Conowingo Dam and Lower Susquehanna River Sediment Mt. Airy Water and Sewer Board December 12, 2013 Bruce Michael Maryland Department of Natural Resources.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
creating a sustainable world The Chesapeake Bay TMDL A Policy Model for Nutrient Pollution Reductions James Noonan October.
Advertisements

Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority Community Water Supply Plan Update Public Meeting Monticello High School September 21, :00 pm.
RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.
The Effect of the Changing Dynamics of the Conowingo Dam on the Chesapeake Bay Mukhtar Ibrahim and Karl Berger, COG staff Water Resources Technical Committee.
Maryland Assateague Coastkeeper Baltimore Harbor Waterkeeper Chester Riverkeeper Choptank Riverkeeper Patuxent Riverkeeper Sassafras Riverkeeper Severn.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment Date: September 24, 2012 Watershed/Reservoir Sediment Management.
City of St Helena Upper York Creek Ecosystem Restoration Project April 28, 2015 St. Helena City Council Meeting.
Montana’s 2007 Nonpoint Source Management Plan Robert Ray MT Dept Environmental Quality.
Chesapeake Bay Restoration An EPA Perspective Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Administrator U.S. EPA.
Chesapeake Bay and New York State Water Quality and the Potential for Future Regulations Presented by the Upper Susquehanna Coalition.
Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Stephen.
Naples Bay Surface Water Improvement and Management (SWIM) Plan
Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin April 22, 2015.
Drought and the Central Valley Project August 2014.
Lassen Lodge Hydroelectric Project Public Scoping Meetings November 5, 2014 (Sacramento and Red Bluff) State Water Resources Control Board Division of.
Update on Chesapeake Bay Issues Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 17, 2009 Ted Graham & Steve Bieber COG Department.
USGS Water Resource Monitoring and Assessment Activities Salinity and other topics presented to the Garfield County Energy Advisory Board Dec. 1, 2005.
2006 Network Users’ Meeting Chesapeake Bay Program Regional Exchange for Non Point Source Best Management Practices April 18, 2006 Nancie L. Imler PA DEP.
Update on Forest Goals and Progress in the Chesapeake Bay Partnership Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting, 8/23/13 Sally Claggett & Julie Mawhorter, US.
Lower Susquehanna River Dam Sediment and Solutions Conowingo Relicensing; LSRWA; MD County Resistance; Solutions; CAC Involvement Thursday November 29.
Susquehanna River Hydroelectric Projects 1 Shawn A. Seaman September 27, 2010 Image or Graphic.
State of Oregon New Hydroelectric Projects Mary Grainey October 2008 Oregon Water Resources Department.
Total Maximum Daily Loads in MS4 Storm Water Programs.
Youghiogheny River Lake Storage ReAllocation for Downstream Water Supply by Werner C. Loehlein, P.E.
Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment Citizens Advisory Committee November 29, 2012 Anna Compton USACE 1.
Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake Executive Council November 29, 2012.
Water Conservation, Reuse & Storage Grant Program Application Review Team Meeting November 7, 2013.
FERC Relicensing of the Toledo Bend Project – Hydroelectric Power Generation Drought Hydroelectric vs. Water Supply Sabine River Authority Issues.
Cape Fear River Fisheries Restoration: An Economic Engine October 31, 2013 Dawn York, Coastal Scientist October 31, 2013 Dawn York, Coastal Scientist.
Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee Meeting Bay Program Water Quality Goals: Focus on Funding Presented to COG Board of Directors September 10, 2003.
Restoring VA Waters the TMDL Way Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 3.
Kilarc-Cow Creek Hydroelectric Project Decommissioning FERC Project No. 606 Technical Meeting May 16, 2007, 1-4 pm Red Lion Redding, CA.
Baird Claytor Hydroelectric Project Sedimentation Study.
Prepared for: Prepared by: Nutrient TMDLs and Their Effect on Dredging Operations in the Chesapeake Bay 24 October 2012 William J Rue- EA Engineering,
John Kennedy VA DEQ - Ches. Bay Program Mgr Tributary Strategies: Point Source Nutrient Controls Potomac Watershed.
Oregon Department of Transportation Stormwater Management Initiative: Meeting New Challenges Presented by: William Fletcher, ODOT February 5, 2008.
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
September 23, 2010 Overview of DWR’s Flood Management Activities Related to the Delta A Briefing to the Delta Stewardship Council 1.
Preserving York County 2010 Municipal Educational Series January 28, 2010 Rick Keister, Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Jake Romig, York County Circuit.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
Marin County Watershed Stewardship Program Marin County Department of Public Works.
1 Atchafalaya River and Bayous Chene, Boeuf, and Black, Louisiana Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP) Kick off Meeting April 13, 2005 Project Manager.
The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update, 2007 The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update February 8, 2007.
Robert M. Hirsch, Research Hydrologist, USGS September 6, 2012 Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Suspended Sediment fluxes from the Susquehanna River to the Bay.
Maryland Association of Counties Conference August 12, 2009 Bob Koroncai USEPA Region III The Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
1 State Parks  Soil and Water Conservation  Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning  Land Conservation Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Chesapeake.
Is the Mid-Atlantic Region Water Rich? Presentation to 5 th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable November 7, 2008 Joseph Hoffman, Executive Director.
Water Quality Certification for hydropower licensing in Wisconsin.
JULIE MAWHORTER MID-ATLANTIC URBAN & COMMUNITY FORESTRY COORDINATOR CHESAPEAKE TREE CANOPY STRATEGY & WORKPLAN UPDATE CITIZEN’S ADVISORY.
Integrated Approach for Assessing and Communicating Progress toward the Chesapeake Bay Water-Quality Standards Scott Phillips USGS, STAR May 14, 2012 PSC.
For EBTJV meeting October 26, 2010 Executive Order Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan – Phase II James Davis-Martin, Chesapeake Bay TMDL Coordinator Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake.
The Chesapeake Bay: How is it Doing? An Overview of The Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
Chesapeake Bay Program
It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:
Dave Clark and Michael Kasch
Comprehensive Conservation & Management Plan (CCMP)
DEP Citizen Advisory Committee October 17, 2017
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Conowingo Dam Update Presented to the Citizens Advisory Committee
Status Nearly 30 scenarios completed for NAB and CBP over a year’s effort. Report on application of CBEMP in preparation. October time frame for draft.
2017 Midpoint Assessment: Year of Decision October 5, 2017 Local Government Advisory Committee Meeting.
Local Government Advisory Committee
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
What is a Watershed Implementation Plan?
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
Enforcement Advocacy Stewardship Education
Chesapeake Bay Suite of Modeling Tools
Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs
Presentation transcript:

Conowingo Dam and Lower Susquehanna River Sediment Mt. Airy Water and Sewer Board December 12, 2013 Bruce Michael Maryland Department of Natural Resources

Presentation Outline  Susquehanna River facts  Impacts from high flow events – USGS Report  Conowingo Dam Relicensing Process  Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment study

What Does this mean to the Bay?  59% (more than half) of the nitrogen comes from outside the Susquehanna River Watershed  75% (3 quarters) of the phosphorus comes from outside the SR Watershed  73% (almost 3 quarters) of the sediment comes from outside the SR Watershed  Jurisdictions outside the SR Watershed must continue to meet their nutrient and sediment reductions if we expect Bay and our tributaries to be restored

Susquehanna River Sediment  3 million tons/year loading with 2 million tons/year captured  Conowingo Dam Traps about 2% N, 40% P and 50-70% of suspended sediments  Ability to store sediment is near or at capacity  Tropical Storm Lee (2011) scoured ≈ 4 million tons of sediment / added about 2 yrs sediment capacity at 728,000 cfs  Hurricane Agnes (1972) – largest single event at 1,100,000 cfs

Sediment

Source: USGS Sediment

Suspended Sediment: Marietta and Conowingo From 1996 to 2012, Flow-Normalized Suspended Sediment Flux at Conowingo increased 84%. Rising from about 1.55 million tons/yr to about 2.85 million tons/yr An increase of about 1.3 million tons/yr Source USGS

Total Phosphorus: Marietta and Conowingo Flow normalized TP flux at Conowingo increases by 51% from Source USGS

Water Quality Impairment Extensive low to no summer dissolved oxygen conditions persist throughout the Chesapeake Bay and its Tidal Tributaries Source:

Water Quality Criteria Attainment  Timing of storms is important. The “best” time for a storm is late fall or early winter. The worst time is early summer.  A winter storm ► depresses summer-average DO by ≈ 0.3 mg/L. ► increases SAV growing season average Chl by ≈ 1 μg/L. ► increases SAV growing season average KE by ≈ 0.1 /m. ► decrease in Deep Channel DO attainment of 1% or less for the 3 years following the storm (using the hydrology).  An early summer storm ► depresses summer average DO by ≈ 0.6 mg/L ► increases SAV growing season average Chl by ≈ 2 μg/L. ► increases SAV growing season average Chl by ≈ 0.25 /m. ► decrease in Deep Channel DO attainment of about 2% for the 3 years following the storm (using the hydrology).

Implications if We Do Not Mitigate for Sediment Behind the Dam  If full implementation of the WIPs by 2025 ► Will not meet Dissolved Oxygen criteria in 3 Chesapeake Bay segments – CB4; Chester River mesohaline; and Eastern Bay ► There are some negative short-term water quality impacts to tributaries down to the Potomac River ► No water quality criteria impact to tributaries except the Chester River and Eastern Bay

Susquehanna River Dams Relicensing  Conowingo Dam -- expires 2014  Muddy Run (Pump/Storage) – expires 2014  Holtwood Dam – amended to 2030  Safe Harbor Dam – expires 2030  York Haven Dam – expires 2014

Relicensing Participants (Conowingo)  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)  Exelon – Applicant / Owner  Maryland – DNR & MDE  Pennsylvania – PADEP, PAFBC  USFWS / NOAA / NMFS  National Park Service (NPS)  Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC)  The Nature Conservancy (TNC)  Lower Susquehanna Riverkeeper

FERC Relicensing Activities (to date)  Exelon Filed Pre-Application Document ► Maryland participated in the development of all study plans ► FERC approved a total of 32 studies ► Exelon conducted studies between 2010 and 2012  Exelon Filed Final License Application (FLA) August 31, 2012  FERC Issued Ready for Environmental Assessment (REA) April 29, 2013  FERC granted extension until December 15, 2013  MD can file comments on the FLA and preliminary fish and wildlife measures for protection, mitigation and enhancement (10j licensing recommendations)  FWS must issue fish passage prescriptions (US Fish and Wildlife mandatory fish passage conditions)  Maryland 401 WQC Application Due (1 year review period) State has to certify that the project will meet water quality standards

Significant Relicensing Issues Identified for Protection, Mitigation and Enhancement High Priority  Sediment Management  Fish Passage  Flow Management - fish stranding - downstream habitat  Water Quality - freshwater mussels Moderate Priority  Debris Management  RTE Species  Land Conservation  Recreation

What We Want To Accomplish Through Relicensing  Proper Management of Sediment  Improved Fish Passage ► American Shad; Goal of 2M above York Haven ► American Eel; Goal of 8.2M within 10 years  Restore Freshwater Mussels ► Water quality / filtration capabilities  Enhance Flow Conditions ► Improve downstream habitat ► Reduce fish stranding  Expand and Improve Recreational Opportunities  BMP for Debris Management  Land Preservation  Protection of RTE Species

 Exelon must file its 401 WQC Application within 60 days of REA.  State must act within 1 year of receipt of the WQC application or it waives its rights (there are ways to extend).  State’s WQC authority has been interpreted broadly by courts.  Includes authority to condition as necessary to ensure compliance with State water quality standards.  Courts have upheld WQC conditions related to fish passage, habitat, minimum flows, and recreation.  FERC cannot grant license without WQC from Maryland (although 1 year licenses are possible).  FERC has little to no authority to reject or modify our WQC conditions.  WQC determination is appealable to State court. MDE’s 401 Water Quality Certification Process

Upcoming Opportunities for Public Comment  Comments to FERC (Final License Application)  Currently December 15, 2013  Comments to MDE (401 Water Quality Certification)  Comment period will be announced by the MDE after a complete application is submitted by Exelon

Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment Study  Watershed assessment (Authorized by Section 729 of Water Resources Development Act of 1986)  Cost: $1.376 million  Cost-sharing sponsor = Maryland Department of the Environment with contributions from MD DNR, Susquehanna River Basin Commission and The Nature Conservancy  Cost sharing = 75% Federal, 25% non-Federal  Agreement executed September 2011  Study duration expected to be 3-years 22

LSRWA Partners  Each agency will be providing funding and/or conducting specific tasks for the assessment. 23

Goals and Objectives 1. Evaluate strategies to manage sediment and associated nutrient delivery to the Chesapeake Bay.  Strategies will incorporate input from Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Watershed Implementation Plans.  Strategies will incorporate evaluations of sediment storage capacity at the three hydroelectric dams on the Lower Susquehanna River.  Strategies will evaluate types of sediment delivered and associated effects on the Chesapeake Bay. 2. Evaluate strategies to manage sediment and associated nutrients available for transport during high flow storm events to reduce impacts to the Chesapeake Bay. 3.Determine the effects to the Chesapeake Bay due to the loss of sediment and nutrient storage behind the hydroelectric dams on the Lower Susquehanna River. 24

Activities Completed to Date Sediment Data Collection (sediment cores, suspended sediment water quality, grain size analysis) Bathymetric Surveys Sediment Characterization Outreach Activities (project website, quarterly updates,...) Literature Search for Potential Strategies – Watershed and Reservoir-Specific Development of Hydraulic, Transport and Bay Models Evaluated Available Alternatives Modeling of Existing and Projected Conditions Assessed Feasibility of Sediment Management Alternatives Developed Rough Cost Estimates of Viable Alternatives Assessing conclusions and recommendations 25

Sediment Management Options Being Investigated Reducing sediment yield from the upstream watershed Expansion of BMPs above and beyond current WIPs Minimize sediment deposition impacts – allow sediments to bypass the dam during times with least impacts to the Bay Reservoir operations Pipeline to downstream areas Increase or recover sediment-trapping volume Dredging with innovative reuse of materials – e.g., construction aggregate, island restoration Dredging with placement on land – e.g., quarries, agricultural lands, abandoned mines 26

Stakeholder Outreach Study Initiation NoticeFebruary 2012 Agency Coordination Letters February 2012 Facebook Page: River-Watershed-Assessment/ LSRWA Website: Stakeholder Involvement Plan updates: to be added 27

Next Steps  Finalize Cost Estimates for Alternatives  Finalize Potential Funding Options and Conclusions  Develop Recommendations – will include additional data on nutrients and impacts to water quality criteria

Questions?