DOCSLIB.ORG

Refinement and Evaluation of the Massachusetts Firm-Yield Estimator Model Version 2.0

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Refinement and Evaluation of the Massachusetts Firm-Yield Estimator Model Version 2.0 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Prepared in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Refinement and Evaluation of the Massachusetts Firm-Yield Estimator Model Version 2.0 Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5125 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Top: Gatehouse at Flints (Sandy) Pond in Lincoln, Massachusetts. Bottom: Water entering Holden Pond #1 from Kendall Reservoir, Holden, Massachusetts. Refinement and Evaluation of the Massachusetts Firm-Yield Estimator Model Version 2.0 By Sara B. Levin, Stacey A. Archfield, and Andrew J. Massey Prepared in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5125 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior KEN SALAZAR, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Marcia K. McNutt, Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 Revised: October 2011 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS. For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Levin, S.B., Archfield, S.A., and Massey, A.J., 2011, Refinement and evaluation of the Massachusetts firm-yield estimator model version 2.0: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2011–5125, 49 p., plus CD–ROM (Also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2011/5125.) iii Acknowledgments The authors thank Thomas Lamonte and Kari Winfield of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection and Linda Hutchins of the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation for their technical reviews of this report. The authors thank U.S. Geological Survey colleagues Marcus C. Waldron and Robert Dudley for their reviews and Lance Ostiguy for his help in the processing of bathymetric measurement data. THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK v Contents Abstract ...........................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1 Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................2 Refinements to the Existing Firm-Yield Estimator Model ........................................................................2 Bathymetry and Stage-Storage Relations ........................................................................................3 Surface-Water Inflows ........................................................................................................................7 Precipitation and Evaporation ............................................................................................................7 Groundwater Contributions ...............................................................................................................13 Applications of the Firm-Yield Estimator Model .....................................................................................14 Application of the Firm-Yield Estimator Model to a Single-Reservoir System .........................14 Application of the Firm-Yield Estimator Model to a Multiple-Reservoir System ......................14 Firm-Yield Estimate Uncertainty and Sensitivity to Model Inputs........................................................16 Sensitivity of Firm-Yield Estimates to Errors in Daily Streamflow...............................................16 Sensitivity of the Firm-Yield Model to Bathymetric-Map Accuracy...........................................20 Validation of Groundwater Parameters ..........................................................................................25 Effect of Drought Severity on Firm-Yield Estimates ...............................................................................26 Effect of Controlled Releases and Demand Management on Firm Yield ............................................33 Controlled-Release Scenarios ..........................................................................................................33 Summer Water-Demand Management ...........................................................................................36 Reducing Reservoir Reliability Requirements ................................................................................37 Tradeoffs Between Demand Management, Controlled Releases, and Reliability ...................37 Summary and Conclusions .........................................................................................................................39 References Cited..........................................................................................................................................40 Appendix 1. Hypsographic Data ............................................................................................................43 Appendix 2. Bathymetric Maps ..............................................................................................................45 Appendix 3. Reservoir-System Diagrams .............................................................................................47 Appendix 4. Monthly Percentile Streamflows .....................................................................................49 vi Figures 1. Map showing locations of drainage areas for 71 drinking-water reservoirs in Massachusetts ..............................................................................................................................4 2. Maps showing location of reservoirs and record length at A, precipitation stations and validations sites, and B, meteorological stations in Massachusetts and vicinity ...12 3. Diagrams showing water balances for a system of reservoirs in which A, water is transported by gravity and B, water is pumped from Reservoir 1 to Reservoir 2 ............17 4. Scatterplots showing A, mean percent difference and B, standard deviation of the percent difference of daily streamflows generated by the Sustainable Yield Estimator at 18 U.S. Geological Survey gaged sites in Massachusetts ..............................................19 5. Boxplot showing percent change in firm yield of selected reservoirs in Massachusetts after accounting for potential errors in daily streamflow in 500 Monte Carlo simulations ............................................................................................................21 6. Diagrams showing original and hypothetical 30-meter transect spacing for Upper Sackett Reservoir in Pittsfield, Massachusetts .....................................................................23 7. Graphs showing A–C, percent change in reservoir storage capacity and D–F, firm yield, resulting from transect spacings and patterns for three study reservoirs in Massachusetts ............................................................................................................................24 8. Graph showing daily simulated and observed reservoir stage for Atkins Reservoir in Amherst, Massachusetts ..........................................................................................................26 9. Graph showing daily simulated and observed reservoir stage for Nagog Pond in Concord, Massachusetts ..........................................................................................................27 10. Boxplots showing A, percent below average streamflow and B, duration of droughts of the 1960s, 1980s, and 2002. C, Percent change in firm yield and D, reliability of firm yields when calculated with the droughts of the 1980s or 2002 .........................................32 11. Graph showing maximum monthly releases as a percentile of long-term monthly flows that is possible at various demand ratios for four reservoirs of increasing storage ratio ................................................................................................................................36 12. Boxplot showing percent changes of firm yield for Massachusetts reservoirs under various management scenarios ...............................................................................................38 13. Graph showing tradeoff curves depicting the estimated yield in relation to controlled releases under various management scenarios for Upper Leahy Reservoir, in Lee, Massachusetts ............................................................................................................................39 vii Tables 1. Massachusetts drinking-water-supply systems and associated reservoirs included in this study ....................................................................................................................................5 2. Reservoir basin characteristics and index streamgages in Massachusetts used in the Sustainable Yield Estimator ..................................................................................................8
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DRAFT Northeast Regional Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load
    DRAFT Northeast Regional Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Maine Department of Environmental Protection Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission April 2007 DRAFT Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................ii Tables ..........................................................................................................................................................iv Figures.........................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements .....................................................................................................................................v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................vi Abbreviations ...........................................................................................................................................xiii Definition of Terms..................................................................................................................................xvi
    [Show full text]
  • Massachusetts Freshwater Beaches [2018]: Water Quality Data for Public and Semi-Public Beaches
    Massachusetts Freshwater Beaches [2018]: Water quality data for public and semi-public beaches The table below summarizes testing and posting information for each freshwater beach in Massachusetts. Under the state regulations, freshwater beaches must test for either E. coli or Enterococci. Most beaches do not have to post after each exceedance, provided that (1) they take an immediate resample and (2) that resample does not exceed the standard. Thus, a beach may have an exceedance but no days posted. Conversely, a beach may have days posted, but no exceedances, if it was posted for a reason other than a bacterial exceedance (e.g. rainfall, a cyanobacterial harmful algae bloom, or another hazard such as limited visibility due to poor water clarity). Single Minimum Maximum Testing Days Community Beach Name Tests Indicator Sample Exceedance Exceedance Frequency Posted Exceedances (cfu/100mL) (cfu/100mL) Abington Island Grove Beach Weekly 12 E. coli 3 236 312 3 Acton NARA Beach Weekly 16 E. coli Agawam Robinson Pond Beach (DCR) Weekly 15 Enterococci Amesbury Camp Bauercrest Weekly 10 E. coli Amesbury Glen Devin Condominiums Weekly 11 E. coli 2 261 1553 14 Amesbury Lake Attitash - A.L.S.I.A. Weekly 11 E. coli Amesbury Lake Gardner Weekly 11 E. coli 1 261 261 7 Amesbury Tuxbury RV Resort Lagoon Weekly 11 E. coli Amherst Puffers Pond (North) Weekly 17 E. coli 4 240 1986.3 8 Amherst Puffers Pond (South) Weekly 18 E. coli 4 285.1 1986.3 8 Andover Camp Maude Eaton (1) Weekly 11 E. Coli Andover Camp Maude Eaton (2) Weekly 11 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Selectmen Deny Planning Board's Request to Consult with Town Attorney
    OUR PURPLE PROMISE We Only Charge • Pro Pics • Full Service 1.5% • Open Houses of Sale Price • MLS *Does Not include Buyer’s Agent Commission *Minimums Apply* gopurpleporch.com 1-508-439-7068 Located in Sturbridge Free by request to residents of Charlton, Charlton City and Charlton Depot SEND YOUR NEWS AND PICS TO [email protected] Friday, March 1, 2019 Selectmen deny planning board’s request to consult with town attorney BY JASON BLEAU Patricia Rydlak appeared interest. manner that could result in the assist them in the case. VILLAGER CORRESPONDENT before selectmen on Tuesday, The Open Meeting Law vio- Board of Selectmen standing in This is only the latest chap- Feb. 19 discussing a request for lations are connected to the violation the laws as well. The ter in an ongoing controversy CHARLTON – The Charlton the use of Town Council to help ongoing debate concerning the Planning Board expressed con- involving Valley Green Grow Board of Selectmen has denied the Planning Board address proposed Valley Green Grow cerns about a lack of legal rep- that has seen the Planning legal assistance to the town’s Open Meeting Law complaints project for Charlton Orchard, resentation in early February, Board and Board of Selectmen Planning Board as officials revealing that the board had an initiative that has grown as the deadline for a response to at odds and citizens debating work to resolve open meeting been denied legal represen- into a town-wide controversy the court approached, and also whether the proposed mari- law violation complaints, as tation. Rydlak said that the and led VGG to file an appeal urged the Board of Selectmen juana cultivation project can well as respond to the ongo- Planning Board was turned in Superior Court after the to meeting with the Planning or should be allowed on the ing litigation concerning the down because the town’s Planning Board denied them Board to discuss how to pro- Charlton Orchard property.
    [Show full text]
  • MDPH Beaches Annual Report 2008
    Marine and Freshwater Beach Testing in Massachusetts Annual Report: 2008 Season Massachusetts Department of Public Health Bureau of Environmental Health Environmental Toxicology Program http://www.mass.gov/dph/topics/beaches.htm July 2009 PART ONE: THE MDPH/BEH BEACHES PROJECT 3 I. Overview ......................................................................................................5 II. Background ..................................................................................................6 A. Beach Water Quality & Health: the need for testing......................................................... 6 B. Establishment of the MDPH/BEHP Beaches Project ....................................................... 6 III. Beach Water Quality Monitoring...................................................................8 A. Sample collection..............................................................................................................8 B. Sample analysis................................................................................................................9 1. The MDPH contract laboratory program ...................................................................... 9 2. The use of indicators .................................................................................................... 9 3. Enterococci................................................................................................................... 10 4. E. coli...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rte-122 Kiosk Poster Final-PAXTON
    ROUTE 122 ~ LOST VILLAGES SCENIC BYWAY Petersham • Barre • Oakham • Rutland • Paxton PETERSHAM BARRE OAKHAM RUTLAND PAXTON ABOUT THE WESTERN MASS BYWAYS SYSTEM For more information about the Route 122 Scenic Byway and Western Mass Scenic Byways, please scan: Nichewaug Village White Valley Village Village of Coldbrook Springs Village of West Rutland Moore State Park, an old mill village site Nichewaug was an early name for the town of Petersham. The village existed under three names for 104 years including Clark’s Oakham was originally the west wing of Rutland; first settled by Rutland was founded in 1713 and incorporated in 1722. It is The Mill Village was established in 1747 and consisted of a Nichewaug village was in the southern section of town and was Mills and Smithville, harnessing power from the Ware River to whites in the 1740s. The town was incorporated as a district on the geographical center of Massachusetts, marked by a tree gristmill, sawmill, triphammer, tavern, and one-room school also known by some as Factory Village with its riverside grist and manufacture cotton cloth. The mill closed in 1925. DCR bought June 11, 1762, and given full town status on August 23, 1775. called the Central Tree located n the Central Tree Road. Originally house. In 1965, the site was named the Major Willard Moore ~ WESTERN MASS SCENIC BYWAYS ~ saw mills, woodshops, blacksmiths and other businesses. The village all the village properties including the company store, post office, There were two main population centers in the town: the center 12 miles square, it included parts of Paxton, Oakham, Barre, Memorial State Park.
    [Show full text]
  • Northeast Regional Mercury TMDL (PDF)
    Northeast Regional Mercury Total Maximum Daily Load Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection Maine Department of Environmental Protection Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission October 24, 2007 Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................ii Tables ..........................................................................................................................................................iv Figures.........................................................................................................................................................iv Acknowledgements .....................................................................................................................................v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................vi Abbreviations ...........................................................................................................................................xiii Definition of Terms..................................................................................................................................xvi
    [Show full text]
  • Update Report for Massachusetts Late 2012
    Update Report R US Army Corps for Massachusetts of Engineers New England District Current as of 696 Virginia Road, Concord, Massachusetts 01742-2751 April 30, 2018 ® Public Affairs Office, 978-318-8264/8238 BUILDING STRONG Home Page: www.nae.usace.army.mil/ Mission Index The missions of the New England District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers include Base Realignment & Closure 11 flood risk management protection, emergency preparedness and response to natu- Defense Environmental Restoration 7 ral disasters and national emergencies, environmental remediation and restoration, Ecological Restoration/Watershed Mgt. 5 natural resource management, stream bank and shoreline protection, navigation Flood Risk Management Protection 13 Flood Damage Reduction 4 maintenance and improvement, support to military facilities and installations, and Interagency & International Support 11 engineering and construction support to other government agencies. The six New Military Support 10 England states cover 66,000 square miles and have 6,100 miles of coastline, 171 Navigation 1 Recreation/Natural Resource Management 13 federal navigation projects (13 deep draft commercial waterways), 13 major river Regulatory Program 12 basins, and thousands of miles of navigable rivers and streams. The District oper- Shoreline/Streambank Protection 4 ates and maintains 31 dams, three hurricane barriers and the Cape Cod Canal. Superfund 10 Through its Regulatory program, the District processes nearly 3,000 applications Work for EPA 10 per year for work in waters and wetlands of the six-state region. We employ about 510 professional civilian employees, with about 300 stationed at our headquarters in Concord, Mass. The other Corps of Engineers employees serve at Corps projects and offices throughout the region.
    [Show full text]
  • Ocm08732575-1946.Pdf
    July 1, 1946 To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives in General Court 'Assembled: The Massachusetts State Planning Board herewith submits its re­ port for the' fiscal year ending June 30, '1946. One change occurred during the year in the Board membership. Richard H. Edwards, who was appointed to fill the unexpired term occa­ sioned by the death of Frederic H. Fay in 1944, rendered brief bu.t con­ structive service until October 1945 when he was succeeded by Robert C. Nordblom who was appointed for the six-year period ending September 18, 1951. For purposes of- convonience in carrying fonm,rd its dotailed studies, the Board has divided tho State into sevon planning regions as follows: 1. Berkshire Region including all of BerkshJre County (two cities and thirty towns) 2. Connecticut Valley Region including all of Franklin, Hampshire and Hampden Counties (f:'ve cities and sixtJ-~our tmms) 3. Worcester County Region includi~ all of Worcester County plus eight adjoining towns in Middlesex County (five cities and sj.xty-three towns) 4. Merr:1mac Region (throe cities and twenty-four towns) 5. Massachusetts Bay and Environs (nineteen citiefl and eighty-one towns) 6. Bristol-Plymouth Region (five cities and twenty-seven towns) 7. Cape Region including Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket Is lands (twenty-three towns), These seven rogions together comprise the thirty-nlne cities and three hundred and twelve towns totaling threo hund.red and fifty-one muni­ cipaJJ,tios in the Commonwealth. Within these regiono studiea are being carri~ covering all the elements of a comprehonoive plan.
    [Show full text]
  • 314 Cmr 4.00: Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards
    Disclaimer The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) provides this file for download from its Web site for the convenience of users only. Please be aware that the OFFICIAL versions of all state statutes and regulations (and many of the MassDEP policies) are only available through the State Bookstore or from the Secretary of State’s Code of Massachusetts Regulations (CMR) Subscription Service. When downloading regulations and policies from the MassDEP Web site, the copy you receive may be different from the official version for a number of reasons, including but not limited to: • The download may have gone wrong and you may have lost important information. • The document may not print well given your specific software/ hardware setup. • If you translate our documents to another word processing program, it may miss/skip/lose important information. • The file on this Web site may be out-of-date (as hard as we try to keep everything current). If you must know that the version you have is correct and up-to-date, then purchase the document through the state bookstore, the subscription service, and/or contact the appropriate MassDEP program. 314 CMR: DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 314 CMR 4.00: MASSACHUSETTS SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS Section 4.01: General Provisions 4.02: Definitions 4.03: Application of Standards 4.04: Antidegradation Provisions 4.05: Classes and Criteria 4.06: Basin Classification and Maps 4.01: General Provisions (1) Title. 314 CMR 4.00 shall be known as the "Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards". (2) Organization of the Standards. 314 CMR 4.00 is comprised of six sections, General Provisions (314 CMR 4.01) Definitions (314 CMR 4.02), Application of Standards (314 CMR 4.03), Antidegradation Provisions (314 CMR 4.04), Classes and Criteria (314 CMR 4.05), and Basin Classification and Maps (314 CMR 4.06).
    [Show full text]
  • Division of Water Pollution Control 314 Cmr 4.00
    314 CMR: DIVISION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 314 CMR 4.00: MASSACHUSETTS SURFACE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS Section 4.01: General Provisions 4.02: Definitions 4.03: Application of Standards 4.04: Antidegradation Provisions 4.05: Classes and Criteria 4.06: Basin Classification and Maps 4.01: General Provisions (1) Title. 314 CMR 4.00 shall be known as the "Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards". (2) Organization of the Standards. 314 CMR 4.00 is comprised of six sections, General Provisions (314 CMR 4.01) Definitions (314 CMR 4.02), Application of Standards (314 CMR 4.03), Antidegradation Provisions (314 CMR 4.04), Classes and Criteria (314 CMR 4.05), and Basin Classification and Maps (314 CMR 4.06). (3) Authority. The Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards are adopted by the Department pursuant to the provisions of M.G.L. c. 21, § 27. (4) Purpose. M.G.L. c. 21, §§ 26 through 53 charges the Department with the duty and responsibility to protect the public health and enhance the quality and value of the water resources of the Commonwealth. It directs the Department to take all action necessary or appropriate to secure to the Commonwealth the benefits of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. The objective of 33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. is the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. To achieve the foregoing requirements the Department has adopted the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards which designate the most sensitive uses for which the various waters of the Commonwealth shall be enhanced, maintained and protected; which prescribe the minimum water quality criteria required to sustain the designated uses; and which contain regulations necessary to achieve the designated uses and maintain existing water quality including, where appropriate, the prohibition of discharges.
    [Show full text]
  • Inland and Coastal Wetlands of Massachusetts: Status and Trends
    INLAND AND COASTAL WETLANDS OF MASSACHUSETTS STATUS AND TRENDS WETLANDS—OUR COMMON WEALTH March 2019 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Charles D. Baker, Governor Karyn E. Polito, Lieutenant Governor Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Matthew A. Beaton, Secretary Department of Environmental Protection Martin Suuberg, Commissioner Douglas E. Fine, Assistant Commissioner for the Bureau of Water Resources Stephanie Moura, Director of Wetlands and Waterways Michael Stroman, Program Chief Wetlands Program Authors Lisa Rhodes, Program Manager Wetland Monitoring & Assessment Michael McHugh, Section Chief Wetlands Conservancy Program Thomas Gruszkos, Wetland Data Analyst MassDEP Wetland Program One Winter Street Boston, MA 02108 INLAND AND COASTAL WETLANDS OF MASSACHUSETTS STATUS AND TRENDS March 2019 INLAND AND COASTAL WETLANDS OF MASSACHUSETTS STATUS AND TRENDS March 2019 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to extend a special thanks to the following staff MassDEP: Stephanie Moura, Director of Wetlands and Waterways; Lealdon Langley, Director of the Division of Watershed Management; Michael Stroman, Wetlands Section Chief; Alice Smith, Thomas Maguire and Nancy Lin of the Wetlands Program; Brian Brodeur, Aaron Richer, Alice Doyle and James Brown, of the GIS Program; Charles Costello, Wetlands Conservancy Program; and Todd Nuerminger, Photo-interpreter, University of Massachusetts, Donahue Institute. We also extend our special thanks to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for providing a portion of the funding for this
    [Show full text]
  • Update Report for Massachusetts
    Update Report R US Army Corps for Massachusetts of Engineers New England District Current as of 696 Virginia Road, Concord, Massachusetts 01742-2751 April 30, 2019 ® Public Affairs Office, 978-318-8264/8238 BUILDING STRONG Home Page: www.nae.usace.army.mil/ Mission Index The missions of the New England District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers include Base Realignment & Closure 11 flood risk management protection, emergency preparedness and response to natu- Defense Environmental Restoration 7 ral disasters and national emergencies, environmental remediation and restoration, Ecological Restoration/Watershed Mgt. 5 natural resource management, stream bank and shoreline protection, navigation Flood Risk Management Protection 12 Flood Damage Reduction 5 maintenance and improvement, support to military facilities and installations, and Interagency & International Support 11 engineering and construction support to other government agencies. The six New Military Support 10 England states cover 66,000 square miles and have 6,100 miles of coastline, 170 Navigation 1 Recreation/Natural Resource Management 12 federal navigation projects (13 deep draft commercial waterways), 13 major river Regulatory Program 11 basins, and thousands of miles of navigable rivers and streams. The District oper- Shoreline/Streambank Protection 4 ates and maintains 31 dams, three hurricane barriers and the Cape Cod Canal. Superfund 9 Through its Regulatory program, the District processes nearly 3,000 applications Work for EPA 9 per year for work in waters and wetlands of the six-state region. We employ about 500 professional civilian employees, with about 300 stationed at our headquarters in Concord, Mass. The other Corps of Engineers employees serve at Corps projects and offices throughout the region.
    [Show full text]