Background on Water Quality Models for the Truckee River WQS Review Process November 2, 2011 Laura Weintraub, Dave Dilks
Mar 29, 2015
Background on Water Quality Models for the Truckee River
WQS Review Process
November 2, 2011
Laura Weintraub, Dave Dilks
Overview
• Water Quality modeling to support the WQS (water quality standards) review process
• Watershed model: – WARMF development and calibration
• River water quality model: – TRHSPF development and calibration
• Overview of model updates• Intended use of the models
2
Need for Water Quality Modeling in WQS Review Process
3
Conceptual Watershed/Water Quality Model
4
5
Model Linkage – Observed Conditions
WatershedModel
WaterQuantity
Water QualityModel
Land Use
ClimateSoil Types
Management Practices
Reservoir Releases
WaterQuality
Pollutant Loads
WWTPs
WARMF TRHSPF
Model Calibration Process• Certain model parameters cannot be directly
measured, and must be indirectly estimated by finding which values allow the model to best describe the observed data – Process is called model calibration
• Calibration guidelines– Keep calibration parameters within reasonable range – No single objective measure of model calibration
6
Compliance with Dissolved Oxygen (DO) Standard is Key Element for Aquatic Life Beneficial Use
7Truckee River downstream of Lake Tahoe
Dissolved Oxygen
Sunlight
Flow
Algae
AerationNutrients (N&P)
Temperature
Organic Matter
8
Use of Models in the WQS/TMDL Process
WatershedModel
Water QualityModel
Land Use
Climate
ManagementPractices
WaterQuality
Nonpoint Loads
WWTPs
9
Use of Models in the WQS/TMDL Process
WatershedModel
Water QualityModel
Land Use
Climate
ManagementPractices
WaterQuality
Nonpoint Loads
Meets WQS?
NoAdjust Point Sourcesor Land Management
Practices
Yes
Done
WWTPs
WARMF Development and Calibration
10
11
WARMF: Watershed Model• Peer reviewed, public
domain• Predicts watershed flow and
pollutant loads based on– land use– meteorological conditions– water management– watershed improvements
• 125 catchments (subwatersheds)
• Time step = 1 day
Key Processes of WARMF
12
Subsurface ProcessesMineral WeatheringAMDSeptic SystemsOrganic Matter DecayNitrificationCation ExchangePlant Uptake
• Driven by meteorology and land use – Simulates nonpoint source loads; point source loads are input
• Simulates hydrology, mass balance, acid-base chemistry, erosion / sediment transport, pollutant build-up / wash-off, water quality, algal nutrient dynamics (simplified)
• Evaluates changes in nonpoint loading with varying land use, meteorological conditions, water use
WARMF Input Data
13
Data Type Data Source Details
Topography USGS DEM (Digital Elevation Model) Basis for watershed delineation
Meteorology NCDC, SNOTELDaily data of precipitation, min/max temp, cloud cover, wind speed, air pressure, dew point temperature
Air Quality NADP/CASTNET Weekly data of dry and wet deposition
Managed flow (diversions)
FWM, TROA Information System, USGS
Flow for all active agricultural and M&I diversions (46)
Reservoir USGS, USBR, CDEC Flow release, elevation, and bathymetry for 6 managed reservoirs
Point sources TMWRF, NDEP, TTSA 2 major and 5 minor sources; flow and WQ records
Land Use / Land Cover NLCD, Washoe County Spatial data circa late 1990’s; 12 LULC categories
Observed Hydrology USGS, TRIG All USGS gages (~ 30) within watershed
Observed Water Quality TMWRF, TRIG, NDEP, STORET, LRWQCB, TTSA
Real-time and grab water quality samples at stations throughout watershed (~40 stations)
WARMF Calibration / Application
• Model Calibration: 1990-1997 • Model Confirmation / Verification:
– 1985-1990 – 1998-2004
• Calibration Report: Systech, 2007. Adaptation of the WARMF Watershed Decision Support System to the Truckee River Basin of California and Nevada, 2007 Calibration Report, Prepared for City of Reno and City of Sparks, NV, Prepared by Systech Engineering, December 2007.
• Report available on TRIG
14
TRHSPF Development and Calibration
15
16
TRHSPF: River Water Quality Model• Long history of HSPF applications in Truckee River (USGS)• Updated to include periphyton based on DSSAMt science• Open code, EPA-supported, peer reviewed• Inputs are flow, watershed loads, point sources• Predicts water quality response of river
– nutrients periphyton dissolved oxygen
TRHSPF Model Domain• 43 segments from E. McCarran Blvd to
Marble Bluff Dam• Average reach length 1.31 miles•Time step = 0.5 hr
17
Key Processes Modeled in TRHSPF
• Stream hydraulics• Water quality
– Temperature, nitrogen, phosphorus, algae, oxygen
18
Key Processes Modeled in TRHSPF (continued)
• Mass transport (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, TDS)• Nutrient dynamics• Productivity (algae growth and decay)
– Performed literature review on benthic algae modeling
– HSPF Enhancements based on DSAMMt algorithms
19
TRHSPF Input Data
20
Data Type Data Source Details
Climate (Hourly) NCDC, WRCCAir Temperature, Dew Point, Wind, Cloud Cover, Solar Radiation (by reach)
Streamflow USGS Flow for 6 locations
Water Quality TMWRF (YSI & Grab)
WQ (YSI) updated for 3 parameters at 9 locations.
WQ (Grab) for 18 parameters at 9 locations.
TMWRF TMWRF WQ input updated for 16 parameters
Diversions FWM, TROA Information System Flow for 10 diversions
GroundwaterRepeat of time series based on
Nowlin (1987) / Brock (1992) / Pohll (2001)
WQ input updated for 13 parameters
Upstream / tributary loads Historical data or WARMF output TR at Reno, Steamboat
Creek, N. Truckee Drain
TRHSPF Calibration / Application• Model Calibration: July 2000 – August 2002
– Many parameters estimated from data– Concurrent algae biomass and water quality data available for
calibration– Acceptable comparison confidence that algorithms can predict
benthic algae reasonably well• Model Confirmation / Verification: 1990, 1995, 1996• Calibration Report: LimnoTech. 2008. Final Draft Calibration of the
Truckee River HSPF Water Quality Model. Prepared for the Cities of Reno and Sparks, Nevada, January, 2008.
• Report available on TRIG
21
Model Updates
22
Truckee River Water Quality Model Updates
• Goal: develop best possible tools given reasonable time, information, and funding
• Due diligence to ensure models work well for recent time period• Model update steps:
– Extended models to run through 12/2008 – updated all databases– Capture changes in loading due to Truckee Meadows development– Conducted model confirmation runs – held model calibration parameters
constant– Documenting changes to models and databases, results of model
confirmation• Share model information with the focus stakeholder group
23
Model Database Updates: WARMF Land Use / Land Cover
• Old Land Use / Land Cover (LULC) data reflective of late 1990’s
• Rapid growth and development through 2006• New LULC reflective of recent growth• Combination of several datasets
– 2006 National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) – underlying base layer– 2010 Washoe County / Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency –
developed parcel data supersedes NLCD data– Site-specific additions based on “parks” layer /Google Earth: ski
resorts, golf courses, parks, animal feeding operation
24
25
26
Late 1990’s previously in WARMF
27
New 2006/2007 layer imported to WARMF(increased development)
Evaluation of Linked WARMF/TRHSPF Modeling Framework
• Previously used data to drive TRHSPF upstream boundary – now using WARMF results
• Comparison of TRHSPF results to data isn’t just evaluation of TRHSPF, but evaluation of linked WARMF/TRHSPF
• Allows for modeling of river WQ response based on changes in watershed
28
TRHSPF DO Results at Tracy / Clark
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1/1/2000 6/29/2000 12/26/2000 6/24/2001 12/21/2001 6/19/2002 12/16/2002
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
Dissolved Oxygen at Tracy/Clark(2000-2002)
Observed Data Modeled Range
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
1/1/2003 6/30/2003 12/27/2003 6/24/2004 12/21/2004 6/19/2005 12/16/2005
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
Dissolved Oxygen at Tracy/Clark(2003-2005)
Observed Data Modeled Range
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1/1/2006 6/30/2006 12/27/2006 6/25/2007 12/22/2007 6/19/2008 12/16/2008
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
Dissolved Oxygen at Tracy/Clark(2006-2008)
Observed Data Modeled Range
29
TRHSPF DO Results at Marble Bluff Dam
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1/1/2000 6/29/2000 12/26/2000 6/24/2001 12/21/2001 6/19/2002 12/16/2002
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
Dissolved Oxygen at Marble Bluff Dam(2000-2002)
Observed Data Modeled Range
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
1/1/2003 6/30/2003 12/27/2003 6/24/2004 12/21/2004 6/19/2005 12/16/2005
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
Dissolved Oxygen at Marble Bluff Dam(2003-2005)
Observed Data Modeled Range
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1/1/2006 6/30/2006 12/27/2006 6/25/2007 12/22/2007 6/19/2008 12/16/2008
Dis
solv
ed O
xyge
n (m
g/L)
Dissolved Oxygen at Marble Bluff Dam(2006-2008)
Observed Data Modeled Range
30
Summary of Model Update
• Confirmation of WARMF and TRHSPF for 2000-2008 period – Model updated to reflect rapid regional growth through
2006• Both models are ready for use to support the third-
party WQS and TMDL review efforts• Third-parties welcome comments and questions
from Focus Stakeholder group• Model confirmation report being finalized
31
Intended Use of Models for WQS Review
• Provide linkage between nutrient loading to the Truckee River and resulting dissolved oxygen levels
• Account for other factors (flow, temperature, light, organic matter, aeration)
• Understand balance of nutrient concentrations which result in DO WQS attainment under a range of flow conditions
32
33
Model Linkage – Observed Conditions
WatershedModel
WaterQuantity
Water QualityModel
Land Use
ClimateSoil Types
Management Practices
Reservoir Releases
WaterQuality
Pollutant Loads
WWTPs
WARMF TRHSPF
34
Model Linkage – Future Conditions
WatershedModel
WaterQuantity
Water QualityModel
Land Use
ClimateSoil Types
ManagementPractices
WaterQuality
Pollutant Loads
WWTPs
WARMF TRHSPF
Flow ManagementModel
Water Quality Model Linkage
35
WARMF
TRHSPF
RiverWare or TROM
Reservoir Releases, Diversions
Diversions Tributary Flows, Nonpoint Sources
In-stream Water Quality
Demands, Water Operations, In-stream Flow Targets Meteorology, Land Use,
TMWRF Effluent and Re-use
TMWRF Effluent
Selection of Flow Management Model• Flow management model will provide a mechanism
to determine a representative low flow condition with current river operations and historical climate
• TROM (Truckee River Operations Model)– Long history of application in Truckee River– Previously coupled with WARMF/TRHSPF for test
simulation• RiverWare
– Newer model; water accounting version functional– Still under development
36
Next Technical Steps in WQS Review Process
• Finalize model update report; distribute to stakeholders
• Solicit feedback from stakeholder group• Construct / run a set of scenario runs
– Establish representative low flow– Link flow management model with WQ models– Vary N and P concentrations DO response
• Document any recommendations for revised WQS
• Submit report to NDEP for WQS Review 37
Questions?
38