Upper Ocklawaha River Basin Interim Lake Level Analysis · Upper Ocklawaha River Basin Interim Lake Level Analysis ... • Wet Season Floods 2004, ... 1000 cfs (ADDED)

Upper Ocklawaha River Basin Interim Lake Level Analysis June 1, 2012 Harris Chain of Lakes Restoration Council Michael G. Cullum, P.E., Director Bureau of Engineering, SJRWMD

50

55

60

65

70

75

Lake Apopka

Burrell Lakes

Lake Griffin

Wat

er L

evel

(fee

t abo

ve s

ea le

vel)

Changes in Historic Water Levels for Lake Apopka and the Harris Chain of Lakes

54

56

58

60

62

64

66

68 fe

et N

AVD8

8 Upper Ocklawaha Lake Levels 1996 - 2012 Red dashed line = minimum desired level for each lake system

Updated to 5-28-2012

Apopka

Harris Eustis Dora

Griffin

Lake Levels below minimum desired level

Griffin

Eustis

Recent Drought

Relief ???

36.5

46.9

50.0

33.7

56.7

50.7 49.4

52.4

49.7 50.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Apopka Burrell Moss Bluff Gainesville SJID

Rain

fall

, In

. Rainfall Comparisons, 5-1-11 thru 5-29-12

Actual Rain

Normal Rain

January, 2012 Projects and Land Committee Meeting - Mission Inn

• District staff recommended 0-0-0 discharge

• Citizens expressed interest in 23-23-0 rates

• 23-23-0 rates implemented through April, 2012 Lake Griffin level dropped one-half inch Burrell (Super Pond) levels dropped 6 inches Lake Apopka dropped 11 inches


• District staff recommended 0-0-0 discharge

• Citizens expressed interest in 23-23-0 rates

• 23-23-0 rates implemented through April, 2012

• 0-0-0 rates implemented May, 2012


• Public requested District review rates and levels

associated with the Operating Schedules during recession period in Spring and rising limb in Fall

• Recommend an Interim Operating Schedule

• June 2012 – June 2013

Approach for implementing Interim Lake Levels in the Harris Chain of Lakes & Lake Apopka

• Added flexibility to manage Burrell sub-basin

lakes with completion of the Harris Bayou project in 2008


• Now - Added flexibility to manage Burrell sub-basin

lakes with completion of the Harris Bayou project in 2008

• Next Year - Store water in the Lake Apopka North Shore Restoration Area (NSRA) – MFL Program – Establish higher average levels and a more

consistent flow of water – Currently resolving contamination issues and

partial re-flood NSRA by 2013.

Lake Apopka North Shore Infrastructure and Flooding


• Use Current Watershed Models from Water Supply Impact Study (WSIS) – Hydrologic Simulation Program – Fortran (HSPF) – 90 models / 11 in-house modelers – External Peer Review – National Academy of Sciences – National

Research Council review • Modeling Schedule

• General WSIS - HSPF Model Description


• Schedule for Modeling – Started January, 2012 – Finished with Calibration/Baseline Scenario

• (1995-2006)

– Finished Modeling Scenarios for Interim Plan – May 31, 2012 – Public Meeting of Results – June 12, 2012 – SJRWMD Governing Board

Land-use, reaches, and rainfall gauges

DEM LULC Soils HSPF Modeling

D.E.M. Land Cover Soils

AGWO Active GroundWater Outflow

Interception Evaporation, CEPE SURO

SURface Outflow

IFWO InterFloW Outflow

Interflow Storage (IFWS)

Evaporation

Transpiration

Precipitation

Interflow Inflow, IFWI Upper Zone ET, UZET

Lower Zone ET, LZET

Active Groundwater ET, AGWET

Inactive Groundwater Inflow, IGWI

Infiltration, INFIL

Lower Zone Inflow, LZI Percolation, PERC

Active Groundwater Inflow, AGWI

Vadose Zone

Saturated Zone

Flow

Time

SURO

IFWO AGWO

Precipitation Yield, SUPY

Baseflow ET, BASET

Surface Detention Storage (SURS)

Interception Storage (CEPS)

Upper Zone Storage (UZS)

Lower Zone Storage (LZS)

Active Ground Water Storage (AGWS)

Inactive Groundwater (Does not contribute to baseflow)

Pervious Land Segment: Flow Paths


Model Improvements – Harris Bayou – Two way flow in Dead River – Groundwater Component – 12 years of simulation 1995-2006

• Extent of Groundwater data • Historic Drought 1999, 2000, 2001 • Wet Season Floods 2004, 2005 • Dry Season El Nino Floods 95/96, 97/98


• Baseline – Current Operating Schedule • For Scenarios, Flood protection top priority:

– Don’t exceed peak levels above Baseline, or – Maximum Desirable levels

• Maximum Discharges – Harris Bayou - 1000 cfs (ADDED) – Burrell - 1600 cfs – Moss Bluff - 2460 cfs

Flood Control Releases

Minimum Flows

Zero Flow Max Desirable Stage Min Desirable Stage

Min Flow 23 CFS Min Flow 28 CFS

Min Flow 30 CFS


Minimum Flows Zero Flow Max Desirable Stage Min Desirable Stage


Min Flow 30 CFS


Min Flow 30 CFS

Min Flow 0 CFS Min Flow 0 CFS Min Flow 0 CFS Min Flow 0 CFS



• Operating Schedule Modifications • Two Scenarios

– A : raise “recession” portion in spring

Flood Control Releases Minimum Flows Zero Flow Max Desirable Stage Min Desirable Stage


Min Flow 30 CFS


Min Flow 30 CFS

Scenario A Lake Apopka

Min Desirable Water Level

Baseline Scenario A

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

66.5

67.5 67.25 67.0 66.75

68

66

65

64

63

62

Operation and W

ater Levels in ft

66.5

67.5 67.25

67.0 66.75

68

66

65

64

63

62

Ope

ratio

n an

d W

ater

Leve

ls in

ft

Operation and W

ater Levels in ft

Scenario A, Lake Eustis

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

62’

63’

62.5’

63.25’

63.5’

64’

61’

60’

Max Desirable Water Level


Operation Schedule Proposed

Water Level Baseline and Scenario A

Ope

ratio

n an

d W

ater

Leve

ls in

ft

62’

63’

62.5’

63.25’

63.5’

64’

61’

60’

Baseline Scenario A

Scenario A, Lake Griffin

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

58’

59.5’ 59.25’

58.5’

59’

59.5

57’

56’

Operation and W

ater Levels in ft O

pera

tion

and

Wat

er Le

vels

in ft

58’

59.5’

58.5’

59’

57’

56’

Baseline Scenario A

Max Desirable


• Operating Schedule Modifications • Two Scenarios

– A : raise “recession” portion in spring – A1 : raise “recession” portion in spring , and floor in summer


Minimum Flows Zero Flow Max Desirable Stage Min Desirable Stage


Min Flow 30 CFS


Min Flow 30 CFS

Scenario A1 Lake Apopka


Baseline Scenario A

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

66.5

67.5 67.25 67.0 66.75

68

66

65

64

63

62

Operation and W

ater Levels in ft

66.5

67.5 67.25

67.0 66.75

68

66

65

64

63

62

Ope

ratio

n an

d W

ater

Leve

ls in

ft

Scenario A1, Lake Eustis O

peration and Water Levels in ft

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

62’

63’

62.5’

63.25’

63.5’

64’

61’

60’

Ope

ratio

n an

d W

ater

Leve

ls in

ft

62’

63’

62.5’

63.25’

63.5’

64’

61’

60’

Max Desirable

Baseline Scenario A1

Scenario A1, Lake Griffin

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

58’

59.25’

58.5’

59’

59.5

57’

56’

Operation and W

ater Levels in ft

58’

59.25’

58.5’

59’

59.5

57’

56’

Ope

ratio

n an

d W

ater

Leve

ls in

ft

Baseline Scenario A1

Max Desirable


RESULTS • Two Scenarios

– A : raise “recession” portion in spring • 8 of 12 years raised average levels

– A1 : raise “recession” and floor in summer • 8 of 12 years raised average levels • Greater duration of higher levels during 8 years • Slight chance of increased levels above Max

Thank YOU!

Recharge and Discharge:

Between

Surfacewater & Groundwater

East Central Florida Transient Model (ECFT) Simulated Upper Floridan Aquifer head at Lake Apopka

ECFT simulated mean Upper Florida Aquifer Head (red), observed Lake Apopka level (blue), and

observed Plymouth UFA (Green)

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2005

Stag

e, E

lev.,

UFA

WL

Documents

Upper Ocklawaha River Basin Interim Lake Level Analysis · Upper Ocklawaha River Basin Interim Lake Level Analysis ... • Wet Season Floods 2004, ... 1000 cfs (ADDED)