Date post: | 18-Jan-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | lora-della-kennedy |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Wat
er
JAM
20
10
City of Raleigh briefing for Jordan Lake Partnership
October 24, 2014
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
2
El. 251.5
El. 236.5
Flood Storage
Sed. S.
Water Quality
Pool
Water Supply
Pool
20 BG 14.7 BG
8.2 BG
Falls Lake Storage Profile
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Falls Lake
Clayton Gage
Illustration of Water Supply Usage Impact on Clayton Flow Target
Illustration of Water Supply Usage Impact on Clayton Flow Target
Water Supply Pool
Water Quality Pool
Raleigh Service
Area
Flow Target184 cfs Nov – Mar254 cfs Apr – Oct
NR WWTP
11
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
4
Reallocate 4.1 BG of WQ Pool
(20.5% of existing WQ Pool) to WS Pool
El. 251.5
El. 236.5
Flood Storage
Sed. S.
Water Quality
Pool
Water Supply
Pool
Reallocation Alternative
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Raleigh Quarry Storage with Neuse River Intake below Richland Creek as a BackupRaleigh Quarry Storage with Neuse River Intake below Richland Creek as a Backup
5
EMJ WTP
Raleigh Quarry
Falls Lake
16
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
6
Raleigh Quarry50-yr Marginal Yield for Raleigh Quarry
(and Neuse River Intake when indicated)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0 BG 1 BG 2 BG 3 BG 4 BG 5 BG 6 BG 7 BG 8 BG 9 BG
Raleigh Quarry Usable Volume
Op
era
tio
na
l 50
-ye
ar
Yie
ld -
MG
D
No Direct transfer from Neuse River to EMJ, 50 mgd recharge rate
Richland Ck backup intake (@18.5 mgd), 50 mgd quarry recharge
Purpose and Need
Raleigh Quarry Storage (with Neuse River Intake below Richland Creek as a Backup)
Estimated current volume
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
River Intake Above Neuse River WWTP River Intake Above Neuse River WWTP
7
Falls Lake
Lake Benson
Raleigh Service
Area
Lake Wheeler
NR WWTP
DE Benton WTP
EMJ WTP
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
8
River Intake Above Neuse River WWTP
Area shaded in green shows potential extent of water supply watershed overlay
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Falls Lake EFDC ModelFalls Lake EFDC Model
Developed by NCDENR DWR to aid in developing nutrient management strategy
Completed in 2009 under guidance of Falls Lake Technical Advisory Committee
Simulating Chl-a concentrations was key purpose Chl-a goal:
Less than 40 µg/L 90% of the time
Focused primarily on nutrientinputs from tributaries
Developed by NCDENR DWR to aid in developing nutrient management strategy
Completed in 2009 under guidance of Falls Lake Technical Advisory Committee
Simulating Chl-a concentrations was key purpose Chl-a goal:
Less than 40 µg/L 90% of the time
Focused primarily on nutrientinputs from tributaries
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Simulation ScenariosSimulation Scenarios
Hydrology
Historical Outflow
Max WS – Current
Allocation
Max WS – A.4
Allocation
Inflow Chl-a Concentratio
n
Unmodified Base Model
Inflow Chl-a = 10 µg/L
Nutrient Reductions
No Nutrient
Reductions
40% N 77% P
Reductions
12 Total Simulation Scenarios
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Chl-a Exceedance FrequencyChl-a Exceedance Frequency
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Unmodified Chl-a, Nutrient ReductionsUnmodified Chl-a, Nutrient Reductions
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
The dotted grey line above represents simulated historical conditions without nutrient reductions in place, with the grey stars illustrating the observed Chl-a concentrations used for model calibration. Historical withdrawal, current allocation, and A4 allocation lines reflect implementation of 40%N / 77%P reductions.
Wat
er
JAM
20
10
The grey band illustrates the root mean squared error from model calibration efforts. Measured Chl-a concentrations were generally within 17.89 µg/L of the concentration simulated for that point in time.
Wat
er
JAM
20
10N
C A
WW
A W
EA
20
11
Other Options?Other Options?
Reclaimed Water as a Source Water
Jordan Lake Allocation
Reclaimed Water as a Source Water
Jordan Lake Allocation