SAN JOAQUIN RIVER Dissolved Oxygen Total Maximum Daily Load Stakeholder Process

San Joaquin River Dissolved Oxygen TMDL
Technical Committee Meeting
November 30, 1999

Attending:  Doug Brewer (JSA), Russ Brown (JSA), Carl Chen (Systech), John
Fleming (Meade and Hunt advisor to dairy industry), Chris Foe (RWQCB), Alex
Hildebrand (SDWA), Mary Hildebrand (Farm Bureau), Jay Jahangiri (Port of
Stockton), Brant Jorgenson (JSA), Tom King (RWQCB), Fred Lee (advisor to
DeltaKeeper), Peggy Lehman (DWR), Gary Litton (UOP), Frank Motzkus (Tracy),
Casey Ralston (DWR), Rich Stowell (Eco:Logic), Kevin Wolf (facilitator and
notes)

Next Meeting: 
1.  December 13, 9 am - 4 pm, 2600 V Street, Sacramento (Jones and Stokes)

A. Next Steps
1. All individuals responsible for a different section of the rough-cut
will provide drafts of their reports to the sjr-tech-com listserv by
December 9 and will give a presentation to the Technical Committee on
December 13.  Reports should follow the style guidelines as proposed by
Fred Lee (contact him a gfredlee@aol.com if you need another copy.)  For
the 13th, oral reports should include:
a. Conclusions
b. Key issues and questions
c. Main hypothesis and sub-hypotheses being addressed.

2.  Fred will finalize the December 13th agenda based on the amount of time
section leaders request for their presentation.  This information should be
sent to Fred as soon as possible. 

3.  When sending drafts to the listserv, cc: Kevin who will then facilitate
the distribution of the documents if there are any transfer problems with
the listserv.  (Note, the listserv can now pass 400kb attachments.)  You
should now be able to send graphics, tables, figures and all related
documents that aren't too large. Even the larger ones can be sent directly
to each other, and Kevin will help facilitate this.) 

4.  When data is referenced in a report, the author should include
information on where the data is located.  If it is accessible via the Web,
include the path and URL.

B.  Water Quality Conditions and Material Flux in the Deep Water Channel
(Peggy Lehman)
1.  Peggy presented an outline of the report she will have for the Dec. 13
meeting.  There was discussion on many parts, which Peggy will address in
her report. 

2.  Carl Chen will include Peggy's data in the plots generated by the
computer model. 

C.  Tom King's Presentation
1. Tom recalculated the load based on new flow information from the UVM
flow monitor in the DWC.  With the new flow data, loads almost doubled. 

2. The recalculated load is still in question because it is not clear how
much water (and BOD) is drawn down the Old River and how much continues in
the San Joaquin to Stockton.  One way to determine this is to use the UVM
river flow data near Stockton and add and subtract all the diversions from
and contributions to the river between that monitoring point and Vernalis,
upstream of the Old River.  The unaccounted-for water can be allocated to
the flow to Old River.   The results can be compared to the DWRSIM model.
Confidence in this calculation is needed to trust how much load enters the
lower river from the upper river.

3.  French Camp Slough information will be included in the report.

4.  The depth of the DWC has changed over time.  Some of the first studies
reported that the channel was 6.5' deep a low water levels.  Around 1910,
it was lowered to 9'.  Over time, it has been dredged and deepened a number
of other times until now it is mostly 35-36' deep with some sections
dredged to 40' deep.  Proposals call for deepening the channel to 40'
throughout its length.  How does a change in depth affect dissolved oxygen
levels?  This will not likely be answered in the rough-cut analysis but
should eventually be evaluated.  In addition to this, the type of sediment
material (clay, organic soil, other?) on the bottom could be important to
the oxygen demand it exerts.   

D.  Computer Model
1. Carl Chen ran through some of the main assumptions and components of the
report he is presenting. Systech will improve the model as outlined in
their November 19 "Work Plan Modeling Support to The Rough-cut Loading
Estimate For San Joaquin TMDL Study" and in response to requests made at
the meeting and stated in these notes.

2. The committee affirmed the ad-hoc committee's decision on the work plan
and the budget for the work Systech will do for the rough-cut loading
estimate. 

3. Carl will include a printout of the coefficient values and the other
assumptions used in his model. 

E.  Sediment Oxygen Demand 
a.  Gary Litton had nothing new to add since his report at the November 9
Technical Meeting.  He will have a full draft report with conclusions by
December 9 and will post it to the Technical Committee list. 

b.  Gary says that they will have preliminary recommendations on locations
for future studies but are unsure of what they will recommend for
methodological procedures. 

c.  Other SOD questions/issues
* How strong is the population of nitrofiers in the ship channel bottom and
what impact do they have on dissolved oxygen levels?
* Is pH a factor in SOD?
* How does the mobility and layering of the sediments affect oxygen demand?

F.  Temperature
1.  The Technical Committee decided not to pursue fast-tracking Ed Dammel's
proposal to analyze the importance and role of water temperature on
dissolved oxygen levels.  The committee wants this proposal to be evaluated
along with the other work plans in conjunction with the Peer Review
process.  If it is unknown if Ed can do this work next summer or fall.  The
main reasons why the committee did not support fast tracking this work is
that Carl's computer model can provide most of the basic temperature
analysis we need for the rough-cut loading analysis. 

2.  Carl will do a sensitivity analysis for temperature and oxygen as part
of the work he does for the rough-cut analysis.

3.  Fred Lee will include a recommendation on how to advance temperature
studies in his synthesis report. 

G.  Stockton RWCF 
1.  Russ Brown and Jones and Stokes will have the report on this data and
analysis available to the listserv on December 9.   

H.  Bin/Other Issues.  (These issues came up during the course of the
meeting and the time was not available to address and answer them.)

1.  Who will validate the computer model and how will this be done?

2.  How will the South Delta Water Management Plan and the use of barriers
be evaluated in terms of their impact on dissolved oxygen levels?  Will
this be modeled? 

3.  Should the TMDL use a different in BOD measurement methodology that
mimics real life conditions as opposed to the methodology that keeps the
sample in the dark and unexposed to air?

4.  Will solving dissolved oxygen problems in the lower river cause
problems elsewhere? How will this be analyzed and included in the decision
making process?

5.  Will the rough-cut (and computer model) account for the BOD that is
entering the lower San Joaquin from the Sacramento River?