Water Quality Impacts of Reservoirs

Burns & McDonnell(Contract C-C20104P)

Gene L. FosterNovember 18, 2004

Presentation Outline

• Study background & goals

• Project team

• Data site identification & data acquisition

• Data set analysis

• Data validation & GIS interface

• Summary & Recommendations

Study Background

• CERP – 60+ elements to mitigate adverse environmental impacts

• WRDA of 2000 authorized 11 initial CERP projects

• EAA storage reservoir – 1 of 11 projects

EAA Reservoir Goals

• Reduce regulatory releases from and back pumping to Lake Okeechobee

• Water storage for Everglades dry season demands

• Optimize STA performance

• Improve EAA flood control & water supply

LTP & EAA Reservoir

• Long Term Plan:– Recognizes importance of predicting EAA Reservoir

influence on STA performance– Recommends assisting design team with water

quality analysis• EAA Reservoir research questions:

– What are quality impacts to water that passes through reservoir?

– What data are need to calibrate a reservoir water quality model?

– What data sets are available to calibrate analytical model(s)?

WQIR Study

• Contracted with Burns & McDonnell under existing modeling contract (C-C20104P-WO02)

• Study goals– Identify water bodies similar to EAA reservoir– Collect hydrologic, climatic, physical & water

quality data for identified sites– Develop calibration data sets

Study Team

• SFWMD– Yanling Zhao, Ph.D. and other District staff

• Burns & McDonnell Engineering Co., Inc.– Galen E. Miller, P.E.– Gene L. Foster, P.E.

• Engineering & Applied Science, Inc.– Srinivas G. Rao, Ph.D., P.E.

• Wetland Solutions, Inc.– Robert L. Knight, Ph.D.

WQIR Work Plan

• Task 1 - Initial Project Meeting

• Task 2 - Identification of Data Sites and Data Acquisition

• Task 3 – Analysis of Data Sets

• Task 4 – Data Validation and Data Interface

Task 2Identification of Data Sites

and Data Acquisition

Task 2 Components

• Identify preliminary data sites

• Screen & select candidate data sites

• Collect data

• Organize & analyze data

• Screen candidate sites

• Report

Identify Preliminary Data Sites

• Land use/land cover maps– SFWMD– SJRWMD– SWFWMD

• 100-acre minimum size

• 622 preliminary water bodies

Preliminary Site Inventory

Preliminary Site Screening

• Agency contacts– SFWMD, SJRWMD, SWFWMD– Florida DEP– County environmental groups

• Screening criteria:– Flow-thorough hydrology– Stage data– Plant community & physical data

• 36 candidate data sites

Candidate Data Sites - SFWMD

• Bonnet Lake• Caloosahatchee River• FP&L Martin Co Reservoir• Lake Istokpoga• Lake Josephine• Lake Sebring• Lake Trafford• Red Beach Lake

Candidate Data Sites - SJRWMD

• Blue Cypress WMA-E• B. Cypress WMA-W• Crescent Lake• Emeralda MCA• Kenansville Lake• Lake Disston• Lake George• Lake Harney• Lake Jessup

• Lake Monroe• Lake Norris• Lake Washington• Rodman Reservoir• St. Johns MCA• St. Johns WMA• Sunnyhill Farm• Taylor Creek Res

Candidate Data Sites - SWFWMD

• Keystone Lake• Lake Calm• Lake Carroll• Lake Howard• Lake Magdalene• Lake Panasoffkee• Lake Parker• Lake Seminole

• Lake Thonotosassa• Medard Park Res• Tsala Apopka

Candidate Data Sites

LTP Coordination

• Lake Apopka

• Lake Jessup

• Brevard County Stick Marsh (SJMCA)

• Sun Ag Reservoir (BCWMA-East)

• Lake Istokpoga

Data Acquisition

• Desired data types– Physical data– Hydrologic & water quality data– Climatic data– Operating criteria and costs

• Data sources– Internet searches– Agency contacts

Candidate Data Site Ratings

• Primary rating criteria– Period of record 1 year or more– Inflow & outflow water volumes– Inflow, outflow & interior phosphorus conc.– Stage/elevation data w/ average depth >3 ft.

• Assigned relative ratings– Good: 8 data sites– Fair: 13 data sites– Poor: 15 data sites

Eight Good-Rated Data Sites

• Crescent Lake• Lake George• Lake Harney• Lake Istokpoga• Lake Jessup• Lake Thonotosassa• Rodman Reservoir• St. Johns Marsh Conservation Area• A.K.A – Potential data sets

Potential (Good-rated) Data Sites

Task 3Analysis of Data Sets

Task 3 Components

• Data validation

• Data summaries

• Water balances

• Phosphorus balances

• Statistical analyses

• Report

Data Validation

• Raw data validation

• Review non-electronic data

• Verify database imports

Data Summaries

• Key data parameters– Flow– Total phosphorus/phosphate concentration– Total nitrogen concentration– Total calcium concentration– Water level & temperature– pH

• 3 locations – inflow, outflow & interior• Time series graphs

Water Balances

• Daily time step for period of record

• Estimated– Surface area– Gaged and ungaged inflow & outflow– Precipitation gains & evaporation losses– Lake elevation & depth– Change in storage– Imbalance term

Phosphorus Mass Balances

• Daily estimates from periodic sample data

• Estimated– Inflow TP concentration and mass flux– Wet & dry phosphorus deposition– Outflow TP concentration and mass flux– Net phosphorus retention

Data Set Analysis

• P retention vs. hydraulic loading rate

• Calculated settling rate (k) vs.– Hydraulic loading rate– Calcium concentration– pH– Water temperature– Depth

Crescent Lake Stations

CRESLMCRESLM

120603120603

120602120602

120601120601

22444202244420

22443202244320

22444402244440

SAVCRL2ISAVCRL2I

DUNNSCRKDUNNSCRK

2003066220030662

2 00304612 0030461

20030662200306622 003041 52 003041 52003041120030411

2 00304102 0030410

2003040820030408

2003038520030385

2003038420030384

2003038320030383

2 003027 72 003027 7

2003027620030276

2003027520030275

2003027420030274

GFCCR0195 GFCCR0195

GFC CR0187 GFC CR0187

GFCCR0186 GFCCR0186

1206B1 1206B1

S AC S AC

LSJ075 LSJ075

HAW HAW

78867886

35183518

1485714857

1485614856

1485514855

1485314853

1485214852

1485114851

1485014850

1484914849

1484814848

1484714847

1484514845

1484314843

1484214842

1484114841

1483914839

1483614836

1483514835

1483214832

1483114831

1483014830

1427414274

1426214262

2003046720030467

1483714837

Lake GeorgeLake George

Crescent LakeCrescent Lake

Lake Di sstonLake Di sston

Lake BrowardLake Broward

Margaret LakeMargaret Lake

Stella LakeStella Lake

20

11

17

305

308

304

302

205

305A

308B

13

305

305

FLAGLER COUNTYFLAGLER COUNTY

PUTN AM COUNTYPUTN AM COUNTY

VOLUSIA COUNTYVOLUSIA COUNTY

STJOHNS COUNTYSTJOHNS COUNTY

MARION COUNTYMARION COUNTY

3 0 31.5 Miles

NORTH CRESCENT LAKEMONITORING STATIONS

Figure 3-1

LEGEND

Monitoring Station

Water Bodies

Streams

Roads

County Boundaries

Cities

1 Inch equals 3 Miles

Crescent Lake - Flow

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Flo

w (

cfs)

InflowOutflowInflow-Rolling Avg.Outflow-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake – Total Phos.

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

To

tal P

hosp

horu

s C

once

ntr

atio

n (m

g/L

) InflowOutflowInteriorInflow-Rolling Avg.Outflow-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake – Total Nitrogen

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

0

2

4

6

8

10

Tot

al N

itrog

en C

once

ntra

tion

(mg/

L)

InflowOutflowInteriorInflow-Rolling Avg.Outflow-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake – Calcium

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Tot

al C

alci

um C

once

ntra

tion

(mg/

L)

InflowOutflowInteriorInflow-Rolling Avg.Outflow-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake - pH

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

pH

(st

anda

rd u

nits

)

InflowOutflowInteriorInflow-Rolling Avg.Outflow-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake - Elevations

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Ave

rag

e M

onth

ly W

ate

r S

urf

ace

Ele

vatio

n (f

eet)

InflowOutflowInflow-Rolling Avg.Outflow-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake – Water Temp.

Crescent Lake

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Calendar Year

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Wa

ter

Te

mpe

ratu

re (

deg

ree

s C

)

InflowOutflowInteriorInterior-Rolling Avg.

Crescent Lake – Ret. Eff. Vs. Q

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Hydraulic Loading Rate (meters/year)

-500

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

Ph

osp

horu

s R

ete

ntio

n E

ffici

ency

(p

erce

nt)

Crescent Lake – K vs. Q

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Hydraulic Loading Rate (meters/year)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Ph

osp

horu

s S

ettli

ng

Ra

te, k

(m

ete

rs/y

ear)

Crescent Lake – K vs. Ca

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Calcium Concentration (mg/L)

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Ph

osp

horu

s S

ettli

ng

Ra

te, k

(m

ete

rs/y

ear)

Crescent Lake – K vs. Temp.

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Water Temperature (degrees C)

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Ph

osp

horu

s S

ettli

ng

Ra

te, k

(m

ete

rs/y

ear)

Depth Comparison

CrescentGeorge

HarneyIstokpoga

JessupThonotosassa

RodmanSJMCA

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18D

epth

(fe

et)

Phosphorus Retention

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Hydraulic Loading Rate (m/yr)

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

Ph

osp

ho

rus

Se

ttlin

g R

ate

, k (

m/y

r)

Crescent

George

Harney

IstokpogaJessup

Thonotosassa

Rodman

SJMCA

Task 4Data Validation & Data Interface

Task 4 Components

• Data validation & delivery

• GIS data interface

• Report

Data Validation

• Daily data

• Non-daily data

• Data normalization & cleanup

Data Summary

• 36 candidate data sites

• 18 Florida counties

• 24 collecting organizations

• 1,311 unique monitoring sites

• 824 hydrologic & water quality parameters

• 3.5 million data points

Data Points by Site

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Number of Data Points (thousands)

Tsala ApopkaTaylor Creek Reservoir

Sunnyhill FarmSt. Johns WMA

St. Johns MCARodman Reservoir

Red Beach LakeMedard Park

Lake WashingtonLake Trafford

Lake ThonotosassaLake Seminole

Lake Sebring

Lake ParkerLake Panasoffkee

Lake NorrisLake Monroe

Lake MagdaleneLake Josephine

Lake JessupLake Istokpoga

Lake HowardLake Harney

Lake George

Lake DisstonLake Carroll

Lake CalmKeystone Lake

Kenansville LakeFP&L Martin Co Res

Emeralda MCACrescent Lake

Caloosahatchee RiverBonnet Lake

Blue Cypress WMA-WestBlue Cypress WMA-East

Dat

a S

ite N

ame

GoodFairPoor

Data Points by Key Parameter

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 200 300 400 500 600

Number of Data Points (thousands)

pH

Water Temperature

Total Nitrogen

Phosphorus

Orthophosphorus

Gage Height

Flow

Elevation

Depth

Calcium

Dat

a S

ite N

ame

Web Data Interface

• Web based – access from browser

• Select one or more lakes from map or list

• Select one or more parameters from list

• Display data for selections on screen

• Export monitoring data for one or more sites

• Export water & phosphorus balances

Web Interface - Splash Screen

Main Web Page

Web Interface – Zoom Into Lake

Web Interface – Displaying Data

Web Interface – Exporting Data

Web Interface – Help Page

Summary, Conclusions & Recommendations

Summary

• 622 preliminary water bodies > 100 acres• 36 candidate sites

– 8 rated good– 13 rated fair– 15 rated poor

• 8 potential sites– 6 natural lakes– 1 reservoir– 1 marsh conservation area

Summary (cont.)

• Data sets for potential sites– Water & phosphorus balances– POR: 6.5 to 22 years

• Data set analyses– P retention efficiency vs. q (hydraulic loading

rate)– P settling rate (k) vs. q, [Ca], pH, temperature

& depth

Conclusions

• Most of 36 candidate data sites are natural lakes with few man-made reservoirs.

• Few of the 36 data sites are physically or operationally similar to EAA reservoir.

• For man-made water bodies, little monitoring data are available.

Recommendations

• Continue search for man-made impoundments similar to EAA reservoir

• Interview managers to determine operating criteria & data availability

• Where necessary, conduct 1-3 years of monitoring

On-line Resources

• WQIR Reports: www.sfwmd.gov/org/erd/ longtermplan/documents.shtml

• WQIR Data Interface: TBD

Discussion