Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20115125

Refinement and evaluation of the Massachusetts firm-yield estimator model version 2.0

Sara B. Levin·Stacey A. Archfield·Andrew J. Massey
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The firm yield is the maximum average daily withdrawal that can be extracted from a reservoir without risk of failure during an extended drought period. Previously developed procedures for determining the firm yield of a reservoir were refined and applied to 38 reservoir systems in Massachusetts, including 25 single- and multiple-reservoir systems that were examined during previous studies and 13 additional reservoir systems. Changes to the firm-yield model include refinements to the simulation methods and input data, as well as the addition of several scenario-testing capabilities. The simulation procedure was adapted to run at a daily time step over a 44-year simulation period, and daily streamflow and meteorological data were compiled for all the reservoirs for input to the model. Another change to the model-simulation methods is the adjustment of the scaling factor used in estimating groundwater contributions to the reservoir. The scaling factor is used to convert the daily groundwater-flow rate into a volume by multiplying the rate by the length of reservoir shoreline that is hydrologically connected to the aquifer. Previous firm-yield analyses used a constant scaling factor that was estimated from the reservoir surface area at full pool. The use of a constant scaling factor caused groundwater flows during periods when the reservoir stage was very low to be overestimated. The constant groundwater scaling factor used in previous analyses was replaced with a variable scaling factor that is based on daily reservoir stage. This change reduced instability in the groundwater-flow algorithms and produced more realistic groundwater-flow contributions during periods of low storage. Uncertainty in the firm-yield model arises from many sources, including errors in input data. The sensitivity of the model to uncertainty in streamflow input data and uncertainty in the stage-storage relation was examined. A series of Monte Carlo simulations were performed on 22 reservoirs to assess the sensitivity of firm-yield estimates to errors in daily-streamflow input data. Results of the Monte Carlo simulations indicate that underestimation in the lowest stream inflows can cause firm yields to be underestimated by an average of 1 to 10 percent. Errors in the stage-storage relation can arise when the point density of bathymetric survey measurements is too low. Existing bathymetric surfaces were resampled using hypothetical transects of varying patterns and point densities in order to quantify the uncertainty in stage-storage relations. Reservoir-volume calculations and resulting firm yields were accurate to within 5 percent when point densities were greater than 20 points per acre of reservoir surface. Methods for incorporating summer water-demand-reduction scenarios into the firm-yield model were developed as well as the ability to relax the no-fail reliability criterion. Although the original firm-yield model allowed monthly reservoir releases to be specified, there have been no previous studies examining the feasibility of controlled releases for downstream flows from Massachusetts reservoirs. Two controlled-release scenarios were tested—with and without a summer water-demand-reduction scenario—for a scenario with a no-fail criterion and a scenario that allows for a 1-percent failure rate over the entire simulation period. Based on these scenarios, about one-third of the reservoir systems were able to support the flow-release scenarios at their 2000–2004 usage rates. Reservoirs with higher storage ratios (reservoir storage capacity to mean annual streamflow) and lower demand ratios (mean annual water demand to annual firm yield) were capable of higher downstream release rates. For the purposes of this research, all reservoir systems were assumed to have structures which enable controlled releases, although this assumption may not be true for many of the reservoirs studied.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations ReportReport
90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 41° to 43° latitude; -73.75° to -69.83333333333333° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Sara B. Levin, Stacey A. Archfield, Andrew J. Massey. 2011. Refinement and evaluation of the Massachusetts firm-yield estimator model version 2.0. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20115125

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Baseline water-quality inventory and summary for the Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park, New Jersey

The Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park (PAGR), established in 2011 in the City of Paterson, New Jersey, contains many cultural, historical, and natural resources. Because of the PAGR’s young age and limited resources, a long record of natural resource data is not available for use to guide future park management and planning decisions. A detailed natural resource inventory was identified as an immediate need in the “Foundation Document—Paterson Great Falls National Historical Park,” given the history of extensive industrial activity throughout the PAGR and the Passaic River Basin. The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the National Park Service and the Urban Waters Federal Partnership for the Lower Passaic River, inventoried water-quality monitoring efforts and compiled historical water-quality data from secondary data sources to define baseline conditions in the PAGR and the surrounding study area. This report documents the methods used to harmonize water-quality data aggregated from multiple sources for the PAGR study area. Procedures implemented during data harmonization include compiling data from multiple sources, assessing the dataset for completeness, addressing metadata concerns, and creating a consistent and quality-assured dataset for future analysis. The harmonized dataset contains 14 aggregated surface-water sites, 1,103 individual sampling days, and 32,000 water-quality records throughout the period of record defined for this study (1952–2021). Summary statistics and comparison to water-quality criteria are provided for focus parameters that can support PAGR management, including field properties, suspended material, total dissolved solids, specific conductance, chloride, sulfate, Escherichia coli, nutrients, contaminants of concern related to fish consumption advisories, and litter and floatable debris. A spatial data gap was identified for the recreational area near the base of the Great Falls and immediately downstream from a known combined sewer overflow discharge location. Analytic data gaps were identified for continuous streamflow and water-quality parameters, floatable debris characterization, and harmful algal blooms identification. Continuous collection of contaminants of concern was identified as a temporal data gap, as these parameters were not consistently collected within the study area. The water-quality data synthesis and summary presented in this report can assist PAGR staff in understanding the complex baseline water resources within the study area and can serve as a baseline to design future water-quality monitoring efforts and evaluate changes in water quality over time. The harmonized dataset, as well as future New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and New Jersey Harbor Discharge Group monitoring data and assessments, can also be used to examine the status and trends in surface-water quality, support compliance with the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), and further investigate changes to park water resources that can affect ecological and human health.

New Jersey↗
USGS2026

Slip tendency and dilation tendency of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report presents the results of slip tendency and dilation tendency analysis of Quaternary faults in the Great Basin region, in the states of Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming. This effort was undertaken as part of two studies: the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office-funded Innovative Geothermal Exploration through Novel Investigations of Undiscovered Systems (INGENIOUS) project, which is a multidisciplinary, multi-institution effort to develop new methodologies and best practices to accelerate the discovery of new, commercially viable hydrothermal resources; and the U.S. Geological Survey Geothermal Resources Investigations Project. The goal of this work is to identify faults and fault segments that are appropriately oriented to be stress-loaded for slip or to dilate under the ambient stress conditions. Both conditions may make such faults more likely to host permeability and fluid flow relative to other faults in the region. Slip tendency and dilation tendency were calculated for all fault segments in the study area from the U.S. Geological Survey Quaternary Fault and Fold Database. Results demonstrate that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency are common in the Great Basin region. The areas containing many high slip tendency and dilation tendency fault segments are associated with high strain rates. These areas also host a relatively high proportion of the known hydrothermal systems. This indicates that faults with high slip tendency and dilation tendency in areas with high strain-rate are potentially most prospective for hosting hydrothermal systems. The database published in coordination with this report contains the slip tendency and dilation tendency results data, including the fault geometry and stress data used to calculate these quantities, for both the Great Basin study area and the smaller INGENIOUS study area.

Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, ↗
USGS2026

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York, and coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York, and nearby coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater emergence flooding. Groundwater emergence fooding refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As a part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the coastal areas of Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed by the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Partnership, formerly called the Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 grid cells that were 900 meters by 900 meters (approximately 3,000 feet by 3,000 feet), for the purpose of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard score was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percentage of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A scenario with a higher sea-level position was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard score was reviewed in conjunction with the National Land Cover Database to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk of potential groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface waterbodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, in the scenario with higher sea-level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated for some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea-level condition and the higher sea-level position scenario.

Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island↗