Snake Subbasin priorities and needs, and that the non-specific guidance for the Lower Snake Subbasin mainstem is being met through this project.

Other comments

We request authorization to re-allocate funds in FY05 to monitor hydraulic/temperature conditions in the Lower Snake (within-year submitted to BOG 6-1-2005). We request extending through FY2006 to address critical ISAB research that was addressed in ISAB document 2005-3 “Recommendation to Study Effects of Load Following on Juvenile Salmon Migratory Behavior and Survival.” Analysis and distillation of FY05 data, plus project results (all years), will be finalized and compiled into a final project report (see metrics above). If approved, this project will be completed and terminate in FY06. Ongoing work targeted the previously named RPA143 and RPA141. Under the Final UPA 2004 Remand, this project now addresses: Section III.E. ESP Specific Actions, Key Alternatives Under Development, Measures that address TDG and Temperature, Temperature Measures, pg 43 “Action Agencies have been working…to develop a plan to model water temperature effects of alternative Snake River Operations. Action Agencies will continue to refine the water temperature model and its use as a river operations management tool.”, And Section IV. RM&E Substrategy 1.3: Hydrosystem Corridor Monitoring, pg 90 “Monitor smolt condition relative to biological and environmental conditions” and pg 91 “Effectiveness research that quantifies the effect of hydrosystem fish passage improvement actions on the survival of juvenile and adult anadromous fish.”, And Section IV. RM&E Substrategy 2.1: Hydrosystem, pg 91 “Study the effect of summer flow augmentation on water temperature velocity, and juvenile fall Chinook salmon migratory behavior and survival in Lower Granite Reservoir.” Ongoing work (2002-027-000) is described in the FCRPS 2005-2007 Implementation Plan under Hydrosystem RM&E Actions (Section V. Research, Monitoring, and Evaluation, Part A. Hydrosystem RM&E Actions, Table 22, pg 47) and shows this project ending in 2005. We request that funding, as indicated and discussed in the budget section above, occur and that the project is extended through FY2006.