Export 30 results:
Filters: Author is Kelly Malinowski  [Clear All Filters]
2022
Davis, J.; Foley, M.; Askevold, R. A.; Sutton, R.; Senn, D.; Plane, E. 2022. 2022 Pulse of the Bay. SFEI Contribution No. 1095. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, California.

The theme of the 2022 Pulse is "50 Years After the Clean Water Act." Nine different individuals or groups have contributed perspectives on progress to date and challenges ahead. This Pulse also includes summaries, from a historical perspective, on the major water quality parameters of concern in the Bay.   

 (5.57 MB) (63.26 MB)
2021
Davis, J.; Foley, M.; Askevold, R.; Chelsky, A.; Dusterhoff, S.; Gilbreath, A.; Lin, D.; Yee, D.; Senn, D.; Sutton, R. 2021. RMP Update 2021. SFEI Contribution No. 1057.

The overarching goal of the Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Bay (RMP) is to answer the highest priority scientific questions faced by managers of Bay water quality. The RMP is an innovative collaboration between the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, the regulated discharger community, the San Francisco Estuary Institute, and many other scientists and interested parties. The purpose of this document is to provide a concise overview of recent RMP activities and findings, and a look ahead to significant products anticipated in the next two years. The report includes a description of the management context that guides the Program; a brief summary of some of the most noteworthy findings of this multifaceted Program; and a summary of progress to date and future plans for addressing priority water quality topics.

 (22.73 MB)
2020
Davis, J.; Foley, M.; Askevold, R.; Buzby, N.; Chelsky, A.; Dusterhoff, S.; Gilbreath, A.; Lin, D.; Miller, E.; Senn, D.; et al. 2020. RMP Update 2020. SFEI Contribution No. 1008.

The overarching goal of the Regional Monitoring Program for Water Quality in San Francisco Bay (RMP) is to answer the highest priority scientific questions faced by managers of Bay water quality. The RMP is an innovative collaboration between the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board, the regulated discharger community, the San Francisco Estuary Institute, and many other scientists and interested parties. The purpose of this document is to provide a concise overview of recent RMP activities and findings, and a look ahead to significant products anticipated in the next two years. The report includes a description of the management context that guides the Program; a brief summary of some of the most noteworthy findings of this multifaceted Program; and a summary of progress to date and future plans for addressing priority water quality topics.

 (44.92 MB)
2019
 (17.98 MB)
Wu, J.; Kauhanen, P.; Hunt, J. A.; Senn, D.; Hale, T.; McKee, L. J. . 2019. Optimal Selection and Placement of Green Infrastructure in Urban Watersheds for PCB Control. Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment 5 (2) . SFEI Contribution No. 729.

San Francisco Bay and its watersheds are polluted by legacy polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), resulting in the establishment of a total maximum daily load (TDML) that requires a 90% PCB load reduction from municipal stormwater. Green infrastructure (GI) is a multibenefit solution for stormwater management, potentially addressing the TMDL objectives, but planning and implementing GI cost-effectively to achieve management goals remains a challenge and requires an integrated watershed approach. This study used the nondominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) coupled with the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM) to find near-optimal combinations of GIs that maximize PCB load reduction and minimize total relative cost at a watershed scale. The selection and placement of three locally favored GI types (bioretention, infiltration trench, and permeable pavement) were analyzed based on their cost and effectiveness. The results show that between optimal solutions and nonoptimal solutions, the effectiveness in load reduction could vary as much as 30% and the difference in total relative cost could be well over $100 million. Sensitivity analysis of both GI costs and sizing criteria suggest that the assumptions made regarding these parameters greatly influenced the optimal solutions. 

If you register for access to the journal, then you may download the article for free through July 31, 2019.

DOI: 10.1061/JSWBAY.0000876

 (3.11 MB)
2017
Holleman, R.; MacVean, L.; Mckibben, M.; Sylvester, Z.; Wren, I.; Senn, D. 2017. Nutrient Management Strategy Science Program. SFEI Contribution No. 879. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (49.7 MB)
Holleman, R.; Nuss, E.; Senn, D. 2017. San Francisco Bay Interim Model Validation Report. SFEI Contribution No. 850. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (34.98 MB)
2016
Senn, D.; Novick, E. 2016. Nutrient Management Strategy Science Plan Report. SFEI Contribution No. 878. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (9.78 MB)
 (542.21 KB)
Senn, D.; Trowbridge, P. 2016. San Francisco Bay Nutrient Management Strategy Observation Program. SFEI Contribution No. 877. San Francisco Estuary Institute: Richmond, CA.
 (565.59 KB)
 (3.74 MB) (5.45 MB) (16.05 MB) (3.03 MB) (523.1 KB)
 (29.89 MB)