1. Water Quality Impacts of Reservoirs Burns & McDonnell (Contract C-C20104P) Gene L. Foster November 18, 2004

2. Presentation Outline Study background & goals Project team Data site identification & data acquisition Data set analysis Data validation & GIS interface Summary & Recommendations

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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)?

6. 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

7. 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.

8. 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

9. Task 2 Identification of Data Sites and Data Acquisition

10. Task 2 Components Identify preliminary data sites Screen & select candidate data sites Collect data Organize & analyze data Screen candidate sites Report

11. Identify Preliminary Data Sites Land use/land cover maps –SFWMD –SJRWMD –SWFWMD 100-acre minimum size 622 preliminary water bodies

12. Preliminary Site Inventory

13. 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

14. Candidate Data Sites - SFWMD Bonnet Lake Caloosahatchee River FP&L Martin Co Reservoir Lake Istokpoga Lake Josephine Lake Sebring Lake Trafford Red Beach Lake

15. 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

16. 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

17. Candidate Data Sites

18. LTP Coordination Lake Apopka Lake Jessup Brevard County Stick Marsh (SJMCA) Sun Ag Reservoir (BCWMA-East) Lake Istokpoga

19. Data Acquisition Desired data types –Physical data –Hydrologic & water quality data –Climatic data –Operating criteria and costs Data sources –Internet searches –Agency contacts

20. 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

21. 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

22. Potential (Good-rated) Data Sites

23. Task 3 Analysis of Data Sets

24. Task 3 Components Data validation Data summaries Water balances Phosphorus balances Statistical analyses Report

25. Data Validation Raw data validation Review non-electronic data Verify database imports

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. Data Set Analysis P retention vs. hydraulic loading rate Calculated settling rate (k) vs. –Hydraulic loading rate –Calcium concentration –pH –Water temperature –Depth

30. Crescent Lake Stations

31. Crescent Lake - Flow

32. Crescent Lake – Total Phos.

33. Crescent Lake – Total Nitrogen

34. Crescent Lake – Calcium

35. Crescent Lake - pH

36. Crescent Lake - Elevations

37. Crescent Lake – Water Temp. Crescent Lake

38. Crescent Lake – Ret. Eff. Vs. Q

39. Crescent Lake – K vs. Q

40. Crescent Lake – K vs. Ca

41. Crescent Lake – K vs. Temp.

42. Depth Comparison

43. Phosphorus Retention

44. Task 4 Data Validation & Data Interface

45. Task 4 Components Data validation & delivery GIS data interface Report

46. Data Validation Daily data Non-daily data Data normalization & cleanup

47. 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

48. Data Points by Site

49. Data Points by Key Parameter

50. 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

51. Web Interface - Splash Screen

52. Main Web Page

53. Web Interface – Zoom Into Lake

54. Web Interface – Displaying Data

55. Web Interface – Exporting Data

56. Web Interface – Help Page

57. Summary, Conclusions & Recommendations

58. 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

59. 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

60. 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.

61. 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

62. On-line Resources WQIR Reports: www.sfwmd.gov/org/erd/ longtermplan/documents.shtmlwww.sfwmd.gov/org/erd/ longtermplan/ WQIR Data Interface: TBD

63. Discussion