Geology topics

Sara L. Brandt

Publications and source records attributed to Sara L. Brandt.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2011

Determination of dilution factors for discharge of aluminum-containing wastes by public water-supply treatment facilities into lakes and reservoirs in Massachusetts

Dilution of aluminum discharged to reservoirs in filter-backwash effluents at water-treatment facilities in Massachusetts was investigated by a field study and computer simulation. Determination of dilution is needed so that permits for discharge ensure compliance with water-quality standards for aquatic life. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chronic standard for aluminum, 87 micrograms per liter (μg/L), rather than the acute standard, 750 μg/L, was used in this investigation because the time scales of chronic exposure (days) more nearly match rates of change in reservoir concentrations than do the time scales of acute exposure (hours). Whereas dilution factors are routinely computed for effluents discharged to streams solely on the basis of flow of the effluent and flow of the receiving stream, dilution determination for effluents discharged to reservoirs is more complex because (1), compared to streams, additional water is available for dilution in reservoirs during low flows as a result of reservoir flushing and storage during higher flows, and (2) aluminum removal in reservoirs occurs by aluminum sedimentation during the residence time of water in the reservoir. Possible resuspension of settled aluminum was not considered in this investigation. An additional concern for setting discharge standards is the substantial concentration of aluminum that can be naturally present in ambient surface waters, usually in association with dissolved organic carbon (DOC), which can bind aluminum and keep it in solution. A method for dilution determination was developed using a mass-balance equation for aluminum and considering sources of aluminum from groundwater, surface water, and filter-backwash effluents and losses caused by sedimentation, water withdrawal, and spill discharge from the reservoir. The method was applied to 13 reservoirs. Data on aluminum and DOC concentrations in reservoirs and influent water were collected during the fall of 2009. Complete reservoir volume was determined to be available for mixing on the basis of vertical and horizontal aluminum-concentration profiling. Losses caused by settling of aluminum were assumed to be proportional to aluminum concentration and reservoir area. The constant of proportionality, as a function of DOC concentration, was established by simulations in each of five reservoirs that differed in DOC concentration. In addition to computing dilution factors, the project determined dilution factors that would be protective with the same statistical basis (frequency of exceedance of the chronic standard) as dilutions computed for streams at the 7-day-average 10-year-recurrence annual low flow (the 7Q10). Low-flow dilutions are used for permitting so that receiving waters are protected even at the worst-case flow levels. The low-flow dilution factors that give the same statistical protection are the lowest annual 7-day-average dilution factors with a recurrence of 10 years, termed 7DF10s. Determination of 7DF10 values for reservoirs required that long periods of record be simulated so that dilution statistics could be determined. Dilution statistics were simulated for 13 reservoirs from 1960 to 2004 using U.S. Geological Survey Firm-Yield Estimator software to model reservoir inputs and outputs and present-day values of filter-effluent discharge and aluminum concentration. Computed settling velocities ranged from 0 centimeters per day (cm/d) at DOC concentrations of 15.5 milligrams per liter (mg/L) to 21.5 cm/d at DOC concentrations of 2.7 mg/L. The 7DF10 values were a function of aluminum effluent discharged. At current (2009) effluent discharge rates, the 7DF10 values varied from 1.8 to 115 among the 13 reservoirs. In most cases, the present-day (2009) discharge resulted in receiving water concentrations that did not exceed the standard at the 7DF10. Exceptions were one reservoir with a very small area and three reservoirs with high concentrations of DOC. Maximum permissible discharges were determined for water-treatment plants by adjusting discharges upward in simulations until the 7DF10 resulted in reservoir concentrations that just met the standard. In terms of aluminum flux, these discharges ranged from 0 to 28 kilograms of aluminum per day.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2010

Preliminary assessment of factors influencing riverine fish communities in Massachusetts

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (MDCR), Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP), and the Massachusetts Department of Fish and Game (MDFG), conducted a preliminary investigation of fish communities in small- to medium-sized Massachusetts streams. The objective of this investigation was to determine relations between fish-community characteristics and anthropogenic alteration, including flow alteration and impervious cover, relative to the effect of physical basin and land-cover (environmental) characteristics. Fish data were obtained for 756 fish-sampling sites from the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife fish-community database. A review of the literature was used to select a set of fish metrics responsive to flow alteration. Fish metrics tested include two fish-community metrics (fluvial-fish relative abundance and fluvial-fish species richness), and five indicator species metrics (relative abundance of brook trout, blacknose dace, fallfish, white sucker, and redfin pickerel). Streamflows were simulated for each fish-sampling site using the Sustainable Yield Estimator application (SYE). Daily streamflows and the SYE water-use database were used to determine a set of indicators of flow alteration, including percent alteration of August median flow, water-use intensity, and withdrawal and return-flow fraction. The contributing areas to the fish-sampling sites were delineated and used with a Geographic Information System (GIS) to determine a set of environmental characteristics, including elevation, basin slope, percent sand and gravel, percent wetland, and percent open water, and a set of anthropogenic-alteration variables, including impervious cover and dam density. Two analytical techniques, quantile regression and generalized linear modeling, were applied to determine the association between fish-response variables and the selected environmental and anthropogenic explanatory variables. Quantile regression indicated that flow alteration and impervious cover were negatively associated with both fluvial-fish relative abundance and fluvial-fish species richness. Three generalized linear models (GLMs) were developed to quantify the response of fish communities to multiple environmental and anthropogenic variables. Flow-alteration variables are statistically significant for the fluvial-fish relative-abundance model. Impervious cover is statistically significant for the fluvial-fish relative-abundance, fluvial-fish species richness, and brook trout relative-abundance models. The variables in the equations were demonstrated to be significant, and the variability explained by the models, as measured by the correlation between observed and predicted values, ranges from 39 to 65 percent. The GLM models indicated that, keeping all other variables the same, a one-unit (1 percent) increase in the percent depletion or percent surcharging of August median flow would result in a 0.4-percent decrease in the relative abundance (in counts per hour) of fluvial fish and that the relative abundance of fluvial fish was expected to be about 55 percent lower in net-depleted streams than in net-surcharged streams. The GLM models also indicated that a unit increase in impervious cover resulted in a 5.5-percent decrease in the relative abundance of fluvial fish and a 2.5-percent decrease in fluvial-fish species richness.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2010

The Massachusetts Sustainable-Yield Estimator: A decision-support tool to assess water availability at ungaged stream locations in Massachusetts

Federal, State and local water-resource managers require a variety of data and modeling tools to better understand water resources. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, has developed a statewide, interactive decision-support tool to meet this need. The decision-support tool, referred to as the Massachusetts Sustainable-Yield Estimator (MA SYE) provides screening-level estimates of the sustainable yield of a basin, defined as the difference between the unregulated streamflow and some user-specified quantity of water that must remain in the stream to support such functions as recreational activities or aquatic habitat. The MA SYE tool was designed, in part, because the quantity of surface water available in a basin is a time-varying quantity subject to competing demands for water. To compute sustainable yield, the MA SYE tool estimates a daily time series of unregulated, daily mean streamflow for a 44-year period of record spanning October 1, 1960, through September 30, 2004. Selected streamflow quantiles from an unregulated, daily flow-duration curve are estimated by solving six regression equations that are a function of physical and climate basin characteristics at an ungaged site on a stream of interest. Streamflow is then interpolated between the estimated quantiles to obtain a continuous daily flow-duration curve. A time series of unregulated daily streamflow subsequently is created by transferring the timing of the daily streamflow at a reference streamgage to the ungaged site by equating exceedence probabilities of contemporaneous flow at the two locations. One of 66 reference streamgages is selected by kriging, a geostatistical method, which is used to map the spatial relation among correlations between the time series of the logarithm of daily streamflows at each reference streamgage and the ungaged site. Estimated unregulated, daily mean streamflows show good agreement with observed unregulated, daily mean streamflow at 18 streamgages located across southern New England. Nash-Sutcliffe efficiency goodness-of-fit values are between 0.69 and 0.98, and percent root-mean-square-error values are between 19 and 283 percent. The MA SYE tool provides an estimate of streamflow adjusted for current (2000-04) water withdrawals and discharges using a spatially referenced database of permitted groundwater and surface-water withdrawal and discharge volumes. For a user-selected basin, the database is queried to obtain the locations of water withdrawal or discharge volumes within the basin. Groundwater and surface-water withdrawals and discharges are subtracted and added, respectively, from the unregulated, daily streamflow at an ungaged site to obtain a streamflow time series that includes the effects of these withdrawals and discharges. Users also have the option of applying an analytical solution to the time-varying, groundwater withdrawal and discharge volumes that take into account the effects of the aquifer properties on the timing and magnitude of streamflow alteration. For the MA SYE tool, it is assumed that groundwater and surface-water divides are coincident. For areas of southeastern Massachusetts and Cape Cod where this assumption is known to be violated, groundwater-flow models are used to estimate average monthly streamflows at fixed locations. There are several limitations to the quality and quantity of the spatially referenced database of groundwater and surface-water withdrawals and discharges. The adjusted streamflow values do not account for the effects on streamflow of climate change, septic-system discharge, impervious area, non-public water-supply withdrawals less than 100,000 gallons per day, and impounded surface-water bodies.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2010

Indicators of streamflow alteration, habitat fragmentation, impervious cover, and water quality for Massachusetts stream basins

Massachusetts streams and stream basins have been subjected to a wide variety of human alterations since colonial times. These alterations include water withdrawals, treated wastewater discharges, construction of onsite septic systems and dams, forest clearing, and urbanization—all of which have the potential to affect streamflow regimes, water quality, and habitat integrity for fish and other aquatic biota. Indicators were developed to characterize these types of potential alteration for subbasins and groundwater contributing areas in Massachusetts. The potential alteration of streamflow by the combined effects of withdrawals and discharges was assessed under two water-use scenarios. Water-use scenario 1 incorporated publicly reported groundwater withdrawals and discharges, direct withdrawals from and discharges to streams, and estimated domestic-well withdrawals and septic-system discharges. Surface-water-reservoir withdrawals were excluded from this scenario. Water-use scenario 2 incorporated all the types of withdrawal and discharge included in scenario 1 as well as withdrawals from surface-water reservoirs—all on a long-term, mean annual basis. All withdrawal and discharge data were previously reported to the State for the 2000–2004 period, except domestic-well withdrawals and septic-system discharges, which were estimated for this study. The majority of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas were estimated to have relatively minor (less than 10 percent) alteration of streamflow under water-use scenario 1 (seasonally varying water use; no surface-water-reservoir withdrawals). However, about 12 percent of subbasins and groundwater contributing areas were estimated to have extensive alteration of streamflows (greater than 40 percent) in August; most of these basins were concentrated in the outer metropolitan Boston region. Potential surcharging of streamflow in August was most commonly indicated for main-stem river subbasins, although surcharging was also indicated for some smaller tributary subbasins. In the high-flow month of April, only 4.8 percent of subbasins and groundwater contributing areas had more than 10 percent potential flow alteration. A majority of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas were also indicated to have relatively minor alteration of streamflow under water-use scenario 2 (long-term average water use, including surface-water-reservoir withdrawals). Extensive alteration of mean annual flows was estimated for about 6 percent of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas. The majority of subbasins estimated to have extensive long-term flow alteration contained reservoirs that were specifically designed, constructed, and managed to supply drinking water to cities. Only a small number of subbasins and groundwater contributing areas (1 percent) were extensively surcharged on a long-term, mean annual basis. Because site-specific data concerning surface-water-reservoir storage dynamics and management practices are not available statewide, the seasonal effects of surface-water-reservoir withdrawals on downstream flows could not be assessed in this study. The impounded storage ratio (volume of impounded subbasin or groundwater-contributing-area storage divided by mean annual predevelopment outflow from the subbasin or contributing area, in units of days) indicates the potential for alteration of streamflow, sediment-transport, and temperature regimes by dams, independent of water use. Storage ratios were less than 1 day for 33 percent of the subbasins and groundwater contributing areas, greater than 1 month for about 40 percent of the cases, and greater than 1 year for 3.2 percent of the cases statewide. Dam density, an indicator of stream-habitat fragmentation by dams, averaged 1 dam for every 6.7 stream miles statewide. Many of these dams are not presently (2009) being managed. The highest dam densities were in portions of Worcester County and in the Plymouth-Carver region, respectively, reflecting the historical reliance of Massachusetts industry upon water power and agricultural water-management practices in southeastern Massachusetts. Impervious cover is a frequently used indicator of urban land use. About 33 percent of the state’s 1,429 subbasins and groundwater contributing areas are relatively undeveloped at the local scale, with a local impervious cover of less than 4 percent. About 18 percent of Massachusetts subbasins and contributing areas are highly developed, with a local impervious cover greater than 16 percent. The remaining 49 percent of subbasins and contributing areas have levels of urban development between these extremes (4 to 16 percent local impervious cover). Cumulative impervious cover, defined for the entire upstream area encompassed by each subbasin, shows a smaller range (0 to 55 percent) than local impervious cover. Both local and cumulative impervious cover were highest in metropolitan Boston and other urban centers. High elevated impervious-cover values were also found along major transportation corridors. The water-quality status of Massachusetts streams is assessed periodically by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection pursuant to the requirements of the Federal Clean Water Act. Streams selected for assessment are commonly located in larger subbasins where some degree of impairment is expected. In the 72 percent of the state’s subbasins and groundwater contributing areas with assessed streams in 2002, more than 50 percent of the assessed stream miles were considered impaired. All of the assessed stream miles were considered impaired in 66 percent of the subbasins and groundwater contributing areas with assessed streams. Large streams, such as the main stems of rivers that make up most of the assessed stream miles, also are in many cases the receiving waters for treated wastewater discharges and for this reason may be more susceptible to water-quality impairments than smaller streams. Subbasins and contributing areas with large fractions of assessed stream miles that are listed as impaired are distributed across the state, but are more prevalent in eastern Massachusetts.

Massachusetts↗

USGS2009

Local and Cumulative Impervious Cover of Massachusetts Stream Basins

Impervious surfaces such as paved roads, parking lots, and building roofs can affect the natural streamflow patterns and ecosystems of nearby streams. This dataset summarizes the percentage of impervious area for watersheds across Massachusetts by using a newly available statewide 1-m binary raster dataset of impervious surface for 2005. In order to accurately capture the wide spatial variability of impervious surface, it was necessary to delineate a new set of finely discretized basin boundaries for Massachusetts. This new set of basins was delineated at a scale finer than that of the existing 12-digit Hydrologic Unit Code basins (HUC-12s) of the national Watershed Boundary Dataset. The dataset consists of three GIS shapefiles. The Massachusetts nested subbasins and the hydrologic units data layers consist of topographically delineated boundaries and their associated percentage of impervious cover for all of Massachusetts except Cape Cod, the Islands, and the Plymouth-Carver region. The Massachusetts groundwater-contributing areas data layer consists of groundwater contributing-area boundaries for streams and coastal areas of Cape Cod and the Plymouth-Carver region. These boundaries were delineated by using groundwater-flow models previously published by the U.S. Geological Survey. Subbasin and hydrologic unit boundaries were delineated statewide with the exception of Cape Cod and the Plymouth-Carver Region. For the purpose of this study, a subbasin is defined as the entire drainage area upstream of an outlet point. Subbasins draining to multiple outlet points on the same stream are nested. That is, a large downstream subbasin polygon comprises all of the smaller upstream subbasin polygons. A hydrologic unit is the intervening drainage area between a given outlet point and the outlet point of the next upstream unit (Fig. 1). Hydrologic units divide subbasins into discrete, nonoverlapping areas. Each hydrologic unit corresponds to a subbasin delineated from the same outlet point; the hydrologic unit and the subbasin share the same unique identifier attribute. Because the same set of outlet points was used for the delineation of subbasins and hydrologic units, the linework for both data layers is identical; however, polygon attributes differ because for a given outlet point, the subbasin polygon area is the sum of all the upstream hydrologic units. Impervious surface summarized for a subbasin represents the percentage of impervious surface area of the entire upstream watershed, whereas the impervious surface for a hydrologic unit represents the percentage of impervious surface area for the intervening drainage area between two outlet points.

Data Series↗