automated water quality project prioritization tool to address tmdls

47
Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs Ron Novy, Orange County Jeff Earhart, PE, CPWG American Public Works Association – April 2-6, 2012

Category:

Business


2 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool

to Address TMDLsRon Novy, Orange CountyJeff Earhart, PE, CPWG

American Public Works Association – April 2-6, 2012

Page 2: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Orange County

+ Population: 1,086,480 (97% urban, 3% rural)+ Land area: 907 sq. mi.+ Water area: 96.7 sq. mi.(10.7%)+ More than 600 named Lakes+ Population density: 1,197 people per square

mile (very high)

Page 3: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Orange County

Lake Management Program Levels:

1. Reactive Management TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load)

39 TMDL impaired lakes NNC (Numeric Nutrient Criteria)

48 NNC Impaired lakes (under EPA rule)

2. Proactive Management Water quality review, trending, need identification

11 Lakes with declining water quality (not impaired yet)

Page 4: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Orange CountyChallenges:

Funding Orange County has a Stormwater Utility, BUT is set to zero Lake Management allotted $500K per year in CIP

Prioritizing Needs Large vs. small projects BMAP requirements Funding, partnerships & grant availability Removal efficiencies O&M costs Political issues

Changing Conditions Narrative vs. Numeric methodology Changing BMP Removal Efficiencies Changing Loading Rates/Sources

Page 5: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Orange County

Challenges:

Static Needs Assessments / Master Plans

Old methodology “snapshot in time” Based on the parameters at time of creation Changing parameters makes plan quickly out-of-date Can spend $100-$200K every couple of years to update. Keep track of projects & needs separately Hard to project future needs

Page 6: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Orange County

Management Need:

Dynamic Needs Assessments / Master Plan system Live system that can be used year after year GIS based system for easy visualization and queries Updateable to changing needs Updateable to changing parameters Standardized to current conditions Produce a new and current Needs Assessment anytime Perform queries based on particular need

Page 7: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Orange County

Create the Solution

2010 Custom Program Development Initiated2010 Custom Program Development InitiatedOC Lake Management hired BPC/TEK JV to develop a dynamic needs OC Lake Management hired BPC/TEK JV to develop a dynamic needs assessment tool based on specific methodologies and needs:assessment tool based on specific methodologies and needs:

+ GIS based /interactive systemGIS based /interactive system+ Updateable parameter coefficientsUpdateable parameter coefficients+ Track /query loads and needs by desired parameterTrack /query loads and needs by desired parameter+ Evaluate and rank potential projectsEvaluate and rank potential projects+ Track and evaluate completed projectsTrack and evaluate completed projects+ Access supplemental data for each project (studies, plans, photos)Access supplemental data for each project (studies, plans, photos)+ Determine TMDL/BMAP load reduction complianceDetermine TMDL/BMAP load reduction compliance+ Generate a Needs Assessment/Master Plan upon requestGenerate a Needs Assessment/Master Plan upon request

Page 8: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Purpose of Program+ Standardize Pollutant Load Calculations+ Rapid Alternative Analysis Scenario Review+ Identify and Categorize Common BMPs+ Rank Projects Using Decision Matrices+ Ability to Sort Projects Based Multiple Parameters+ Generate Reports

Page 9: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

GIS Layers

• Created• Point Projects• Line Projects• Polygon Projects• Project

Watersheds

• Already Exist• Commissioner Districts• Section Township Range• Major Basins• Soils• Land Use• Soils• Streets• TMDL• FDEP WBIDS

Page 10: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

GIS Layers

Page 11: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Setting Up a Project

Page 12: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Sorting and Ranking

Page 13: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Report Sheet

Page 14: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Lake Down Watershed

Page 15: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Land Use

Page 16: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Soils

Page 17: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Lake Down Project Information

Page 18: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Lake Down BMP Water Quality Info

Page 19: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Lake Down Capital Costs

Page 20: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Lake Down References Upload

Page 21: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Lake Down Priority Factors

Page 22: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Area-Weighted Runoff Coefficient(C) and Event Mean Concentration (EMC)

+ C = area-weighted runoff coefficient,+ Cn = area-weighted runoff coefficient

for a given land use, n,+ Arean = area (acres) for land use, n,

and HSG, m,+ n = number of different land uses

within the area, and + m = number of different HSGs within

the area.

∑ ∑

∑ ∑

=

=

=n m

mmn

n m

mmnmn

Area

AreaCC

1 1,

1 1,, *

∑ ∑

∑ ∑

=

=

=n m

mmn

n m

mmnmn

Area

AreaCC

1 1,

1 1,, *

+ EMCX = area-weighted EMC for the project for pollutant X(mg/L),

+ n = number of land uses within the area,

+ EMCn = EMC (mg/L) for a given land use, and

+ Arean = area (acres) for a given land use (the total area, A, could also be used here).

( )

∑= n

n

n

nn

X

Area

AreaEMCEMC

1

1

*

Page 23: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Annual Pollutant Loads

+ LX = annual pollutant load (lbs/yr) for pollutant X+ Q = annual runoff volume (ac-ft/yr)+ EMCX = area-weighted event mean concentration (mg/L) for

pollutant X+ 2.72 = a unit conversion value [ (ac-ft/yr)*(mg/L) to lb/yr ].

72.2** XX EMCWeightedQL =

Page 24: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Example Pollutant Load Calculation

Column1 Column2 Area (acres) Column4

Land Use Name TP (mg/l) Area (acres)

EMC * Area

Low-Density Residential 0.190 2 0.380Medium Density Residential 0.306 1 0.306High Density Residential 0.520 2 1.040Commercial 0.170 2 0.340Institutional 0.345 1 0.345

Total   8 2.411Average EMC (mg/l)     0.301

Land Use Soil Group C-Factor Area (acres) Column1

Low-Density Residential A 0.02 2 0.04

Medium Density Residential B 0.1 1 0.1

High Density Residential C 0.3 2 0.6Commercial D 0.43 2 0.86Institutional B 0.24 1 0.24

Total     8 1.84Composite C-Factor       0.23

Page 25: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Example Pollutant Load Calculation Cont

72.2** XX EMCWeightedQL =

Annual Rainfall 50.03 inC-Factor 0.23 

Area 8.00 acresFlow (Q) 7.67 ac-ft

EMC 0.30 mg/lLoad (lb/yr) 6.29 lb/yr

Page 26: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Relational Tables+ Pollutant Reduction+ Runoff Coefficients+ Land Use + Event Mean Concentrations+ Land Use Types and Codes+ Decision Matrix Points+ Decision Matrix Weighting

Page 27: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Land Use EMCs Land Use Name TN TP BOD TSS Cu Pb Zn

Low-Density Residential 1.58 0.190 4.4 20.4 0.009 0.002 0.029

Medium Density Residential 2.00 0.306 7.5 33.0 0.018 0.004 0.057

High Density Residential 2.32 0.520 11.3 77.8 0.009 0.006 0.086

Commercial 1.23 0.170 7.6 59.2 0.017 0.006 0.083

Institutional 2.40 0.345 11.3 69.7 0.015 0.006B 0.160

Industrial/Utility 1.23 0.180 7.6 60.0 0.003 0.002 0.057

Transportation Facility 1.64 0.220 5.2 37.3 0.032 0.011 0.120

Pasture Agriculture 3.47 0.616 5.1 94.3 0.013C 0.003C 0.021C

Citrus Agriculture 2.24 0.183 2.6 15.5 0.003 0.001 0.012

Row Crops Agriculture 2.65 0.593 3.8C 19.8 0.022 0.004 0.030

General Agriculture 2.79 0.431 3.8 43.2 0.013 0.003 0.021

Golf Course 2.00 0.306 7.5 33.0 0.018 0.004 0.057

Wetland 1.15 0.074 1.2 7.8 0.0 0.0 0.0

Watered 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Open 1.15 0.074 1.2 7.8 -- -- --

Forest 1.15 0.074 1.2 7.8 -- -- --

Page 28: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

BMP Trapping Efficiencies for TP BMP %

Off-line Retention 0.25 treatment volume 40

Off-line Retention 0.50 treatment volume 62

Off-line Retention 0.75 treatment volume 75

Off-line Retention 1.00 treatment volume 84

On-line Retention 0.25 treatment volume 30

On-line Retention 0.50 treatment volume 52

On-line Retention 0.75 treatment volume 65

On-line Retention 1.00 treatment volume 74

Wet Pond 0.5 TV, 7 day residence time 40

Wet Pond 1.0 TV, 14 day residence time 60

Combination Swale/Wet Pond 92

Dry Detention 10

Baffle Box 10

Nutrient Baffle Box (Second Generation) 25

Catch Basin Inserts / Inlet Filters 5

BMP %

Catch Basin Inserts / Inlet Filters* 1.98

Grass Swales 35

Infiltration Trench 52

Porous Pavement 0.5 52

Concrete Grad Pavement 0.5 52

Street Sweeping (semi-weekly) 20

Street Sweeping (semi-weekly)* 2.81

Street Sweeping (weekly) 15

Street Sweeping (weekly)* 1.4

Street Sweeping (biweekly) 10

Street Sweeping (biweekly)* 0.7

Stormceptor 10

CDS 5

Public Education 5

Wetlands 10

Media Filter System 36

Alum 89*lbs/curb mile/yr

Page 29: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Factor WeightsFactor Weight

Pollutant Removal % 30

TMDL Compliance % 30

Funding Availability 5

Land Availability5

Public Support 5

Downstream Benefits 10

BMAP Process 5

Life Cycle Cost 10

Page 30: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Pollutant Reduction Percentage Point Value

Value (%)Per Pollutant

Points

0-5 0

6-25 1

26-50 3

51-11 5

Page 31: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

TMDL Compliance Point ValueValue (%) Points

0-5 2

6-10 3

11-15 4

16-20 5

21-25 6

26-30 7

31-35 8

36-40 9

41-100 10

Page 32: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Funding and Land Availability Point Value Non-County

Contribution/ValuePoints

0 – 10% 1

>10 – 25% 2

>25 – 50% 3

>50 – 75% 4

>75 – 100% 5

Land for Specific Project/Value

Points

No Available Land 0

Privately Owned (Unknown)

2

Privately Owned (Willing Seller)

3

County Owned 5

Page 33: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Public Support and Downstream Benefit Point Value Public Support/Value Points

Opposed Project -5

Neutral or Unknown 0

Strong Demand 5

Downstream Benefits/Value

Points

No Outfall 0

Drainwell 1

Downstream has lower water quality

2

Downstream has higher water quality

4

OFW, Preserve, or Other 5

Page 34: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Street Sweeping and Catch Basin Pollutant Load Estimation

+ Source: PM and Nutrient Load Recovery, Credits and Costs for MS4 Maintenance Activities by University of Florida Engineering School of Sustainable Infrastructure and Environment, Environmental Engineering Sciences Department, John Sansalone, PhD

+ The primary objective is a Florida based “yardstick” or metrics allowing an MS4 to quantify nutrient (N and P) loads through separation then recovery of particulate matter (PM) for common urban hydrologic functional units (HFU)

1. Pavement systems cleaning (pavement street sweeping)2. Catch basins (inlets)3. “BMP” (the most utilized and cleaned BMPs in MS4)

Page 35: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Participating Florida MS4s

Page 36: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Project Sampled a Diversity of “BMPs”

Page 37: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

TN Results by Land Use and HFU

Page 38: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Cost $/Pound: PM, TP, TN Separation or Recovery

Page 39: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Example: Street Sweeping PM, TP, TN Recovery

Page 40: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Report Information

Page 41: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Street Sweeping Area

Page 42: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Street Sweeping Area

Page 43: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Street Sweeping Based on Lane Mile+ 5.93 Swept Miles+ 12.48 TP lb/mile/yr+ 73.97 TP lb/year

removed

Page 44: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Street Sweeping Based on Percent Removal+ 5.93 Swept Miles+ 20% TP removal

Rate+ 208.25 TP lb

removed

Page 45: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Florida-Based Distribution of P (as TP)

Page 46: Automated Water Quality Project Prioritization Tool to Address TMDLs

Conclusions

+ Monitor Compliance with TMDL Goals

+ Support and Document Needs and Results for Council or Commission

+ Active Report

+ Removal Efficiencies Customizable to a Specific Project

+ Quick and Standardized Alternative Analysis

+ Find the Best Project that Meets Grant Requirements or Funding Needs