|
|
|
Critical flow-storm approach to total maximum
daily load (TMDL) development: an analytical conceptual model |
| Zhang Harry1, Yu Shaw2 |
| 1.CH2M HILL, 15010 Conference Center Drive; 2.Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Thornton Hall, University of Virginia |
|
|
|
|
Abstract One of the key challenges in the total maximum daily load (TMDL) development process is how to define the critical condition for a receiving waterbody. The main concern in using a continuous simulation approach is the absence of any guarantee that the most critical condition will be captured during the selected representative hydrologic period, given the scarcity of long-term continuous data. The objectives of this paper are to clearly address the critical condition in the TMDL development process and to compare continuous and event-based approaches in defining critical condition during TMDL development for a waterbody impacted by both point and nonpoint source pollution. A practical, event-based critical flow-storm (CFS) approach was developed to explicitly addresses the critical condition as a combination of a low stream flow and a storm event of a selected magnitude, both having certain frequencies of occurrence. This paper illustrated the CFS concept and provided its theoretical basis using a derived analytical conceptual model. The CFS approach clearly defined a critical condition, obtained reasonable results and could be considered as an alternative method in TMDL development.
|
|
Issue Date: 05 September 2008
|
|
| 1 |
United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA). . Guidance for Water Quality-BasedDecisions: The TMDL Process. USEPA ReportEPA 440/4-91-001. 1991
|
| 2 |
United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA). . Draft Guidance for WaterQuality-based Decisions: The TMDL Process (2nd ed). USEPA Report EPA 841-D-99-001. 1999
|
| 3 |
United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA). . Protocol for Developing NutrientTMDLs (1st ed). USEPA Report EPA 841-B-99-007. 1999
|
| 4 |
United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA). . Protocol for Developing PathogenTMDLs (1st ed). USEPA Report EPA 841-R-00-002. 2001
|
| 5 |
Zhang H X, Yu S L . Condition critical: Definingthe “critical condition” for a total maximum daily loadrequires great care, especially when addressing nonpoint pollutants. Water Environment and Technology, 2005,
|
| 6 |
Zhang H X, Yu S L . A conceptual model of thecritical flow-storm approach for TMDL development. Proceedings ofASCE Water Resources Planning and Management Annual Conference.Reston, USA: American Society of Civil Engineers, 2002
|
| 7 |
Beven K J . Changing ideas in hydrology: The case of physically based models. Journal of Hydrology, 1989, 105: 157–172.
doi:10.1016/0022‐1694(89)90101‐7
|
| 8 |
Zhang H X . The critical flow-storm approach and uncertainty analysis for theTMDL development process. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree.Charlottesville: University of Virginia, 2000
|
| 9 |
Wanielista M, Kersten R, Eaglin R . Hydrology: Water Quantity and Quality Control (2nd ed). New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1997
|
| 10 |
Sartor J D, Boyd G B . Water Pollution Aspects ofStreet Surface Contaminants. USEPA ReportEPA-R2-72-081. 1972
|
| 11 |
Sartor J D, Boyd G B, Agardy F J . Water pollution aspects of street surface contaminants. Journal of Water Pollution Control Federation, 1974, 46(3): 458–467
|
| 12 |
United States EnvironmentalProtection Agency (USEPA). . Results of the NationwideUrban Runoff Program. National TechnicalInformation Service Report PB84-185552. 1983
|
| 13 |
American Society ofCivil Engineers (ASCE) and Water Environment Federation (WEF). . UrbanRunoff Quality Management. Alexandria: ASCE and Reston: WEF, 1998
|
| 14 |
Donigian A S, Imhoff J C, Bicknell B R . Predicting water quality resulting from agriculturalnonpoint source pollution via simulation-HSPF. In: Schaller F W, Bailey G W, eds. Agricultural Management and Water Quality. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1983, 200–249
|
| 15 |
Bicknell B R, Donigian A S, Barnwell T A . Modeling water quality and the effects of agriculturalbest management practices in the Iowa River Basin. Water Science and Technology, 1985, 17: 1141–1153
|
| 16 |
Bicknell B R, Imhoff J C, Kittle J L Jr, Donigian A S Jr . Hydrological Simulation Program-FORTRAN, User's Manual for Release11. Athens: Environmental Research Laboratory, USEPA, 1996
|
| 17 |
Donigian A S Jr, Bicknell B R, Imhoff J C . Hydrological simulation program-FORTRAN (HSPF). In: Singh V P, ed. Computer Modelsof Watershed Hydrology. Littleton: Water ResourcesPublications LLC, 1995, 395–442
|
| 18 |
Zhang H X, Yu S L, Culver T B . The critical flow-storm approach for nitrate TMDL developmentin the Muddy Creek Watershed, Virginia. Atlanta: Proceeding of WEFTEC.Alexandria, USA: Water Environmental Federation, 2001
|
| 19 |
Culver T B, Neeley K, Yu S L, Zhang X, Potts A, Naperala T R . (2002a). Nitrate TMDL development: The Muddy Creek/Dry River case study. Journal of Contemporary Water Research and Education(formerly Water Resources Update), 2002, 5–13
|
| 20 |
Zhang H X, Yu S L . The critical flow-storm approachfor the TMDL process: Application in nitrate TMDL development in MuddyCreek, Virginia. Proceeding of BiennialWorld Water Congress. London,United Kingdom: International WaterAssociation, 2006
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
