ESPM51111

Hydrology and Water Quality Field Methods

Delisting of Shingle Creek impairment for Chloride &

Preliminary studies on better BMP’s

Prepared by:

Carlos Zhingre

Professor: Joseph Magner

Preformed: Spring 2009

Department of Natural Resources

The University of Minnesota

Saint Paul
I. Abstract

The Shingle Creek Watershed has been categorized by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

and The Environmental Protection Agency as impaired because of its highest concentrations of

chlorides in its streams (3). Shingle Creek is designed as a Class 2 water for the protection of

Aquatic Life ( Minnesota R.ch.7050) Excessive chloride in water bodies stresses biota and has an

adverse affect on plants and invertebrates. In Minnesota Water Quality Standards are 230mg/L for

chronic esposure and 860 mg/L for acute exposure.

This watershed drains 43 square miles in nine cities in Hennepin County and is a sink not just for

residential storm water, but also it receives loadings from highway runoff, contaminated with a

variety of pollutants that includes sodium chlorides from salts applied heavily in winter.

Prolonged exposure to chlorides concentrations as low as 230 mg/L harm biota. A highest

concentrations of 8,000 mg/L was recorded in Shingle Creek ( 3) It is unknown how much

runoff from impervious surfaces in developed areas (roads and sidewalks ) of Shingle Creek

Watershed is contributing to the stream, the report from an local consulting firm gives just

estimates. Also, there is not yet an exact measure of how much chloride loading is coming from

groundwater into the watershed. Lastly, it is unknown how much chloride runoff from highway

ponds seeps into groundwater (3)

Because of its variability issues it is difficult to measure choloride management success. For

instance, the following scenarios can happen: winter season can have a little bit of of snow, but a

lot of frozen events, this will prompt the use a lot of salt and the watershed will not have enough

“Dilution Capacity” from snow packs, therefore Shingle Creek will have spikes of chloride

concentration in the streams and this harms aquatic life. Seasonal variation can change year to

year and the opposite scenario can happen, lot of snow, mild winter seasons, and a lot of
“Dilution Capacity” and chloride concentration on the Shingle Creek will not exceed state and

federal thresholds. Consequently, it is more challenging to select proper analysis tools or models

to manage this watershed. On the other hand road salt is one major type of non-point source

pollution that can be managed (2). The focus of this study is to look further into the assessment

to improve the Best Management Practices BMP’s of existing highway ponds in the watershed

and understand how to use these ponds for the benefit of the entire watershed

II. Introduction

The Clean Water Act (CWA) passed by the US Congress in 1972 prioritized on maintaining the

chemical, physical and biological integrity of the nation’s water free of anthropogenic pollutants.

Section of the 303(d) of the CWA requires the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ( MPCA) to

identify water that are not meeting the state water quality standars and develop Total maximum

Daily Loads (TMDL)for those waterbodies. A TMDL is the total amount of a pollutant that lakes

or rivers can have at any time and still comply with the water quality standarts. For chloride, the

Water Quality Standards in Minnesota:

- Chronic standard of 230mg/L based on the 4 day average

- Acute standard of 860 mg/L

Shingle Creek is designed as a Class 2 water for the protection of Aquatic Life ( Minnesota

R.ch.7050) The control of chlorides on impairment of water streams is one of antropogenic

sources and is been critical, to avoid further deterioration of water bodies………………………

In colder regions, when comes to mobility, there is a stakeholder struggle in today’s economy

between balancing winter season mobility and protecting the environment at the same time. It is

difficult to find solutions that satisfies stakeholders in both: economically and safety. In the
northern hemisphere, roads salts - sodium chloride- is considered very economical compared to

other chemical……………….. (2). Alternative products such as calcium chlorides and

magnesium chlorides are more expensive. Balancing road safety and mobility in winter and

keeping life close to normal is increasingly challenging. At the same time sodium chlorides it is

one of the toxic pollutants that humans are loading into the environment every year at staggering

proportions.

There are some preliminary questions to ask for this assessment:

Can chlorides runoff be managed? What is the best way to discharge chlorides into the streams?

How about mass balance? Should the total amount of salt applied to the roads be reduced or the

concentration should be reduced by diluting? If cities or counties put certain amount of salt in

the street, the salts will run off and get into the streams, so to reduce the amount of salt we need

to apply less into the streets.

How can the existing ponds in the watershed be modeled? What are the assumptions? If dilution

process is the key in designing these ponds, how this model will incorporate dilution criteria into

the parameters, for instance should the model timeline be 4 hours, 40 hours, 4 days etc. How to

get the parameters that is needed to model such as loading rates of chlorides, average storage in

the ponds, volumes, and flow rates?

What are the dynamics on the ponds in winter? How about the dynamics of runoff chloride

underneath the ice in ponds? Should small ponds be emptied in fall to provide a greater storage

capacity for winter runoff chlorides and have good dilution rates?

III. Literature review

Accordingly to a study done by the University of Minnesota, 78 percent of the road salt applied

stays in the watershed (1) In the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (TMCA) an estimated of

350,000 short tonnes of road salt are used annually for road de-icing to keep driving conditions

close to normal (4) Also, it was found that chloride concentrations – salinity- in 39 metro area

lakes have increased over the past 22 years (1) The finding correlates to the salt road purchased

by the state of Minnesota. Aquatic life and drinking water are affected by continuous levels of

chloride concentration as low as 250 mg/L (1). In 2008, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

listed five metro area streams impaired by chloride.

Another study done by the Unites States Geological Survey USGS on 2005, reported an

estimated of 23 million short tones of road salt applied in the continental US (5)

Shingle Creek Watershed is under the TMDL’s impaired list from chloride because the State of

Minnesota and EPA has determined that water exceeded the State and Federal standards

concentration for chloride(3). A local consulting firm in Minnesota has quantified the TMDL

pollutant reductions needed to meet the water quality standards for chloride in Shingle Creek.

The Shingle Creek TMDL for chloride is being established in accordance with Section 303(d) of

the Clean Water Act (3)

IV. Proposed solution - design

The following design solution is under considerations for more research in this project:

1. To look more into the highway or retention ponds used as control structures to hold up all the

winter runoff on the existent ponds in the Shingle Creek watershed. Understanding more in depth
the flow dynamics underneath the ice in winter from runoff chlorides in these ponds is the key in

designing a better BMP’s.

For instance, to expand more research into the corrected field methods used to measure the flow

underneath the ice. Finding out more on aerial velocity meters that go underneath the ice to

measure the flows will allow understanding the dynamics happening at that moment in winter

underneath the ice from the chlorides runoff from highways.

2. To determine whether or not emptying the ponds before winter will be a good idea to have

more storage volume for the winter runoff from the highway. Studying some of the ponds in the

area and figuring out which ones is the key in this watershed and use them to our benefit. Once

the dynamics is understand the, it could be expanded spatially in the watershed.

3. The TMDL’s Shingle Creek study still is weak on knowing how much chlorides infiltrates into

the groundwater in winter from the Shingle Creek watershed and quantify or the percentage that

groundwater is affected from winter run off and the natural process that occurs as well. Finding

out a little bit more by researching if similar work has been done in the US or Canada.

4. The main work will be to create a dead zone pond kind of model - a batch reactor with a

finite volume and estimate how things change with time. This can be recreated in a lab.

Data for this model can be obtained from global estimates already existing such as how much

water falls on the watershed and how much salt is applied per year. That gives a max dilution

and also we have flow rates, volumes, storages, and application rates of chlorides that will give

concentrations. Also to quantify what fraction of rain and snow is from runoff i.e, 20 percent that

gives a more realistic dilution factor.

V. Conclusion
This project presents a lot of challenges and uncertainties and it is difficult to measure success

because of its variability issues. Since the main focus is relying on dilution then this project

cannot be a success because the salt loadings are not changing and the environment is getting

more in a detrimental state. The “Dilution Capacity” from snow packs, variability is still a big

concern and difficult to manage, therefore will raise the chlorides concentration in Shingle Creek

spikes on occasion and its aquatic life will suffer.

Knowing that road salts is one type of non-point source pollution that can be managed is a

advantage for stakeholders and regulatory agencies such as MPCA and EPA working together

for t improving BMP’s in this watershed.

In terms of remediating these streams, there really isn't anything besides reducing the amount of

chloride applied in a watershed that can be managed again through dilution. As soon as salts get

into the water, it cannot be removed except through the very energy intensive practices of

distillation or reverse osmosis. It cannot be filtered out, it does not bioremediate or break down.

If ponds are proved to be great BMP’s, then it follows that this mitigation process can be okay,

but not hundred percent effective. In a sense the main question is “Mass Balance”, since we are

not getting rid of the salts, we are just diluting and putting it back into the streams and the

feeling is that people involved in this study think is okay as long as the concentrations do not go

over the 230mg/L. I cannot agree on this as a perfect solution. Also, Mister Lake Casino is using

reverse osmosis to treat runoff chlorides from the parking lots. In Australia they are doing a lot

of research on using plants to work on their agricultural lands since their water table is rising and

has a high content of chlorides. Can we adopt these mitigation practices?

Lastly, there are a lot of concerns with salinity in soil and water around the globe and the

following BMP’s are to be considered on their ongoing research to minimize the impact of

runoff chlorides and they can be considered locally as well:

To change our automotive habits by implementing new rules such reducing winter roads

speeds, using mass transit during major winter storms and to decide what it is worth in years to

come: road safety or protecting our natural resource, namely water.

REFERENCES

1. Novotny, E, Murphy, D., Stefan, H. (2008). Increase in Urban Lake Salinity by Deicing

Salts. Science of the Total Environment (in press).

2. Environment Canada/ Health Canada (ECHC). (1999). Environment Protection Act 1999.

Priority Substances List Assessment Report - Road Salt. Ottawa, Canada.

3. Wenck Associates Inc (2006). Shingle Creek Chloride TMDL Report

4. Novotny, E., Sander, A., O. Mohseni, H. Stefan, (2007). Road Salt Effects on the Water

Quality of Lakes in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area. University of

Minnesota, St. Anthony Falls Laboratory Report No. 505, Dec. 2007, 47 pp.

5. http://water.usgs.gov/