Chatfield Reservoir Hydrologic Scenario Development - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 18
About This Presentation
Title:

Chatfield Reservoir Hydrologic Scenario Development

Description:

South Platte conc not related to flow. Plum Cr higher conc at higher flow ... Partitioning of load between South Platte and Plum Creek basins ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:21
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: WQC5
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Chatfield Reservoir Hydrologic Scenario Development


1
Chatfield Reservoir Hydrologic Scenario
Development
  • Jim Saunders
  • WQCD Standards Unit
  • 13 March 2008

2
Roadmap for Technical Review
3
For Today
  • Explain purpose served by hydrologic scenario
  • Review examples
  • Outline issues for Chatfield
  • Problems with existing scenario
  • Options for new scenario
  • Make a recommendation

4
What Purpose Does the Hydrologic Scenario Serve?
  • Part of logical basis for linking implementation
    of controls to attainment of standard
  • Necessary for defining allowable load in terms of
    pounds (flow x concentration)
  • Control regulations define allocations in pounds

5
Hydrologic Scenarios in Existing Control
Regulations
  • Dillon
  • 1982 (212,000 AF) return period 3y
  • Index future P loads to base year (1982)
  • Cherry Creek
  • 1982 (2245 AF) return period 1.2y
  • Index to 1982 base year
  • Chatfield
  • Original 1982 (93,000 AF) return period 3y
  • Revised Q10 (261,000 AF) actual return period
    5y
  • Bear Creek not specified

6
Comments on Chatfield Scenario
  • Rationale for Q10 is based on exceedance
    probability for load rather than in-lake
    concentration
  • Concentration threshold could be exceeded at any
    flow if load is high enough
  • Assumes implicitly that higher load means poorer
    WQ not necessarily true

7
Conceptual Basis for New Scenario
  • How is the allowable phosphorus load influenced
    by hydrologic conditions?
  • Is the chl-TP relationship affected by flow?
    depends (in concept) flow may control of TP
  • Is the TP conc-load relationship affected by
    flow? depends (in concept) on P retention
  • Logical basis highest inflow concentration is
    most likely to yield highest in-lake
    concentration
  • What determines highest inflow TP concentration?
  • Not necessarily a low flow scenario
  • Depends on mix of two sources SP and Plum

8
Starting Point for Hydrologic Scenario Development
  • Select median total inflow
  • WQCD often uses median flow in TMDL development
    for streams
  • Median computed inflow 100,860 AF
  • Determine relative importance of the two main
    tributaries for setting the inflow concentration
  • Inflow concentration is total load/total inflow
  • Does each tributary represent a constant
    proportion of total inflow?
  • Does concentration vary with flow in either
    tributary?

9
Phosphorus Annual Average Concentration and
Tributary Flow
  • South Platte conc not related to flow
  • Plum Cr higher conc at higher flow
  • Which influence is stronger in mixed flow?

10
Flows Largely Independent
11
Relative Importance of Plum Creek
  • TP concentration in Plum Cr gtgt South Platte
  • When is Plum highest? not at highest flows
  • Median Plum 16

12
Expanding the Scenario
  • Started with median total inflow
  • Set proportion from Plum Creek
  • Median (16)
  • High end (gt30)
  • Return period?
  • What determines Plum Creek contribution to inflow
    TP concentration?
  • Dependence of concentration on flow
  • Relative importance of flow

13
Concentration and Flow in Plum
  • Annual avg concentration is load/inflow
  • Plateau abv 20,000 AF/y (TP0.175 mg/L)

14
Influence of Plum Creek on Inflow TP
  • Realistic range of inflow (backdrop of median
    total inflow)
  • More Plum Cr flow (as ) means higher inflow
    phosphorus concentration for reservoir

15
Defining a Return Period
  • Plum Cr gt 20,000 AF/y in 11/31 yrs
  • Plum Cr gt 20 of inflow in 11/31 yrs
  • Both criteria met in 6/31 yrs (19) return
    period about 5 y

16
WQCD Recommendation for Hydrologic Scenario
  • Median total inflow 100,860 AF/y
  • Plum Creek set contribution
  • Option 1 median (16)
  • About 16,000 AF/y TP conc below plateau
  • Option 2 20
  • About 20,000 AF/y TP conc on plateau
  • Exceedance frequency about once-in-5 yrs

17
TMAL Development Issues not included in Technical
Review
  • Partitioning of load between South Platte and
    Plum Creek basins
  • Allocations to sources within each basin
  • Define margin of safety

18
Whats Next?
  • Next month technical review as basis for
    proposal connecting the dots
  • Hydrologic scenario
  • Load translator
  • Concentration translator
  • Standards, goals, and attainment
  • Tracking memo
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com