Jordan River Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Phase 1

Transcription

1 Jordan River Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Phase 1 Presentation at Salt Lake County Watershed Symposium September 27,

2 What causes low oxygen in Jordan River? 1. Excess Organic Matter 2. River bottom muck 3. Management

3 Measuring Organic Matter in the Jordan River Used a model to better understand what was happening in the river Model underpredicted SOD - Suggests accumulation over long period of time CPOM= COURSE PARTICULATE ORGANIC MATTER (>1 MM) Leaves and Muck FPOM= FINE PARTICULATE ORGANIC MATTER (<1 MM) DOM= DISSOLVED ORGANIC MATTER Photos: Hogsett

4 Jordan River TMDL Phase 1 Bulk Allocation - Existing OM loads (kg/yr) Lower Jordan River Discrete Sources Diffuse Sources Source Loads to Lower Jordan Contribution (%) Loading Goal Reduction (%) Upstream of 2100 South 469,062 20% 284,996 39% Downstream of 2100 South 824,264 35% 482,096 42% Upstream of 2100 South 752,429 32% 546,205 27% Downstream of 2100 South 303,749 13% 140,439 54% Total 2,349, % 1,453,736 38%

5 Jordan River Phased TMDL Schedule Phase I: Identifying the problem Development of models to calculate loading Phase 2 ( ): Understanding the problem Intensively collect data to accurately assess OM loading, both in time and space Investigate and initiate changes in behavior and management to reduce OM loading Phase 3 ( ) Complete designs for structural point and nonpoint source controls Phase 4 ( ) Construction of capital improvements, if necessary Both point and non-point sources will bear responsibility to reduce OM loads to achieve the DO standards

6 Jordan River Phase 1 Schedule TMDL Process Action Date Completed? 30-Day Public Comment Period on Draft TMDL For comments and resultant changes go to: TMDL Modified As Appropriate Based on Public Input January 3, 2012 to March 31, 2012 June 6, 2012 For final draft go to: If Implementation Costs Exceed Legislative Thresholds, Submit TMDL for either Committee or Full Legislative Action Water Quality Board Approval of TMDL / Petition to Initiate Rulemaking to Adopt TMDL into UAC R TMDLs. There are no costs associated with implementation of Phase 1 of the TMDL. June 27, Day DAR Public Notice Period August 1, August 31, 2012 Petition Water Quality Board for Formal Adoption of TMDL into September 26, 2012 Rule Submit TMDL to EPA for Formal Approval October 1, 2012 EPA approval January 2013

7 Jordan River Phased TMDL Schedule Phase I: Identifying the problem Development of models to calculate loading Phase 2 ( ): Understanding the problem Intensively collect data to accurately assess OM loading, both in time and space Investigate and initiate changes in behavior and management to reduce OM loading Phase 3 ( ) Complete designs for structural point and nonpoint source controls Phase 4 ( ) Construction of capital improvements, if necessary Both point and non-point sources will bear responsibility to reduce OM loads to achieve the DO standards

8 Special Studies on the Jordan River : Intensive Monitoring Year for Jordan River Water Quality Sampling Shared effort between DWQ and Partner Agencies Monthly sampling Jordan River / Utah Lake is targeted basin for 2014 State NPS funding Photo: SLCO

9 Special Studies on the Jordan River 2. Continuous monitoring along the Jordan River Jordan River/Farmington Bay Water Quality Council DO, conductivity, temperature, turbidity, ph, fdom Utah Lake Outlet, Jordan River at 1700 South, Surplus Canal, 500 North, Cudahy Lane, Burnham Dam, State Canal Photos: YSI

10 Dissolved Oxygen Study August 2012 DO (mg/l) Lower River, 8/22-28/2012, DO S 2100 S sat N 500 N sat Center St Center St sat 4.1 Burnham Burnham sat 4.5 mg/l 4 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 6:00 18:00 time

11 Special Studies on the Jordan River 3. Re-aeration feasibility study on Jordan River Salt Lake City Public Utilities Model effects of off-channel aeration Pilot study: size, use, costs, location Explore use when DO concentrations are at their lowest

12 Special Studies on the Jordan River Jordan River Flow Modification Study River Network, DWQ and Salt Lake City Explore flow regime in the Jordan River to determine if modified flow management by Salt Lake City might be used to improve water quality and habitat structure on the lower Jordan Timely, orchestrated high-flow events to possibly flush OM in lower Jordan Could increased flows suspend and transport the problematic OM? If so, what flows? What would be the best timing (e.g., Spring? Fall?) and pattern (e.g., pulses?) 2100 S and Surplus Canal

13 Special Studies on the Jordan River Jordan River Flow Modification Study (cont.) Is there an on-going flow regime that would help maintain the channel and water quality? What are the related threats and challenges? (e.g., Bank stability concerns? Flooding? Water rights implications?) What are the related benefits? (e.g., Improvements in habitat structure? Improvements in other parameters? Degradation?) Where would the OM be deposited? Would it be collectable/removable?)

14 Special Studies on the Jordan River 4. Understanding Sources and Fate of Organic Matter Partnership between DWQ, University of Utah and Utah State University USU: Dr. Michelle Baker Continuous monitoring of: stream flow, DOM, SPOM fluxes, DO, turbidity, chlorophyll-a, and CDOM (chromophoric DOM) using optical sensors Discrete measurements of: CPOM fluxes at each sample location, benthic organic matter standing stocks; biological fluxes 7800 S, 5400 S, 3300 S, 2300 S, 1700 S, 500 N, Cudahy Lane

15 Deliverables from Baker s Study 1. Quantity major organic matter fluxes on the Jordan River mainstem When and where major inputs occur; Due to algae, small detritus, leaves, primary production in the river, or outside the river 2. Assess relationship between sensor data and grab sample 3. Rating curves for future flow calculations. 4. Identify trouble areas segments perhaps where storm water flows should be directly measured to account for those inputs. 5. Assess relationships among VSS, TSS and chlorophyll to guide future water quality monitoring. 6. Estimate standing stocks of multiple organic matter pools that can be used to scale-up chamber based measures of SOD rates of specific detritus pools.

16 Special Studies on the Jordan River 4. Understanding Sources and Fate of Organic Matter Partnership between DWQ, University of Utah and Utah State University U of U: Dr. Ramesh Goel A detailed speciation and identification of sources of organic matters (both dissolved and suspended) to better understand DO dynamics in the Jordan River.

17 Deliverables from Goel s Study 1. Establish a working protocol for bulk sediment organic carbon content and speciation in the form of CPOM and FPOM Is there a correlation between type of carbon (in forms of bulk, CPOM, and FPOM volatile solids (VS) and total organic carbon (TOC) content). 2. Quantify amount of CPOM originating in the urbanized watershed and introduced into the Lower Jordan River during storm events. 3. Quantify organic degradation within the sediments of the Lower Jordan River and the effects on ambient water quality due to methane and ammonia fluxes using in-situ and lab methods. 4. Investigate hyporheic exchanges in the Upper Jordan River and relate this beneficial sediment-water interaction to ambient water quality.

18 Coordinated Sampling on the Jordan River Monthly meetings being held with DWQ, Salt Lake County Flood Control, Salt Lake City Public Utilities, JR/FB WQC, U of U, USU What additionally should we be sampling for? With regular monitoring and storm water monitoring? When in the storm s timing is most critical to capture? Total Suspended Solid (TSS) & Volatile Suspended Solids (VSS) as surrogate for FPOM Carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) Suspended Sediment Concentration (SSC)

19 Thank you! Hilary N. Arens Carl Adams