Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFINAL REPORT - RAY ROBERTS HDROLECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY - - It r - yy~ ~sl kr.' AaV 1~ {p R dl.jyl t ~~-{g3 t 1 ~"Y _ 1 If 7t 1. F' 777- 4fp 1Tr !H Off` 4 p y . yl, i •t,i $ E~~ y~r. , s~f .1 y ii -VA ol, 4 d r! ~jj r{ v , ~q J, t i~r I • ~ OTT y ee~ec#r'v~ F'eastbtlt1y 6<~ f , FINAL REPORT RAY ROBERTS HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY Of DENTON, TEXAS UTILITIES DEPARTMENT NOVEMBER 1981 BLACK & VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS rr t TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1-1 1.1 PURPOSE 1-1 1.2 SCOPE OI' STUDY 1-1 1.3 REPORT FORMAT 1-2 2.0 SUMMARY 2-1 2.1 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF HYDROELECTRIC INSTALLATION 2-1 2.2 PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2-2 2.3 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT 2-4 2.4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2^8 3.0 PROJECT DATA 3-1 3.1 PLANNED FACILITIES 3-1 3.2 HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS 3-3 3.3 SEOTECIINICAL CONDITIONS 3-5 4.0 CONCEPTUAL, DESIGN 4-1- 4.1 GENERAL 4-1 4.2 DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES 4-1 4.3 SELECTION OF PROJECT DESIGN 4-4 4.4 RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT 4-7 5.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL, CONDITIONS 5-1 5,1 BASE LINE; CONDITIONS 5-1 .2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 5-10 5.3 REFERENCES 5-13 6.0 LEGAL/REGULATORY 6-1 6.1. LICENSE FOR A MINOR WATER POWER PROJECT 6-1 6,2 US CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT 6-1 6,3 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT 01' INTERIOR 6-2 6,4 TEY.AS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT 6-2 6.5 1',,',XAS HISTORIC COMMISSION 6-2 Ili 6.6 OTHER STATE AGENCIES 6-2 7.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 7-1 7.1 INTRODUCTTION 7-1 7.2 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES 7'-2 I Tc-1 77- t:".ec ~I TABLE, OF CONTENTS (Coatinued) Page 7.3 1JOR ACTIVITIES 7"3 7.4 ; 'OJEC.' ORGANIZATION 7-8 7.5 DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE 7-10 7.6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT BUDGET AND CAST[ FLOW 7-10 APPENDIX A POWER SIMULATION APPENDIX B ECONOMIC ANALYSES APPENDIX C HYDROLOGIC DATA LIST OF TABLES TABLE 2-1 RAY ROBERT S ITYDROELEC'T'RIC PROJECT COSTS 2-5 TABLE 2-2 NET ANNUAL SAVINGS .2-6 TABLE. 2-3 KEY SCHEDULE ELEMENTS 2-10 TABLE 2-4 CASH FLOW ESTIMATES 2-11 TABLE 4-1 PROJECT COST DATA 4-13 TABLE 4-2 MAINTENANCE EXPENSE I""TIHATE 4-14 TABLE 4-3 SUMMARY OF ANNUAI, OPERAT101v AND MAIN'TENANCE' COSTS 4-15 TABLE 4-4 PROJECTED GROSS I3ENFFITS 4-I-7 TABLE' 4-5 FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS, TO'TAI, INVESTMENT, AND ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE 4-18 TABLE 4-6 PROJECTED VAI,UF,S OF' ANNIIAI, OPI;aA'TING COSTS 4-19 TAB14E 4-7 YEARLY ECONOMIC SUMMARY 4-21 TABLE 5-1 SURFACE WATER QUALI'T'Y 5-8 TABLE 7-1 EVALUATION OF DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES 7-4 LIS'T' OF FIGURES FIGURE 2-1 PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM POI&RHOUSE CONSTRUCTION 2-3 FIGURE 2-2 NET ANNUAL SAVINGS 2-7 FIGURE 2-3 CASH FLOW 2-12 TG-z lff: tf, tt' r , 1 n TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF FIGURES (Continued) Page i FIGURE 3-1 PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM 3-2 FIGURE 3-2 ELM FORK OY TRINITY ABOVE PROPOSED RAY. ROBERTS DAM 3-4 FIGURE 3-3 FLOW DURATION CURVE RAY ROBERTS LAKE 3-6 FIGURE 3-4 LAKE LEVEL DURATION CURVE RAY ROBERTS LAKE 3-7 FIGURE 3-5 IfEAD LOSS VS DISCHARGE RAY ROBERTS LAKE 3-8 FIGURE 3-6 TAILWATER RATING CURVE RAY ROBERTS LAKE 3-9 FIGURE 4-1 TURBINE SELECTION 4-6 FIGURE 4-2 PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM POWERHOUSE CONSTRUCTION 4-9 FIGURE 4-3 PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM POWERHOUSE PLAN AND PROFILE 4-10 FIGURE 7-1 ORGANIZATION OF MAJOR ACTIVITIES 7-5 FIGURE 7-2 PROJECT ORGANIZATION 7-9 FIGURE 7-3 DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE 7-13. TC-3 1 77 E,s 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1, 1 PIIRPOSL The Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Feasibility Study was performed to 00 „ assess the technical, economic, environmental, and legal/regulatory £easi.- ^ , NM bility of developing a hydroelectric facility on the Elm Pork of the Trinity River, at the planned Ray Roberts Dam. the information presented in this report is intended to support a fully informed decision by the City of Denton regarding the allocation of funds required for the continued develop- ment of the proposed project. Seeking to minimize the utility expenses of its customers, the City of Denton initiated a program for the evaluation of the hydroelectric generat- ing potential at Lewisville Reservoir and the planned Ray Roberts Reservoir. Use of the potential hydroelectric generation to displace an equivalent amount: of gas-fired energy, was envisioned to offer an e.nviro.!tmentally attractive and inflation-free opportunity to minimize utility expenses. 'The data, investigations, analyses, and projections described in this report are intended to provide a sound basis upon which the City of Denton can evaluate the incentive to develop or abandon the proposed hydroelectric project. If the city elects to pursue implementation, the development plan and scheduJe formulated as an element. of the comprehensive feasibility study can guide the city in its endeavor to finance, oversee, and manage the licensing, design, construction, and start-up of the proposed hydro- electric project. 1.2 SCOPE OF STUDY The objective to provide the City of Denton with sufficient informa- tion to support a decision regarding development of the proposed Ray Rober.t., hydroelectric Project required the evaluation of the following issues. (1) Vie recommended capacity and configuration of the hydroelectric facility. (2) The expected operation and performance of the facility, including peak power production and annual energy production. 1,1 7777777777 7%: bF; It (3) The estimated investment and operating costs of the project. (k) The estimated value of power and energy provided by the project. (5) The projected financial and economic benefits of the project. (6) The potential environmental and social impacts of the project. (7) The requirements and risks of A censing the project. (g) The plan and schedule for developing the project, These pru}cct issues were studied by Black & Veatch Consulting RnEi- neers under the direction of the City of Denton, Utilities Department. 1.3 REPORT FORMAT This Feasibility Study Report is presented in seven chapters which present project data, describe study analyses, and summarize findings. Detailed data used in, and resulting from, operating and economic analyses are presented in three appendices. A separately bound Executive Summary presents the material of Sec- tion 1.0, Introduction, and Section 2.0, Summary, of the Feasibility Study Report, along with major information presented in Sections 3.0 through 7.0. 1°2 ~r ,1r I 1 2.0 SUMIARY The Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project has been found to be a techni- cally, economically, environmentally, and legally feasible concept, A one-unit configuration with a nominal capacity of 1,000 kilowatts is recom- mended for the proposed development. The unit would generate 950 kilowatts at a rated head of 90 feet and a rated flow of 132 cubic feet per second, The average annual generation from the project is estimated to be about 7,750,000 kilowatt-hours. The facility could be available for service after partial filling of the planned Ray Roberts Reservoir--1987 to 1939 depending on s-asonal inflows following completion of construction. It is estimated that the total project investment including all bonding expenses will be $4,854,000 in 1988. That amount includes an estimated $750,000 reimbursement: to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for incorporating proposed piping modifications to the planned outlet works. During its first 20 years of operation, the Ray Roberts Hydr^,-lectric Project would save the city's customers an estimated $62,248,000. Net savings from the proposed project would be achieved during the first year ® of operation, and capital recovery of the total bonded investment v,ould be realized by 1994. 2.1 CONCEPTUAL. DESIGN OF HYDROELECTRIC INSTALLATION The proposed hydroelectric development would be located at the down- stream terminus of the outlet works at Ray Roberts Dam, planned for comple- tion in 1986. The lurbioe generator unit would operate on flows normally released through the low-flow discharge pipe. The single-unit coafigura- tior would entail the connection of a 60-inch diameter welded steel pipe to she blind flanged bifurcation on the low-flow outlet conduit planned by the Corp of Engineers. A 110-foot section of the 60-inch diameter steel pipe would connect to the Francis turbine, located about 30 feet from the side of the planned stilling basin. A tailrace; would extend about 1.00 feet downstr-am from the turbine draft tube, running parallel to the stilling basin, to the natural channel of the Elm Fork of the Trinity River. In a 2-1 degree, modify a roughly rectangular area about 220 feet long and 100 feet wide on each side of the planned stilling basin. FigtLte 2-1 Illustrates the proposed Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project. Generation from the proposed project would be transmitted via a new 12.5 kilovolt distribution line, approximately 4,000 feet to the Menton County Electric Cooperative distribution system. The Ray Roberts Reservoir is planned for flood control, water conser- vation, and recreation multipurpose operation. The project sponsors will be permitted to regulate the normal water supply releases from the conser- vation pool. That regulation would be affected Lh~:ough the operation of the wicket gates on the hydraulic turbine, or through the operation of the control valve on the 60-inch low-flow discharge pipe. At reservoir stages above or below the limits of the conservation pool, the Corps of Engineers would take over all control of reservoir releases. The proposed hydro- electric installation would generate energy from flows released for the reservoir multipurpose operation. The proposed installation would not be dependent on any modification to planned release rates. Benefits from the installation would be maximized by the Corps of Engineers' adoption of, 0 operating rules that specify the hydraulically optimum use of the low-flow discharge pipe prior to, and during, operation of the 1.3-foot diameter conduit, since flow released thtough the large conduit will bypass the hydroelectric installation, All structures will bc-- monitored, operated, and maintained by, or under the control of, the Fort Worth District Corps of Engineers. 2.2 PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL ASST ,SHENT Construction and operation of the proposed Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project should have essentially no adverse environmental or social impacts, The proposed development does not entail the modification of flow rates from Ray Roberts Reservoir as presently planned for its multipurpose opera- tion. Flow rates through the Ray Roberts outlet works would be the same with or without development of the. proposed hydroelectric £aci.lit.if.s. Access to fishing and recreational. areas above and below the dam would remain open during construction and operation of the proposed facilities. 2-2 i~1' i { -._4f a ;,S { nf,_ri'-n -777, Sf /~JL 1 1i " 7TF,` lip : F.L,5691 SPILLWAY AND STILLING BASIN BY OTHERS1 BUTTERFLY VALVE BY DENTON - 1 ` 81JN0 FLANGE BY OTHERS I I , ~i t_L_ -~JI III EL.522-0 (j VALVE. VAULT BY OTHERS ~T. N EL.522-0 W '`-1-•------------ ~EL.510-0„ 6(f {d PIPE BY DENTON POWERHOUSE BY DENTON / EL. 535' / EL. 5521 -EL,569r / / PLAN \ ScnLV; V-z0'-0;' - - - - - - BIACK & VEATCH DE.NTON,TEXAS CONSULnNa [ACINIIAS HYDROELECTRIC FEA51BILITY STUDY FIGURE 2--1 r lcr 943E PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM POWERHOUSE CONSTRUCTION r0. DAT[ Itnllal Val U KC lrr 1 No threatened, endangered, or rare species are likely to be impacted by the hydroelectric project, The proposed hydroelectric project would not disturb any archaeological sites unaffected by construction of the proposed reservoir project. 2.3 ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT The Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project could begin operation following p,ortial filling of the reservoir to elevation 590 feet above mean sea level. The one-unit, 1.0-megawatt hydroelectric project would require a total investment of about $4,854,000 in 1988. That estimate is composed of $1,090,000 direct costs in November 1981, $645,000 indirect and contingency costs, $538,000 net interest during construction, $1,123,000 in escalation to 1988, a $124,000 bond fee, a $584,000 bond reserve fund, and $750,000 for additional costs incurred by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the proposed modifications to the outlet works. The hydroelectric project developer will be required to reimburse the Corps of Engineers for specific costs associated with the modification of the planned outlet works from a single-conduit configuration to a dual-conduit configuration, The modifica- tion greatly enhances the conditions for hydroelectric development at the Ray Roberts site. Repayment of those costs is expected to be over a 50-year period at 7-3/8 per cent interest. A summary of those costs is presented on Table 2-1. The annual amortization of the total bonded amount and Corps reimbursement would be $639,600. Total annual fixed costs including in- surance, taxes, payments to a renewal and replacemcut fund, and fees are estimated to be $96,500. Annual interest earned on the bond reserve fund would be $75,900, reducing the total annual fixed charges to $660,200, The estimated operation and maintenance expense for 1988--the first year of operation--is $52,900. r Based on the average annual. generation of 7,750,000 kilowatt-hours, resulting from 0- 50-year simulation, the 1988, first year cost of genera- tion at the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project would be 92,01 mills per kilowatt-hour. Table 2-2 and Figure 2-2 summarize the annual benefits expected from the Ray Roberts Project for the first 20 years of operation, 2-4 TABLE 2-1. RAY ROBERTS HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT COSTS Project Data Type of Turbine Francis Number of Units 1 Approximate Runner Diameter (nun) 675 Plant Capacity (kW) 11000 Average Annual Generation (MWh) 7,750 In-Service Date 1988 Estimated Project Costs ($1,000) Electro/Mechanical 620 Powerhouse Civil 470 Direct Cost (November 1981 1,090 Indirect Cost 381 Contingencies 264 Subtotal (November 1981 1,735 Nct Interest. During Construction 538 Escalation _11123 Total Construction Cost (1988 30396 Bond Fee 124 Reserve Fund 584 Total Bond Amount, (1988 4,104 Annual Fixed CostW',* 660.2 1988 Total Operating Cost 713,1 1988 Operating Cost (mils/Wh) 92.01. ~Incl.uding 7-3/8 per cent annual interest charges on $750,000 cost of pressurized conduit modifications, **Including, 50-year annual payment of $55,400 for amortization and interest of $750,000 incremental investment: by the Corps of Engineers. 2-5 ,s f,. , ,.:T ~"~'m~- ' `•.'~P f'Y`~.~5 i, .Im'iH. =..vt]H..~;~.*~.,.1S at~~ ~W } TABLE 2-2. NET ANNUAL SAVINGS Total Cost Value of Net Annual Year of Gerieratiw, Generation Savings $I,000 _ $1,000 $1,000 1988 713 834 121 1989 718 999 281 1990 723 11197 474 1991 729 1,356 627 1992 735 11537 802 1993 742 1,742 15000 1191 749 11974 1,225 1995 757 21237 11480 1996 765 21534 1,769 1997 775 21872 21097 1998 785 3,254 21469 1999 797 31688 21891 2000 809 41179 3,310 2001 823 4,736 3,913 2002 837 5,366 41529 2003 853 6,081 5,228 2004 870 6,891 61021 2005 889 7,809 61920 2006 910 8,849 7,939 2007 933 10,028 9,095 2-6 I i 8 -•-I I ~ U O o~° 6 - Z 4 - Z 3 - - - a 1- Z 2 I 0 1988 1992 19% 2000 2004 YEAR BLACK & VEATCH ©E NTON , TEXAS caNEUtnNa ENalNf#n= HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY DATE ~1Q1"` NET ANNUAL SAVINGS L 1 9432 RAY ROBERTS LAKE FIGURE 2-2 2-7 assuming a 9 per cent general rate of inflation, 9 per cent annual escala- tion on operation and maintenance costs, and a projection of natural gas prices for the Denton area. Generation from the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project is expected to displace an equal amount of generation from a natural gas fired thermal generating unit, operating as spinning reserve or base generation. Positive annual savings will be realized in 1988, the first year of operation. Ten-year total annual savings would be $9,874,000. The 15- and 20-year total annual savings are estimated to be $27,046,000 and $62,248,000, respectively. Capital recovery of the total $4,854,000 investment is expected by 1994, the seventh year of operation. The estimated 20-year net present value of the proposed Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project is $6,058,000 (benefit/cost ratio of 3.60). 2.4 DEVELOPMENT PLAN Follow-on development of the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project should be initiated by the second quarter in 1982 so that the licensing effort could be coordinated with the licensing of the proposed Lewisville Hydro f electric Project, and to allow a minimum risk development plan without jeopardizing completion by the time the reservoir would be filled. 2.4.1 Major Activities Schedule The major activities of the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project develop- merit include licensing, design engineering, equipment procurement, and construction. The principle segments of the project schedule include the time required to prepare and submit an application for a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license, the time required for FERC to review the application and issue a license, the time required for design and procurement of long lead time components, and the time required for con- struction. The coils tructi.on schedule for the Ray Roberts Reservoir Project allows the use of a low risk development plan for the hydroelectric project, while providing time to complete the hydro facility prior to completion of ` reservoir filling. 1 2.8 Key elements from the development schedule are listed in T:tble 2-3. The schedule avoids overlapping of FERC license review and other development activities, and allows the timely completion of the proposed project. 2.4.3 Cash Flow Consistent with the development schedule described above, the City of Denton will spend about $35,300 between rch 1982 and March 1983 for the preparation of an application for a FERC license for the Ray Roberts Hydro- electric Project. Receipt of the FERC license is expected by March 1984. Engineering activities including the preparation of bid specifications for major procurement items, the evaluation of proposals, design, and initial procurements will require the expenditure of about $723,000 between March 1986 and September 1987. Remaining expenditures for design, procurement, construction, and construction management during the period from September 1987 to project completion in June 1988 will amount to about $2,100,000. The projected cash flow is based on a ten per cent annual escalation of estimated November 1981 costs. Table 2-4 summarizes the cash flow described in the preceding. 2-9 67, TABLE 2-3. KEY SCHEDULE ELEMENTS March 1982 Initiate Licensing March 1983 Submit FERC License Application March 1984 Receive FERC License March 1986 Initiate Turbine-Generator Specification June 1986 Issue Turbine-Generator Specification September 1986 Award Turbine-Generator Contract November 1986 Initiate Design of Civil Works May 1987 Release Turbine-Generator Manufacturer for Fabrication June 1987 Issue Civil Works Specification September 1987 Award Civil Contract November 1987 Start Construction June 1988 Facility Operation 2-10 ' x TABLE 2-4. CASH FLOW ESTIMATES Date Cumulative Cumulative Project Quarter/ Project Project Fraction of uarter Year _ Activity Costa Costs Total Costs $11000 $11000 per cent 1 2/82 L 8.5 8.5 0.3 2 3/82 L 8.7 17.2 0.6 3 4/82 L 9.3 26.5 0.9 4 1/83 L 8.8 35.3 112 5 2/83 35.3 1.2 6 3/83 35.3 l.2 7 4/83 35.3 1.2 8 1/84 35.3 1.2 9 2/84 % 35.3 1.2 10 3/84 35.3 1.2 11 4/84 35.3 112 12 1/85 35.3 1.2 13 2/85 35.3 1.2 14 3/85 35.3 1.2 15 4/85 35.3 1.2 16 1/86 P 49.5 84.8 3.0 17 2/86 D 50.7 135.5 4.7 18 3/86 D 51.9 187.4 6,6 19 4/86 D 53.1 240.5 6.4 20 1/87 1) 54.4 294.9 10.3 21 2/87 D, E 136.9 431.8 1.511 22 3/87 D, E 327.2 759.0 26.6 23 4/87 C, E 682.9 1,441.9 50.5 2-11 TABLE 2-4 (Continued). CASH FLOW ESTIMATES Date Cumulative Cumulative Project Quarter/ Project Project Fraction of 9,uarter Year Activiq Costs Costs Total Costs $10000 $1,000 per cent 24 1/88 C, E 699.6 2,141,5 74.9 25 2/88 C, E 716.3 21857.8 100.0 *Assumed receipt of FERC License. Note: Costs include contingency allowances and escalation. L--Licensing. D--Design. E--Equipment Procurement. C--Construction and Construction Management. 2-12 W O m v a r 5.0 PROJECT DATA 3.1 PLANNED FACILITIES The planned facilities at Ray Roberts Reservoir consist- of an earthfill embankment, an uncontrolled concrete gravity trapezoidal broad-crested spillway, and the outlet works. These facilities are shown on Figure 3-1, 3.1.1 Earthfill Embankment The embankment will be a compacted impervious earthfill section extend- ing 14,965 feet across the valley floor at a maximum height of 141 feet, The top of the dam at elevation 665.0 will be 46 feet wide. A paved service road will be located along the top of the embankment. Upstream slope protection consists of filter and ri.prap. Downstream slope protection consists of grass. 3.1.2 Spillway The 100-foot wide spillway will be located in the left abutment. '.hat structure will consist of an approach channel, trapezoida3. broad-crested weir section, nonoverflow gravity abutment sections, an apron of concrete paving, spillway training walls, and a pilot channel to the Islm Fork. Tne approach channel will converge to 100 feet wide at the weir. with an invert elevation of 645.5 with vertical side slopes. The 100-foot long weir will have a crest elevation of 645.5. The concrete apron w" 'e 36 inches thick with gravel drains, grouted anchor bars and training walls. A pilot. channel will extend from the spillway apron to the Elm Fork. 3.1.3 Outlet Works The^outlet works, as presently planned with the proposed conduit modifications, will consist of an approach channel, intake structure, two conduits, and a stilling basin and outlet channel common to both conduits. The intake tower wiLl house two 6.0 by 13.0-foot sluice gates for flood releases and four 4 by 8-foot slide gates for conservation releases. The 16-foot diameter flood release conduit will be 1,507 feet long. It will have an inLet invert elevation of 545.0 at the intake structure and an exit elevation of. 540.0 at the stilling basin. The 60-inch diameter service conduit, as presently proposed by the Corps of Engineers, will run under- neath the flood release conduit. The service conduit will he serveu by 3-1 J~MMM : t +4':; j r +..3 , , . •ae , ' ~ k^y s `1'~+, . yyT7.' ~ F T l a'S'{fi~v 'c S ~sfS'S♦If??,' 7TL oy.!'7 '7i !l 7 . ~ 4 . 11 UW .'~l. 1- a ' ~ TM. H I G H SNAy 455 ioss v +w l [L ~3 I ) •l e1' INTAKEfSk U~TUt~E- F•, o i ~a J 10, AONEL J F ,-..-,.40C ERHOUS 10 1 L O > Srn ) 1 J ~ A i U~aer J( 7 ' X a 1I€ArC1I DENTON ,TEXAS llgls~ lll~ HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY psalm ~~1--- Anrl FIGURE 3-I 9+1313 ROPOSED RAY AOBERTS D4, mv1 lliw M p Mtt M .,7 obi . 11111-1, " ' -a F y~it '~h. ,mot f, +2. of J i[s ;n'^ 4111- :n' " IATIWI~ITT TIN four slide gates allowing water to enter the wet well which will feed the j conduit. The slide gates will be at dif2erent elevations to permit multiple lake level discharges. The service conduit will discharge at the stilling basin. The stilling basin will be 179 feet long and 32 feet wide at the end of the sill. The apron will be shaped to follow the curve of the free falling discharge jet with a horizontal section 92 feet long. An end sfll and two rows of baffle blocks are to be provided. The 60-inch pipe will extend from the wet wells in the intake structure to the stilling basin. It will parallel the conduit throughout its length to a valve box by the conduit portal. There it will reduce to a 48-inch pipe which will. emerge through the right side wall of the stilling basin about 33.5 feet down- stream of the portal. 3.2 ITYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS 3.2.1 Hydrologic Conditions The drainage basin of the Elm Fork of the Trinity River above Ray Roberts Dam is approximately 692 square miles in area. Figure 3-2 is a map of the waterways in the basin. Major streams in the basin are Spring Creek and Isle Du Bois Creek. Approximately 32 inches of precipitation fall on the basin during an average year. The precipitation is almost exclusively rt._nfall. Approximately 54 inches of water evaporate from lakes in the area during an average year. An average of approximately five inches of precipitation runs off the land. Titis corresponds to 16 per cent of the average precipitation. Ray Roberts Lake is to be located at river mile 60 on the Elm Fork about 30 miles upstream of Lewisville ])am. The lake will contain approxi- mately 799,600 acre feet of water when filled to an elevation of 632.5 feet.. The reservoir is a multipurpose flood control/water supply/recreation project. Approximately 265,000 acre feet of flood control water may be stored in the flood pool between elevations of 640.5 and 632.5 feet. The conservation pool, between elevations of 632.5 and 568 feet, contains 788,160 acre feet of water. Water below 568 feet is considered dead storage. The Dallas Water Utility has studied water yields from Ray Roberts Lake based on future regional demands (year 2000) for water and past hydro- logic data. The study is shown in Appendix C. The study shows drafts, or ® 3-3 u ° , (Y yll t . , h", i t , t ^e=i Y I z Yi i ',7P i,2` ,f!?vP} 1+ s,'a., i*R~ 17, 0 Ap o foR z a W o a u Spa~NG o aJ w / a J 2 W o M' PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM 97 0 NO SCALE MACK 8 VUTCH DENTON,TEXAS colic Lyme U MEEn HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY "tO1fT ELM FORK OF TRINITY ABOVE FIGURE 3-2 E-D4T 8EYISIDH DYN CA ACC APP PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS DAM water available for use, from Aubrey (Ray Roberts) Fake. The study is based on a constant draft of approximately 131.5 cubic feet per second (260,87 acre feet per day) from the lake, The Dallas study is more conser- vative than the Corps of Engineers-Fort Worth District study which shows that a constant' draft of 152 cubic feet per second could be taken from Ray Roberts Take. The Dallas study is used in this analysis. A flow duration curve was derived from the Dallas study and is shown on Figure 3-3. This curve shows the percentage of time that a flow is greater than a given value. A reservoir level duration curve for the Dallas study is shown on figure 3-4. 3.2.2 ~y raulic Conditions The amount of pressure (head loss as measured in feet of water) needed to force a given discharge through the outlet structure was calculated. Fig,. ,-5 shows the head loss versus discharge curve for the outlet struc- ture. The lake elevation minus the tailwater elevation minus the head loss equals the net head available to power the turbine. Assumptions used in the calculations are as follows. (1) Trash racks have 1-1/2 inch spacing between the bars to prevent debris from damaging the turbine. (2) A 60-inch service conduit will be installed underneath the 13-foot flood conduit. (3) A Hazer-Williams coefficient of C = 1.20 was used for the service conduit and penstock. It is assumed that this piping will be lined to prevent corrosion. The tail-water curve for the Elm Fork immediately downstream of the stilling basin is shown on Figure 3-6. The tailwater is controlled by the physical characteristics of the river, and it is not practical to lower the tailwater to gain more net head, 3.3 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS The strati.graphy present in the proposed reservoir area includes two overburden units, Recent alluvium and Pleistocene terr,iCe deposits; and Cretaceous aged bedrock units, the Woodbine Group, the Grayson marl and plain Street limestone, the Pawpaw, and the Weno formation. 3-5 S '•Ir f ' -'7 ~:i t K^ti, r~ x~i y~~s ~ "~lRty j ::7 ti.v _ .~rrriwrwr~r X000 1000 800 600 400 200 loo 80 60 _ l ' 4Q 20 - $ I- { { 10 0 20 40 60 80 100 BLACK & VEATCH DENTON, TEXAS coNsulnNe ENGINEERS HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY DATE PRa6DT FLOW DURATION CURVE U 943?, RAY ROBERTS LAKE FIGURE 3-3 a 3-6 1rY ~tl'1*?.N ~(C 1~~ iY .1R S '!~F Ct s~ 9 .l 1 T t 'nfTS 1{~1 r "sT ia •{t r' 1 { . 1 04 I 640 630 w v z 0 620 Q w w J w 610 w x 4 J 600 590 0 :0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PERCENT OF TIME ELEVATION IS EXCEEDED BLACK & VEATCH DE NTON ,TEXAS - CONSULTING txolmfENs HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY PROJECT FIGURE 3-4 _ local (3432 LAKE LEVEL DURATION CURVE NO. DATE REVISION WN CK ACC APP RAY ROBERTS LAKE 1 50 40 30 _ 20 10 _ 6.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 1.0 0.8 0.6 0,4 1 0,2 - - - 0.1 0 2 - 3 a 5 6 DISCHARGE (100 CFS) BLACK & VEATCH DENTON , TEXAS comuma ENsINEIns HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY STUDY DAT HEAD LOSS VS, DISCHARGE 9432 RAY ROBERTS LAKE FIGURE 3-5 3-8 .e. „ - _ i}r. ~ ~n F~'°%;y C~.'i~ ~r-~r 4R v '~'.;.ny ;i '"t~p~Smrq..:t" 1! S}i''t}e 7 ~53~. ~i s 5;; I 5Si ~ .c ~,~~t pf2 firT'.,_ ~~-1-~- 1 ~R:f:a F ,r Ft~ 7r i f,~i. Jf t♦ „e ! esl, t.. xi 1 It i ~~S 1 ~V ;f'' ~i.l W 2d~i +.r a Y(~ i =t ~ y Y is t / L t`f i xY.2 ~ ~ t t Y ~ 4 i n a^ 550 545 - - - - - - J N w 5 40 W ti.. z W ~ z a 535 - 1J J lx l 530 - 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 DISCHARGE IN THOUSAND SECOND -FEET BLACK & VEATCH DENTON,TEXAS CONSULTING ENGINEERS HYDROELEC-TM'C FEASIBILITY STUDY MOJECT FIGURE 3-6 9432 TAILWATERpRATING CURVE N0. DATE HEYISIOM 01!11 GK ACC APP RAY RQf, ERTC LAKE 4 rt n r~ ~j14rt1 .Yt Lrt~i'7a Y?'~ l Ri ~1 r S P1 v : 11 i The alluvium consists of flood-plain deposits of cl.aY, silt, soad, And gravel found along the bottomlauds of the Elm Fork and its tributaries, These deposits are up to 45 feet thick at the damsite. Terrace deposits are remnants of ancient flood-plain deposits that were left exposed high in, relief after streams cut their paths successively deeper into the underly- ing bedrock. The terrace deposits border the Elm Fork and isle du Bois Creek over a portion of their course. The terrace deposits probably reach a maximum thickness of about 35 feet. The bedrock consists of limestone, marl, clay shale, and sandy shale. These units dip gently to the southeast, The regional dip of the bedrock is greater than the slope of the land surface, causing progressively younger formations to be exposed from the northwest to the southeast across the proposed reservoir area. No faulting or other structural features have been identified in the proposed project area. The powerhouse will be founded on a mat foundation system bearing on ~ the Pawpaw shale. The Pawpaw shale at the foundation elevation is a dark i gray to black unweathered silty shale with numerous sandstone lenses. An allowable bearing capacity of 53,000 psf will be used for redesigning the mat foundation, The powerhouse is located in Seismic Zone 1 as defined by the Unii'orm Building Code. The powerhouse will be designed to withstand the effects of a seismic event of the intensity of Modified Mercall.i V and VI which corre- sponds to a Seismic Zone 1. 3-10 ;r i rTrR z.v~ r ~rxr xn+-~Y..n^ TT, j L' ^rr- 9,t ~r ,rv ` F-77+`T_- ,1 y~ fiy i 0 rp r w ~y i tw 4.0 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN 4.1 GENERAL Development of a hydroelectric facility at the Ray Roberts Reservoir Project will be markedly enchanced by the modifications to the planned outlet works, as presently proposed by the Fort Worth District, J.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The original plans specify a single-conduit configu- ration. That conduit was to be 13 feet in diameter, with control provided by two 6-foot by 13-foot sluice gates. The conduit was not intended to function as a pressvi•e penstock. The modified design specifies a two- conduit configuration, incorporating the original 13-foot diameter conduit for flood releases, and a 60-inch diameter low-flow pipe with downstream control for normal operating releases. The 60-inch steel pipe will be fitted with a bifurcation and a blind flange to allow future coupling with a turbine penstock. The hydroelectric installation would be located alongside the planned outlet works stilling basin. Turbine discharges would parallel the stilling basin and enter the Elm Fork Triniiy River at or near the downstream end of the stilling basin. The entire hydroelectric project boundary would be confined to an area next to the stilling basin about 200 feet long and 80 feet wide. Located in or contiguous to the toe of tl,n planned dam and outlet works, the proposed hydroelectric project area will b.: within the areas modified by construction of the dam. 4.2 DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES The prevalence of several well defined project parameters served to reduce the matrix of development alternatives incorporating various project locations, pool elevations, generating capacities, turbirie/generator, types and configurations, and modes of operation that may normally be considered for a proposed hydroelectric project. The approximate location and layout of the hydroelectric facility will be largely controlled by the placement of the planned bifurcation on the 60-inch low-flow pipe. Final powerhouse siting aad penstock routing, within close proximity, to the outlet works stilling basin, will be formulated through detailed interaction with the 4-1 r •i:~ ~ U6 .a ~ t w~ ,"n-,: 7ti` ;i 1 >7r ~ _ Corps of Engineers during final design activities. The operating pool elevations will be determined as a result of flood control and water supply operation of the Ray Roberts Reservoir. Just as the pool elevations could not be regulated to facilitate hydroelectric operation, the reservoir release rates and modes of operation would not be afrected or controlled by the development and operation of the proposed Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project. The hydroelectric project would be operated in accordance with the flood control, water supply, and recreation multipurpose operation of the Lewisville Project. The project components remaining open for the consideration of development alternatives include turbine types, sizes, and configurations; and gererator types. 4.2.1 Turbine rNlt.e~aatives As appropriate for most hydroelectric projects, consideration was given to development alternatives incorporating various numbers, types, sizes, and configurations of turbines, to assess the economically advan- tageous power producing potential of the Ray Roberts Reservoir site. With the available flows through the Ray Roberts h able f Reservoir outlet works, and net generating heads between 60 and 100 iee'~, the station capac- ity could be between 300 and 2,400 kilowatts. Alternative types of hydraulic turbines compatible with the projected operating conditions are listed below. (1) Francis. (2) Cross flow. Francis-type hydraulic turbines are normally used in medium to high head installations. They are often selected for relatively low-flow facil- ities when the normal operating heads are in excess of 60 feet. Francis univ.s are used for heads above those requiring fixed blade propeller and Kaplan-type turbines, and for herds below those requiring impulse or Pelton- type turbines. Francis turbines have somewhat better part load efficiency than fixed blade propeller units, but less than Kaplan units. A Francis unit may not require as deep a setting as a comparable propeller selection, allowing a reduction in excavation and civil structure costs. 4-2 Verticai or horizontal conrigurations can be used with a Francis-type hydraulic turbine. The vertical configuration with a spiral case is the more conventional arrangement; however, the incorporation of a spiral case and elbow draft tube will probably increase the powerhouse dimensions And costs over a horizontal arrangement. The location of the proposed power- house, contiguous to the toe of the dam and in close proximity to the stilling basin, may preclude the use of the deeper vertical shift configu- ration. Cross-flow turbines, as manufactured by Ossberger of Germany and distributed in North America by Stapenhoest, Inc. of Point Claire, Quebec, are radial impulse type turbines. The peak efficiency of cross-flow turbines is about five percentage points lower than that of the Kaplan and fixed propeller type turbines. The cross-flow units do experience relatively good part load efficiencies. Cross-flow turbines, like other impulse units, are set relatively high above the minimum tailwater level. The high setting allows the reduction of powerhouse excavation costs. However, preliminary estimates indicate that a cross-flow turbine would cost about 1 25 per cent more than a comparably sized single-regulated Kaplan turbine. To promote the development of small scale hydroelectric projects, and the sale of equipment, severrl turbine generator manufacturers have devel- oped a line of pre-engineered or standard units. The benefit of the pre- engineered units is that manufacturers' engineering costs can be spread over a number of units. That allows the avoidance of design engineering and model testing expenses, associted with castom built units, which small. hydroelectric projects could riot support-. Standardized Francis-type units are available for applications with net operating heads ranging between about 25 and 1,200 feet, and correlating turbine discharge capacities between about 20 anti 900 cubic feet per second. 4.2.2 Generator Alternatives Synchronous and induction generators were considered for applir.ation at the proposed. Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project. Synchronous generators provide the most Flexibility in terms of operation under varying system conditions; however, the attendant control packages for synchronization and 4-3 •c: r: --77r r_'--.^.-_z-^;--r^z-rr•~'^:..,.--.--.-..rte field control raise the cost of the total system in comparison with induc- tion generators. Induction generators are basically induction motors operating at slightly above synchronous speed. Field control and synchronization pack- ages are not required because the connected electrical system supplie excitation and frequency control, A disadvantage of an induction generator is that the connected electric system must supply KVAR to the generator. On a distribution system such as being considered for the Ray Roberts Project, that could mean that capacitor banks at the plant will need to be installed, and possibly automatically connected and disconnected for voltage regulation. If capacities are required, synchronous generators may be the economic choice system conditions as known. During the detailed design, where a final determination can be made on the type of operator to utilize. Follow-on design and economic analyses for the feasibility study will reference the more expensive synchronous generator alternative. 4.3 SELECTION OF PROJECT DESIGN The power output of a hydroelectric facility is a function of the head and flow available for generation, and the performance chs•acteristics of the turbine generator unit(s) under the prevailing head and flow conditions. Optimization of the economic performance of a hydroelectric facility is dependent upon the proper matching of turbine generator alternatives with the head and flow conditions under which it will operate. Different numbers, types and sizes of h.ydrai:.lic turbines, and similar turbines with different synchronous rotating speeds will achieve different operating efficiencies, and consequently output, over the range of operating head and flow conditions. The selection of hydraulic turbine equipment for a proposed development involves a technical and economic evaluation of the long-term performance of the considered development alternatives over the range of projected operating conditions. The equipment should be sized and designed to operate near maximum efficiency under frequently recurring head and flow conditions. The available head will generally dictate the type of turbine_ to be used at a given site.. The turbine size, or total discharge capacity of the facility, should be large enough so that the per cent of 4-4 time that excess flow must be spilled is economically minimized. The turbine(s) should not be so large that the developer is paying for incre- mental capacity that is rarely used. The selection of a turbine discharge capacity for the proposed Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project was performed in consideration of the pro- jected hydrologic conditions described in Section 3.0. Alternative turbine discharge capacities attainable with various sizes of standardized turbines were considered. Use of standardized--pre-engineered--turbine generator equipment was considered to be a financially and economically prudent restriction on machinery selection. Standardized Francis turbines with 600, 675, and 750 millimetre runner diameters were initially considered for the Ray Roberts Project. Under expected head conditions, the estimated maximum discharge capacities of those turbines are 100, 130, and 160 cubic feet per second, respectively'. Figure 4-1 illustrates the per cent of time that the discharge capacities of the various standardized turbines would be exceeded at the Ray Roberts Project. Experience has indicated that, dependent upon the value of displaced energy, the total discharge capacity of a hydroelectric facility should be selected co that it will not be exceeded more than 10 to 20 per cent of the time. If sized within that range--high or low, depending on energy valuation--optimum economic performance will be realized. As indicated on Figure 4-1, the planned constant draft operation of Ray Roberts Reservoir should result in a nearly continuous release of 132 cubic feet per second. The flow rate is expected to be less than 132 cubic feet per second only three per cent of the time. The flow rate is expected to be greater than 132 cubic feet per second only seve•.i per cent of the time. Accordingly, a 750 millimetre diameter turbine would be significantly under used more than 93 per cent of the time, and a 600 milli- metre diameter t.urbinc ..,ould have significantly inadr_~quate capacity more than 97 per cent of the time, Be cause of the planned operation, the 730 and 600 millimetre diameter turbines were eliminated from further consideration in the formulation of a conceptual design. The 675 millimetre diameter Francis turbine provides the best application for the projected operating 4-5 lie, i u TUR81HE DISCHAROE CAPACITY (CFS) n~ w w m v co o ° o o a° o° °o °o o °o Q No OPTIMUM ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE v n m x -1 O Q T r m v+ c A r r ~ m o a 0 m m x V n o m v C m o t co r_ o N co w z x m M w fn o m T m m r- ~t c m - A C7 O m o x m ol p V Vl O ~ O TURBINE DIAMETER (MM) conditions. That unit was selected for the formulation of a conceptual design and the preparation of cost estimates. Because of their increased cost and relatively limited availability, cross-flow type turbines were excluded from further consideration during the feasibility study. Cross-flow type turbines could be reevaluated during final design and bid evaluation activities if significant cost savings are offered by turbine generator manufacturers proposing those turbines as an alternative. Because of its wide application with standardized Francis-type tur- bines, a horizontal configuration was used for preliminary engineering designs. The final powerhouse design-is dependent on the characteristics of the turbine generator units that it will ultimately house. Accordingly, final formulation of the powerhouse design is achieved through a detailed, integrated, evaluation of proposals from interested turbine generator manufacturers. 4.4 RECORMENDED DEVELOPMENT The selection process described in the preceding section provides a practical, and likely optimum, project design for the Ray Roberts 13ydro- electric Project. The project data presented in this section is of suffi- cient detail to support a final decision regarding project development, and to ,upport an application for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) license. Final design changes regarding turbine generator types and power- house configuration will not affect. project- feasibility or the significant project data presented to the federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Descriptions of the physical, operational., economic, and financial, characteristics of the conceptual design formulated during the feasibility study are presented in the following sections. 4.4.1 Physical. Features Basic components of the proposed hydroelectric development consist of a penstock, powerhouse, a tailrace, and a new distribution line to intercon- nect with the Denton County Electric Cooperative distribution system. The penstock will consist of about 110 feet of 60-inch diameter welded steel pipe running from the proposed, blind flanged, bifurcation to the inlet of 4-7 'o the hydraulic turbine. The .routing of the penstock is sWiit on Figure 4-2, The penstock will be equipped with a full diameter butterfly valve to control flow to the powerhouse. Operation of the valve and turbine generator unit will be coordinated with the water supply demands of the City of Dallas in order to maintain the primary function of the conservation storage within Ray Roberts Lake. As the penstock will not be within the embankment, concrete encasement of the penstock is not provided. During detailed design of the project, a hydraulic surge analysis will be performed to determine the appropriate design pressure of the penstock. Preliminary analyses indicate that the design hydrostatic prass,,rres imposed on the pen- stock and service conduit by the hydroelectric development would not exceed the pressure rating of the service conduit. The turbine gate operating time will be set sufficiently low to prevent excessive water hammer in the conduit. The hydraulic turbine, ge:erator, electrical control, and auxiliary equipment will be housed in a reinforced concrete structure (powerhouse) approximately 30 feet in length by 20 feet in width by 46 feet deep. A plan and profile of the proposed powerhouse is shown on Figure 4-3. The configuration of the powerhouse is a function of the hydraulic turbine selected and would be subject to minor revision during detailed design of the project. The structure will be primarily below grade with a small pre- cast concrete structure provided above grade for personnel access. The hydroelectric development is assumed to be an unmanned station, therefore, no sanitary facilities are provided. Access hatches are provided to facili- tate servicing the station e,ntipment. A mobile crane will be required for wainteriance operations since a permanent powerhouse crane is not provided. Dewatering of the powerhouse water passage for servicing the turbine will require closure of the upstream valve and installation of stop logs at the draft tube exit. A tailrace will be required to direct the turbine discharges to the outlet works discharge channel (F,lm Fork River). The tailrace wild consist of reinforced concrete training walls and a channel. bottom of either con- crete or excavated earth with riprap cover. The tailrace configuration is shown on Figure 4-3. The tailrace will be located and configured to mini- is 4-B EL, 5891 EL.552~ EL, 535 SPILLWAY AND STILLING BASIN ---..Y__..,_ ~ HY OTHERS--.` BUTTERFLY VALVE BY DENTON L -6LIND FLANGE BY OTHERS Lam` - EL.522-0 1 1 VALVE VAULT BY OTHERS fL 1-0Ii ~`'L-- - EL. 522_-0 60" 0 PIPE BY DENTON-- . 510 POWERHOUSE BY DENTON-'~ / EL. 53S'~- i 1 _ I EL. 552' -EL.589' / PLAN BLACK & VEATCH DENTONJEXAS t011(UlTlp9 [ppIMEtA3 HYDROELECTRIC FEASIBILITY 5TUDY ^iO c' A PROPOSED RAY ROBERTS D M [I Kc Nt AM FIGURE ~ 9-032 POWERHOUSE CONSTRUCTION ww, f t ~ .y l e t t c t I I 5° tFr'~'i' fi ra r i}.r I'F I 777777 77,37 r r L, ! ,V' s i 1 f (x i I 17•t u b > ,ill. I /lI 1 t t r_ v . , YI . ~4 ill ~ ) . . ~STILLINO BASIN WALL ~1 . 0 A N A o -mot m GL TURBINE O b PLAN IQ, o l9' W. c c 20= o' ae'- o' es'-o' B412' PRECAST { ACCESS ENCLOSURE-- M '^AEMOYABLE METAL ROOF MtCH d ACCESS STAIRS NOT SHOWN-----'-- L 552-0' GRADE y -STILLING BASIN WALL--- 'S70P LOG CL TURBINE E CL EL.527!0' 1 _ _ _ EL s2i~o'-- nwY•.,,,,...•' °~3 B`~ >Ub,.~s.°_•:`D67O •0r__O_cT~l•n'~'~^.'$o:~• r"• .P'< EL. 510 -0 t El _SG6L0' PROFILE 1 10' 0 - 10' 70' _ _ 8[ACK A VEATCN oEr~rt~rl, rt xns - - nntl11g1 nruiElr _ HYDROELLCTAIS FEh5701LIYY STWY -_v____ ' It PIIDI OSFD RAY ROBERTS DAM FIGURE a a WWJ 9472 lim-0 -I r+.t rcwrw u ra to POWERHOUSE PLA; 6 PFlC>FILE 1. 7, mize interference with planned recreational facilities and also to minimize losses in the tailrace. A new distribution lice and switchgear will be required to interconnect the proposed hydroelectric development with the Denton County Electric Cooperative distribution system. Approximately 4,000 feet of new 12.5 kV distribution line will be installed. 4.4.2 Operation-Generation The proposed Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project will operate with flows and fool levels as dictated by the flood control, water supply, and recrea- tion operation of the Ray Roberts Reservoir. Releases from the conservation pool will be discharged through the 60-inch steel pipe paralleling the flood flow conduit. When the pool rises above the top of the conservation pool, flood releases will be passed through the 13-foot diameter conduit,. During normal water supply operation, releases from the Ray Roberts Reservoir will be passed through the 60-inch pipe, diverted to the new turbine, and discharged into the powerhouse tailrace and the Film Fork of the 'T'rinity River. Downstream water demands in excess of the turbine discharge capacity will be released through the low-flow discharge pre- viously planned for such releases. At times of high water demand, releases from Ray Roberts Reservoir may be simultaneously passed through both the hydraulic turbine and the low-flow outlet portal. A schedule for such releases--setting the flow rates through the turbine, the outlet portal, and the flood conduit for a spectrum of pool level and downstream demand conditions--will be developed during detailed design. Project simulation (referencing the projecr_ed Ray Roberts Reservoir operation with 50 years of historical inflows) was performed for t-he pro- posed 675 millimetre diameter Francis turb;.ne installation. Results of that simulation indicate that the proposed developia4nt would provide 7,750,000 killowatt-hours of long-term average anniial generation. Appendix A contains the detailed results of that simulation, 4.4.3 Project Costs Estimated direct construction costs and c.ontinuini; annual costs are presented in this section. Indirect costs, contingencies, interest during 4-11 I u construction, escalation, bond fee, and reserve fund estimates were summa- rized on Table 2-1. Those estimates were derived from detailed cash dis- bursement schedules. 4.4.3.1 Initial Capital Costs. The estimated direct costs Cox the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project are presented on Table 4-1. Cost estimates for the Francis turbine generator unit and auxiliary equipment were obtained from turbine generator manufacturers. Construction costs were derived by applying appropriate unit prices to quantities esti- mated from conceptual design drawings. The estimated d?.rect cost of the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project is $1,090,000 in 1981. As indicated on Table 2-1, the total bonded amount for the project is $4,104,000 in 1988, 4.4.3.2 A_nnual_Costy. A review of cost information presented in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission publication }Itdroelectric Plant Con- struction Cost and Annual Production Expenses and reports from other hydro- electric evaluations supported the estimate of annual operating costs for the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project. The estimated annual operation and maintenance expenses are summarized on Tables 4-2 and 4-3. Those costs were assumed to escalate at nine per cent annually. The estimated fixed annual costs are listed below. Fixed Annual Char es $1,000 Renewal and Replacement 10.3 License Ices and Rent 4.1 Insurance 20.5 Payments in Lieu of Taxes 61.6 Bond Amortization and Interest 584.2 Reimbursement to Corps 55.4 Reserve Fund Earnings (75_9) Total Annual Fixed Cost 660.2 4-12 i 1, 1..Yr' i e-, l 11 ] 11 40 TABLE 4-1. PROJECT COST DATA November. 1981 Dollars $1,000 Structures and Improvements--Generation Plant 334.0 Intake and Waterways 136.0 Water Wheels, Turbines, and Generators 311,0 Accessory Electric Equipment 184.5 Miscellaneous Power Plant Equipment 58.5 Transmission Equipment 66.0 Total Di.,:ects Without Corps Reimbursement 11090,0 Outlet Conduit Modifications 750.0 Total Direct Costs 1,840.0 I 4-13 s =w r~rea TABLE 4-2. HAIN',ENAIIGE EXPENSE ESTIMATE November 1981 Dollars Perform Visual Inspectiou Daily--less than l h/day (check oil levels, temperatures, valves, seals, and bearings) 274 hours at $12.00/h 3,288a Refill cr Change Oil-Perform Minor Repairs to T/G units--3 h/wk 1 mechanic, at $12.00/h 1,8721' 1 electrician, at $20.00/h 3,120c 1 laborer at $8.001h 1,2484 Perform Unwatered Inspection and Maintenance of T/G units-30 h/yr• .l mechanics at $12.00/h 360b 1 electrician at $20.00/h 600c 2 laborers at $8.00/h 4804 Maintenance of Intake and `,!aterways--3 h/wk (removal of trashrack debris and maintenance of tailrace) 2 laborers &t $8.00/h 21496 Maintenance of Structures-4 h/wk (maintaining grounds and facility) 1 laborer at $8.00/h ?_)_4L9 6 Total. Personel Expense 15,960 II Operation Supervision and Engineering. bMaintenance Supervision and Engineering. `'Maintenance of Electric Plant. dMaintenance of Miscellaneous Hydraulic Plant. 4-14 k h L TABLE 4-3. SUMHAV OF ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS November 1981 Dollars Operation Supervision and Engineering 3,288 Water Rights Electric Service 31000 Miscellaneous Expenses--Materials, Supplies 11000 Rents and Fees 3,000 Maintenance Supervision and Engineering 21230 Maintenance of Structures 2,497 Maintenance of Intake and Waterways 21497 Maintenance of Electric Plant 31720 Maintenance of Miscellaneous Hydraulic Plant _1:728 Total Production Expense 22,950 4-15 4.4.4 Benefit/Cost Analyses 4.4:4.1 Annual Benefits. The energy generated by the facility would be utilized by the Utilities Department of the City of Denton to offset or displace higher cost energy. At the time that the facility first becomes operational, the bulk of vhe energy used by the City will be from the Commanche Peak nuclear units and the lignite-fueled Gibbons Creek Unit 1. The City will receive this low cost power through its membership in the Texas Municipal Power Agency (TMPA), together with the cities of Garland, Greenville, and Bryan. However, even after the TMPA capacity is available, a significant amount of natural gas fueled power will be required by the four cities in the form of spinning "reserve. A part of this natural gas fueled generation will be displaced by the Ray Roberts hydroelectric facility, Table 4-4 shows the projected gross annual value of the proposed Ray Roberts facility based on a recent projection of natural. gas prices developed by black & Veatch. 4.4.4.2 Total Investment Costs. The total investment required for the facility consists of all direct and indirect construction costs--including escalation and an allowance for contingencies--plus the costs of financing the construction. These financing costs include interest clue on the bond during the construction period, the fee associated with the bond to cover legal, engineering, and printing costs as well as the underwriters discount, and a bond reserve fund. Ta'>le 4-5 shows the assumptions made and the resulting total investment cost. 4.4.4.3 Annual Operating Costs and Net Benefits. The gross ar.aual benefits shown in Table 4-4 must be reduced by the annual costs of operation- -non-f.ueI operating and maintenance (00) costs, insurance, and payment in lieu of taxes. In addition to the normal costs an annual charge will be paid by Denton to the United States. This charge would be established by FERC for the costs of administration of Part I of the Federal Power Act, for utiliza- tion of the government Ray Roberts facility, and for the use aad occupancy of any federal lands. The specific bases for these charges are not defined. Discussions with FFRC have indicated that the charge will be reasonable and will not affect project feasibility. Table 4-6 chows the assumed values of these annual charges. 4-16 TABLE 4-4. PROTECTED GROSS BENEFITS Projected Price of Projected Year Natural Gas Gross Benefit $/MBtu $1,000 1981 2.79 1985* 5.62 1990 13.79 10197 1995 25.76 20236 2000 48.14 4,179 2005 89.96 7,80) *Assuming a full years operation, with long-term average pool condi- tions, 4-17 TABLE 4-5. FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS, TOTAL INVESTMENT, AND ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE ~ Financial Assumption Bond Rate 13 per cent Bond Term 20 years Bond F6e 3 per cent I Bond Reserve Fund One Year Principle and Interest Total Investment ($1,000) 1.0 Mw Faciliq__ Total Construction Cost Less Interest 21858 Interest During Constructions 538 Bond Fee 124 Reserve Fund 584 Total Investment 41104 Annual Debt Service (51.000) Principle and Interest 584.2 Reimbursement to Corps 55.4 Earnings in Reserve Fund** -75.4 Total Annual 563.7 *Incli:ding 7-3/8 per cent annual interest charges on $750,000 cost of pressurized conduit modifications. "C Assuming earnings at 13 per cent. 4'-18 1 li I I TABLE 4-61 PROJECTED VALUES OF ANNUAL OPERATINO COSTS Value - Cost Item Operating and Maintenance $52,900 in 1986; escalation at 9 per cent, plus 0.25 per cent of total investment for interim repair and replacement account Insurance 0,5 per cent of total investment Payment in Lieu of Taxes 1.5 per cent of total investment FERC Assess Fee 0.1. per cent of total investment 4-19 1. ~i ! Z- t r f: i f .t . ,~5„ r y-7v n 7 7 4.4.4.4 Economic and Financial Analyses, The economic assessment consisted of the comparison of the present value of the cumulative net annual benefits-- discounted at 13 per cent--to the investment is the benfit/cost ratio (H/C ratio). When the benefit/cost ratio is equal to 1.0, capital recovery has occurred. That is, the present worth of the benefits has recovered the initial investment. The difference between the cumulative present worth benefits and the initial investment is the Net Present Value (NPV), When the NPV is equal to zero, capital recovery has occurred. The financial assessment considered the ability of the net annual revenue V: meet the annual debt obligation as defined in Table 4-5. When the net annual revenue exceeds the debt obligation, position annual net savings have occurred. The period over which benefits will be realized is the expected facility life, which for hydropower facilities is generally in excess of fifty years. However, the 20 year period during which the bond is outstanding and the annual debt burden must be met is a more realistic time for evalua- tion. Table 4-7 presents the results of the economic and financial evalua- tion for the 1,000 kilowatt Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project. The results of the assessment are summarized below, (1) Capital recovery year--•1994. (2) B/C ratio at bond life--3.60. (3) NPV at Bond Life ($1,000)--6,058. (4) Initial year net savings ($1,000)--121. (5) First year of positive savings--19$8. (6) Total savings over bond life ($1,000)--62,248. (7) Present worth of total savings over bond life ($1,000)--6,240. The results show the significant economic and financial incentives that ar represented by the planned Ray Roberts Reservoir site. Capital. recovery occurs in the seventh year while positive annual savings are achieved during the first year of operation. 4-20 11, I7,11 W117.11 11 y ~ ~ ,S, r , 1 i\ l i t 1! r? i' TABLE 4-%. YEARLY ECONOMIC Sl7NMARY Cumulative Benefit Net Cumulative Cumulative Groau Annual Operetl"g Costs _ Net Present korth Coat Present Debt N,-t Net Present North Year Benefit 6&H Tex Insurance Yee ' Benefits Net Benefit" Ratio Value Service* Savingv Savings _ Net SavlnRa Z$%"o00} ,,loo ZS1,00a UT 0 OT ZW-bonT ($%ooo) $1,000 _ Z oau) M c o5 Zsi;uoo) N1,006) M ,ooo) 1988 834 63 61.6 20.5 4.1 685 329 0.14 -2,002 563.7 121 121 58 1989 999 68 61.6 20.5 4.1 845 688 0.30 -1,643 563.1 281 402 178 1990 1,197 73 61.6 20.5 4.1 1,031 1,078 0.46 -1,253 563.7 474 876 356 1991 1,356 79 61.6 20.5 4.1 1,191 1,475 0.63 -856 563.7 627 1,503 565 1992 1,537 85 61.6 20.5 4.1 1,366 1,877 0.81 -454 563.7 802 2,305 801 1993 1,742 92 61.6 20.5 4.1 1,564 2,285 0.98 -46 563.? 1,000 3,305 1,062 1994 1,973 99 61.6 20.5 4.1 1,788 2,697 1.16 366 563.7 1,224 4,529 1,344 1995 2,236 107 41.6 20.5 4.1 2,043 3,114 1.34 783 563.7 1,419 6,009 1,646 1996 2,534 116 61.6 20.5 4.1 2,332 3,536 1.5: 1,205 563.7 1,166 7,777 1,966 1997 2,872 125 61.6 20.5 4.l 2,660 3,961 1.70 1,63D 563.7 2,097 9,874 2,301 1998 3,254 136 61.6 20.5 4.1 3,032 4,390 1.88 2,059 563.7 2,469 12,343 2,650 1999 3,686 147 6116 20.5 4.1 3,455 4,823 2.01 2,492 563.7 2,891 15,233 3,012 2000 4,179 159 61.6 20.5 4.1 3,933 5,259 2.26 2,928 563.7 3,370 18,603 3,386 2001 4,735 173 61.6 20.5 4.1 4,477 5,698 2.44 3,367 563.1 3,913 22,516 3,769 2002 5,366 187 61.6 20.5 4.1 5,093 6,139 2.63 3,808 563.1 4,529 27,045 4,162 2003 6,081 203 61.6 20.5 4.1 5,792 6,584 2.82 4,253 563.7 5,228 32,273 4,561 2004 6,891 221 6116 20.5 4.1 6,584 7,032 3.02 4,701 563,7 6,021 38,294 4,97:, 2005 7,809 239 61.6 20.5 4.1 7,483 7,482 3.21 5,151 563.7 6,920 45,214 5,389 2006 8,849 260 61.6 20.5 4.1 8,503 7,934 3.40 5,6D3 563.7 7,939 53,153 5,812 2007 10,028 283 61.6 20.5 4.1 9,659 8,389 3.69 6,058 563.7 9,095 62,248 F,240 *Including 50-year annual payment of $55,400 for amortization of 1750,000 Incremental expenditure by the Corps of Eugineers for modified c alet vurkS, i30Ir Owwwwwwo I 5,0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 5.1 BASE .LINK, CONDITIONS 5.1,1 General Description--Trinity River Basin The Trinity River watershed lies in the eastern half of the State of Texas. It is bounded on the north by the Red River Basin, on the east by the Saline and Neches River Basin, and on the west and south by the Brazos and San Jacinto River Basinu. It has a combined total drainage area of 17,969 square miles and extends through 38 counties. The Ray Roberts Dam will be constructed on the Elm Fork which is a major tributary of the Trinity River. The Elm Fork rises in eastern Montague County in north central Texas and flows in a generally southeasterly to southerly direction to a confluence with the West Fork at Dallas, Texas to form the Trinity River. The Elm Fork drains a total area of 2,577 square miles, and its basin is wide in proportion to its length, The maximum width is about 60 miles, and the length along the general axis of drainage is approximately 80 miles. The watershed lies within portions of Montague, Rise, Cooke, Denton, Grayson, Collins, Tarrant, and Dallas counties. The major tributaries of the Elm Fork are Clear. Creek, Isle du Bois Cree!c, Little Elm Creek, Denton Creek, and Hickory Creek. 5.1.2 Physiogrr, iy There are four major physiographic subdivisions associated with the Elm Fork watershed. They are the West Cross Timbers, Grand Prairie, East Cross Timbers, and the Blackland Prairie. 5,1.2.1 Western_ Cross Timbers. Most of Montague County lies within the Western Cross 'l'imbers Region. This region is formed mostly on the dissected and erodes; outcrops of Pennsylvania age; the sandstone and sandy outcrops of the western Cretaceous strata are included in the eastern strips of this region. These eastern outcrops of the Cretaceous are often "soft" and nonresistant in contrast witli the "hard" and usually very resistant outcrops common to most of the region. The softer and less resistant strata have been eroded to form lowlands, and the remainder of the region is in reality a dissected plateau with a strongly erosional topography. 5-1 Most of the West Cross Timber soil in the Elm Fork watershed is a highly erodible reddish-brown and yellow sandy soil with thin vegetable cover and with post and bluejacket oaks as the predominant timber growth. 5.1.2.2 The Grand Prairies, The Grand Prairies extend from the vicinity of the Brazos to the Red River., This region is a strip that is narrower than the Black Prairies and is situated between the wooded county of the sandy Eastern Cross Timbers and the wooded strands which are characteristic oL the sandy lowlands to the west. The Grand Prairies are underlain with "hard" li-mestones which are more resistant to dissection and erosion than are the "soft" less resistant member, underlying tho "lack Prairies region, Because of these features of resistance to erosion, the Grand Prairies have been referred to as the "hard-rock" prairies. 5.1.2.3 The Eastern Cross Timbers, The Eastern Cross 'l'imbers consist of a rather narrow strip formed on the outcrops of the geological formation known as the Woodbine Sands. The region is a dissected belt characterized by woodlands of post.-oak and blackjacket oak. The variegated surface produced by dissection ',s comprised of three major- elements. There are steeper slopes that are erosional and have shallow soils. The moderate slopes have deeper soils that generally are suitable for farming. Deposits of fine textured materials occur along, the lower port,,)ns of the larger slope:; of the region. These deposits support almost pure stands of post-oak, and these areas arc often called "post-oak flats," 5.1.2.4 The Black Prairies, The Black Prairies region is developed on Cr.eLaccous materials of shales, limestone, marls, and limey clays. Because of the increasing width of outcrops of these formations, the width of the region increases northward so that [n the vicinity of Dallas the region is more than three times as wide as it, is where crossed by the Colorado River. The Black Prairie.; are characterized by widely rolling,, gently undul.at- ing areas associated with i.ts Low altitude and slight. elevation in conjun c- Lion with the features of the outcropping geological materials and the stage of dissection which prevails Lhroughout most of the region, 5-2 71, 5 , 1.3 TO 30&ra Il The topography throughout the basin is predominantly gently rolling, varying from brokf,!a prairie in the northern and northwestern portions to level or rolling with some rough land along the lower reaches.2 5.1.4 Climate The climate In the project area is temperate, with hot summers and cool winters. The mean annual temperature in the watershed is about 65.5 F, with January having an average minimum daily temperature of approximately 34 F. July has an average maximum daily temperature of approximately 96 F. The average length of the growing season is about 226 days. The mean annual precipitation over the area is about 31.6 inches. 5.1.5 Geology The --ock strata supporting the project area consists of sands, clays, mi.rls, and limestones that belong to the Cretaceous age. All of thes„ strata dip gently toward the Gulf of Mexico. The regional. clip of the bedrock is greater titan the slope of the land surface., causing progressively younger formations to be exposed from the northwest to the southeast across the watershed. Flood-plain deposits of clay, silt, sand, and gravel are found along the bottornlands of the Elm Fork and its tributaries. These deposits are about 45 feet. thick at the damsite. 't'errace deposits, remnants of ancient flood-plain fills that were left standing high in relief after streams cut. their paths successively deeper into rock, border the Elm Fork and Isle du Bois Creek over it portion of Lheir course. These deposits probably reach it maximum thickness of about 35 feet. Formations that crop out iu the reservoir area include, in descending strati_graphic sequence, Recent alluvium, Pleistocene terrace deposits, the Woodbine formation, the Grayson marl and Main SLre et limes Lone, the Pawpaw, W0110, and Denton formations, and the fort WorLh limestone. 5.1.6 Soils the rna,jor. soils associations that occur within the project area include, from west to east, the Crockett-Wilson and lleiden-Purves, the 'trinity, and 5-3 the Galey-Crockett and Galey-Freestone-Truce. These soils associations define areas that are suitable for a certain kind of farming or other land use. The Crockett-Wilson soils occur in the western arm of the proposed Ray Roberts Lake at two locations: upstream from the right abutment of the dam and in southern Cooke County. The level to gently sloping areas are domi- nated by deep, loamy soils with tight clayey subsoils that are well drained to somewhat poorly drained, medium acid to neutral, and have high shrink- swell properties. The soils of the association are used mainly for pasture- land and cropland. The Ileiden-Purvey soils will border the western portion of the reservoir in northern Denton County. The area. if; characterized by gently sloping, well-drained, calcareous clayey solids ied mainly for rangeland and cropland. They do not have the high shrin swell character- istics of the Crockett-Wilson soils. The T riuity soils are the nearly level bottomland soils that occupy the flood plains of the Mai Fork and Isle du Bois Creek. The calcareous, clayey, somewhat poorly to moderately drained soils were formed in deep textured alluvium washed from the higher-lying uplands. Flooding occurs one or more times each year unless the area is protected. The soils are used primarily for pastureland and wildlife. The areas between the blur Fork and the Isle du Bois Creek and cast of Isle du Bois Greek are characterized by soils of the Galey-Crockett and Galey-Freestone-Truce Associations. These are areas of gently sloping, we'/-I to moderately well-drained, slightly acid, sandy loam soils that occupy rolling hills on outcrops of sandy numbers of the Upper Cretar,.co.+.s formations, primaTA ly the Woodbine formation. These soils are used mainly for pasture and urban. land. They generally support a heavy growth of oak timber and brush. 5.1.7 Vegetation There are no sizable areas within the Elm Fork watershed which could be considered natural habitat uninfluenced by man. in the Cross Timbers, the better soils are under cultivation, and a large amount of remaining 5-4 land is rangelartd.l Predominant rangeland grasses are little bluestem (Andropogon scoparius), sideoats grama (Bouteloua curtipeodula), switch- grass (Panicum virgattun), Canada wildrye (Elymus canadensis), hairy grama (Bouteloua hi.rsuta), tall dropseed (S orcbolus riper), and Texas winter- grass (Stipa Leucotricha). 't'ress that are found in the area include post, blackjack, and shinnery oaks (uereus M^), mesquite (Prosopis_ juliflora), juniper (Juniperus spry.), and pecan (Cara illinoensis). Mach of the original climax grassland has been invaded by brush as well as weedy annual and perennial grasses such as hairy tridens (Erioneunon pi,losnm), Texas grama (Bouteloua vij~idiseta), a red grama (B. trifida), red lovegrass (hragrostis ox s), windmill grass (Chloris verticellata), and tumble grass (Schedonuar.dum pani.culatus). The Grand Prairie is essentially a tall grass region with dominant grass species including big bluestem (Audropogon gerardi), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), and Indian grass (Sorghastrum nutans). Juniper, mes- quite, and weedy or undesirable grasses and f,orbes also have invaded this primarily rangeland region. The Blackland Prairie was a true tall grass prairie which for the most part has been converted to crop production. Original tall grasses were big, and l.i.ttle bluestem, Indian grass, switchgrass, sideoats grams, hairy grama, tall. dropseed, Texas wintergrass, and buffal.ograss (Buchloe dactyloi.cics). Some of the most ecologically significant habitat within the project area are stands of bottom land hardwoods that. are associated with the Trinity River Basin. The greatest species density occurs in these areas which represent some of the largest undisturbed natural riparian IrabitaL avai:l.able. These area,, are characteristic of the Higher levels of strcccs- sion that occur in the drainage, These forrested areas exist pri_mari..ly because of Lhei.r nearness to rivers, streams, or reservoirs, tive vegetation of these bottom lands include hardwood fore.sLs of lrecan, American elm, willow, cottonwood, walnut, box elder, sycamore, bar oak, hackberry, and green ash. Uplands and ,Lopes support numerous stands of blackjack, post and live oaks, hackberry, honey 1PCltst', and persimmon. Typical ground cover consists of native Forbes and vines. Burning and 5"5 overgrazing of some slopes and uplands have permitted the invasion of bloodweed, broomweed, Cocklebur, and Johnson grass. 5,1.8 Wildlife There are more than 40 species of mammals that are known to ocr;ur within the project area.3 The only significant large game species found in the county is the white-tailed deer, preferred lcabitat of the deer is clearest or partially cleared edges of bottom land or flood plain forests, Smaller mammals that are found in the county include raccoon, fox, beaver, mink nutria, gray and fox squirrels, jackrabbits, cottontail. rabbits, and a variety of small rodents, Data concerning population densitici and distri- bution of these species in the project area are not available, Texas has thr greatest diversity of avian species of an}, state in the, nat:ion.4 The Mississippi flyways pass across portions of the Trinity Raver Basin, and over 540 species of birds are known to occur as residents or transients of tine area. Lewisville and Grapevine lakes, aml the Trinity k River and associated tributaries provide valuable resting, feeding, and nesting habitat., Bird game species most frequently lrunte;d are morning cloves, bobwhite quail, and various species of duck and geese, Wild turkey ar<! occasiona~l.ly found in bottom land areas and in undisturbed habitat along tributary drainage, Various species of frogs, toads, salamanders, snzlies, turtles, and other amphibians and reptiles also occur in the project area.5 5.1,9 Water Quality The I:lm Fork of the Trinity River is a source of water for municipal suppli,!s to Dallas and adjacent, cities. As a result., Elm Fork has beers closely monitored to det°rmine its suitabili~y for domestic water supply,' Phy:oplaukton counts as high as 8,926 cells per m.'ililiLre have been observed at the Lake Lewisville outlet, and samples generally contained a predomi- nance of diatoms. Green algae constituted the major portion of the remaining phytoplanAIon groups. There! does not appear to he any historical data on aquatic miccrophvtes in the Um Fork of the Trinity River. 1)ata c;vr,cerning macro invertebrates are limiLOd to a study in 1950 which identif.tel numerous members of the 5-6 order Gphemexopter.s (mayflies), gentsially indicative of good water quality,7 These organisms are an important component of the aquatic food chaa.n because they convert plant tissue to animal tissue and are consumed by a variety of predators. Dater quality monitoring stations are operated by the US Geological Survey at four streamflow gaging stations. The City of Dallas also formerly operated a water monitoring station at the outlet of Lake Lewisville, A summary of water quality data obtained from these five stations intermittently from 1969 to 1978 are suramari.zed on Table 5-1. The water quality generally is good at these monitoring sites. 5.1.10 Fisheries Resources Studies made of the Elm fork between the City of Gainesville and the confluence of Elm. Fork and Clear Creek indicated that the two most abundant fishes present were red shiners and bullhead minnows.2 The most important sport fishes present were channel catfish (lctalurus punctatus), flathead catfish (Pylodietus olivaris), white bass (Morone chysops), sunfish (several - species of Lepomis), and largemouth bass (Mi.crop terus_ salmoides). From collections made in the smaller trib,,,tary streams of the reservoir site, the most abundant species present were shiners, mosquito fish, and green sunfish. The most important sport fishes present were channel catfish, sunfish, largemouth bass, spotted bass (Micropterus punctulattus), and white crappie (Pomoxis annularis). Important commercial species present were carp (Cyprinus cario), carpsuckers (Corpiodes carpi.o), and ong-nosed gar (Lepisostells Os Sells From collections made in the smaller tributary streams of the reservoir. :;iLc, the most abundant species were shiners (several. species of NoLropis), mosquito fish (Gambusia affinis), and green sunfish (Lcpomis cyanuellus). The commercial species present were black bul'l.head (letplurus metal), and spotted sucltcr (Minytrema melano)s). 5.1.11 Threatened and Endangered S I'here are several species of animals potentially present in the project area that are considered as threatened, endangered, or r.are,8 They are the red wolf, gray wolf, red--cockaded woodpecker, the American peregrine falcon, 5-7 ,^-ii i'-i 3.m'•yTll TIj TABLE 5-1.. SURVACE WATER QUALITY* Location Ca M$_ Na HC03 S04 CX F _ NO3 PO4 D.O. AOD 11 Elm Fork 80 6.5 70 270 41 79 0.3 1.5 0,5 9.4 1.9 7.7 't'rinity River, near Sanger Denton Creek, 81 10.5 27 253 54 30 0.3 0.5 7.3 near Justin isle 'du Bois 57 12.1 62 141 56 109 0.4 1.5 6.9 Creek, near Pilot Point Outlet Lake 56 4.6 30 141 39 0.6 8.1 Lewisville Little Elm 5B 4.2 7 124 i4 5 0.4 0.6 - 6.9 Creek, near Aubrey "All values expressed as mg/1 except pH. ~ Source of data: US Geological Survey, 1.978. _~r the southern bald eagle, whooping crane, artic peregrine falcon, and the Aanerican alligator. The exact status of these species within the project area is unknown, but it is possible that they are present, or may migrato through the area. 5.1.12 Cultural Resources 5.1.1.2,1 Historical Sites. There are no sites within the project area listed in the National Register of Historic Places,9 Of the approximately 140 structures that will. be affected by the construction of the flay Roberts Lake, only one appears to have been built before 1890.2 It is the Mammon's house which was built in the 1850's and is architecturally unique. Twenty other structures appear to have been constructed between 1890 and 1.910. About half of these are unoccupied, and several are badly dilapedated. Generally, the structures in he project area are in a greatly deteriorated conditiou. There are no state historical markers in the project area, 10 5.1.12.1 Ar.chaeolcvical Sites. There are 26 recorded archaeological sites within the limits of the proposed reservoir,2 The sites range in size from small concentrations of lithic debris, marking the location of intermittently used tool manufacturing locales, to large village ,ites which were occupied repeatedly during the Archaic and Neo-American periods. The types of activity sites recorded included quarry sites, mussel shell gatiaerisfg sites, and hunting camps. During the construction of the Lewisville Dam on the Elm Fork, signif- icant archaeological finds were uncovered during excavatinn activities. It is possible that similar finds may be discovered during the construction of the Ray Roberts Dram. 5.1.13 ftecr.eation The lakes in the vicinity of the proposed Kay Roberts Luke receive, heavy recreational use by the urban populations in the Dallas-Tort Worth area. The U.S. Corps of Engineer lakes were constructed primarily for flood control purposes. Tor recreational use:, there are raot enough access areas, picnic areas, swimming beaches, and only limited camping or rental. services. 'Pile increasing urban population has imposed a severe strain on the existing lake facilities to meet the recreational demand. 5-9 w 1, I 5.1.14 Other Features Land in the Ray Roberts Lake area is used for agricultural, mining, services, commerce, and manufarturing industries, and for roads, utilities, residences, and farmsteads. Cooke and Denton Counties in which the proposed Ray Roberts Lake site and its drainage area are located have experienced a significant growth in population during recent years. This trend is expected to continue because the area is within the sphere of influence of the rapidly expanding Dallas- Fort Worth metropolitan complex. Denton and Gainesville are Lite two prin- cipal. cities in the vicinity of the proposed project. 5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Generally, the environmental conditions described in Section 6.0 serve as a basis for assessing potential impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed hydroelectric project at Ray Roberts Dam, 5,2,1 Construction Im acta On March 31, 1911, the Forth Worth District Eti,ineer issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) concerning the construction of hydropower penstocks at the Ray Roberts facility. It wab concluded that the construc° Lion of the penstocks would not have any significant effects on thee natural or man-made envir.onnuents; the construction would not involve tile diticliarke of any dredged or fill material in waters of Lite United States; and no endangered species or their habitats would be affected. The construction of the powerhouse and associated facilities should have essentially no envirnnmental impact.. The hydroelectric generating unit. wi.ll constitute only a fraction of the total Ray Roberts project ronstroct.ion. Water w~i11 he routed from the downstream end of the five-foot diameter i low-flow pipe, through the turbine, and into a short. tailrace channel. 1'he. tailrace will- merge with the outlet works diversion canal just downstream f't~am Lite st.illinp, basin, Since Che low-flow pipe and diversion canal are part of tite dam and reservoir project, Lite only construction for tote hydro-- electric generating unit will be the !tifurcati.ort and piping from the low- flow pipe, the powerhouse, and the channel leading to the diversion canal.. 5°1Q .17 77 e. The generating unit will bi constructed essentially within a small portion of the total, project construction area. `!'here will be no discharge of dredged or fill material, and water duality will be unaffected. No threatened, :endangered, or rare species will likely be impacted by the hydroelectric project. The Texas Historical Commission (the Commission) has pointed out that there are numerous archaeological sites present in the Ray Roberts project area. It. appears that the hydroelectric facilities would be within the dam and reservoir construction limits, and that any archaeological sites present would be impacted by the lake project with or without the hydroelectric facilities. To make a definite determination of any known sites that potent.ia1.l.y could be affected specifically by the generating facilities, drawings showing the locations and extent of the planned hydroelectri, unit have been provided for the Commission's evaluation. 5.2.2 Operational impacts The proposed hydroelectric project would operate with nonflood flows normally released from Ray Roberts Lake for alternative uses. Operation of the generating unit would not impact the planned flood control., water conservation, or recreation of the lake. Water, releases would be controlled by an agreement made between the City of Denton, the City of Dallas, and the U,S. Corps of I;ngineer.s. The cities, will endeavor to request releases of water impounded in Ray Roberts Lake ill such a manner and of such a volume that there will he a continuous minimum outpouring through the conduit- into Lhe I?lm Fork of Lhe Trinity [Uver. From the t.i.me "he impotinding of Ray Roberts bake begins until the lake is falf N11, the minimum conservation storage release will he d o, ermined by the following montlil.y release formula. Minimum Monthly (Monthly rate per following x (Maximum obtaived Release table, storage) Half full storage After the lake reaches half full and thereafter, the minimum release will average 15 cubic feet per second (CFS), or 1.0 million gallons per day (MGD), apportioned to monthly rates as follows. 5-T1 77 { Month_ CFS MGD January 12 8 February 18 12 dat'ch 30 19 Apr, i.1 25 16 May 39 25 Julie 22 14 July 6 4 August 3 2 September 5 3 October 6 4 November 7 5 December 7 5 In the event of the extreme drought conditions so that the total storage in bot.li Ray Robr;r.ts and Lewisville Lakes becomes depleted to about 300,000 acre feet., with a small part of this storage being in flay Roberts Lake, the two cities retain the right to release all the water remaining in Ray Roberts Lake into Lewisville Lake. After all the water is released from Ray Roberts Lake and as long as the drought continues, the natural flow of the channel. (at Ray Roberts Dam) will. not be impounded in flay Roberts Lake, but will. be permitted to flow freely down the channel to Lewisville. 'I'll(! Corps of Engineers will endeavor to release water in such a manner that the flows will be continuous rather than sporadic or slugged. I'lle Corps also will attempt. to release water from Ray Roberts lake at such rates of :increase or decrease that will conform to the nritural hydrograph for comparable flows. The operation of the hydroelectric facilities will have no effect oil this plan of water releaser. Denton, Dallas, and the Corps of Engineers will control all water releases according to the agreement described. Access by fishermen to the Ray Roberts Lake wilt not be. affected by the planned hydroelectric facilities. Any plans for recreational areas will not be influenced by the generating unit, 5-12 . .W Y- f Any impacts on the waters or fishery of the Elm Fork will result from the spills and scheduled releases of water from the lake. The generation of electricity will he an incidental occurrance of such water discharges, 5.2.3 Conclusions There do not appear to be any environmental constraints which would preclude the construction of the proposed hydroelectric generating facili- ties at the Ray Roberts Dam. 5.3 REFEREMES 1. Johnson, F.. Il., "The Natural Regions of Texas," The University of Texas Bulletin No. 3113, April 1, 1931, 2. U.S. Corps of Engineers, "Final Environmental Impact Statement, Aubrey Lake, Elm Fork, Trinity River, Texas, U.S, Army Engineer District, Fort Worth, Texas, January 31, 1974. 3. Hurt, W. 11,, and R. P. Gros senheider, A Field Guide to the Mammals, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1964. 4. Oherho'Lser., If. C., The IIird Life of Texas, Uni.versi.ty of Texas Press, Austin, Texas, 1.974, _ 5. Conant, Rober, A Field Gnide_to Reptiles and Amphibiarin of Eastern and Central North America, Houghton Company, Bonton, 2nd Edition, 6, Nortlr Central "texas Council of Governments, The 1977 Annual Water Quality Planagcment_PIan, January 1975. North Central Texas Council of, Governments, Arlington, Texas, 1975. 7. I. W. Santry, Inc., Consulting L;ngs'neers,., Den ton Coil nty Rural Water and Wastewater Plan, North Central Texas. Council of Governments, Ar1i.agton, Texas, 1975. I 8, U.S. Fish and Wi.l(i, c Service, "Republications of the Lists of VAidaugered and Threatened Species and Correction of Technical Errors in Final Rules," Federal Regi.vter, Volume 45, No. 99, Ttresdav, May 20, 1980. 9. D(,pdrtment of the Interior, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service) Nat -.nal. Register of Ilistor.c- Places, Feocral Register, V,)iume 41+, No. G, Tuesdfly, February 6, 1979. 10. Texas lli.storical. (:ommission, Guide to Official Texas flisLori. caI- Plarkcrs, 1975 Edition, P. 0, Box 12276, Austin, Texas 7871il. 5-13 i I rari.r.r: ' t 1?~ 6.0 LEGAL/REGULATORY The construction and operation of non-federal hydroelectric power facilities are under the jurisdiction of the federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), The Federal Power Act of 1935 established this federal authority to assure that private hydropower developments were designed and operated to achieve optimum use of water and power resources committed by a project, License acquisition requires filing an application with FERC which conforms to regulations and which allows FERC to determine if the project meets statutory requirements 6.1 LICENSE FOR A MINOR WATER POWER PROJECT Under recently adopted rules, the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project would be licensed as a minor water power project. A minor project is defined in the rules as one with a generating capacity of 1.5 MW or less. A so-called "short form" application for license has been developed for such water po-4er projects. The number of required exhibits has been seduced from seven to three. Those three exhibits include an environmental report (Exhibit E), a set of project drawings (Exhibit F), and project maps . (Exhibit G), Although the permit application now requires fewer exhibits, a rather comprehensive environmental report is still necessary and about 18 months are still needed to obtain a license. Consultation with Federal and state regulatory agencies continues to be an integral part. of the licensing pr.c,cess, and the estimated review time of the application is nine irt.nths. Details of a license application schedule is given in Section 7, page (later). The Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project is not eligible for exemption from licensing because it will be located at a federally owned facility. 6.2 U3 CORPS OF ENGINEERS PERMIT The Corps of Engineers regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material. into waters of the United States under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. It will be necessary to file an application for a permit. The information in the application will enable the Corps of Engineers to deter- mine if a Section 404 permit will be needed for the proposed Ray Roberts project. 6-1 + 'fay )Fp , '-17hS 6.3 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR While no actual permit in required from the Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency is authorized under several statutes and executive orders to assure protection and enhancement of the fish and wildlife resources impacted by a proposed project. Requirements, including those for threatened and endangered species, specified by the Service usually are ia:.orporated by FERC as conditions of the license. An applicant for license should initiate and maintain communication with appropriate offices within the Service to innure that the project and license app}.ication are responsive to the fish and wildlife needs specified by the Service. 6.4 TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT There is no permit required from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, however, consultation and concurrence with the agency is necessary. The Parks and Wildlife Department particularly is concerned about any potential impacts on fish, recreational activities, and the operation of the Lewisville State Dish Hatchery. 6,5 TEXAS HISTORIC COMMISSION Consultation with the 'texas Historic Commission is required to icicntify any potential impacts on cultural resources. No formal permit is necessary. 6,6 OTIM? STATE AGENCIES Thera are no foreseen state regulatory constraints to the proposed i project because of its limited nature. This, conclusion will be verified during the consultation process required to prepare the FJ''HC license appli- cation. I PrT .}!1' r -T)i-•-,~ ,i r~~~ ern ~fdi c Q i" lJ~ ` 7.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 7.1 INTRODUCTION The development plan for the Ray Roberts Hydroelectric Project consists of all activities required for facility licensing, design engineering, construction, and start-up of tLe facility. The construction schedule for the Ray Roberts Reservoir Project allows the use of a low risk development plan for the hydroelectric project, while providing, time to complete the hydro facility prior to completion of reservoir filling. The project schedule consists of four major elements, (1) Time required for environmental. assessment and the time to actually prepare and submit the FERC license application. (2) Time required for FERC to approve and issue the license assuming that the preparation by FERC of an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. (3) Time required for final design and procurement of long lead tfmv manufactured components. (4) Time required for facility construction. Paralleling these schedule elements is the overall. project inanagement and control activit%,. 'Of these schedule elements, the time required for FERC approval is beyond the direct control of the developer, although the time can be reduced to the extent possible by providing a complete application with full docu- mentation and by constant coordination with FERC and other agencies prior to the application submittal. Because 11ERC approval is net guaranteed, any project development done during the review period represents a possible cost exposure. The Ray Roberts Reservoir Project schedule allows a minimum risk development plrtn without jeopardizing completion of the hydroelectric project by the time the reservoir would be filled to an elevation allowing hydro operation. No hydroelectric design or procurement activities have to be performed prior to receipt of the FERC license, The initial schedule element requires the completion of the FERC license application prior to 7°1 expiration of the preliminary permit in May 19£33. No other activities are anticipated for up to three years following that submittal. 7.2 ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES Two possible development strategies wers. considered and evaluated. Each represents a different level of early cost exposure and final project cost. For each strategy, the time required for each of the schedule ele- ments was determined based on experience and the realities of the project. (1) Application preparation requires 9 to 12 months. This time length is primarily controlled by the time required for agency response and coordination. Actually expended time is expected to be only two or three months. (2) Based en discussion with FERC officials, FERC license review time is unlikely to be less than 6 months with 8 to 9 months being a realistically conservative time estimate, (3) Final design and procurement should begin at least 12 to 14 months prior to construction with 14 months being a valid planning estimate. Turbine manufacture should begin at least 10 months prior to installation. 0 (4) Construction in the field will require 8 to 9 months for full commercial operation. Construction work cannot begin before the license is issued. (5) Project management and control should precede final design and procurement by three months. The two strategies ore outlined below. Stragegy 1, Initiate licensing activities in March 1982, to coordinate with Lewisville Hydroelectric Licensing Activities, with license submittal by March 1983. Proceed with final design and procurements by November 1.983 to ensure that construction can be completed with completion oi: the major embankment structure. Strategy 2; Like Strategy I but delay final design and procurements until March 1986 to allow timely completion of hydro facility witl filling of the r^servoir.. 7"2 .I Table 7-1 shows the estimated interest paid prior to operation, and the total investment for each strategy. Strategy 1 is burdened with a large interest expense while the completed hydro facility sits idle, waitinj, for the reservoir to become adequately full to provide the minimum head required for operation. Strategy 2 is the recommended development plan, Initiation of design, procurement, and construction activities should be responsive to the construction and reservoir filling schedules of the Ray Roberts Reservoir Project. 7.3 MAJOR ACTIVITIES There are five activity areas included in the development plan. (1) Project Planning and Control.. (2) licensing and Permits. (3) Design Engineering. (4) Major Procurements. (5) Field Construction. Figure 7-1 shows the organization of the major activities. 7.3.1 Project Planning and Control Project planning and control activities would be initiated at the start of the project and continue throughout the development. Specific tasks would include the following. (1) Project schedule control--A detailed project schedule will be developed and used ai; the basis for schedule monitoring. The schedule control is essential so that the development can accom- modate any delays in licensing cr the major component procur.enxmt and delivery process and still meet the scheduled completion date. The schedule will be updated periodically, (2) Project procurement control--The procurement management effort will begin with a specific procurement schedule of specification issue dates anti contract swards. Based on Denton contracting practices, a procurement procedures will be p ubli.shed to servo as a guide to the procurement process. The procurement procedures will be the key component to the development of the commercial 7-3 TABLE 7-1. AVALUATIOH OF DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES Date of Interest Commercial Prior to Total Strategy Opezation O~ ration Investment $1.2000 $110' Initial licenaing--hydro June 1988 11209 5plI4 completed with embankment Initial licensing--Hydro June 1988 538 41854 completed with reservoir f it ling AlEstimated date for partial reservoir tilling adequate to allow hydro operation, it I I 7-4 7 PROJECT PLANNING AND CONTROL SCHEDULE CONTROL PROCUREMENT CONTROL COST MONITORING PROJECT INSTRUCTIONS LICENSING AND DESIGN PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PERMITS ENGINEERING VENDOR SURVEILLANCE LICENSE APPLICATION GE07ECHNICAL EVALUATION yr LCE AND STATE AGENCY DETAILED DESIGN BIDDERS LIST DEVELOPMENT SURVEYING AND MAPPING INTERFACING MANUFACTURERS' AND BID SOLICITATION AND FIELD COORDINATION OF EVALUATION CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS' DRAWINGS CONTRACT DOCUMENT INSPECTION OF WORK AND DATA REVIEW PREPARATION FOR CONFORMANCE VENDOR SURVEILLANCE AND START-UP AND INITIAL EXPEDITING OPERATION ORGANIZATION OF MAJOR ACTIVITIES FIGURE 7-1 i specifications and will establish Denton preferred terms and conditions. Project procurement control responsibilities will also include the monitoring of procurement packages and, in coordina- tion with the design engineer's tasks, vendor surveillance, and quality control monitoring. (3) Project cost monitoring--The detailed cost control effort will begin with a budget estimate and a work breakdown which will be used for a baseline cost control document, as it will identify the costs associated with each procurement and construction package, These budget estimates serve throughout the project for performance measurement. Detailed cost comparisons, as they are determined, would be reported as deviations (plus or minas) from the bul'get estimate. Cost control reports will be published periodically using estimated and actual costa to project total expenditures and cash flow. (4) Project Instructions--A project instruction procedure is a key control feature which would be developed in consultation with Denton. These instructions will serve as a guide for project coordination. 7.3.2 Licensing-and-Permitting The licensing and permitting activities include all tasks heeded for the preparation of applications for a FERC license, and other Federal, state, and local agency permits and approvals. The licensing management effort would also involve the iglmodiat.c contact with the various Federal, stale, and local regulatory ageacics. This contact is essential to insure that all requirements are satisfied and to expedite the licensing and permitting process by avo:idinq, the need to resubmit exhibits or provide. additional information. This also avoids connnuni.cations delays. Discussions with TF,RC have :indicated that resolution of state agency amounts and Corps of Fjigiueer concurrence prior to License submittal are essential to an expedient license review. 7-G I i i L- After submittal of the applications, the license and permit activity would monitor progress and support needs for testimony or additional evi- dence as well as interfacing with design engineering and construction management to insure that the environmental safeguards are observed. 7.3.3 Design Engineer.iu The design engineering effort would consist of the design engineering leading to specifications, design drawings, and the detailed civil design, The first work would be to obtain more detailed data than was available for the initial study, by employing subcontractors for the surveying and mapping and geological investigation and borings. The second activity will include the detailed engineering and prepara- tion of the technical requirements specification for the turbine generator and the detailed civil structure design. The final design for the power- house will depend on the specifics of the turbine generator. 7.3.4 Procurement The procurement activity includes the typical activities listed below. (1) Planning and preparation of the procurement package specification, (2) Selection of qualified and acceptable bidders. (3) Submission of specification to acceptable bidders. (4) Coordination during the bidding sequence. (5) Participation in vendor presentations. (6) Formally dor.umenLed evaluation of proposals received. (7) Preparation of contract and purchase order documents. (8) Administration and coordination of contract regtri.rements. (9) Monitoring and surveillance of contracts, Lo i.ncl.ude the follow- ing. (a) Quality assurance audits. (b) In-plattL inspections. (c) Witnessing of performancc tests. (d) Performance unde=r contract, including expel .Ling. (10) Processing and distribution of vendor document submiLtals. (11) Contintiati.on procurement of spare parts. (12) Documentation of changes. (13) Payment control as required. 7-7 The major procurement package would be the turbine generator which would probably be a furniolt and erect contract to a joint team proposing for both the turbine and generator. A long bid evaluation time is included as a part of the procurement effort for the turbine generator. This time is essential to evaluate the expected alternative offerings, All study cost estimates and turbine selections were based on preliminary manufacturer's estimates. Until firm price bids are available it would not be in the best economic interest of Menton to finalize the turbine selection, 7.3.5 Field Construction Field construction would commence about nine months prior to the date expected for the achievement of adequate reservoir filling to support hydro operation. 7.4 PROJECT ORGANIZATION The project organization for the total development is shown on Fig- ure 7-2, This organization is consistent with the primary activities. Each element of the organization has certain specific responsibilities for the proj,act. (1) City of Dento-a--Project administration and financing, final deci- sions on major design options and contract awards, major procure- merits, and disbursement of funds. (2) Project_ Mar►ager--The project manager would be immediately respon- sible to the client for all aspects of the Project. 3 Managing Pro,ject_l'sn ineer-'1'be managing project engineer provides the day-to-day coordination of all personnel assigned to the project. (4) Le al environmental Coor.din,,tnr--The legal-environmental coordi- nator is responsible for the preparation of all license and permit appl.icat.ions, and ~i.rcct interface with licensing agenciev, (5) Design Engineering tlanagr.r--1'hc design engineering manager is responsible for performance of all detail engineering work, including supervision of l3eotechnical investigations, detailed design, and preparation of ;anal drawings, 7-8 I'.\ .ry r s.:t rr v ~4i. ` to ,r; n ,it ~~r, r _l-1. 'Ile e t CITY OF DENTON PARTNER-IN-CHARGE PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT CONTROL N GINO PR JECT ENG NEE LF.GALIENVIRONM':NTAL PROJECT ENGINEERING PROCUREMENT CONSTRUCTION COORDINATCR MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT ~a DESIGN OFFICE SITE RESIDENT LAWYERS EHGIHEEPS PROCUREMENT ENGINEERS ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICIANS STAFF TECHNICIANS SCIENTISTS DRAFTERS SCHEDULER PROJECT ORGANIZATION FIGURE 7-2 (6) Procurement Manager--The procurement manager is responsible for all phases of the procurement, bid evaluations, and vendor sur- veillance activities. (7) Construction Manager--The construction manager Is responsible for the construction management and start-up activities. This requires the de-ailed control and coordination of the several major and minor construction contracts to insure schedule and cost control, and satisfy the need to protect the environment during the con- struction work. 7.5 DEVELOPMENT SCIM)ULE Figure 7-3 is a development schedule, showing the initial breakout of major activities. Project commercial operation date is June 1988, with initiation of licensing in March 1982 and engineering in March 1986. The key schedule elements are listed on Table 2-3. 7.6 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT BUDGET AND CASH FLOW The project budget would be developed by activity, procurement compo- nent, and individual construction contract as a part of the project manage- ment and control activity. file estimated total construction cost and investment requirement is shown below. $1.1000....... Direct Costs--Including Escalation and Contingencies 2,116 Indirect Costs Including Escalation and Contingencies 742 Subtotal. 2,858 Net. Interest During Construction 538 Total Construction Cost 31396 Bond Tee 124 Reserve Fund 584 Totai 13onded Amount (1988 4,104 Corps Reimbursement 750 Total Investment (1988 41854 Rased on t(re schedule shown on Figure 7-3, an initial cash flow for the total, project including an estimated contingency allowance and escala- tion at 10 per cent has been developed and is shown on Table 2-3. Tlie cash flow may be modified based oil actual contracts. 7-10 I I r itl ~.r 1 l RAY ROBERTS PROJECT SCHEDULE 1882 1883 198y 1885 1988 1887 1988 _ 1989 COMPLETION DEVELOPMENT Of RAY ROBERTS OF DAN _Mood DAN RESERVOIR FILLING HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT 8 LICENSING I APPLICA'f10N AND AGENCY MEETINGS 4 FERC REVIEW B A DESIGN r r TURBINE-GENERATOR ? 3 CIVIL WORKS B A TRANSMISSION/DISTRIBUTION MECHANICAL/ELECTRICAL A23 R 5 6 PROCUREMENT TURBINE-GENERATOR CIVIL CON'RACTOR I CONSTRUCTION B A 5 6 7 r r r INSTALLATION STAR]-UP R ~ KEY; B - SEND SPEC IfICATION FOR 810. 4 - RECEIVE LICENSE, BOND SALE. A - AWARD CONTRACT. 5 - RECEIVE EMBEDDED PARTS. R - RELEASE CONTRACTOR FOR MAJOR WORK 6 - RECEIVE TURBINE. TURBINE FABRICATION OR START OF CONSTRUCTION). 7 - FACILITY OPERATION. I - SUBMIT LICENSE APPLICATION. 8 - PRELIMINARY PERHIT EXPIRATION. 2 - RECEIVE EMBEDDED PARTS SHOP DRAWINGS. 3 - RECEIVE OTHER SHOP DRAWINGS, DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE FIGURE 7-3 7-11 • I 10 I APPENDIX A POWER SIIIUI,ATION A-1 r a rtr'.;... ;.;~•,j n.Y S'A',:r .:rr r x r s- r ~e a., `*~FUn T w. ><y,..E• 4bt+s')krs'71 e'.G` 1,` 'C"jl , f`A.y u, 4 5 7 SJ G 1 fs t a r 7'N11 r !"W' 1 x a ~I i p. Jt~ d ti e 4 xr * IT I 4 " , +r r h.! h~r~' f<, r9r f. i k 3 i ~ :1~ t 1 r 4~!4~1 W',t r .Y 4 i ..ii i} i5 4 1 2~. r r-. rtt l aJ. ,r ` 'i-- ~3i. ~ .f 1 •ar~+ RK a.ri~ DATA 111.181 PF66 04 y 0CN1 G1% , TvYAS RAY ROHTRIS HYDRO F+LACR E VEPTCR CONSU1.11hG Ef.G1NL£RS rraoJFCT 44 S2.OC1 _ _ OPEkATING SIMULATION TYPE 0$ 7URUINE FRANCIS NUR6ER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER.. DIAMETER _._(MM): 675 r AVERAGE MONT$ILY CONDITIONS FOAL _ _DNAI - T SPILL TAILNTER UNITS FLOW PLANT ___y EAR MONTH Et£VAT10h RATE RATE FLEVA710 - - - - N GROSS HEAD OPFAATING PFR UNIT NE7 NEA9 OUTPUT GENERATION CFS C-FS FT MSL. FT CFS.__.."- - -fY - - - _KY---- AWNS 1920 JAli 6?2.5 1?~. 95A. 53P.4 94.1 1 1326 92.3 980. 729. . 100,2 134 -9b.3__-----1085.__ 729. r 3 1920 532.7 4 1 r. 1920 MAR 632.4 132. 87. 532.8 9966 1 43 97.8 70 3. P83. 1926 APR 632.3 132. n. 532.2 140.1 1 532. 98.3 1058. 762. 19 Z0 -MANY 632.3. - - 132.----_1907e_.__... 89..1..___ 67.3679! 192v" JUN 672.5 192. 2% 532.4 10001 1 132. 98.3 1059. 762. 1920 JUL 6'2.4 132. 0. 532.2 100.1 1 132. 98.3 1059. 788. .1920..._.,. AUG-- 632.4 Vjlt. - 67-.---- 532.8 99.5 ; 132. 97.7------1052. 782. _ 991 1920 S1E 63295 132. 820. 537.6 94.9 1 132. _ 93 1 743 1920 OCT 672.5 132. 485. .535.5 9700 1 132. 95.2 1018. 758. 1920.. NOV - 63632.5 _132_._._38.5;32.5 10040 - 1 132. fB.2 1057. 761. - i z. 1047.-- r - -1920 DFC i. . S 1 z_.- 51. .,33... 94.2 1 13z. 714. 9027. 1921 JAN 632.5 132. 487. 535.5 97.0 1 132. 45.2 1019 758. _ _ , ` 95.1 _ 1017. 683 1921 FED 6.2 _ .5 1. 2. 501, 53..6 G.9 1 132. 1921 MAR 632.5 132. 94. 532,9 99.6 1 132. 97.6 1053. 783. 1921APR .5 1112.___ 537.0 _ 95.5 - 13?. 93.7 999. 719. 1921 ?AY 632.3 172. 0. . 7. . 96.3 8 78 537.2 100.0 1 132 105 1921 JUN 632.E 132. 0. 532.2 99.8 1 132. 98.0 1055. 760. 1921 JUL 131.6 13i.. 0, _ 532.2 _ 99.4 1 132. 97.6 1050. 781. 1921 _t 532.2 98.6 1 132. 9G.9 104b. _ 774. 1921 SE P 532.97.8 1 132. 96.C 1029. 741. 1921 Oct 629.i, 1'L. _ 53?.2 97.0 1 132. 95.2.., 1018! 757. 1921 NOV a2FN.5 172. 0. 532.2 96.3 1 132. 94.5 1009. 7260 2.2 95.8 1 132. 94.0 1003. 746. 1921 DFC 62P.1 132. 53 sFF233 9016. ♦ k'. )oiP ?f,`r;;r ^r P'.S- l... ~m:~ la xr Cr.i},+ ro.r rF r".i.. F.;y I:. ..F+i?\. r,~ '4' 4 i t F , i ,r. A , rf ~ ®r",.., r l i t A 2 M .r.. .00Ak WE 111181 VAB 4 , Ile DENTOKip TirAS kAY RONkRTS HYDRO _ _ _ _ _ ULAC6 6 VEATC11 CONSULTING ENGINEEkS PROJFCT 9432.002 OPERATING SIMULA710h TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS NUI'UEA OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER-_DIAMETER ~(MM) 675 o AVERAGE MONTHLY CONDI71ONS___._..---,---...----.-_--_- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _POOL DRAfl SPILL_ TAILWATER UNITS FLO_N _ PLANT O10 HATE RATE ELEV_ATION GROSS HEAD Ot'ERATING_- PEfl UNIT NET HEAb~ OUTPUT GENfAATIOti 'i YEAR MOh~TH Elf'JAT1'60-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -..-r ' FT PSL _ CFS...__ _.__C.F_SFT--PSL -FT -CFS____ FT K-'w ~YYHS ^i 1924 JAN 627.7 172. `32.2 95.5 1 132. 93.7 998. 743. FFU_ _ 1772" 532.2 - --45_.2. 1- - -132 -----93 4 -----994.- - - -----668. >j _ 93.0 989. T36. 1922 MAR 627.0 132 . C. 532.2 94.7 1 1320 "I 1922 APR 628.5 132. 0. 532.2 94.3 1 132. 94.5 1009. 726. r 1922 - M AY 631 .4 -132 • - 119. 533.1 98.3 C 0.2 - 1 1 13232. ' 96.5 - 1036. 771 . 1 JU h 6.32.5 1' 2 . 0 - . _ 5 32 . 2 98.4 1059 763 922 1 1922 JUL 6..1.2.0 1 6. 532.2 99.7 1 132. 97.9 1054. 784. --_-_192-[ AUG _611.1_-..._ _-1'2_. 4•-_____-- _%3.2.12 ..__98.8 1. 132.---_----97.0 1042._------- 776. 742. 1922 SEP 630.2 172. 0. 532.2 97,9 1 1329 96.1 16314' 192Z OCT 629.5 132 C. 532.2 97.2 1 132. 95.4 1022. 760. 1922 NOV ---629.21.3.2_. 0. 53262. 96.9 1 _.152•_--__ 95.2 1018. 733. - 1922 DEC 628.9 1'.2. C. 532.2 96.7 1 132. 94.9 1014. T55, - 6 4 5 6 . 1923 JAN 41 1 C. _ 537.2 96.3 1-- 1_3.21 9ti.'5_..- 1009.•-.._.. 751. 1923 IF. I; 62•!.4 }3i.. 532.2 96.2 1 132. 94.4 1008. 677. 1923 T°i AR 628.3 132. P. 532.2 96.0 1 132. 94.2 1006. 74E. 'I 1923 Ai'R 62 .6 1. f 532.2 95.7 1 132. 93.9 1002. 721._ 1923 MAY 627.5 112 . 532.2 95..2 _ 1 132. 93.4 995. 740 1923 JUr. 627.5 1'2 532.2 95.2 1 132. 93.4 995. 716. 192; JUL 027_." 1 532.2 95.1 _1_ 13.2. 93..3, _ 993. 739. 19 1 ntr c,Ze 112. C. 2.Z 94.1 i 152. 9L.4 981. 730. 1921, SEP 625.0 5:12.2 Q~.4 1 132. 91.6 970. 698. 1923 u[ t 2 „4 1 , ' . 532.2 93.2 132. 91.4 966. 720. 6 . 1923 Nov 6?5.5 112 C. 532.2 y3.2 1 132. 91.4 969. 697. 1921, DEC 625.E 17L. 532.2 93.o 1 132. 91.8 973. 724. _ 8663. 4 ~,•."i'I;rj '~t ;m AV°M$~1 ~i I Gt'~1 a 4l. ,rn. a .111 i.d y f 1 i:... ~1r (`f Jt ii pE~' Y v i Y t. l . DATE 11t1tA1 PAG g. I DEN7114~ TL'RAS RAY KOHLNTS HYDRO DLACY. R VEATCH CONSULTING LNGINLEfS PROJECT S43i..;C-? OPEPA1114C SIMULATION TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS NUMBER Of UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM): 675 AVERAGE MONTHLY CONDITIONS POOL DRAFT SPILL-"_-T.IILRATER. U141.7S _ FLOVl~ --_PLANT- YEAR MUNT11 ELEVATION RATE PATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION _ ^ FT_MS1.- _ C.ES_ C-f_S- _ FT MSL FL .I_,_ _ _CFS.°----- Y - -KU -MlfHS,.....__.. 1924 JAN 626.iL 132. 3. 532.2 93.9 1 132. 92.2 9780 728. ' 1924 FED_. 62 136. ..5.37.5._. _93.7 - - 1 -------13,6. - 91.8 - - - 1001. - ---673. _ 1924 MAR 626.5 132. 532.2 94.3 i 132. 92.5 983. 731. k 1924 APR 627.4 132. G. 532.2 95.1 1 132. 93.3 993. 715. 1924 MAY- --0.- - 532.2 9510 - - - 1. - - -132_• 9.3-'- -992.__. 738. - - 1924 JUN 626.6 1 532.2 94.4 1 132. 92.6 984. 708. 1924 JUL 625.7 132. 0. 552.2 93.4 1 132. 91.6 971. 7236 1924_ AUy. -624.7 - 1_'52. _....C.... 532.2 1 132_ - 9G.7 959. 1924 SEP 624.4 1.T2. C. 532.2 91.7 1 132. 89.9 948. 683• { 1924 OCT 623.3 132. 0. 532.2 91.0 1 132. 89.2 940. 699. 1,_924.._._._N0V- ---622.6 - 132.---- -0•-- 532.2..- 90.4.- ---1- 132• - 88.6 930. - 670. 1924 DEC 622.1 132. C. 53202 89.9 1 132. 88.1 924. 688; __cssa 8169. 1925 JAN 621.8 132. 0. 532.2 89.5 1 132. 87.7 919. 684. 1925 FfP 621.5 132. 1 `32.2 89,0 1 132. 87.2 913. 613. 1925 YA;4 6?C.5 1326 532.2 B8.3 1 132. 86.5 903. 672. 1925.__ APR it, 24. 1 '2_. 212--_-- A7.8 --._._1. 132. 86.0 897.--._....._. 646. 1925 MAY r,2'1.U 112. 0. 532.2 87.8 1 132 $6.q 897. 661.-- 1925 1UN 619.0 132. 1532.2 87.3 1 131. 85.5 892. 642. 1925 J'IL _61h.4 _ 1'l. 0. 532.2 86.2 1 130. 84.4. 872... 649. 172, Ab 617.4 1'2. 53;.2 85.2 1 130. 83.4 855. 636. 1925 SEP 61 b.7 132. 53;.2 84.4 1 129. 82.6 841. 606. 1925 OCT 61C. 1'.2. t. 532.11 1 129. 82.1 833. 6?0. 532.2 83.6 1 128. 8108 828. - 596. 1925 NOY 615.9 112. 1925 DEC 615.3 132. 532.2 R3.0 1 128. 81.3 818. 609. 703D. • a 2, ~ 11 {v r ,i r1 t Y~ I , , DENTDhp TLxA~ RAY RONFRTS HYDNO BLACK K VEATCH CONSULTINCt FNGINLERS PROJECT 9432.002 OPLRATING SIMULATION TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS NUPO ER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 T,UR-dIN,E_RUNNER .DIAMETER _ (MM):675--_---. AVERAGE_ MGNIHLT . _ _ 1 _ POOL GRAFT _ SPILL _-_TAILWAIER UNITS FLOW _ __PLANT - - - YEAR MONT{I ELEVATION RATE RATE_ ELEVATION GFOSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT .HET HEAD QUTPU~- ^BENERATiON F1 MSL - CE-5 CFS_ - fT MSL FT_.__ -CFS x11-.__ --RUNS. 1926 JAN 015.0 112. 532.2 82.8 1 128• b1.0 8130 605. 192E F_f-H_•_ --_614.7__-- 1''2. -'f - 532.2 - 82'5--- - ? °°----127. 80.7 809. 543 1926 MAR 614.4 132. 0. 532.2 82.2 1 127. 80.4 803. 597. 1926 APR 614.6 132• 0. 532.2 82.3 1 127. 80.6 806. 580. -1926` MAY _615_.1 1_32.•.. 0•-- 532.2..__._,._... 83.0 1 - 128• - .8-~.3... 818. 609._.. 1926 Jlrn 614.0 1'?. 532.2 83.8 1 728. 82.0 831. 598. 1926 JUL 617.4 172. U. 532.2 85.2 1 130. 83.4 855. 636. ' 1926 _..AU4--- 618.6 - -112- G'-- - -532..2 -86.3 1 - - 130. 84.5 874. 650. 625. -1426 SFP 618.2 132. 0. 532.2 86.0 1 530. 8402 869. 1926 OCT 618.0 132. C. 532.2 85.7 1 130. 3309 864. 643. • I'( 142E NOY_-- --6-1,7.6.. 1-1-2' 0' - - 532. 85.4 - 1 - 130. 858. 63.4- 855. 618 636. ' tYZe bEL 417.4 132• 0. 537... 85.2 1 130. ROIISRe 7341. I 1927 J-AN_ 61,7..6 1.326 0. 532.2 85 .4 1 _ 13.0 83.6 _ 858. 638. 1927 FF[I ti?-2 132. 512.7 __P6.0 1 130. 84.2 868. 583. 1927 MAR (.1 J.8 1!2. 0. 51.2.2 87.6 1 131• 85.E 896. 667. 1927 APA 621.6 132. C. 532.2 F9.3 1 132. 87.6 917, 660. . -1927 MAY 622.4 1''.2. 0. 532.2 40.2 1 132. 884 4 928 690. 1927 JUN 622.2 112. n 53242 90.0 1 132. 88.2 926. 666. 1927 JUL__ 622.0 _ 132. 0,. 532.2 89.7 1 132.' 8840 922. . 686• 19,-7 Pil( 527.2 89.3 - 152 P7.5 916. 681- 1927 SE!' 62).; 1'-2. 5'?7.2 2°8.5 1 13?. 86.7 906. 652. 1927 UCT t7..5 117• 532.2 _ 88.3 1 132. 86.5 903. 672. _ '3 .2 88.1 I - 232. 1427 NOV G20..i'1c. 86.3 90O 648 1927 DEC 620.5 1 C. 532.2 Y8.2 1 132. P, 6.4 902• - 671. 7916. t r f+r: I 7 S t t .r w m, . PiSS f~tS i GE12 DATE 1'11181 PA rr+rr fiR, yyrrr ' c_ DENTON, TEkAE RAY RObLRTS HYDRO BLACK K VL'ATCH CONSULT1hG ENGINEERS OPPROFRJF.ATCITNG 44 S'iZ.OC2 IMULAT101` NTYPt UMBERFOF TURBINE UHITS ' FRANCIS INSTALLED 1 TUR61NE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM) 675 + AVERAGE MONTHLY CONDITIONS ,I _ POOL DRAFT _SPILL TA1L%.ATEP. UNITS_ FLOW- - - --P_L_ANT - , YEAR MONTH _ ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION -F_T-MSL C-FN CF,$- - fT NSL FT Crs FT_... KW- IVHS 1928 JAN 620.7 132. 532.2 68.5 1 132. 86.7 905. 674. ,I 9 t FfL, 6?0.5 176. 532.3 88.2_ 1 132. 86.3 905. 608. - 1928 MAR 620.1 132. 0. 532,2 87.8 - 1 132. 86.0. 897. 667. +.I 1928 APR 614.8' 132. 0. 512.2 87 .5 1 131 • 85.7 895. 645. 1928 . MAY - 61,9.8... 132)x- C'- 532.2 __..87.6. 1- 131. - 850.6 896.-- - 667. 1925 JUN 620.1 132, 2.2 87.9 1 132. 86.1 897. 646. 1926 JUL 620.1 132. 532.2 87.8 1 132. 86.0 897. 667. 1928 Atlb___ 619.5_.. 1,32.•_- 532.2 87.3 1 131. 85_5 890. 662. .0. 532.2 86.5 1 131. 84.7 877. 632. i 1928 SFP 618.7 132. - 1928 OCT 618.1 132. 0. 532.2 85.9 1 130. 8401 867. 645. 4 1928 NO_V_- 617.6_,,_.__ ..__1.3.2 . 532.2 85.5 1130. 83.7- 860. 620. 532.2 85.5 1 130. 8347 860. - 644. ~1928 OFC 617.6 1'Z. T772• 1929 JAN 617.9 132, C. 532.2 85.7 1 130. 83.9 863.642. _29 FEH 1 8 172 532.2 85.6 1 130 838 $62 579 ...._..47. . 1929 rAh 617.6 132. . 532.? 85.4 1 139. . 83..6 858. . 638. 1929 APR 617.2 132._, 532.2 _ P5 U 1 129. 83.2 851. 612. 1929 MAY 618.7 53 ?.2 86.5 1 131. 84.7 877. 653. 1929 JUN 610.3 1'.2, r, 532.2 88.0 1 132• 86.2 900. 648. 1929 JUL 619.6 _ 131, 0,__ _ 532.2 __8/•(, 1 131. 85.6 892. 664. 1929 r,u(: 618 6 132. 532.2 26.4 1 131) 84.t, _ 875. 651. 1429 SLP C-17.f 2. 537.2 85.6 1 138. 83.8 862. 620. 1929 OCT 617,a 1°2. 532.2 85.1 - 1 _ 1290 83,3 853. 6'25. , 824 8_. 844. 608. ~ . 2 84 . 6 1 142 l Z v I,oV t16.d 1 1929 DfC 016.6 1::2, 0 . 532.2 84.3 1 129. 82.5 840. 625. _ 7575. ' DA1E 111481 p A, 14 DEhTOhi TLXAS RAY ROB EPiS IIYDR0 BLACK & VEATCH CONSULTING FNGINLEIzS -PROJECT 9432.0C2 _ OPERATING SIPULATION TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS NUNUER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE_ RUNNER ,_0_1A_ME7£R_..(MM)_t 675----__.__ I,I AVERAGE_ MONTHLY COt DITIONS„__-- ~i POOL _ URAfT SPILL TAILWATER UNITS FLOW PLANT t--- - - _ YEAR MONTH ELEVATION RATE. RATE ELEVATION GROSS NEAO 0PERATINfi PER UNIT NET NEAR OUTPUT GENERATION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FT_ MSL_ C) S CFS FT 10SL _FT CFS- FT KW,---.. M1rHS 193 JAN 016.1 1?2 532.2 94.1 1 729. 82.3 835. 621. 143 FEU 615..9.-- _1v2x 0. 532.2 ---83.6 1... 12(1 81.8 828 556 - 1930 MAR 615.4 1?Z. 0. 532.2 83.1 1 128. 81.4 620. 610. 1930 APR 614.8 132. 0. 532.2 82.5 1 128. 8047 809. 583. 1230 -MqY- 615.6 -1'1._ 0. R_3•.4 .__1 ---12g• fl1'6---- --5x4. _ 613. ,~---1935 JUN 616.5 132. C. `12.2 84.2 i 129. 82.4 838. 604. 1930 JUL 615.5 132. 0. 572.2 83.3 1 128. 81.5 822. 612. 1931 AUG 614.51724 `32.2 82.3 1 127. 80.5 805. 599. - 1930 SLP 613.6 D. 532 .2 81 .4 ; 127* -`------74.6 790. _ 569. M 1930 OCT 613.4 132. 0. 532.2 81.2 1 1270 79.4 787. 5F>,. 1930 NOV 6-13.7_ 1.32.x... Ox 532..2 81.4 127.-- - -.79.6 791. St.4, 1930 DEC 614,0 132, 532.2 81.E 1 127. 80.0 7970 SY . 7114, 1931JAh___._ _ _...614.2 132. 532.2 82.0 1 127. E0.2 794. 595. 1931 FCN 614„ 1''Z. C, 5!2,2 f32.1 1 12'1. 80.3 801. 538. 1931 MAR 614.9 132, 532,2 82.7 1 128. 8004 812. 6C-4. 1931 APR 615.2 132. " 532.2 P2.9 1 12R 8102 816. 558. 193}..,.___ NAY 6 4.9 112. 532.2 82.7 S 128. 84.9 811. 604. 1931 JV% 614.2 132. C 532.2 G2.0 1 127. 80.2 800. 576. 1931. JUL_ 613.4 81•_2_... 127. 79.4 786. 5850 19?1 Alu, x12.5 1.~2, `?2.2_ _8d.3 7eC. 78.5 _ _ 772.._. S;.i, 1931 Sts' e11.5 172. 532.2 79.3 1 125. 77.5 755. 544, 1931 uCT 61;.9 1'L. ,2 78.7 1 125. 76.9 745. 554. 1931 hoV 610,6 132. C. fs2.2 78.3 1 125. 16.6 740. 533, 1931 0 F C 610.2 17". 532.2 78.0 1 124, 76.2 734, 54A. I e ~"2T h l ~f ~~i t 'j tr t ~yt rn. v1~ yl j ! ra y r •S,{' 1•t t r :r"tn :r •st rk. DATE t11'1N1 PAGE 16 Av A4 p~ DENT014 TtXAS RAY RONERTS HYDRO BLACK $ VEATCN CONSULTING ENGINLERS > PROJECT 9432,002 rT OPFRATIAG SlMUiA'F10N TYPE Of TURBINE FRA NCIS _ NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNEP. DIAMETER (MM): 675 ,I • - - - - AVERAGE MONTH L Y L_O f1 D 17 IONS _ _ " _ POOL DRAFT___ _SPILL _TAILWATER __--------_------_UNS-TSFLOW ---T-_---PLANT YEAR MONTH -ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERAT14G PER UNIT HET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION - - - - - t _ .I---- F-T NSL--- CFS --CFS_-.__.. 4_FS fT- - KW - ---AYHS 1932 JAN 613.2 1 C. 532.2 8.0 .9 1 126. 79.1 782. 582. - ..__1932 - FFH 618.1 17t.. n' 532..3.,..,...- ..._._R5.8 _ 863. _ 580 1932 MAR 6?0.0 30. 0. 531.5 8805 1 30. 8804 0. 0. 1932 APR 619.9 25. C. 531.5 86.4 1 25. 88.5 0. 0. 1932..__._MAy_ - ---619_.8 13Z• ----.-Q•...._. _._532_,?_.._..._.._._-87.6_-.._.... - 1 -Z31..`---- 85-.8. 896 667. 1932 JUN 619.6 12. C. 532.2 87.4 1 131. 85.6 893. 643. 1932 JUL 619.6 12. n. 53 87.3 1 131. 85.5 892. 663. 193[ AUb 0.1.9._3 - -1_1_2• 532.?__,..- - 87.1 - -----1 - 131'------85.3 887. 660. 0. 532.2 86.3 1 130. 84.5 874. 629, a~ 1932 SEP 618.6 132. 1932 OCT 617.9 132. 0. 532.2 85.7 1 130. 83.9 N63. 642. 1932-____-- NOV 617.2 132. 4. 532.2 85._01 129. 83.2 851. 613 1932 DEC 617.1 172 532.2- - 84.9 - 1 i29. 83.1 849. 632• 6311. 1-933 JAN -61-7.5 - 1'2• C. _532.2 __.-85.3- 1 130. - -R3.5 857. 637. 1933 FfD 617.b 132. 5'_2.2 R5.3 1 130. 83.5 857. 576. 1937, rcN 61B.O 132. P 532.2 A5.7 1 130. 83.V 864. 643. " 1933 APR 618.4 172. 532.2 86.1 1 130.. 84.3 d71. 627. 1933 MAY 8 172 C. `.32.2 86.5 131. 84.7 878, - 653. 1933 JUN 618.8 112. 532.? 86.6 1 131. 84.8 879. 633. 1933 JUL 618.0 132. C. 532.2 85.8 1 130. 84.0 865. 644. 19.", AUb 617.5 17~ 0, 532.2 85.3 1 130. 83.5 856. - 637, 193? SEP 616.9 1"2. " 532.2 84.7 1 129• 8?.9 846. 609, 193: UCT t,1b.:; 112. 532.7. 84.G 1 129. 82.2 834. 621. 1931_ NOV b1l~ .6 1 532.2 83.3 t 128. B1.6 823. 593. 1933 01C It 15,G 132. 532.2 82.8 1 128, 81.0 813. 605. 7477, r ~b• t~'~A'', .r i h~ j~ij r, s {ji; i i ,art i { ( P ° V s IPa• 77 7 ✓ ~d~l *1kA A 14P DAYS 111181 PAGE 18 "I'll, , 0444, DE NTOt,1 TL'YAS RAY VOOERIS HYDRO BLACK K VEATCII COIiSULTING FNGINLERS PROJECT 94_32.002 OPENATING SIMULATION TYPE OF TURI3INE f R A N C I S NUMUER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 _TURUINE RUNNER DI.AMEIER (MM): 675 - AVERAGE MONTHLY COrID_STIONS - - POOL DRAFT_ SPILL TAILWATER UNITS FLOW _ PLANT _ -OUTPUT GEkERATION r YEAR MONTH ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERAT-LNG PER UNIT NETHEAD _FT. MSL--- CF -S _CF.S FT_ NSL F7 LFS - f7 X11 RYHS- r - - ' 1934 JAN 014.6 1'r.. n. 532.2 82.3 1 127 80,5 8045. 600. 1934 FLU _ x14.3_.__. 132• i. 532.2 82.0 1 127. SO.a 801. 538. 80.4 803. 598, - 127. 1934 PAR 614.4 1' _'2. 0. 532.2 82.2 1 1934 APR 614.8 132. 0. 532.2 82.6 1 1245. 80.8 810. 583. 1934 MAY 4.14_.9 1?2•- - 0. 532.2 82.6_-..__... t - -128' 8008. - - -Bill _ 603. 1934 JUN t14.2 1 ^ 532.2 81.9 1 127. 8U.1 799. 575. 19'4 JUL 612.8 132 0. 532.2 80.6 1 126. 78.8 777. 578. I 193. AUG 611.5 1.'2. 53.1..2 79.2 1 125. 77.4 754. 561. _ . - - _ _ - - - - -530 1934 SEP 610.4 132. C. 532.2 78.1 1 125. 7663 736 75.5 7224 537. 1934 OCT 609.5 132. 0. 532.2 77.3 1 124. 1934 NOV_._ 60-9•8T?Z_• 532.2 76.5 1 124. __-__---_---74.7 710. 511. - ; - 532.2 -76.G--- -1 74.2 701. _ 522_.-.. 1934 DFC b0t. 1.c. 6735. 1935 JAN 6(7.8 132. 0. 532.2 75.6 1 123. 73.6 695. 517. }93~ FFU rt7.6 1:'2. C. 532.2 75.3 1 123. 73.5 691. 464. 1935 MAk tr7,3 13 Z . 532.2 75.0 1 121. 73.3 686. 511. 1935 APR 6(7.L 112. 532,2 74.8 1 123• 73.0 683. 491. 1935 May 612.3 132, 0. 532.2 80.0 1 1245. - 78.2 767. 571. 1935 JUN 61M.8 22. ! 531.5 87.4 1 22• 87.4 0, 0. 88.5 1 6. 68.7 _ 0. 0. 1935 JUL 611.9 6. C. 5111.1 143`_ AU, 611, 13L', 0. 532.2 .°7.c 1 131. 85.2 686. 659. 1935 SFF t1R.7 1-'2• 532.2 86.5 1 131, b4.7 877, 631. 1935 OC1 o18.6 1'-2. 532.2 P6.4 1 13^. 84.6 875.__ _ 651. 1935 r,OV 618.5 132. 5?2.2 86.3 1 130. -84.5 873. 629, 19,15 DEC 619.2 112. 532.2 87.0 1 131. 85.2 885. 659. 083 > r. .~.SaT, t{...,~.C„^'iiF7Tt'1`'pr ;,rer as nYU. ;1:.~'~CF .m -.jx 1"rsryl4n.. 'T° x 1 Y ly. y.'c: yr ~m{r ;r "rrn. .n;zPt}r ~,~inr. ~~~~t fir t r qr[. r 1 i % r r _ 1 1-~ 9 1 t C . 'l~•~ 1'{' 7 tER !h'r r'1 1 r x ? 1 1. ! 1 e 1 . 1 A++kk 1 ` DATE 111181 PA6E 20 DtNTONI TEXAS RAY HOE+fkTS }+Y DR _ 0 BLACK 6 VLATCH CONSULTIN(i ENGINEFRS PROJECT 9432r.G^2 _ I.N.G SINUL.A_T_I_-ON TYPE 0'A TURBINE. FRANCIS OPERATP NUMHf.R OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINI..,RUNNER DIAMETER ;.(MIA)-. 675 AVERAGE MONTHLY CON DIT_IONS r-- _ POOL _ _ DRAFT SPILL TAILWATER _ UNITS _ FLOU PLANT li TEAR MONTH ELEVATION RATE - RATE- ELEVATION GROSS HEAD- OPERATING PER UN17~ NET 14EAD - ^OUTPUT GENERATION FT MSL CFS- CFS _-FT, MSL FT -CFS_ _ FT KN MM 1936 JAN 619.7 13i. 532.2 87.4 1 131. 85.6 893. 665. 1936 Ml - 619.3 - -176. 5.-1.2_•3 ..._87.0 1- 131. - -85.1 ..._884.594._..-. 1936 MAR --618.7 132. C. 532.2 86.5 1 130. 84.7 877. 652. 1936 AVR 618 .0 132. 0. 532.2 85.8 1 130. 84.0 864. 622. 1930 Yg{ - - 7.4 1JZ! - 532.2 _ 85.7..._ 1 ----1-34'--- - 83.9. -863. 642. __41 ^532 85 .5 .2 83.7 860. 619. 1 130. 1936 JUN 617.7 1''2. 1936 JUL 616.7 17 2. `32.2 84.5 i 129. 82.7 842. 626. 1936 AUG 615.6____---------172., 532_.? 83.3.__-------- 1.28. 81.5 822. 612. 1936 SEP 616.1 1i2. 0 532.2 83.8 128. 82.0 831. 599. 1936 OCT 617.7 1 0. . 532.2 85.4 1 130. 83.6 859. 630. 1936----__-__NOY-__6.17.9 -132.._-____-- -11 532.2 85.7 1 130. 83.9 863. 622. C. - 3~. 83.7 859. 639. 1936 DEC _ _ 17.3-- 1 x32.2 85 .5 1 130. 753?. 1937 JAN 617.9 _ 13.2_'_. __.0. 532.2 85.7 1 130. 83.9_..____..... 863. - 642• 1937 FFb b18.0 132. 532.2 85.8 1 13C. 84.0 865. 581. 1937 VAR 617.8 132. C, 532.2 85.6 1 130. 83.8 861, 641. 1937 ark 617.5 132. 532.2 _-85.3 __.1 13^. 83.5 956. 617. 1937 MAY 616.8 11e. 532.2 84.6 1 127. 82.8 844, 628. 1937 JUN 616.2 1'2. ^ 53:'.2 84.0 1 129. 82.2 834, 600. 1937 JUL 615.6 1:12. 0. 532.2 _83.3 1 _ 128. 81.5 823. 612. 1937 AUG c14 .P. 1T ^ s32.2 82.5 1 +~Y. 80.7 809. 602. 1937 SE'Y 613.9 1532.2 81.7 1 127. 79.9 795. '172. 1937 OCT C13.i 1'2. C. 532.2 80.9 1 126. 79.1 782. 582. 1937 NOV 612.6 1?1. S. 532.2 80.4 1 126. 78.6 774. 557. 1937 DEC 112.6 172. 0. 532.: 80.3 1 126, 78.5 772. 575. 7209. r7r v.., ~^7. ~ N n n,TSF'2 . /?T r t . 11..,,,T tf 4f .M ~3. • 5C t, ~YS t'¢:. ST'7n,.F, , ~ ~ YT.. ,f 1 . ..K.'S t` fN .]Y95f .t S.'~Iir iFi ^~'T.. ,4'$,. e.i,..r ~'1t1 c ~tmT 'F. s N'kr DATE 1111t`81 PA6 2z a DENTONr TEXAS RAY ROSIPTS HYDRO OLACK B VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT 9432.02 OPERATING SIPULATIOi - -TYPE OF 'FUROINE FRANCIS NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED i TURBINE RUNNEN_DIAKE7ER (mm): 675 ,i AVERAGE MON7HLY CONDITIONS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - POOL_ DRAFT SPILL_ T_AIL_W_ATER UNITS _ FLOW _ PLANT -I YEAR MONTH ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERA7IN6 PER UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION - - - - - - - - - - ---FT MSL-- --CFS CFS FT_ MSL FT CFS FT ------KW - _-_MYHS - - 1938 JAN 613.5 172. 0. 532.2 81.2 1 127. 79.4 787. 586. 193b FFPi 616.1 Ill. C. 532.2 83.8 1 128. 831 . 559. 1938 MAfi -62G.0 132. - - - 5- -32-- 2 - 8 - --82.x 99. 6'. 0. . A7. 1 132. 0 899. 669. 1938 APR 622.1 13'2. 0. 532.2 89.9 1 132. 88.1 924. 665. 1938 MAN _ _...__6z2'Q------ 0. _._532.2 89.7 1 - _1.~.2~ .4--- - 922. -----684.. 1938 JUN 621-.5 1 2 . G. 532.2 89.2 1 132. 87.4 915-. 659. 1938 JUL 62,v.8 132. C. 532.2 88.6 1 132. 8618 907. 675. 1938 AUG 619.9 172 C. 532.2 87.7 1 131. 85.9 897. 668. SEF 618.9 130^ 84.9 880. 634. 1938 . C. 532.2 86.7 1 131. 1938 OCT 1 137. 0. 532.2 85.8 1 130. 84.0 866. 644. _63.4 .6541 615. 1938 _ NOV 617 .4 132. 0. 532.7 8542 1 129• 1938 DEC 616.8 132. I. 532.2 84.ti 1 129. 82.8 844. 628. 7686. 1939 JAN 615.4 132. 0. 532.2 8441 1 129. 82.4 837. 623. 1939 f.Fl.. 616.J 132. 5322 83.8 1 12P. 82.0 831. 558. 1939 P.Ak 616 . 0 172. 532..2 83.7 1 128. 81.9 829. 617. 1939 AFk 616.4 112. C. 532.2 84.2 1 129. 82.4 837. 603. 1939 FAY 61f..4 132. 0. 532.2 84.2 1 129. 82.4 831. 623. 1934 JUN 615.8 132 1. 0. 532.2 F3.5 1 128. 81.7 826. 595. 1939 Jlit, 614.4 132. P. 532.2 82.7 1 128. 80.9 812. 604. 1939 AU6 61!.9 1' 532.2 61.6 1 127. 79.8 794. 591. 1939 SIP 612.9 1l2, f. 532.2 60.6 1 126. 78.8 777. 559. 1939 OrT 611.8 112. C. `.32.2 79.6 1 125. 7'7.8 760. 566. 1939 NOV 611.1 172. C. 532 o2 78.9 1 125. 77.1 749. 539. 1939 LEC 610.5 1?2. 532.2 78.3 1 125. 76.5 739. 550. 7027. . r~;pc r u~11`~F•, ( .nF 4'`~I tt J l;! ~'-T:t~ rr ea, j. iwf. 1 i 1.' 1 + Y° ..n li Ii 1lrf l + ? t r lr r1 +1.'r+ i. trr 777 77% 11 1. '..11 .:.1 ~~r.. F. i+ DATi' 1i~}E1 1'Afi~2'4 DEN)")'Nj Tt,XAS RAY k04c TS 11 YONO OLACK Z VEATCH CONSULTING L1.GINLFkS PROJLCT 9472.092 _ OPERATING SIMULATION TYPE OF TURBINE NUMUER OF UNITS INSTALLED TUP81NF RUNNER DIAMETER (MM): 675 AVERAGE_ MONTNLY_ CONDITIONS _ POOL_ _ CRAFT SPILL TAILWATER UNITS_ FL01_t____ _ PLANT _ YEAR MOATH ELF VA TIOft~ RATE _ RATE - E L E _UA710k _ ~ROS5 HEAD OPERATIN6 PER llNIT HET HEAD- - OUYF'UT 6EHERATION FT MSL CFS CFS FT MSL fT CfS FT xv 11YHS 194C JAN 616.0 112. 0. 532.2 77.8 1 124. 76.0 730. 543. 1940 FFH 4n9.5 136. 532.7 77.3 1 124. 7544 720. 484. 1 940 MAR 6 0 48.8 132 4. 532.2 76.6 1 124. 7 4 8 7 11 52 9; 1940 APR 608.9 1'2. 0. 532.2 76.7 1 124. 74.9 713. 513. _ 546. 1944 YA.Y 610.2 13`' - 0! 532.2 78_.0 - L - 124. 76.2 734. - - - 8.1 765 . 194C JUN 612.1 1'2. C. 532.? 79.9 1 1 7 26. 551. 1940 JOL 613.5 1?2. 532.2 81.3 1 127. 79.5 788. 586. 1940 AUG 613.3 132. 532.2 81.0 1 126. 79.2 784. 583. 1940 SEP 612.2 - 132. 532,2 80.0 1 126. 711.2 766. 552. 1940 Oct 611.2 132. 4. 532.2 78.9 1 125. 77.1 749. 557. .1940 NOV 611.4 132. _ 0. _ 532.2 79.2 1 125. 77.4 - 753. 542. 1946 4e[ t13,2 1?2. d. 532 .2 P1.0 1 12A. 79.2 784. 583. -6570. 1941 JAN 61/.3 132. 0.__..__ _532.2 82.0 1_ 127.__-_-_-- 80.2 8.01..596, 1941 FEI3 614,4 1 7. 532.2 82.7 1 128. 80.9 811. 56°,. 1941 mAR 615.7 112. C. 532.2 83.4 1 128. 84.6 824. 613. 1941 APR _ 07.1 132. C. 532.2 84,8 1 129. 83.0 848. 611. 1941 MAY 618.7 19. P. 531.6 87.2 _1 39. 87.0 0._. 0. 4941 JUN 622.E 1'.2. 532,2 90.5 1 132. 88.7 933. 672. 1941 JUL 626.3 6. 0. 531.3 94.9 1 6. 95.2 0. 0. 1941 ALAI 112. 532 93.6 1 132. 91.8 973. 724, 1941 3FP 6?.`+.1 7T1. C. 532.2 92.9 1 132. 91.1 964. 694. 1941 OCT i.?5.1 1112 0. 532.2 92.9 1 132. 91.1 964, 717. 1941 NOV 625.6 1"2. 0. 532.2 93.3 1 132. 91.5 970. 698. 1941 DEC 625.4 13Z, 0. 532,2 93.2 1 132. 91.4 968. 720. 6590. r t . e ,l .°i r f r v, r, **i*w DAYS ~111P,1 PAQE Z6 . t 0EI47nf, Ii YA° AA1' NO$;CRTS HYDNO BLACK & VLATCH CONSULtI&C ENFINLfRS PROJCCT 9432.,;02 OPEAA1114G Si"'ULATIOte TYPE Of TUROIbE FRANCIS NU"UfR OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURD114E RUNNER DIA14E7-ER1MM3,t 675 AVERAGE. MONTHLY- COND,IT10N5__~_~_~-_~-- POOL___ DRAFT _SPILL,._ -TAiLSATER_ UN)T5. FLOW PLANT i! YEAR YoNIH ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UN17 NET HEAD OUTPUT GENfRAT10N - - - - ^..M _ _ _FTN5L - CFS_._.__.._C-F.S FT NSL F? CfS.- FT _KY_.. _ MWHS 1942 JAN 075,1 1?2• 532.2 92.9 1 132. 91.1 964. 717, - 19-42... _ Ffl 6?4.e 172•. c- 532.._2 2-'5 132. 90.7 959. 644. 1942 MAR 674.3 132. 0. 532.7 92.1 1 132. 90.3 953. 7090 1942 APR 628.3 132. 1090. 539,1 89.1 1 132. 87.3 914. 65 5. 1 _ 132 ------~.9----- -t0i4. - 754. v 19.40 MAY _ 632.5 13 11. `36._ 53:.8 -_96•7 t 2 95.4 1022. 736. 447. 53.,3 97.2 1 132. N 3 2 . 5 1 . 1942 JU t. 1942 Jut. 63.0 132. 0. 532.2 99.8 1 132. 98.0 1056. 785. 1942__...._ Al' .__61.112- - 1-7 • ^ 532.2 99.0 1---- 1.32. - 97.2 - 1045. - 777. 1942 5 - 630.0 132. Q. 532.2 98.4 1 132. 96,6 1037. 747. 1942 OCT 030.4 132. 0. 532.2 98.2 1 13Z. 96.4 1034. 769. 1942 NOV 132' .__.___.9• _ . _ 532.2_ _ 98.0 1. -132 - 96.2 --1_031. 743. 1942 DEL 630.u 132. 97.7 1 132. 95.9 1028. 765. 8805. 1943 J AN 629.7 132. C. 537,2 97.4 1 132. - _ 95.6 1024. 762. 1943 FFe- G79.2 1320 532.2 97.0 1 132. 95.2 1D18. 686. 1943 MAP 629.5 172. 532.2 970E 1 132. 95.5 1027. 761. 1943 APf: 63( .0 _ 172. _ 532.2 97.5 - --1 132. 96.0 1029. 741. 1943 M A V 610.4 132. 0. 532.2_ 98.2 1 132. 96.4 1034. 769. 1943 JUN 630.8 132. C. 532.2 98.5 1 132. 96.7 1038. 748. 1943 ,1 UL 630.2 132. 0. 532.2 97.9 1 132. 96.1 _1030. 767. 1943 Ar,0 629.(, 13l. c. 5.1 2.2 96.8 1 132. 95.0 1016. 756. 1943 ;t r' 628.1j 1'2. 532.2 95.8 1 132. 94.C 1003. 722. I' 1943 oCT 627.. 172. C. 5 2.2 95.1 1 132. 9313 994. 739. 1943 NOV 426.P 132. T. 532.2 94.5 1 132. 92.7 986. 710. 1943 OFC 626.4 112. 532.2 94.2 1 132, 9Z.4 981. 710. I i "'f' S tC"aT. 'i,+;~ f d + , v r rTc~.t r it +r > a s r rC r qv, . P7 et Y i d J! A N'' ( st c. f. fw ,pt +~}1- ~ t4 DATE 111181 PA628 RAY ROBEPTS UYOkO CLACK B VLAICIr CONSULTING CNGINECRS PROJECT Q4?Z.7.02 TYPE Of TURBINE. FRANCIS OPERi.' If+G SIMULATIOM NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER_DIA,METER_ (MM): 675 A-VE RACE- M O N 7 H 4 Y„ _C 0 FI D 1 T 10 H S_-_____^_-__ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - POOLDf+AFT _ _SPILLTAiLWATER UNITS _FLOW PLANT _ YEAR MONTH ELE9ATION RATE RATE ELFYATION - GROSS MEAD 0 PERAT1kG PER UNIT NET IIEAD -OUTPUT GENERATION - _ _ - - - .._....-a_ - _ - • CFS _ -._fT -.FT_"M$L_..._._ CFS CFS FT MSL FT KY MY 1944 ..JAN 626.3 1'2. 0. 532.2 94.0 1 132. 92.2 979. 7290 Eu 6.27.01~!` . Cr 532.3 94.7 1 13d. 92.6 1015. 682• 1944 _ - - - - - - 132. 93.9 1001. 745. _T 0. 532.2 95.7 1 1944 MAR 627.4 12. 532.2 95.9 1 132• 94.1 1004• 723. 1944 APR 626.1 1332. 0• 96.9 1 95.1 1018. 757..__ _ 1 -1944__._ _._.r.AY 629.2- 13z' 0. _ 532.2 2 - 1944 JUN 624.8 132. ^ 532.2 97.6 1 132. 95.8 1026. 739. • 96.8 1 132. 95.0 1015. 755. 1944 JUL 629.0 132. 532.2 44.1 004 747. 1944 AUC628.1 132. 0. 537.2 v5.9 1 132. - - - ----1- - -71.5.. _ _"P 62 -----7 .3 1-(2. 0• 532.2 95.1 1 132. 93.3 993 1944 S F . 1844 OCT 626.7 132. C• 532.2 94.4 1 132. 92.6 484. 7321944NOV 626.4 1.,2. C• 532.2 94.1 __132-' - 92,3 981. _ 706;--,--- 1944-- DEL 626.6 132. - - 532.2 94.3 1 132. 92.5 983. 732. 8761. 1945 J.A++. 621.8 17.2• 0. 532.2 94_.6 1, 132. 92.6 986. 734. 194°i fEU t28.t 1?2. r, 532.2 96.4 1 132. 94 .6 10 10. 679. 679, 1945 t,AR 6?1.5 132. 173?. 542.5 89.0 1 132. 87.2 913. ' 539.7 92.8 1- 132. 91.0 963. 694,-- 1945 APR 612.5 1.2. 11F: ^ 9. 132. 96. 48,8 .1 11040580. . 74787 _ 532.2 100.0 1 1945 t-' AY 632.3 117• 1945 j('11, 63i.3 132. 204. 533.7 98.6 1 11332. 2 . 9.6 2 1032. 768. _1945 JUL. 0 '~2.5 1?2. '25.. 534.5 98.0 ..1945.._ nub 6'c.1 C. 532.2 _.99.8 1 132. 98.0 1056. 786 1945 sEP 631,7 L'~. 7 532.2 99.4 1 132. 97.6 1051. 757. 1945 oC7 632.x_ 1'52. f31•2 99.8 1 132• 98.0 1055. _ 785. 1945 604 632.: 1`52, C. 532.2 100.0 1 132. 98.2 1057.. 761. 194: P E r 631.E 132. C, 53 7.2 99.6 1 132, 97.8 1053.. 783. --...6960. - - ark+a Ft, aaa~i DATE 111181 PAGEO DLNION ~ TI9h: RAY Row FIS +mpo BLACK P. VLATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT 943c.CC2 OPERAT1hf- SIh'ULATION TYPE Of TURBINE AN CIS NUMBER Of UNITS INSTAL,LEA I TURBINE RUNNER DIAME fER _(MM): 675 _ AVERAGE MONTALY CONDITIONS _ POOL DRAFT_ SPILL __._TAI_LWATER UNITS FLO_r _PLANT _ - YEAR NON TN ELE_VATION RATE RATE ELEVATION -GROSS HEAD OPERATING ~PER UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION - MSL__ C.FS CIS FT VSL FT KW 1946 JAN o31.9 13 C. 5321? 99.6 1 132. 97.8 1053. 783. 1946 FL.a.-. 632:3 13.2._ 642.. - 536.5 -9-5.8__... 1 - 132..._ _.94.0_1002_.. --674.---- 1946 MAR 672.5 13 2. 145. 533.2 94.3 1 932. 47.9 1448. 780. 1946 APR 632.5 132. 9. 532.3 100.2 1 132. 98.4 1059. 763. 1-946 MAY _.._632.5 132. 1251_.. 540.0 92,5 _ 1 1-32.__... 90.7. 9580 .____._..713. 194E JUN t?2.5 1?2. 98 S3P.5 94.0 1 132. 92.2 978. 704. 194b JUL e32.G 1'2• U. `,32.2 9908 1 132. 98.0 1055. 785. 1940 AUG 6*1.1 132. C. 532.2 96.9 1 132. 97.1 1044.- 776. 1946 SEP 630.5 132. C 532.2 98.3 1 132. 9b.5 1035. 745. 1946 OCT 629.9 13 0. 532.2 97.7 1 132. 95.9 1028. 765. 1946 140V 630.61324 532.2 _ 98.6 1 132. 9618 1039. 748. 1946 OLC 032.2 673 . . . 536.7 9505 93.7 - 999. 743._ 8980. 1947 JAN - 632 - -132. 0. 532.2 100.2 132._... - 98.4 1059. - 788 1947 FEP c32.1 32. - 532.2 99.A 1 137. 98.0 10564 710. 1947 "A.k 631,9 53?.2 Q9.6 1 132. 97.8 1053. 783. 1947 APR 6-1 .1. 532.2 99.7 1 132. 97.9 105`. 759. 1947 Y1.Y o3'G.3 112. 0. 532.7 99.5 1 132. 97.8 1053. 783. 1947 JUN 6'2.5 132. 35. 532.5 100.0 1 132. 98.2 1058. 761. 1947 JUL. C...__ _532.2 99.7 _ 1 132. 97_.9 1.055.. 765. C. 532.2 96.7 1 13?. 46.9 1041. _ 1447 AUK 1.t 775. 1947 SiP t? .C: 1T2. 2.2 9746 1 '132. 96.0 10[9. 741. 1947 Oc T CZ9.i 1'.2. i. 532.2 __.97.0 1 132. 95.3 10190 758. 1947 NOV 62F.,8 1 f. 532.2 96.6 1 132. 94.8 1013. 729. 1947 co EE 629.3 1'2. 532.2 97.1 1 132. 95.3 1019, 758. 9131 . OATF 111181 PAG8~32 RAY ROP;RTS IIYDHn ULACK f. VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT 902@L Ct, - OPERATING SIMULATION TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS NUMPER OF UNITS INSTALLED I TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER- (MMI; 675______-~-.- AVERAGE MONTHLY CONDITIONS ~ POOH 0AA17 SP.ItL_ TAILWATER UIlITS_._. FLOW --PLANT PER-UNIT NE7 HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION YEAR VON TH ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING - - - - - IT_MSL CIS C F S FT r5L FT _CFS_ MwHS -1948 JAN 6 2 1 C. 532.2 97.9 1 132. 96.1 1031. 767. 1946 1F0 _ 611.4 1?6._.. I. _ 532.1 99.1 i_36. - _1072. __...720. 1948 MAR 6.'2.4 1'2. 2F. 532.4 10F1.0 1 112. 98.2 1057. 787. 1948 APR 632.2 132. 0. 532.2 100.0 1 132. 98.2 1057. 761. __1948 _MAY _61 1' r. 11.9. 533.7 98.9. 1 132• 97.1_ -1044._-- 777_. 1948 JUN L12.3 132• 5: 2.2 190.0 1 132. 98.2 1058. 762. 1948 JUL 631.9 1 ^ `32.2 99.6 1 132. 97.8 1053. 784. 194F. PUG 6, 31.1 1 2,_._ 531.2 99.0 1 132. 97.2 1044.-_ 777. -96.2 7031. 742. 1946 SEP 630.2 112. 532.2 98.0 l 132. 1948 OCT 029.4 132• 532.2 97.1 1 132. 95.3 1020. 759. 1941 NOV 6~_h.7.__-- _132. P. 532.2 96.4 1- 132. 94.6 1011. 728. ' 194e PEC 625.u 132. 5 32,2 95.8 1 132. 94.0 1003. 746. 9109. - _.1949... _ JAN 627.9 1_32. 0. 532.2 95.8 -132. 93.6- 1000. 744. - 6 T2 .2 96 . _.1 132. - 94.3 1006. _..676, fE i 1T2. C. 5 1949 , :8.3 1949 ✓'Ak b:°.7 132. ^ `32.2 96.5 1 132. 94.7 1012. 753. 1949 MAY 629.7.._. 02.- 3 • 53-2.2 96.4 _ 1 132. 94.6 1011. 728. 755. 32.2 96.7 1 132. 94.9 1015. 1149 JUN 629.4 1? 0 532.?. 97.2 1 132. 95.4 1021. 735. 1949 10 1. 6<9.v_ 1 2. 532,2 _ 96.8 1 _ 132. 95.0 1015. 755. 32, 1V40 AUG 62.l. 7 - 95.9 1 1 94 1 1004 747. 1949 SEP 627.7 1T2. 2 ?.2 95.4 1 f12, 93.6 998. 7180 < 13?. 94.1 1004. 747. 1949 0C1 G2. 1 12. 12.2 9,.9 1 132, 94,1_ _1008. 728, 194Y NOV 62f.5 1,2. 0. 532.2 96.2 I 1949 PEC c2t•U 1 2. 532.; ^5.8 1 132. 94.0 1002. 746. ATE 111191 PAGEo34 DE.LTU6. 7i-W RAY RCbLR1S HYDRO BLACK C VLAICH COASULT1iiG UNGINEFRS DROJf(1 94-1[.C92 OPERATING SIVULATION TYPE Of TURBINE. FRANCIS NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM): 675 AVERAGE MONTHLY. CONDITIONS__. - DkAfI SPILL TAILUATER UNITS FLOW PLANT YEAR WONTH LLEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION - s FT MSL CFS CFS FT Mil FT cis F:T_.__...__ KW MYlis 195 Jar, b28.2 112. 532.2 05.9 1 132. 94.1 1004. 747. 195( FFL 625.3 1?2. C. '32.2 97.1 1 132. 95_.3 1020. 685.-,_ . - 1956 r,AR 629.9 132. 532.2 97.7 1 132. 95.9 1021. 264. 1950 AVE. 629.5 132. C. 53Z,2 97.3 1 132. 95.5 1022. 736. 1950 11 AY 6''0.7 _ 132. O. 532.2 96.4 .1937._._.- 772. 195 JUN 6'2.1 112. 99.8 1 132. 96.0 1056. 760. 195C JUL 6_72.4 1?2. 2 598.5 1 132. 96.7 1038. 772. _1950 _ AUG 631.5, 12. 99, f3e,6 93.9 1 132. 92.1 977. 777, - 1950 Fp 632.5 132. 150!. 541,3 91.2 1 132. 89.4 44t. 678. 1950 0 C T 632.2 112. 532.2 9v.9 1 132. 98.1 1057, 786. 1955 NOV 01 .5 1.32 . _ 532.2 99.2_ 1 - -132. 97.4 1048. 755. 1951 D!.C 629.9 1'2. t 32.2 98.7 1 132. 96.y 1p40 774. 8956, 1951 JA,N 630.4 132. 98.2 1 132. 96.41 1034. 769. 1951 FFi 63C.~ 1.'2. 532.2 98.0 1 132. 96.2 1032. 693, 1951 rpR 6?(,. 171, 532.2 97 F 1 1,2. 96.0 1028. 765. 1+`.1 !Pr ~.S 1?:. 532.2 97.2 1 132. 95.5 1022. 736. 1)51 HAY 629.1 1?2. 532.2 96.8 1 132. 95.6 1016. 756. 1951 JUN 679.6 5 3 ? . 2 97.4 1 132, 95.6 1023. 737. 1951 JUt 63u.1 532.2 47.9 1_ 132. 96.1 1030. 766. 1951 1U1, o7ti.3 1' 47.1 1 132, 95.3 1019. 758. 1951 ;FP 62E.•. i''. 53 96.1 1 +'.2. 94.3 10074 725. 1951 u!1 r27.7 2. 53.-'.2 95,4 1 1?. 93.< 998. 742. 1951 LOV 627.1 932.2 94.9 1 131. 93,1 990. 713. 1951 uFC X26.6 1'2. 53?.2 94,4 1 132. 92.6 984. 732. b893. UATF 111181 PAGE 36 DENTOf, TL>AS PAY ROFILPTS HYDRO NLACK R VLATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT -W 2.OC[ OPERnTItrG SIMULATION 'TYPE OF TURUIfJE FRANCIS PUPHER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 IRUINE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM): 675 ___.AVEAAGL 1`~ONTIILY. CONDITIONS _ i POLL -DRAFT SPILL. TAIL-iTATLP_ UNITS FLOG PLANT YEAR PON Tif L: LE VAT ION RATE RATE ELEVATION G,rOSS HEAD OPERATING PEP UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT 6ENERATION - - - - - - - ------T--- FTMSL Cf5 CF.S._ FT KSL fT C F 5 ---F7 Ky._.~. --M11HS '1952 JAI. 626.1 1'2. P. 5.7..2.2 0399 1 132. 92.1 977. 727. :1952 FEF, 625.6 114•. C_r__..-._ 532.3 93.4 1 136. 91.5 996669 1952 MnN 6253 132. 0. 532.2 93.1 1 732 91.3 966 719. 1952 APR 625 ..5 132. 0. 532.2 93.2 1 132. . 91.4 969. . 697. -----1952 MAY 6.25.7 1'~• 0. "3i'.2 93.5 __..._1 3.2. p1.7 - 972 _ 723. - - 1952 JUN 625.2 172 532.2 92.9 1 132. 91.1 - 964 694. 1952 JUL 6?4.1 17.2. 532.2 91.9 1 132, 90.1 951. 708. i95'c AUG6?3.L 17 532.2 9C.F 1 132 89.0 936. 696. 1952 SIP 621.9 '132. C. 532.2 89,7 1 132. 8719 _ 921 663. 1951 OCT 620.9 132. 0. 532.2 818.7 1 132. 86.9 909. 676. _1952 1ro_V-,---.--- 620.2 1.7.2. 0~ 532.2 88.0 _1 _--..132.-- 86,2 899. 647. 1957 DEC 619.8 132 0. 5 2.2 1?7.6 1 13T. 85.8 896. 667. _ 8287. 1;753 JAN 619.4 132. 0. 532.2 87.2 1 131. 85.4 889. 661. >53 _ rFL 618.9 137...._. 5'.2.2 P6.7 1 t31. 84.9 880, 591. (951 MAP 61b.5 172. C. 532,2 86.3 1 13^. 8;.5 873. 650. 1V5.3 APP C1h.V 12. C, `.3?.2 P6.6 1 131. 84.8 879. 633. 1953 MAY 619.6 1'Z 0._ 532.2_._ P7.3 1 131. 85.5 892. 663. 1953 JU4 619.2 132. C, 532,2 87.0 1 131. 85.2 885. 637. 1953 JUL 618.2 132. C, 532.? 86.0 1 130. 84.2 868. 646. j v57, A U 6 -617,j-- 1 l 2.2- 85.0 -1 129• 83.2 852. - 634. 1953 SI1- 016.2 1'L. 84,0 1 129. 82.2 834. 601, _ 195? u(T 615.0 17Z. 83.4 1 128. 81,6 823. 613. 1553 NOV 015.6 2. 532.2 r'~.2 1 128. 81.4 820. 591. 1953 DE r, 015.1 12. `32.? P.2.9 1 81.1 815. 607, 7527. r7" 79,-?; n~ .r. ter.---• '.i ~ ' n e,s ~ _ i . "7{ r r ~ ~ ii.,~ 1 ~ 1.'~' ~ ' 1 t. Sf ;~e ~r o +*+.F I.F .+i'+w DATE'ii1791' PA6E8 DENI01., TEXAS RAY R08EPTS HYDRO BLACK 6 VLATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT 91.32.002 OPERATING SIMULATION TYPE Of TURBINE FRANCIS NUMBER Of UNITS INSTALLED 1 _ TURBINE _RUNNER DIAMETER--(M1°)'675____-__-.. -AVERAG-E_MONT-IFLY CONDITIONS 1EL10O.L.._ _.....-...rHAF_T SPILL TA1LWATLR UNITS FLOW PLA11T YEAR MONTH EVATIoN. RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT MET HEAD OUTPUT C69kAT10N - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f7_.MSL CFS_ CFS FT MSL. fT CFS _ FT R-N- - Mw NS,. 1954 1414 t14.F' 1?2• C. 532.2 82.6 1 128. 80.e 8100 602. 1454 _ FEP--__-, - 614 .3 _ 1_' 2. C___..._ 512. 2 82.1. ._1 127. 80.3 802_• 539. - 6„ IAR 613.5 132. 0. 532.2 81.3 9 127. 79.5 788 5886,. 1954 MAR— 1954 APR 612.8 132. 0. 53Z.2 80.6 1 126, 78.8 776. 559. 1954 _ piAY__._ . 6.12.9 132 0' - 532..2--- _ 80.7 - - - - 1 - 126. 78.9 1954 JUN 613.2 132. 0. 532 .2 80.9 1 126. 79.2 781. 563. 1954 JUL 612.'_ 172. 0, 532.2 80.0 1 126. 78.3 768. 571. t 1954.__._... AUG____-- ---_610.F 172. C_. 532.2----__-- 78.6 1 125. 76.8 744, 553. I 1954 SEP 609 .d 132 9. 532.2 77.2 1 1240 75.4 721. 5117. 1954 oCI 608.6 132. 0. 532.2 76.3 1 1230 74.5 7070 526. __---1954 NPV_____ ---607.,9 _1-2-2_0 532.2. 75.7 1 123. 7319 696. 501_• 73.2 685. 510. 1954 D E C 607.: 1 9. 532. 75.0 1 123, -A FL AP. 6610. 1955 JAN 606.6 132 0. 532.2 74.3 1 _122. 72.5 .675 502. 1955 F1 t, cf6.t C. 532.2 73.8 1 122. 72.0 66'I. 448. 1955 r.AR ff5.el 532.2 73.3 1 122. 71.5 659. 490. 1Y` AIk !?2• ^ 53?'2 - 7.2..8 --1 121. _ 71_.0 650.- 468 1955 May 605.8 11 1. 532. 73.6 1 122• 71.8 663. 494• 1955 JUN 607.1 112. 532.2 74.9 1 123. 73.1 683. 492. 1955 JUL nCb.~, C.. 53212 _ 74.4 1_-_ 122.- 72.6 676.,_ 503. 1955 AIIG tLS.ti 172. r. 532.2 75.1 1 122. 71.3 656. 488. 1955 17c. 532.2 72.0 1 121, 7C,2 639. 460, 1955 GCT tC'.1 11f1. `.32.7 70.4 1 119. 6669 586. 436. 532.F 68.6 1 118. 64.E _1 19 5 ,,5 NOV tn1.5 217. 543. - 341. 1955 DEC tCJ.U 19E. 0. 5'2.7 67.3 1 118. 63 .5 532. 396. 5568. *rsra F:i •f~a. DATE 1111$1 PAGEWO DEh19h7 -FAAS RAY ROHcKTS HYORD BLACK F, VEATCH COASULIIKG EAGINLLkS PROJECT 0432.002 _ OPERATViO SIMULATION TYPE OF TURBINE - 7- FRANCIS HUMBER OF U1411S INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM); 675 {VERVE--- MONTHLY CONDITIONS POOL 9KAF7 SPILL TAILMATER UNITS FLON PLANT YLAft MONTH fLfYATiON 'RATE RATE -ELF YAT10Ff GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT NET HERO - OUTPUT GENERATION __,FT HSC F S -CFS FT MSL FT - CFS FT KW MWHS 19,6 JAN 51)8.6 174. 0. 532.5 66.1 1 117. 63.2 526. 391. l - 1956 .(FL -59 7_ 1:{6. 65.4 - 118. 63 *5 532.. 357. 1956 MAR 596.7 153. 532.4 64.3 1 117. 62.0 507. 377. 1956 APR 595.7 588. 0, 532.6 62.6 1 115. 51.2 46U. 331. 1956 Q.._..._ _ 5.32.2 61.7 1 - 116. - S~' y - 472. - 351. ' 1956 JUN 591.9 344. C. 533.7 58.2 1 344. 47.9 0. 0 1956 J U L 587,9 397, n. 534,1 53.8 l 397. 40.4 0. 0. . _AUt,5F2•`_.._-__ 4?1. 1. 536,3 48,1 1 431. 32.6 0. 0. - - - - - - - - 1956 SFP 577.5 167. C. 531.5 4500 1 W. 42.3 0. 0. 1956 OCT 574.5 142. 0. 532.3 42.2 1 142. 40.1 0. 0. 56------__NOy`.~72.._0 106. 04 532.1 40.0 1 1G6. 38.7 0 0 ' 1956 DFC S7V.0 11C. S. 532,1 37.9 1 110. 36.6 0. 0. 1957 JAN567.2 SC5. C. 532,.0 35.1 1 105. 33.9 0.- -.0• 1457 It1 . 564.' 112. 532.1 - 32,8 - 1 112. 31.4 0. 0. 1957 ^Ax 565.' 1W ^ 532,1 ?3.2 1 112. 31.8 0. 0. 1957 A P k 5E5.~ 25. C. 531.5 53.6 i 2S. 53.6 0. 0. 1957 rr,AY 612.1 ;y. 0. 531.6 50.5 1 39. 80.3 0. 0 1957 JUN 120.9 22. C. 531 89.5 1 22. 89.5 0. 0. 1957 JUL t21.5 6. P. 531 .3 90.1 1 6. 90.4 0. 0. 1057 AU6 C2C.9 3. C. 531.7 89.6 1 3. 89.9 0 0. 1957 <<~' G2J.7 5. ^ `31,' 89.3 1 S. 89.6 0. . b. 1957 OFT 62C.} 531.? E9.4 1 6. 89.6 0. 0. 1957 hOV 023.2 0,. _ 531.3 91.9 1 7 92,1 0. 0. 1957 DFC 625.7 7. 531.3 94.3 1 7, 94.5 0. 0. l DATE 11191 PAO*42. RAY RONEkT~ HYDRO OLACK 6 VFATCH CONSULTING FIvG1kLFPS Pki?JECT 941i.C'02 OPEkA.IIh~; SINULAIION - - TYPE OF TURUINf FRANCIS NUHBIR OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TOR0INE RUNNER DIAMETEN __(NY).C__-675 a AVERA_GE_.MONTIILY CONDITIONS__ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - P00L_ Ok_AFTSPILL TAI,LFATER _ UNITS FLOW ---~---._.-._PLANT----------__ YEAR 6N1 11 ELEVATION RATE RA1E ELFVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PEp UNIT NET HEAD OUTPUT GENERATION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 _ - FT MSL --_CF_5._ C F S FT NSt FT. --...__..._.__CIS_ -F_T_,---°- KM - MYNS 532.2 93.9 1 132. 92.1 9780 727. ~ 1958 JAN 62 6.c i'2, ,,1.95E__...___ fEN._____-__47y.5,-- 532-.2 94.2 ...1 - - --132. 42.4 982.----------660,!------ ' 1958 14R 626 .9 132. G. `32.2 94.7 1 132. 92.9 987. 735. f, 1956 APR 628.5 172. 0. 532.2 95.7 1 1324 93.9 1001. 721. f 1958 NAY 630.t, 132.. 467. 535.4 95.1 _ 1_.... _13 ~ 43.3- 993. _ 739. 195E JUN 532 .2 100.2 1 132. 98.4 1060. 703. 1958 JUL 632.3 1'2. 0, 532.2 100.1 1 132, 98.3 1058. 787. . 1955 AUa b31 F' 132, 5!2.2 99.6 1 132. 97.8 1052. 783. 1958 SEP 6'1.1 132. 532 -2 98.8 1 132. 97.0 1043. 751. 1958 OCT 130.5 13 C. 532.2 98.3 1 132. 96.5 1035. 770. II 1958 NOV____ 630-.Q__ _1.-'?. 532.2 97.7 1_ ._132.-------_ _ 95.9-- - - 1028-.- - 740 _ . 7958 LEC 127.5 1'.2. 532,2 97.3 1 132. 95.5 1022. 760. -8537. 1959 JAN 629.1_,f3[-. 0. 532.2 96.9 1 132. 95.1 1017. 756. 1959 FEL 625.7 172. 96.5 1 132. 94.7 1611. 680. 1959 haF t,2d.3 172. `,32.2 96,0 1 132. 94.2 1006. 748, 1959 FPk 627 .7 1'2. `32, 2 95.5 1 132, 93.7 998. 719. 1959 FA r 627 2 i 0. 532.7 95.0 f 132. 93.2 992. 738. + _ . .2. 1959 JON 627.5 1'2. C, S''2.2 95.2 1 132. 93.4 995, 716. 1959 JUL 627.5 112. 532.2 95.6 1 132. 93.8 999. 744. 1954 RUC. 5.27,3 -3--. 738 i°2. 32.2 95.J t?2. 93. 3 99. . 1955' SEE' tib.! 172• `32.2 94.2 1 132. 92.4 982. 707, 1959 OCT t?6. 1 c. 532,2 94.5 1 132. 92.7 986. 733. 1959 _ 14OV 6'7.2 1~2, 5 . -93..2 991.: 714. _ i 2 . 2 v5 . 0 ~ 132. 1959 DfC 127.3 12. 0. 532.2 95.0 1 132. 93.2 992. 738. E7S1. o'E: DATE 111161 PAGE*44 OENTfit, TifPf, HAY k0t±[PIS FIYORO CLACK k VLA7(It CONSULTIhb F:FIGINECPS PROJECT 94-;i'.GC2 OP ERATI C SIMUL ATIUA TYPE Of TURBINE FRANCIS NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE PUt:NER DIf11ETER (MM): 675 - -~_---AVERAGE.-- MONTHLY CONDITIONS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FOOL _-_-DRAFT SPILL TAILUATI'R UNITS _ FLOL_ PLANT YEAR PONTH ELEVATION RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HCAD OPERATING PER UNIT NET HEAD -OUTPUT GENERATION - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -fI-MSL- _CC5. C f S fT MSL FT _.CFS. FT KW- _ FIYHS 1966 JA1, 628.3 1-72. o. 532.2 96.0 1 132. 94.2 1005. ~ 748. I _1960 F E B 626.9 1 4. 532.3 96.7 1 136. 9448 1040. 699. 1961 MAR 628.9 132. 0. 532.2 96.6 1 132. 94.9 1014. 754. 1960 APK 628.6 1'2. 0. 532.2 46.4 1 132. 94.6 1010. 727. 19tJ_ M_AY 628-.: 13 _.532.2__ _ 95.9 1 _ 132• 94.1 1004._- --74-7. 1960 JUIo 677.7 132. ^ 532.2 95.4 1 132. 93.6 998. 718. ' 1963 JUL 627 3 1'2. 0. 53 95.0 1 132. 93.2 992. 738. 1960 AUb 626.8 13Z. 532.2 94.6 1 132. 92.8 986. 734 196{ SEP 626.1 IY2. co 53'x.`.2 93.9 1 132. 92.1 478• 704. 1960 OCT 625.7 1320 0. 532.2 93.4 1 132. 91.6 971. 772• _ 1960 _ NOV 625.. _132 0. 532.292.9 _ 1 132. 91.1 964. 694. 196v DEC 62(o .9 172• 53 42.6 1 132. 90.8 961, -715. ===_uc 8701. --1961 JAIL 62513?• 532.2 8 1 132. 91.0 9620 716. 1961 FE! 025.2 1 7 2. ^ 532.2 93.6 1 132 _ . 91.2 965. 649. 1961 m1L; 025.7 17 2, 532.2 93.4 1 132. 99 6 971. 723. 1961 APB 621 .1; 1'2. 1 5_x2.2 93.6 1 132. 91.8 973. 700. 1961 MAY 625.4 172• C. 532.2 95.2 1 132. 91.4 961 -720. 1961 JUI~ 625.1 1' 0. 532.^ 92.9 1 132• 91.1 964. 691). 1961 JUL 024.7 1 537.2 92.5 1 132. 90.7 9586 713. 1961 :u <~..; 1r. 57 2.2 91.7 1 132. 89.9 948. 705. 1961 SEP 623."2 112. 532.2 91.0 1 137. 89.2 939. 676. 1961 oCT t'2.t 1.'2. C. 532.2 90.6 1 132. 88.8 933. 694. 1961 Nov 622.5 1'2. 532.2 90.2 1 132. 88.4 927. 664. 1961 UE~ 0'2.3 12. 532.2 90,1 1 132. 88.3 926. 689. s34a. fa~66 Kn .+ae•r DATE 111181 PAGE44 UfI~TU>.~ T!YAS RAY k0bER1S HYDRO BLACV R VEATCH CONSULTING ENGII;kT(/5 PROJECT (,412.002 OPERATING S14ULATIOA TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 • TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER (Mm): 675 - - - _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - POOL _DRAFT SPILL TAILWATER UNITS FLOii PLANT _ YEAR MONTH ELEVATION ,AATE RATE EIFVAYION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT NET 1+EAD OUTPUT oENERATION n - - - - °__.°f___ ..~rr..w w rti FT M_L CF5 CFS FT MSL FT CFS_ FT _ KY __l1WHS ~ 88.0 9Y31 487. 1962 JAN 622.1 132. `232.2 A9.8 1 132. ' -1-962 FEES_... _62.1_.0 1- ' c.~...__.. `32.2 --89'3-. 1 - - - - 132. 87.6 - 917._ 6166 0. 532.2 88.9 1 137. _---87.1 911. 678. 1962 MAR 621.1 132. 1962 APR 621.5 132. 532.2 8912 1 132. 87.4 916. 639. 1962 .M.A?'_ _ 621.7.-- }72• n 532.2. 89.4 1 1~2• 87.6---------918 683 1962 JU` 621.9 1?2. r. 532.2 89.7 1 132. 87.9 921. 663. 1962 JUL 622.2 112 532 o2 90.0 1 132. 88.2 925. 688. 'I .__AU6 621.5 132. C•___.,.. ._5 _?.2 89.2..___._._ 1 132. 87.4 916. 681. - - - - - - T90.0 ----944. 1962 SEP 624.0-- -132. 532.2 91.8 7 132. 6846 1962 OCT 626.8 132. f„ 532 94.6 1 132. 92.8 987. 734. l 1.962__._.. NOV._027.2-____ ._.._1;`2. _ 0._.. _53,2.2 94.9 --1 13z .._93.1 991.-- 713. 53262 95.4 1 132. 9`.6 9976 -74?. - 1962 DF.C 627.6 lie, 8229. 532.2 95.2 1 132. 1963 JAN 627.4 172. 93.4 994._ 740. 1963 ffir 627.6 1I2. 532.2 94.8 1 132 93.0 989. 665. 1963 I+Ak 626.7 172. 532.? 94.5 1 132. 92.7 985. 733. 1963 APR 626.7 17Z. 5117.2 94.5 1 132. 92.7 985. TD9. 1.96 -3 I + . A Y 6 _ 2 6 . 9 1 r 1 _ . C `.32.2 94.7 .1 132. 92.9 987. 735. . 1963 JUN 626.7 172. 532.2 94.4 1 132. 92.6 984. 7D9. 196; JUL 626.1 1 532.2 93.9 1 132. 92.1 977. 7117. 1963 Au„ t25.4 172. `.32.2 93.1 1 132. 91.3 967. 720. 1963 5FP c24.5 1'2. r 532.2 9-.2 1 132. 90.4 955. 688. 1961 ocl b23.o 532.2 91.4 1 132. 89.6 944. 703. 83.9- 935. 673. 19(1 0v 62[.7 1'2. 532.2 90.7 1 132_•. 1963 D F C 6?2 .4 1?2. 7. 532,2 90.2 1 132• 88.4 928. 691. 8490. 1 d 4 I 1 1 - `t N Il 7 1 DATE 111181 PAQE- 4El, DLI,TON~ TceAS _ RAY ROREPTS HYORO BLACK L V£ATCF! CONSULTING PN(,IYEERS PA0JCCT 94'2.0('2 OPERATING SIMULATION TYPE Of TURBINE FRANLhS NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED I TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM) 675 ^ AVERAGL. MONTHLY CONDITIONS. PAUL DRAFT SPILL TAILWATLP UNITS FLOW PLANT YcAR MONTlI LLEVAT30h RATE RATE ELEVATION GROSS HEAD OPERATING PER UNIT NE7 1FEA0 OUTPUT 6ENERATIAN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - fl MSL`-- C,FS CFS - FT- MSL FT Cf_S" FT xW__..., MNNS 1964 JAN 622.0 132. 0, `32.,2 89.8 1 132, 88.0 923. 687, 1964_ F,FIi " 6.2,1.(1 136. C. 532.3 89.3 1133. 87.4 924, 4521 132. 87.4 915. 681. 1964 APR 621.6 132. 0. 532.2 89.3 1 132. 87.6 917. 660. AY. 621b--- X32• 0' 53.2..2 89.4 ? .1.32, 87.6 - 918 683.- 1964 P - 1964 1UM1 611.3 132. r 537.2 89.G 1 132. 87.Z 913. 657. 1964 JUL 62).4 1'.2. 532.2 R8.1 1 132. 86.3 9010 670. 1964 A06 - 619.3 132. 532.2_ A7.0 - 1 - - - - .131` 85.2 --887. - 66.0_. 648, 1964 SEP 620.3 132. O. 532.2 88.1 1 132. 86.3 900. 1964 OCT 621.5 132. C. 532.2 8903 1 132. 87.5 916. 682. 1964 NOV 623.5 1'2. 532.2 91.3 1.___...._-.. 132. 89.5 943. - 679, . 531,3 94.7 1 7, 94.7 00 0 1964 DFC 626.v 7. 7328. 1965 JA4 626.3 132. 522 .2 94.1 1 13,.'. 92.3 980. _ .29. - 1965 F I t 2 . I- 91.-.7 1 132 --72.q 9bEi. 664, 627.E 196, PAN 627. Y c. 5 3?.2 95.1 1 132. 93.3 993. 739. 1965 AF,4 627.v `32,2 94.8 1 132. 93.0 989. 712. 196`. KAY 627.3 _ 1'2. _ p. 532.2 9511 1 132. 93.3 993. 739. 1965 JUp, 627.b 1'Z. 532,2 95.6 1 132. 93.8 999, 720. 1965 JU1. 627.4 1'2. 0. 532.2 95.2 1 132. 93.4 995. 740. 19(S AU(. 6'(•.? 172. C. 532.2 94.4 1 1'7. 92.6 964. 732. 19C5 IEU t172. `31.2 94.4 1 132. 92.6 984. 708. 1965 6CT t;26.7 1' 32.2 94.5 1 132. 9Z.7 9b 5. 733. 196, liov 626.a 1'2. 532.2 94.1 1 132. 92.3 980. 706. 196`. DFC 626.i 1'2. C. 532.2 93.8 1 132. 92.0 976. 7Z6. 8648. . .4 . , 'ri 47!!`.rnn , tj. 3•.r?r I I Nfr,.,rmrr ~itr'-.1 C{t ani.r: Fr 7, (rt'ja:st GN • t`r~.. fry r -~1) i ttt f r . t t t ;.t[ {~~1i• ti ')yet 1 t ( r'~i O ,irk . i.w. . •a. DA;TE,•1'f 11E`1 f P-Wl DE NTUN~ 7i.x1,S RAY IIC13LPTS HYDRO 13LACK r. VEA10f CONSULTING Ft+GINEERS PROJECT 9ti32.c^? OPERATING SIMULATION TYPE OF TURUINE FRANCIS NUMUEN OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER (M*): 675 AVERAGE MONTHLY CONDITIONS POOL DRAFT SPILL TAILWATER UNITS FLOW PLANT Y£AR "UNTH ELEVATION RATE PATE ELEUA'ti10N GROSS NEAR OPERATING PEA UNIT HET HEAD OUTPUT 6EHERATIOM FT FSL- CFS CFS. FT_MSL FT - CFSFT- -..._,._Kid MWHS 'j 1966 JAN 625.7 1'2. 0. `32.2 93.5 1 132. 91.7 972. 723. FEl' 626.-C'-_..----.. .1?2."• 531.2._._.._._._ _.94.3_.... - 132. 92.5_.__.- -a83.~ - 6616 1966 MAB 627.5 132. 0. 532.2 95.2 1 132. 93.4 595. T 196t APR 63040 132. 634. 536.4 93.5 1 132. 91.7 9720 700. 1966 MAY 632.5 132. 656. 536.6 95.9 _.t __...._.._,._..132._----____--94-.7_ ..._----_--1004._-- 747. 532.2 100.0 1 132. 98.2 1056. 762. 1966 JUN 631.3 1'2. 1. 1966 JUL 01.? 1'2. C. 5.'.2.2 99.4 1 132. 97.6 10510 782o 1966 AUG 671.2 172. 532.2 99.C __-1132. 97.2 1044. 777. 1966 _ SFP 631.1 132. 1, 532.2- 98.8 1 132. 97.0 - 1043. 751. 1966 UCT 6?0.8 132. 0. 531.2 98.5 1 132. 96.7 1039. 773. 1.966 &OV 63(,.2__._._.._.. 1-32._ C. 532.2 9800 ? 132. 96.2 1032. 743. _ 1023. - . 1966 DEC 629.E 1 2. 532.2 97.6 f 95.8 132. -T84 ----s_ 8921. 1967 JAN 629.4 132. 0. 532,2 97.2 1 132. 95,4 1021. 760. . 95.0 1016. 683. 1967 FCb t29.v 172. `.37.2 96.8 1 152 1967 A.R 62.7 172. `.32.2 96.4 1 132. 94.6 1011. 752. 1967 Apt; 532.2 96.4 1 132. 94.6 1011. 728. 1967 MAY t?9.t 1.'e. 0. `.'2.2 Q7.5 1 132. 95.7 1026. 763. 1967 JUN 630.7 12. C, 532.2 98.5 1 132, 96.7 1038. 747. 1967 JUt 6.'.t.4 1'2. 532.2 98.1 1 _ 132. 96.3 1033. 769, 19t7 A11 L, cZ'yt 1'20 `32.2 97.4 1 132. 95.6 1023, 7610 1967 51p c 9., 1'2. 96.7 1 132. 94.9 1015. 731. 1967 V C T t r.`. 172. C. `32.2 96.2 1 132. _ 94.5 .1008. 750. 1967 Nov 62F. 172. C. 532.2 95.8 1 132. 94.0 1002. 722. 1967 DEC 677.7 172. `-32.2 95.5 1 132, 93.7 998. 743. 8908. 7 l j'C-.K' { 'i S f~~~'- Il ~~Q i i-•~.i h'::? 4 ~1'y'1 t jtri ~:^i'+ST~•''~ r t S{ } } Jp s ...,t f}!,'~rJ~ vk t~i 1 { r iP .r f 1 r - 1 1 ti , t~* ~ r ' ~ 1 ,r !i ~ J ~ ' a f ;L ~t ~i V`.~ l r y~ I f! ~ i ~ ~ it ~ iii i ~ 1r . r 1 541 iv. arty DENT0IN tLK1< RAY R0111,kIS RYD RO FLACK 6 VLATCh CON°L'LTINC• INGINLEkS y PROJECT 9432.(,02 H - TYPE OF TURBINE FRANCIS OPEkAT1Nu i LLA7I~N NUYUER l;f UNITS 111STALLEO 1 7UR81NE RUNNER DIAMETER (MM): 675 AVERAGE MONTHLY CONDITIONS POOL DRAFT SPILL „ TAILWATER UNITS FLCW PLANT IF. AR YOUTH ELEVATION RATE RATF ELEVATION GPOSS HEAD 60ERAIING PER UNIT NET HEAD 6UTPOY GCNERAT'ION F -_HSL_' Cf S__ FT_rSL FT C.FS_ - - - ----FT..- KW_°.-- ANN$ 196t JAN 627.E 132. CL 532.2 95.5 1 132. 9347 999. 743. 1968 FEi -62-7.9^-- _ 136.. M1•...- - --53.2_._3 9504 -1 --136. 93.7^ 1027. - - 690. 1968_ MAk 429.4 132. 0. 532.2 97.1 1 132. 95.3 t020a 754. 1968 APR 631.5 13 0. 532.2 99.3 1 132. 97.5 1048. 755. 1968 MAY 632.3 ._..1 .7-2_• 1062. 539.0 _ 93.3 1. 1966 JIM _._...612.5 172. 19*. 533.6 98.9. 1 132. 97.1 1044. 752. 1968 JUL 612.3 1321 0. 532.2 100.1 1 132. 98.3 1058. 787. 1968.__..._ AUG _ 631_.7 132. 532.2 99.5 1--- 132 97.7 1051. 782. 196A SfF 431.1 132. 0, 532.2 93.9 1 132. 97.1 1044. 751. 1966 OCT 630.8 132. 0. 532.2 98.5 1 132. 96.7 1039. 773. 1968-. NOV 630.5532_.. 0. 532.2 _ 98.3 1 132. _960-51036.__ 746. 1968 DEC 630.3 1,2. -532.2 98.0 1 132. 96.2 1032. 768. Y3 9027. 1969 JAN 630.2_- 132._ 0. 4,32.2 ?7.9 1 132. 96.1 1031. 767. n 1969 S f 5..12 , .2 99.7 132 96.9 1041. 699. b 6?0.9 13... 1569 MAR 672.0 132. 495, 535.6 96.5 1 132. 94.7 1011. 757. 1969 APP 472.5 132. 2:8. 534.3 98.2 1 132. 96.4 1034. 745. 1969 0 Y 612.5 132. 2163. 544.4 88.1 1 132. 86.3 901. 670.- 1969 JUN 632.1, 112. 532.2 100.2 t 132. 98.4 1059. 763. 1969 JUL 611.'i 1 0. 532.2 99.7 1 132. 97.9 _ 1054. 784. 1969 l,uo 111.1 172. 2, 532.2 9k,9 1 t32. 97.1 1044. 777. 1969 <P o1t.c '172. `32.2 98.4 t 132. 96.6 1037. 746. 1969 OCT G7 .4 1-72. 532.2 08.2 1 132. 96.4 1034. 769. 1969 NOV 630.2 1'2. `32.2 97.9 1 132. 96.1 1031. 742. 1959 DEC 631:.2 1'2, C. 532.2 98.8 1 132. 96.2 1031. 767. 8982. a.wos lip ~iti i ~y,3ra Tr APPENDIX B ECONOMIC ANALYSES B-1 ; r.~_.~ .~-n i^'_.'_-•'^^'T'.Y 7 , i~. t 'i i 15000 KW INSTALLED 1988 IMMEDIATE OPERATION LI I DEN70NI 7F.XA5 RAY ROBERTS HYCRO BLACK 8 VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT 9432.OC2 ECONOMIC SIMULATION TYPE OF TURBINE(S) FRANCIS TURBINE RUNNER DIAMETER 675 NUMBER Of UNITS INSTALLED K 1 PRESENT WORTH INVESTMENT a 2331 YEARLY ECONOMIC EVALUATION SUMMARY 51000) - - - - - - ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS CUM PV BENEFIT - NET -CUM PW GROSS NET NET COST PRESENT DEBT NET CUM NET NET YEAR E:BNEFIT 0 w8 M TAX IRS' FEE BENEFITS BENEFITS RATIO VALUE SERVICE SAVINGS SAVINGS SAVINGS 1488 834. 636 61.6 20.5 4.1 685. 329. 914 -2002. 563.7 121. 121. 58. 680 61.6 20.5 4.1 845. _ _ . _ _ 4989 999. 888. 30 -164 .3. 563.7 281. 402. 178. 1590 1197. 73. 61.6 2C.5 4.1 1037. 1078. .46 -1253. 5E 3.7 474. 876. 356. 19'71 1356. 790 61.6 20.5 4.1 1191. 1475. .63 -856. 563.7 627. S03. 565. 1992 1537. 85. 61.6 20.5 411 1366. 1877. .81 -454. 563.7 802. r'05. 801. 1993 1142. 92. 61.6 20.5 4.1 1564. 2285. .98 -46. 563.7 1000. 33051 1062. 1994 1973. 99, 61.6 20.5 4.1 1768. 2697. 1616 366. 543.7 1224. 4529. 13440 1995 2236. 107. 61.6 20.5 4.1 2043. 3114. 1.34 783. 563.7 1479. 6609. 1646. 1996 2534. 116. 61.6 20.5 4.1 2332. 3536. 1.52 1205. 563.7 1768. 7777. 1966. 1997 2872. 125. 61.6 20.5 4.1 2660. 3961. 1.70 7630. 563.7 2097. 9874. 2301. 1998 3254. 136. 61.6 20.5 4.1 3032. 4390. 1.88 2059. 563.1 2469. 11343. 26500 1999 3688. 147. 61.6 20.5 4.1 3455. 4823. 2.07 2492. 563.7 2891. 15233. 3012. 2000 4179. 159. 61.6 2C.5 4.1 3933. 5259. 2.26 2928. 56397 3370. 18603. 3386. 2001 4735. 173. 61.6 20.5 4.1 4477. 5698. 2.44 3367. 563.7 3913. 22516. 3749.- 2002 6366. 187. 61.6 20.5 4.1 5093. 6139. 1.63 3808. 563.7 4529. 27045. 4162. 2003 6081. 203. 61.6 20.5 4.1 5792. 6584. 2082 4253. 563.7 5228. 32273. 4564. 2004 6391. 221. 61.6 20.5 4.1 6584. 7032. 3.02 4701. 563.7 6021. 38294. 4973. 2405 7909. 239. 61.6 2^.5 4.1 7483. 7482. 3.21 5151. 563.7 6920. 45214, 5389. 2006 8849. 260. 61.6 20.5 4.1 6503. 7934. 3.40 5603. 563.7 7939, 53153. 5812. 2001 10028. 283. 61.6 20.5 4.1 9659. 6389. 3.60 6058. 563.7 9095. 62248. 6240. 10000 Kw INSTALLED 1988 1989 OPERATION • tt ..'7,=7 ~r11RT• a ........----~}~•.y;~~E'1/F--+-^ 5-s}. t~s 4yt 1~•: . 77 j1 , J, . r ,":7 f ISi !77777 .77777777 1 l DCNTOA* TEXAS RAY RCBEkTS HYDRO PLACk P. VEATCII CO,'ySULTING„E.NGINECF.S _ PROJECT 94?2•4'.2 ECONOMIC SIMULATION TYPE OF TURI:IHE(S) ~ FRANCIS-1989 TURBINE RUNNER -DIAMETER__ - 6.75 NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 PRESENT YORTN INVESTMENT 2331 YEARLY ECONOMIC EVALUATION SUMMARY ($1000) ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS CUM PY 0ENEF.IT AT CUM P1i GROSS NET NFT COST (PRESENT DEBT NET CUM NET NET YEAR. BfHfFIT O_$ %-TAX __INS._ fEE PENEF_IT,S. GENE-ETTS._ RATIO_ VALUE LHky '1 t ye G - r'---~1s(z 2 4.1 -8h. - - ---1'1 • -~0Z 2372. - -65-0. 650. ----312. 1989 999. 68. 61.6 2?.5 4.1 845. 31R. .14 -2013, 563.7 281. -3690 -193. 1996 1197. 73. 61.6 2^.5 4,1 1037. 708. .30 -1623. 563.7 474. 105, -15. N 1991 1356. 79.-__-. 61 T6 20_.5._. 4.1 - ._1191..... _ _.....1104-• .47 _.-122,7...------563.7__._.627..---.... 1.326 - 1941., ' 1992 1537. 85. 61,6 2F 4.1 1366. 15 7. .65 -824. 563.7 802. 1534. 431. 1993 1742, 926 61.6 2f.5 4.1 1564. 1914. P2 -417. 563.7 1000. 2534. 691. 1994 1973. 99.• --64 .6_ _2_6.5. 4.1 1789._, 2377._ 1•'5.0. -4. 563,7.-~ 1224. - 3758. - 974. 1995 2236. 107, 61.6 20.5 4.1 2043. 2744. 1.18 413. 563.7 1679. 5239. 1276. 1996 2534. 116. 61.6 20.5 4.1 2332. 1165. 1.36 834. 563.7 1768. 7006. 15950 ' 1997 2872. 125. 61.6 20.5 _4,1 2660.. 3591. 1.5., 1260.563,7_____ 2097. „9103. _1930. 1798 ?254. 13 _ 6. 61.6 2'.5 4.1 3032. 40 2L. 1.72 -1689, 563.7 2469. 11572. 2280. 1999 1,,I 141, 61.6 25." 4.1 3455. 4452. 1.91 2121. 563.7 2891. 14462. 2642. 2-2G. 4179• _ ..15^. 61.5_..2.• 4.1 3937, _ 48PB. _ 2.11 0-- 2.557.----- -53370.---•---1.78.32!_ 15 • 173. 61.6 27.5 4.1 -4477. 5327. 2129 2996. 963.7 3913. 21745. 3399. 200'1 4735. - 2002 5366. 187. 61.6 2?,5 4.1 5093. 5769. 2.47 3438. 563.7 4529. 26274. 3792. 2.67 3883. 563.7 2003 6'81. 203. 61.6 2(-.5-_ 4.1 _ 5792. - 667.61614.. 2.87 _ -4330. 7 -5223, 3150?. 44193. 603. 204 68°1. 221. 61.6 2C.` 4.1 6FS4, 2C.5 78"9. '139. 61.6 2".5 4.1 7487. 7112. 3.05 4781. 563.7 692^. 44443. 5019. 1.16 8849. 26^.. 61.6 ?;.5__-4.1 6503. 7564. 7.24 5237. 563.7 793+. 52382. 5441. r.5 4.1 9659. R019. 3.44 5688. 563.7 9095. 207 10128. 289. - 61.6 Z 01477. 5870. ~c y ~ 1 (1 I II II it I , 000 Ksd INSTAU Ell 1988 1990 OPERATION I~ I II I 7 i 7) 7 f DEN 76h, TEXAS RAY RONEHTS HYDRO 0LACK_ B VEATCII CONSUIT_II1GENGI'(EF.RS - - • PROJECT 9435-092 ECONOMIC SIMULATION TYPE OF TURUINE(S) = FRANCIS-1990 TUR81,NE RUNNER DIAMETER 67.5 - - NUMBER OF UNITS 1NSTAI,LED = 1 PRESENT UORTR INVESTI!L NT 2331 YEARLY ECONOMIC EVALUATION SUMMARY (SI 000) - - - ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS CUM 14 UENEFIT NET CUM PV GROSS - - - - NET NET COST PRESENT DEBT NET CUM NET NET YEAR _ 13E11H1T-„ 0 &__M TAX INS-. FT:_F VENEFIT5------ OFNE_FITS RATiOVALUE _-.SERVICESAVINGS _SAVI!!0S. SAVINGS__,__-. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 f__ ..'S---4.t -86. -41 72- -2372.--- 563.7 -65!J~ -65Q.~-- -L2. 1988 563.7 -650. 1300. -588. 1984 0. 0. 61.6 24.5 4.1 -86. -78. -.03 -2409a . 1990 11970 73. 61.6 20.5 4.1 1037. 312. .13 -2019. 563.7 474. -•826. -410. . 1971 1356. -792_!1x5_. _4,1 7171. _._,.7,09._ .30 - `7.622.-- 563.7 --627. - 199. ------201 1992 1537. 85. 61.6 20.5 4.1 1366. 1111. .48 -1220. 563.7 A02. 601. 35. 1993 1742. 92. 61.6 2'.5 4,1 1564. 1519. .65 -812. 563.7 1000. 1603. 296. 1-994 12972363, _ _9-9. 6.1.!f _.`0.5---4.1 1788. 1931.. _.83 -4Q_0__.....°-563.7 - 1224. - 2823_._....__ 578• 1995 2236. 167. 61.6 20.5 4.1 2043. 2348. 1.01 17. 563.7 1479. 4307. 880. 1996 2534. 116. 61.6 2C.° 4,1 2332. 2770. 1.19 439. 563.7 1768. 6075. 1200. 1997 2872. 125. 61.6 2 .5 4..1 266.031-_95-- _1_.37 86-4.$63.7____ -.2097.____ _8172.x_._._.,._ 1535. 1998 3254. 136. 61.6 2 4.1 3^37. 3624. 1.F5 1293. 563.7 2469. 10641. 1884, 1999 36RY. 147. 61.6 2".5 4.1 3455. 4(.57. 1.74 1726. 563.7 2391. 13531. 2246. 2004 4179. _ 159. 61_•6_ 2C,5 4.1 393'-.- - 4x.92,,_ _1.93. _ 2161 ----Sh3.7--- 16901.,;------ 2619.----_.-. 2V01 4735. 173. 61.6 20.5 4.1 4477. 4931. 2.12 2600. 563.7 3913. 20814. 3003, 2002 5366. 187. 61.6 20.5 4.1 5093. 5373. 2.31 3042. 563.7 4529. 25343. 3396. 24046vvfi'..... 201. F1•h 2f .5 4.1 5792. 5818-, 2.50 3487. ---563..7- 5228• -_,_.3,0'11 3798' v T 4,1 6584. 666. 2.69 3935. 563.7 6021. 36592. 4207. 205 78'9. 239, 6I.6 L'.5 4.1 7483. 6715. 2.F8 4385. 563.7 6920. 43511. /.623. 206 F849. 260. <'..•6 2'•5 4.1 850!.71E5. 3.98 4? 37. 563.7 -7939. 51451• 5046.__ 2007 1 0023. 283. 61.6. 20.5 4.1 9659. 7623. 3.27 52920 5 63.7 9095. 60546. 5474. . I~.'Sf li 11000 KW INSTALUD IMPIEDIATF OPERATION NEW GAS PRICES i-'_Kd l• „ ~z:S rcy°'-^1s f t~ t,{: r .?sR„-f.~".,. .ryAr.E-T h DLNTON, Tii%AS DAY ROBERTS HYDRO OL:.CK R VEATCH CONSULTING ENGINEERS PROJECT 9432.)?2 ECONOP11C SIMUI.ATIO1i TYPE OF TURBINE(S) = NEW GAS PRICES TURBINE RUNNER DIAf1ETER ____67.5_ NUMBER OF UNITS INSTALLED 1 PRESENT NORTH INVESTMENT - 2331 - YFARLY ECONOMIC EVALUATION SUMMARY ($1000) AN N-0-4 LOPERATING COSTS_ CUM PW UENEFIT NET- -cum-P.W _ GROSS NET NET COST PRESENT DEBT NET CUM NET NET YEAR BENEFIT_ 0_✓;_.M -_TAX INS. FEE_ _.-11ENEFI75 OE_NEFITS RATIO VALUE SERVICE __-„-SAVINGS_ SAVINGS _ SAVINGS,. _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1988 1 3163. b_i.6 2^.5 4._1 R8?. 424. 18 -1907. 563.7 318 3118. 153• 1989 1115. 68. 61.6 20.5 4.1 a61 8-Z. .36 -1499. 563.1- -_-397. 716. 322. 1996 121)0. 730 61.6 20.5 4.1 1P40. 1223. .52 -1108. 563.7 476. 1192. 501. 1991 1345. 79, 61,6 20.5 411 1142, 1604. .69 -727. 563.7579. 1771. 694, 1492 1425. 85. 61.6 2C.5 r.1 1254. 1973. _ -85 -358. 563.7 690. 2461. 897, 1993 1553. 92. 61,6 2^.5 4.1 1376. 2332. 1.00 1. 563.7 812. 3273. 1109. 1994 1693. 99. 61.6 2'j.` 4.1 150x,_ 2680. 1.15 349. 563.7 944. 4217. 1326. 1995 1846. 107. 61.6 2.^.5 4.7 1652. 3917. 1.29 686 _5837 ~ 5 3 116 1489. 1549- 1996 2C12. 116. 61.6 20.5 4.1 1810, 3344. 1.43 IC13. . 563..7 1246, 6552. 1774. 1997 2193.12,5,. 61.6 20.5 4.1 1981. 3661. 1.57 1330. 563.7 1419. 7969. 2000, 1rQ8 ?19;,. 136. 81.6 2^.` 4.1 216p, X967. 1.70 1836. 563.7 1999 2615. 147. 61,6 21:.5 4.1 237?. 4265. 1.P3 1934. 563.7 1809. 11383. 2454, 2G0 ?F4J-_ 159. 61,E 2f.5 4.1 2°94. 4552. 1.95 2221. 563.7 2031. 13413. 2679. ?vol 3195. 173. 61.6 2f~5 4.1 2837. 4830. 2.07 2499. 563.7 2273. 156 2902. 2002 3374. 187. 61.6 2%K 4.1 310". 5099. 2.19 2768. 5h3.7 2537. 182230 3122. 2v03 'o78 . 203. 61.6 20.5 4.1 3388. 5359. 2.30 3023. 563.7 2825. 21047. 3339. ' 4J^9. 2 1 . 61,6 2^ .S 4.1 3?02. 2004 5611. 5..41 3280. 563.7 313E-, 24186. 3552. 2 ~ ? 5 4369. 239. 61.6 2'.5 4.1 4!'44. 58`4. 2.51 3523. 563,7 3480. 27666. 3762. 20 6 4763. 76^. 61,6 2^.5 4.1 4416. 6CP9. 2.61 3758. 563.7 3853. 3^518. 3967. 2007 5191. 283. 61.6 2^.5 4.1 4P?2. 6316. 2.71 3985. 563.7 4259. 35777. 4167. i I ~I APPENDIX C 1(YDROLOGIC DATA C-1 C'. f f ' •i .•r f"+'S~aya4Y71 S y ,i., .t JUNE 121 1981 DALLAS WATER UTILITIES IMPOUNDING RESERVOIR OPERATION RUN 81.163.1658 AUBREY LAKE1 STUDY 2 - DALLAS WATER SYSTEM OPERATION WITH AUBREY LAKE OWU 079-AU.HS2AU AYOREY - LEWISVILLE OPERATION TO BE PROPOSED TO TEXAS PARKS AND H L.DLLIFE: TOTAL DEMANDS SAME AS AUBREY YIELD STUDY 2 AUBREY IS DRAFTED AT 85.0 MGU UNLESS THE AUBREY DRAWDOWN EX CEED9 THE LEWISVILLE DRAWOOWN BY URE THAN FINE FEET. THEN AUBREY I DRAFTED AT AN DEMANDS OARE F 15AKEN1AWITH SPRING hONTHS NEAR 30 CFS. ALL REMAINING IF LEWISVILLE FALLS TO 481.0 FEET ITS DRAFT IS REDUCED SUCH THAT LEWISVILLE WILL NOT FALL BELOW 48 .0 UNTIL AUBREY FALLS TO AN EyUIVALENT STORAGE 130 000 ACRE FEETI. DEMAND REDUCTION AT LtWISVILLE IS COMPENSAR O AT AUBREY. AFTER BOTH LAKES FALL TO 381000 ACREAVEILlOLEMANOERS SPLIT BE? 'EEN THEM1 OR TAKEN FROM WHICHEVER HAS A'7 S WATER UTILITIES IMPOUNDING RESERVOIR OPERATION DALLAS AUBREY IAKEv STUDY 2 - DALLAS HATER SYSTEM OPERATION WITH AUBREY LAKE DHU Y79-AU.RS2AU CONSERVATION POOL PARAMETERSs TOP: WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 632.50 FT g1l. CAPACITY 792362 AC FT BOTTOM: WATER SURFACE ELEVATION 550,00 FT +n+ L CAPACITY 669 AC FT fP i;"-, AUBREY LAKE IN PERIOD - - - - - - - - START OF PERIOD _ TRA,&ER MEAN CUKFACE ADJUSTED NET NET CHANGE MONTH YEAR NUMBER LFTVMSL N SACRFTE P AC"FT IAC FT AACAFT ACREE5 INCHES~TACNFT 1HACTFOIT~AGE AC FT JAN 1920 1 632.50 792382 133 64288 8067 29301 -1.05 -2564 U 58898 FEB 1920 2 632.50 792362 125 9195 7565 29244 2.22 5410 -3655 MAR 1920 3 632.38 788727 133 23464 8087 29244 2.67 6507 3655 5-148 APR 1920 4 632.50 792382 129 8833 7826 29139 4.77 11583 -10447 MAY 1920 5 632.14 781935 133 126097 8087 29139 -3.94 -9557 10447 117263 JUN 1920 6 632.50 792382 129 9157 7826 29301 0.11 269 0 1191 JUL 192C 7 632.50 792382 133 4369 8087 29176 1.84 4474 -8059 AUG 1920 0 632.22 784323 133 20221 8087 29176 --0048 -1167 4059 5315 SEP 1920 9 632050 792382 129 65625 7826 29301 3.73 910d u 4d8tU OCT 1920 10 63Z.50 792382 133 34337 8087 29301 -1.42 -3467 0 29850 NOV 1920 11 632.50 792382 129 12229 7826 29301 0.94 2295 0 1237 DEC 1920 L2 632.50 792382 133 17884 808/ 29301 0„22 537 0 9393 TOTAL IN YEARS 1512 395699 95470 9.61 23418 U 216375 qr~ AUBREY LAKc - START OF PERIOD - TRANSFER -MEAN SURFACFRLDAyDJUSTED NET- - - NET CHANGE - MONTH YEAR NUMBER FFT MSLON SACRFTE pUACAF _AC EFT AC AFT ACRES INGHE$ _AC FT 1NACTFIAGE ACIPT JAN 1921 13 632.50 792382 133 38233 8087 29301 0.26 635 0 29644 FEB 1921 14 632.`0 192382 120 1-1604 7304 29301 1.07 2613 0 27801 MAR 1921 15 632.50 792382 13;3 18518 8087 29301 1097 4810 0 5754 APR 1921 16 63200 792382 129 52138 7826 29301 0068 1660 0 42781 MAY 1921 17 632.50 792382 133 4487 80,87 24105 3.78 9168 -12635 JUN 1921 18 632.07 719,147 129 14408 7826 28863 4.05 9741 -3030 JUL 1921 19 631.96 776717 133 3285 8087 28567 5.54 13188 -17857 AUG 1921 20 631.34 758860 133 512 8087 27954 7.64 17797 -25239 SEP 1921 21 630.43 733621 129 51 '7826 27262 6.48 14721 -22367 OCT 1921 22 629.61 711254 133 0 6087 26683 6.16 13742 -21696 NOV 1921 23 628080 689558 129 0 7826 26151 3.17 6908 -14605 DEC 1921 24 628.24 674953 1311 33 8087 25783 0.h7 1440 -9361 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 169269 95217 41.49 96423 -126790 lOS9b: JAN 1922 25 627.88 665592 133 173 808'1 25565 0.10 213 -1994 FEB 1922 26 627.57 657598 120 254 7304 25369 0.79 16'10 -8600 MAR 1922 27 627.23 648998 133 424 8087 25120 2.22 4647 -12111 APR 1922 28 626974 636821 129 95112 7826 26175 -2.30 -5017 92432 MAY 1922 29 630.28 729253 133 0001 8087 28369 2.80 6619 63129 7299 JUN 192230 632.50 792382 129 11355 78,26 29253 3.17 7728 -3070 JUL 1922 31 632.40 789312 133 3128 Boaz 28614 8.64 20146 -25572 AUG 1922 32 631.51 763740 133 0 6087 28087 7.63 17059 -25013 SEP 1922 33 630.59 737927 129 0 7826 27380 6.65 15173 -22874 OCT 1922 34 629.75 715057 133 0 8087 26874 3003 6786 -14140 NOV 1922 35 629.21 700317 129 2282 7026 26664 -1.87 -4155 -1260 DEC 1922 36 629.16 699057 133 0 8087 26473 2.11 4655 -12609 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1567 198729 95217 32.91 76924 20656 7299 AUBREY LAKE p---------------- - IN PERIOD- START MONTH YEAR NUMBER E~JVATIONF STAC FT ORAGE PUACAF?R INFLOW DRAFT' KEdA1AREAAFACI IEV USTR AGNFT IN~SIORAaE AGIF1 AC ACRES E C JAN 1923 37 628.68 686448 133 1593 8087 26101 0.03 65 -6426 FEB 1923 38 628.44 680022 120 7109 7304, 26075 0,19 413 -488 MAR 1923 39 628.42 679534 133 4424 8007 25950 1091 4130 -7660 APR 1923 40 628.12 671874 129 1136 1826 25718 0054 1157 •7718 MAY 1923 41 627082 664156 133 752 6087 25411 5.18 10969 -18171 JUN 1923 42 627.11 645985 129 31599 7826 25411 2069 5696 18206 JUL 1923 43 627.83 664191 133 149 8067 25336 7.91 16701 -24506 AUG 1923 44 626.86 639685 133 2 8087 24636 7.51 15418 -23370 SEP 1923 45 625.91 616315 129 0 7026 24031 3.87 7152 -15449 OCT 1923 46 625.27 600866 133 9081 8087 2327 -3.1,3 -6839 7966 NOV 1923 47 625.60 608832 129 1453 7826 2:3954 -0005 -100 -6144 DEC 1923 ri0 625.34 602688 133 28297 8087 24201 -1.34 -2102 23045 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 85595 95217 25.01 52660 -60115 JAN 1924 49 626.29 625733 133 3900 8087 240176 0.60 1224 -5278 FEB 1924 50 626.08 620455 125 2900 7565 24279 t.32 26,11 7211 MAR 1924 51 625.78 613244 133 43550 8087 24754 -0,60 -1238 36834 APR 192!1 52 627.27 650078 129 17550 7826 75343 2.64 55,15 4278 MAY 1924 53 627.44 654356 133 8750 6087 25283 4.80 10113 -9317 JUN 1924 54 627.07 645039 129 1550 7826 24823 7092 16383 -22530 JUL 1924 55 626.16 622509 133 650 8081 24101 8.04 16148 -23452 AUG 1924 56 625,19 599057 133 200 8081 23457 7,32 14309 -22063 SEP 1924 57 624.25 .576994 129 0 7826 22991 3.12 5918 -13675 OCT 1924 58 623.65 563319 133 0 8087 22519 4.66 8782 -16736 N1lV 1924 59 622.91 546583 129 0 7826 ZZ031 3.36 6170 -13867 DEC 1924 60 622.20 532716 133 400 8081 21705 -0.36 -651 -6903 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1570 79450 95418 42.84 85464 -99920 7777 AUB~ V LAKE EE - - - S- - - - ` - - YN PER10 _puu T START gF PR TRA MONtH YEAR NUMBED EFTV1ATI S7TTORCRA E' PU GAG R IACLFT DRAFT ME AAN SUR AARRIAFAGk 1M ES A4 FT* INA IGRRiAGF PILL AG V1 JAN 1925 61 621.97 525813 133 100 S087 214F47 0.60 1012 -8926 FED 1925 62 621035 516887 120 0 7304 21098 2.88 5064 -12248 MAR 1925 63 620.97 504SU 133 0 8087 20610 5.52 9508 -17462 APR 1925 64 620.12 487171 129 8750 7826 20393 2076 11690 -3637 MAY 1925 65 619095 483540 133 15100 8087 20394 2.04 3467 3679 JUN 1925 66 620.13 487219 129 150 7426 19722 8052 14003 -21550 JUL 1925 67 619.03 465669 133 0 8057 18522 9.60 14818 -22712 AUG 1925 68 617.80 442897 133 100 8087 18005 3.60 5402 -13256 SEP 1921 69 617007 429641 129 750 7526 11600 5.04 7392 -14339 OCT 1925 70 616.25 415302 133 7250 8087 17354 1.44 2082 -2786 NOW 1925 71 616.09 412516 129 1400 7826 17195 1.20 1720 -8011 DEC 1925 72 615.62 404499 133 0 8087 16896 2.52 3548 -11502 70TAL IN YEAR: 1567 33600 95217 45.72 72766 -132816 JAN 1916 73 614.95 391997 133 6300 13087 16748 -2.52 -3517 1863 FEB 1926 74 615.06 394860 120 400 7304 16629 2.58 3991 -10775 MAR 1926 75 614.41 384085 133 7200 8087 16482 -0.36 -494 -260 APR 1926 76 614.39 383825 129 15450 7826 16564 0.96 1325 6420 MAY 1926 77 614.78 390253 133 26400 8087 16897 0096 1352 17094 JUN 1926 78 615.79 407347 129 21650 1826 17204 3.96 5104 8249 JUL 1926 79 616.27 415596 133 51350 8087 18014 0.96 1441 41955 AUG 1926 80 618.60 457551 133 12300 0081 18586 3.96 6133 -1787 SEP 1926 81 618.50 455764 129 4200 7826 16435 3.84 5899 -9396 OCT 1926 82 611.99 446368 133 5200 8087 18292 -1.08 -1646 -1108 NOV 1926 83 617.93 445260 129 500 7826 16099 3.00 4525 -11722 DEC 1926 84 617.20 433538 133 12000 8087 18010 -0.60 -901 5747 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 163750 95217 15.96 23612 46288 V;F' 1} pf.' fl c ~ i `r ~ r i~~l ~1 . i~ ~ ~ r 1• r ;f y t s ilia Y~ r r :L r '111 ili AUBREY LAKE _ r PERIOA ELSTARTOOF 5TRQAA6E TRANSFER INFLOW llRAFT MFANAAERAFACERIO~ AUOSTREA?INNEET~ - » IMTSiRHAM9 SPI V HONTH YEAR NUMBER F7 HSL AG FT AC FT AL FT AC FT ACRES 1NLlfES A FT AC FT AC FT JAN 1927 85 617.60 439265 133 12800 8087 18095 3.24 4886 -40 Fig 1927 86 617.60 439245 120 27050 7304 18424 -1092 -2948 42614 MAR 1927 87 618.84 462059 133 49600 8087 20123 1068 2817 38829 APR 1927 88 620.79 500888 129 42800 7824 21333 0060 1067 34036 MAY 1927 89 622.38 534924 133 16750 8087 21890 5.76 10507 289 JUN L921 90 622.40 535213 129 6600 1_826 21770 3.72 6149 -^7846 JUL 1927 91 622.04 527367 133 10900 BOY7 21609 2.88 5186 -2240 AUG 1927 92 621.93 525127 133 300 8087 21263 6.24 11051 -18711 SEP 1927 93 621.05 506416 129 509 7826 20784 3.00 5196 -12393 OCT 1927 94 620.46 494023 133 9050 8087 20643 -0.36 -619 17L5 NOV 1927 95 620.54 495738 129 2850 7826 20535 3.00 5134 -9981 OEC 1927 96 620.06 485757 133 20650 8087 20625 -2.40 -4125 16821 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 201650 95217 25.44 44907 63293 JAN 1926 91 620.87 5UZE70 133 2900 8087 20751 0.96 1661 -6715 FEB 1928 98 620.54 495863 125 4500 7565 20620 0.48 825 -3765 MAR 1928 99 620.36 492098 133 1900 8087 20408 3072 6326 -12380 APR 1928 100 619.75 479710 119 11900 7826 20015 2.04 3403 800 MAY 1928 101 619.79 480518 133 13100 8087 201Z4 1.92 3220 1926 JUN 1928 102 619.89 482444 129 17250 7826 20426 0.72 1226 !1327 JUL 1928 1J3 620.30 490771 133 6150 8087 20407 4.60 7959 -9763 AUG L928 104 619.82 481008 133 3600 8087 19577 5016 8418 -12772 SEP 1928 105 619.16 468236 129 1350 1826 18667 6000 9344 -15691 OCT 1928 106 618.33 452545 133 4350 8087 16372 2064 4042 -7646 NOV 1928 107 617.91 444899 129 4050 1826 18188 0096 1455 -5102 OEC 1928 108 617.63 439797 L33 10650 8081 16164 •-1.44 -ZL87 4818 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1572 81700 95478 27.84 45697 -57903 --r'-r•--eV : 1 77 ; ^-7-.'•-'c. 1 AUOREY LAKE - START OF PERIL - rTR wSFER - - - - - - - -MEAN SURFACE ADJUSTE ~NET- - - NET CHANGE - - - - PERIOD ELEVATION STORAGE PU AGE INFLOW DRAFT AREA EVAPORATION * IN STORAGE SPILL MONTH YEAR NUMBER FT MSL AC FT AC FT AC FT AC FT ACRES INCHES Af, FT AC FT AC FT JAN' 1929 109 617.90 444675 133 7750 8087 18257 -0.12 -183 -21 FEB 1929 110 617090 444654 120 4900 7304 18228 -().24 -365 -1919 MAR 1929 111 617.19 442135 133 5150 8087 18100 2.52 3801 -41bU5 APR 1929 112 617.43 436130 129 3200 7826 17877 2.52 3,154 -8251 MAY 1929 113 616097 427879 133 70350 8087 187L5 -3000 -4619 67075 JUN 1929 114 620.50 494954 129 10450 7826 20517 7.32 12515 -9762 JUL 1929 115 620.03 485192 133 1200 8087 19734 6.36 10459 •-17213 AUG 1929 116 619.15 467979 133 0 8087 18614 6.16 12658 -20612 SEP 1929 111 618.05 447367 129 4750 7826 16226 3000 4557 -•7504 OCT 1929 118 617.63 439863 133 0 8087 17964 1.32 1976 -9930 •NOY 1929 119 617&08 429933 129 850 7826 17692 1.08 1592 -8439 DEC 1929 120 616.60 421494 Y33 5850 8087 17556 -0.12 --1053 -1051 TOTAL IN YEARS 1567 114450 95217 28.20 45032 -24232 JAN 1930 121 616.54 420443 133 0 8087 17422 0.24 348 -8302 FEB 1930 122 616.07 412141 120 1550 7304 17204 0472 1032 -6666 MAR 1930 123 615.68 405475 133 2500 8087 16948 3.24 4576 -10030 APR 1930 124 615.09 395445 129 1750 7826 16645 3.48 4827 -10114 MAY 1930 125 614.44 364671 133 45600 8087 17088 -2.16 -3076 40722 JUN 1930 126 616.83 425393 129 3700 7826 17508 5.64 8219 -12226 JUL 1930 127 616.13 413167 133 200 8087 17031 8.64 12262 -2UO16 AUG 1930 128 614.95 393151 133 0 8087 16539 4.44 6119 -14073 SEP 1930 129 614.10 379018 129 200 1826 16132 5.28 7098 -14595 OCT 1930 130 613.20 364483 133 11650 8087 16022 --2.76 -3605 7581 NOV 193D 131 613.67 372064 129 7BUO 1826 16137 0.24 323 -220 DEC 1930 132 613.66 371844 133 20900 8087 16318 0.72 979 11967 WTAL IN YEARS 1567 96050 95217 27.72 39032 -36632 AU8REY LAKE pp - IN PERIOD- ---p-- MONTH R INFLFT DAC FT RAFT MEAN ~UAFAGE I E PUMA - ADJOSTEV AC NET NET 6 YEAR NlE1N8ER ELEVATION LUNF S~LRFGE- PUAMCAFI FT IN AGTFRAG SPILL F JAN 1931 133 614039 3838111 133 1850 8087 16390 0.36 4192 -6596 FEB 1931 134 613.99 377215 120 15200 7304 16435 -1.44 -1972 9988 MAR 1931 135 bli.60 387203 133 18750 8087 16708 0.24 334 10462 APR 1931 136 615.22 397665 129 9600 7826 16843 2.28 3200 -1297 MAY 1931 137 615.15 39b368 133 3500 8087 16698 3000 4175 -8629 JUN 1931 138 014.63 387739 1Z9 2550 7926 16409 5.76 7676 -13023 JUL 1931 139 613.83 374716 133 1250 8087 16009 5.28 7044 -13748 AUG 1931 140 612098 360968 133 950 8087 15585 5052 7169 -14173 SEP 1931 141 612.07 346795 129 0 7826 15132 7.06 8928 -16625 OCT 1931 142 610.97 330170 133 7250 0087 14861 0.84 1040 -1744 NOV 1931 143 610.85 328426 129 500 7826 14708 0048 588 -7785 DEC 1931 344 610.32 320641 133 5050 8087 14543 -0.36 -•436 -2468 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 66450 95217 29004 38438 -65638 JAN 1932 145 610.15 318173 133 98800 8087 15956 -3.84 -5106 95952 FEB 1932 146 616.18 414125 125 73750 7565 18375 -2.04 -3124 69434 MAR 1932 147 619.95 483559 133 10200 1845 20360 3.96 6719 1769 APR 1932 148 620.03 485328 129 2800 1488 20246 3.60 6014 -4633 MAY 1932 149 619.80 480695 133 11650 8087 2,"1120 1.32 2213 1483 JUN 1932 150 619988 482178 129 1300 7826 19790 1092 3168 -9565 JUL 1932 151 619.39 472613 133 22350 8087 19708 4.32 7095 7301 AUG 1932 152 619.76 479914 133 400 8087 19275 6.60 10601 -18155 SEP 1932 153 618.82 461759 129 2050 7826 18587 2088 4461 -10108 OCT 1932 154 618.26 451651 133 0 8087 10271 3.36 5116 -13070 NOV 1932 155 617.56 438581 129 0 7826 17007 3924 4029 -12526 DEC 1932 156 616.86 426055 133 12950 8087 17833 -2.64 -3923 8919 TOTAL IN YEAR2 1572 236250 82898 22.68 38123 116601 ,.s, AUBREY LAKE _ _ _ ^ _ IN pIpp _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ STAR OF PERIOD - -TR A_NFEEER yy MEAN SURFACE AD F Eq NET N Ts_ FT CNARQE AC D MONTH YEAR NUNBER EL VN~LON SAC FTC PUAG FT IAACCLFT AGAFT ACRES THEMES a ONfi I AG A~ I JAN 1933 157 617.36 434974 133 12800 8047 16064 -1.08 -1626 6472 FEB 1933 158 617.72 441446 120 2950 1304 18084 0.60 904 -5138 MAR 1933 159 617.44 436308 133 28950 8047 18294 1 20 1829 19167 APR 1933 160 618.49 455475 129 8050 7826 18484 3.60 5545 -5192 MAY 1933 161 618.21 450203 133 30400 8087 16694 1.08 1682 20764 JUN 1933 162 619.31 471041 129 1100 7926 18732 1-92 12363 -17960 JUL 1933 163 618.36 453087 133 2350 f8087 18333 3.96 60511 -11654 AUG 1933 164 617.72 441433 133 4350 8087 18041 2.118 4330 -7935 SEP 1933 165 617.28 433499 129 7fe) 7826 11742 3.48 5145 -12092 OCT 1933 166 616,60 421407 133 0 8087 17395 2.88 4175 12129 NOV 1933 167 615090 409278 129 0 7826 17053 2.16 3070 -10767 DEC 1933 168 615.27 398511 133 300 8087 16753 0.84 1173 -8827 10TAL IN YEAR. 1567 93000 95217 290 52 44640 -45290 JAN 1934 169 614.75 389684 133 2700 8087 16553 0.60 824 -6082 FEB 1934 170 614.30 383602 120 3950 7304 16420 0.48 651 -3891 MAR 1934 171 614.14 379711 133 17100 0087 16484 U.36 495 8651 APR 1934 172 614.67 388362 129 12950 7826 16654 0.84 1166 4087 MAY 1934 173 614.91 392449 133 8850 8087 16680 2.16 3002 -2106 JUN 1934 174 614.79 390343 129 0 7026 16379 9.36 12716 -20413 JUL 1934 175 613.53 369870 133 0 8087 15733 10.68 14002 -21956 AUG 1934 176 612.14 347914 133 0 8087 15106 10.08 12689 -20643 SEP 1934 177 610.77 327271 12L' 0 7826 14606 3036 4090 -11787 OCT 1934 178 609091 315484 133 0 8087 14206 4.80 5682 -13636 NOV 1934 179 609.01 301848 129 2450 7826 13900 0.96 1112 -6359 DEC 1934 180 608.55 295489 133 0 B0B7 13665 1.32 1503 -9457 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 48000 95217 45.00 58002 -103652 •.1 r t' AUDREY.LAKE q pp pp {-N--- - IN PERIOD --~•----------GG---_ MONTH YEAR NUMBER ELEVATION ACRAGE- PUMCAEWR INFLOW DRRAfii NE A~URFACE INCA STETAOCNFT 1NA~SIOIA~E AGIFT JAN 1935 181 607.86 286032 133 4150 8081 134~9~7 -2.28 -2564 -41240 FEB 1935 182 607.76 284792 120 1700 7304 13384 0412 1134 -5618 MAR 1935 183 607.34 279174 133 9050 8087 13266 2040 365,3 -1551 APR 1935 184 607.23 277617 129 4150 7826 1160 1.20 1316 -4863 MAY 1935 185 606.86 272754 133 166700 8087 15669 -5.52 -7i08 161954 JUN 1935 186 617.68 440708 L29 46150 1309 18735 1032 2061 42909 JUL 1935 187 619.95 463617 133 3950 _ 369 20145 4.44 7454 -37411 AUG 1935 188 619.76 479871 133 0 8087 19212 7032 11719 -19673 SEP 1935 189 618.74 460204 129 3450 7826 18675 -2.40 -3735 -512 OCT 1935 190 618071 459692 133 4750 8087 18612 0.60 931 -4135 NOW 1935 191 618.49 455551 129 7650 7826 18568 -0.60 -928 881 DEC 1935 192 618.54 456438 133 31950 3067 19137 -0.84 -1340 25336 TOTAL IN YEARs 1567 285650 80982 5.76 10493 195742 JAM 1936 193 619.85 481774 133 2200 8007 19863 0.84 1390 -7144 FEB 1936 194 619.49 474630 125 1150 7565 19212 1080 2882 -9172 HAR 1936 195 619.02 465458 133 1700 8087 18666 3.48 5413 -11667 APR 1936 196 61&.39 453791 129 950 7826 18309 5028 8056 -14803 MAY 1936 197 617459 436988 133 18050 8087 18274 -1.56 -2376 12472 JUN 1.936 198 618.27 451460 129 950 1826 18172 8.28 12539 -19286 JUL 1936 199 617.21 432174 133 200 8087 17618 7008 10395 -18149 AUG 1936 200 616.18 414025 133 0 8067 17036 9.40 13458 -21412 SEP 1936 201 614.92 392613 129 44550 7626 1,7314 -2.04 -2943 39796 OCT 1936 202 617.22 432409 133 25000 8087 14140 0.24 363 16683 NOV 1936 203 6,8.14 449092 129 2200 7826 118280 1.20 1826 -7325 DEC 1936 204 617.74 441767 133 6800 8087 18153 0000 0 -1154 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1572 103750 95478 34.08 51005 -41161 L o 1 t l 1 .i Y f t 1 AUDREY LAKE _ STAR rlog F P IOD - TRpjH _ R ri - -NEAR SURFAEr 020JU TE r T_ _ ' ET E' _ _ _ _ Fi AGAFT ACR S INLFIEEAG FT SNYNAAWdE AC1Fr{ MONTH YEAR NUMBEp R EFTVPAI5h S~RAME P AC F 1AACCL yy JAN 1937 205 617.68 440613 133 16400 8087 18279 --0.72 -1097 9543 FED 1937 206 618.20 450156 120 3600 7304 18315 2,28 3480 -7064 MAR 1937 207 617.81 443092 i 133 8300 1087 18210 0024 364 -18 APR 1937 208 617081 443074 129 3750 7826 18058 4.08 6140 -10087 MAY 1937 209 617.25 432981 133 950 $081 17679 5076 8486 -15490 JUN 1937 210 616036 417497 129 6900 7826 17376 3036 4865 -5662 JUL 1937 211 616.05 411835 133 2250 8087 17042 7.68 10907 -16611 AUG 1937 212 615.08 395224 133 5500 13097, 16637 6012 8485 -10939 SEP 1937 213 614.42 384265 129 0 7826 lb275 6.00 8138 -15835 OCT 1937 214 613.44 368450 133 550 BOB? 15490 1008 1430 -8834 NOV 1937 215 612.89 359616 129 950 7826 15641 0.72 938 -7685 DEC 1937 216 612.40 35031 133 9500 8087 15606 -2088 -3745 5291 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1,367 58650 95217 33.72 48391 -83391 JAM 1938 237 617.74 357222 1.33 29750 8087 16035 -0.84 -1122 22918 FEB 1938 218 614.17 380140 120 69850 7304 17334 -2.40 -3461 66133 MAR 1938 219 617.99 446273 133 82050 8087 20420 -•3.60 -6126 80222 APR 1938 220 622.00 526495 129 14200 7026 21686 1.20 2169 4334 MAY 1938 221 622.20 530829 133 3200 4087 1[589 3.12 5613 -10367 JUN 1938 222 621.71 57.0462 129 3450 7626 21239 3.72 6584 -10831 JUL 1938 223 621021 509631 133 300 $087 20818 4.92 8535 -16189 AUG 1938 224 670.43 493442 133 0 0087 20236 7980 13153 -21107 SEP 1938 225 619.37 472335 129 0 1826 18781 5.88 9203 -16900 OCT 4938 226 618.46 455435 133 200 4087 18354 4.56 6975 -14729 NOV 1930 227 617.68 440706 129 7826 11983 1080 2697 -10394 DEC 1930 228 617.10 430312 133 0 8087 17692 0.84 1238 -9192 TUTAL IN YEAR: 156"1 203000 95217 17.00 45452 63898 ! ~ 1 rf .tt '9t Ii St 7 iC.3 ..f _ ! .'.,rr ~ ,t t. i'1 ¢i:: t ff ! A i .y ;it yv :t Jfj •t;1E . AUBREY LAKE R p - STAAqr OF PERIOpp - TRANSFER - w - y- + - I4EAN SUI PERIOD - pSp - -N-T~ - - NET CHANGE - - MONTH YEAR NUMBER E1~F~WSiDN SAC TE PUACAFT INFLFI DRAFT AAARREA ]NLH,SRATACEFT IN STORAGE SPILL AC FT AC FT JAN 1939 229 616.•58 421120 133 300 8087 17461 -0.48 -698 -6956 Flia 1939 230 616.19 414164 120 900 7304 17289 -0.84 -1210 -5074 0AIR 1939 231 615.89 409090 133 12100 8087 17243 1.92 1759 1987 APR 1939 232 616.01 411071 129 22300 7126 17467 0072 1048 13555 MAY 1939 233 616.78 424632 133 1950 8087 17480 4.56 6642 -12646 JUN 1939 234 616.06 411986 129 3800 7826 17152 4.08 5832 -9729 JUL 1939 235 615.49 402257 133 8087 16715 8.04 11199 -19153 AUG 1939 236 614.35 383104 133 450 8087 16249 5.64 1637 -15141 ,SEP 1939 237 613.41 367963 129 0 7826 15739 7.68 10073 -17770 OCT 1939 238 612.29 350193 133 0 8087 15276 4.44 5652 -•13606 NOV 1939 239 611.39 336587 129 0 7826 14961 0024 299 -7996 DEC 1939 240 610.86 328591 133 O 8087 14687 1.20 1469 --9423 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 42400 95211 37.20 50102 -101952 JAN 1940 241 610.22 319168 133 3150 8087 14435 1.20 1444 -6248 FEB 1940 242 609.79 312920 125 0 7565 14225 -0.12 -142 -7298 MAR 1940 243 609.27 305622 133 500 8087 13921 4.32 5012 -12466 APR 1940 244 608.30 293156 129 23700 7826 13970 0.24 279 15724 MAY 1940 245 609050 308080 133 31000 0087 14547 1.44 1746 21300 JUN 1940 246 610.91 330180 129 45000 7826 15399 1.92 2464 34839 JUL 1940 247 613.,23 365019 133 23400 8087 16051 5.28 7062 8384 AUG 1940 248 613.75 373403 133 2100 8087 15934 7.56 1OU38 -15892 SEP 1940 249 612.16 357511 129 0 7826 15437 7.44 9511 -17268 OCT 1940 250 611.64 340243 133 100 8087 14975 5016 6439 -14293 NOW 1940 251 610668 325950 129 27350 7826 15084 -1.68 -2112 21765 DEC 1940 252 612.13 347715 133 42200 8087 15937 -1008 -1434 35680 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1572 190500 95478 31.68 40367 64217 i T7 } l }r t i r t til i r ~r f r a"? 1 11":. i `IT AUBREY LAKE S - fl F - IH VERIOG p~------ - - - R N MONTH YEAR PNUMBER ERIOD EFi~MSL F PER12 S f.FC~E- PUIM~FAFTR IACLOV DRAFT MEAN AREAFirGE ]EW lllt FT IN TAC Fl ORAGE SPILL F AC JAN 1941 253 614.36 38339``5 133 6450 8087 16420 1.44 1970 -3474 FEB 1941 254 614.15 379921 120 31200 7304 16708 -0.72 -1002 25018 MAR 1941 255 615.65 404939 133 10700 80,87 17093 1.56 2222 524 APR 1941 256 615.68 405463 129 54450 7626 17817 -1.56 -2316 49069 MAY 1941 257 618.43 454532 133 18100 2398 18685 2.76 4298 11537 JUN 1941 258 619.05 466069 129 17085U 7826 22313 -Q.72 -1339 164492 JUL 1941 259 626.49 630561 133 3650 369 24551 64.72 13749 -10335 AUG 1941 260 626.07 620226 133 3650 8087 24184 4.44 8948 -13252 SEP 1941 261 625.52 606974 129 0 7826 23700 6.12 12087 -19764 Oct 1941 262 624.69 587190 133 24750 8087 23729 -2052 -4983 21779 NOV 1941 263 625.60 608969 129 10000 7826 24011 2040 4802 -2499 DEC 1941 264 625.50 606470 133 5550 8087 23915 0084 1674 -4078 TOTAL IN YEARS 1567 339350 81810 20.76 40110 218997 JAN 1942 265 625.33 602392 133 2400 8087 23722 1.80 3558 -9112 FEB 1942 266 624.95 593280 120 2050 7304 23475 2.04 3991 -9125 MAR 1942 267 624.56 584155 133 3200 8087 23209 3.40 6731 -11485 APR 1942 260 624.06 572670 129 278950 -7826 26159 -6.12 -13341 219712 64882 MAY 1942 269 632.50 792382 133 46500 -8087 29301 2.28 5567 0 32979 JUN 194,2 270 632.50 792382 129 41300 ...7826 29301 2.88 7032 U 76571 JUL 1942 271 632.50 792382 133 2400 8067 28093 8.64 20803 -26351 AUG 1942 272 631.59 766U25 133 400 8087 28230 5.40 12IU4 -20258 SEP 1042 213 630.87 745767 129 3600 7826 27760 3.6U 8328 -12425 OCT 1942 274 630.42 733342 133 10100 8087 27574 1.08 2482 --336 NOV 1942 275 630.41 733006 129 4450 7826 27411 3.36 7675 -10922 DEC 1942 276 630.02 722084 133 6100 6087 27212 0.48 1088 -2942 IUTAL IN YEAR. 1567 401450 ,-95217 28.92 66610 116750 1c44i1 r t i`:r T T:,777 J r it .F~ t yr r ~4-_ r~ ~ f 4 r START OF PACI -MANAGFT AC. F AC T E - 11NFLO - DRAFT -ktiA~~~tRFAGEAl1~~~~SOAAi~06J1F7 - - JhA~VOR A6Gj PERIOD EL FT M.S?. EVATION STORFTGE tit - A61FI AMONTH LAYEAR NURSER JAN 1943 277 629.91 119142 133 0 8087 27002 2428 5130 -13084 FEB 1453 278 629.42 706058 120 1150 7304 26675 2.64 5869 -11903 MAR 1943 279 628.98 694155 133 39100 coal 26920 0.24 538 30608 APR 1943 280 630411 724763 129 11750 7826 27270 3.60 8181 -4128 MAY 1943 281 629.96 720635 133 32550 8087 27567 0.00 0 24596 JUN 1943 202 630.85 745231 129 11400 7826 21845 3096 91,89 -5486 JUL 1943 183 630065 739745 133 700 J8087 27365 8.88 20250 -27504 AUG 1943 284 629.65 712241 133 0 Boaz 26565 11.16 24705 -32659 SEP 1943 285 628.42 679582 129 0 7826 25172 5.40 11597 -19294 OCT 1943 206 627.67 660288 133 1850 8087 25354 4.32 9127 -15231 NOV 1943 287 627.07 645057 129 0 7826 24955 3.24 6738 -14435 DEC 1943 288 626.49 630622 133 2550 B087 24669 -1.08 -2220 -3184 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 101050 95217 44.64 99104 -91704 JAN 1944 289 626.36 627438 133 3500 6087 24549 -0.12 -245 -4209 FEES 1944 290 626.19 623219 125 43200 7565 25130 -2204 -4272 40032 MAR 1944 291 627.79 663261 133 18900 8087 25-690 1.44 3084 1862 APR 1944 292 628.30 671123 129 15000 78$6 25846 3!.28 4911 2392 MAY 1944 293 628.19 673515 133 59350 8087 26b69 -0.60 -1333 52729 JUN 1944 294 630.17 726244 129 3500 7926 27099 6.96 15717 -19914 JUL 1944 295 629.43 706330 133 1200 8087 26541 7.20 15925 -22679 AUG 1944 296 628.57 683651 133 2650 8087 25654 7.80 16805 -22109 SEP 1944 297 627.72 66.1542 129 750 7826 25329 6.12 12918 -19865 OCT 1944 298 6?6.94 641L17 133 1200 8067 24865 3.12 6465 -13219 NOV 1944 299 626,40 628458 129 7300 7826 24628 0.48 985 -1382 DF.C 14)44 300 626.35 627076 133 19300 8087 24790 0000 0 11346 THIAL 1., 1LAR: 1512 175850 95478 32.64 70960 10984 J L AU8A1Y LAKE - START OF PERIOD - TRANS GF R - _ - -p M- - - - - - `MEAN SUVACEAl{l20y~USTE -NET- - -ET CHANGE - - MONTH YEAR NUMBER EfiiYFISLpN SACRCTE PUACAR lACLFT ACAFT ACRES A GNES~"AGNFT -NET T}7 AGE AC1FJ JAN 1945 301 626.81 638422 133 9350 8087 24964 0.96 1997 -601 FED 1945 302 626.78 637821 120 97500 7304 26262 -2.64. -5178 96094 MAR 1945 303 630.44 733915 133 166750 8087 28435 -2.64 -6256 58467 106585 APR 1945 304 632.50 792382 129 79550 ---7826 29,3111 0.60 1465 0 10388 MAY 1945 305 632.50 792382 133 7000 0087 29106 4.80 11642 12596 JUN 1945 306 632.07 779786 129 38550 ._._-7826 29166 2.52 6112 )4996 12145 JUL 1945 307 632.50 792382 133 34100 --•8087 29301 2.52 6153 0 19993 AUG 1945 308 632.50 792382 133 1300 8087 28925 7.32 17644 -24298 SEP 1945 309 631.66 768084 129 17100 7826 28591 3048 8291 1112 OCT 1945 310 631.70 769196 133 31650 8087 28883 1080 4332 19364 NOV 1945 311 632.37 788560 129 4850 7826 29026 3000 7257 -10104 DEC 1945 312 632.02 778456 133 1300 8087 28709 1.92 4593 -11247 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 489000 95217 23.64 57452 126787 209111 JAN 1946 313 631.63 767209 133 19100 6087 28732 -0.72 --1124 12870 FEB 1946 314 632.08 780079 120 55750 7304 29111 0.24 582 12303 35681 MAR 1946 315 f Q.30 792302 133 19800 ---8087 29301 1.20 2930 0 11916 APR 1946 316 632.50 792382 129 12900 - -7826 29301 1.92 4688 0 515 MAY 1946 317 632.50 792382 133 8050D --8087 29301 -1.80 -•4395 0 76941 JUN 1946 318 6-32.50 792382 129 77150 7826 29301 4,56 11134 0 58819 JUL 1946 319 632.50 792382 1,33 1650 8087 28813 8.88 21366 -27670 AUG 1946 320 431.54 764712 133 1250 8087 20162 6.72 15171 -22475 SEP 1946 321 630.74 742237 129 1250 7026 27641, 3.00 6911 -13350 OLT 1946 322 630.26 728879 133 0 8087 27203 4.08 9249 -17203 NOV 1946 323 629463 711676 129 65100 7026 27897 -3.36 -1811 65214 DEC 1946 324 631.97 776890 133 63400 - 8087 29061 -0.60 -1453 15492 41407 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 397050 95217 24.12 57248 25113 2zllr' q -r~1 er l ,r!YP' A ,y!^,.+,~►~1i~ 1'X1 fir fY .777W77), i a pp _ - - - - IN PERIODyy- -~--~-----_y AUDREY LAKE - MONTH YEAR PERIOD EFGVMTLONF SPERIOD TORAGE PJAGAF7R IACLFT ARAET META ~ERAFACE INCiES~~A FT INAbTOTAGE APIL F'l UMBER JAN 1947 325 632.50 792382 133 5600 8087 29206 1.56 3797 -16151 FEB 1947 326 632.29 786231 120 1050 7301, 28922 2.52 6074 -12208 MAR 1947 327 631.87 774023 133 9100 8087 28727 0.96 2298 -1152 APR 1947 328 631.83 772671 129 16400 7826 20830 0012 288 8415 MAY 1947 329 632012 781286 133 27000 ---4087 29129 1056 3787 11096 4163 JUN 1947 330 632.50 792382 129 19150----7826 29301 3.84 9376 0 2077 JUL 1947 331 632.50 792382 133 400 8087 28837 9.36 224x93 -30047 AUG 1947 332 631.46 762335 133 1100 6087 2.8033 8052 19903 -26751 SEP 1947 333 630.50 735578 129 0 7826 27282 7.56 17188 -24805 OCT 1941 334 629.59 710693 133 0 8087 26736 3.54 8556 -16510 NOV 1947 335 628098 694183 129 700 7826 26369 1.20 2637 -9634 DEC 1947 336 628.61 684549 133 41650 8061 26744 -1.20 -2674 36370 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1567 122150 95217 39.84 93723 -11463 6240 JAN 1940 337 629.97 720919 133 20350 8087 27374 0.72 1642 10754 FEB 1948 338 630.36 731673 125 59800 7565 28346 -1080 -4252 56612 MAR 1948 339 632.36 780285 133 18750 ----8087 29237 2.04 4910 4097 1721 APR 1948 340 632.50 792382 , "4 2300 7826 29029 5.04 12192 -17589 MAY 1940 341 631.90 774793 133 34100 -.0081 29029 -0.24 -581 17589 9130 JUN 1948 342 632.50 792382 129 6550 7826 29103 4.80 11641 -12788 I JUL 1948 343 632.06 779594 133 1120U 8087 28755 5.64 1333 -10269 AUG 1948 3x14 631.70 769325 133 0 6087 28202 8088 20869 -28823 SEP 1940 345 630.68 740502 129 0 7826 27408 8.04 18363 --26060 OCT 194-1 346 629.73 714442 133 0 0087 26802 4.92 10989 -16943 NOV 1948 347 629.03 695499 129 U 7826 26274 4.92 10772 -184654 DEC, 1948 340 628.32 677030 133 0 8087 25713 2088 6186 -14140 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1572 153050 95478 45.84 106306 -58029 luo(l 4i n~iR 1 - .v C° 1 bl - p 'rt ~ 7t2~ T. AUURESf LAKE - STAR OF PEgRI0G0 - -TRAM FER - - - - - _ - - -NEAR SURFAGER10Ay0~US ED 7- _ NET CHANGE- T - MONTH YEAR NUMBER EFTyM5LON SACRd PUACAFT IACLFT ACAFT ACRES INCNESAA7AC FT 1NAGTFTAGE ACIFT JAN 1949 349 627.77 662890 133 8050 8087 25661 --2.52 -5389 5485 FEB ).949 350 (027.99 666375 120 23250 7304 25983 -0.36 -779 16845 MAR 1949 351 628.64 685220 133 15350 8087 26311 1.32 2894 4702 APR 1949 352 0628081 689722 129 3750 7826 26259 1.80 3939 -7886 NAY 1949 353 628.51 681836 133 32150 8087 26510 0000 0 24196 JUN 1949 354 629.42 706032 129 15950 7826 26826 3.84 8584 -331 JUL 1949 355 629041 705701 133 200 8087 26532 6.48 14327 •22081 AUG 1949 356 628057 683620 133 0 8087 25864 6.24 13449 -21403 SEP 1949 357 627.75 662217 129 9250 74126 25538 2.40 5108 -3555 OCT 1949 358 627.61 658662 133 35950 8087 25876 -0.60 -1294 29290 NOV 1949 359 628.74 687952 17.9 1200 7826 26094 3.96 8611 -•15108 DEC 1949 360 -628.16 672844 133 1000 13087 25739 0.48 1030 -7984 TOTAL IN YEARS 1567 1461OU 95217 23.34 50480 1970 JAN 1950 361 627.85 664060 133 22300 8087 25881 -1.32 -2847 17193 FEB 1950 362 628.51 682053 120 51550 7304 7/.0773 0.36 803 43563 MAR 1950 363 630.14 725616 133 3200 8087 27163 3.96 6964 -13718 APR 1950 364 629.64 711898 129 3650 7026 26899 1.08 2421 -6468 MAY 1950 365 629.40 705430 133 76950 8087 27790 -0.60 -1354) 7U286 JUN 1950 366 631.93 7757 16 129 23650 7626, 28920 3.00 7230 8723 JUL 1950 367 632.23 784439 133 27150 --_-8087 29178 -1.32 -3210 7943 14463 AUG 1950 368 632.50 792382 133 76950 8087 29301 3.24 7911 0 61US5 SEP 1950 369 632,50 792382 129 99900 ----7826 29301 1.20 29.10 0 89271 OCT 1950 370 632.50 792302 133 2800 8087 23988 (a.24 15474 -20220 NOV 1950 371 631.80 772154 129 1350 7826 28423 5028 12.')06 -18853 OLC 1950 372 631.14 753301 133 1250 8087 27957 3.12 7269 -13973 70TAL 114 VLAk: 1567 390610 95217 44.24 51661 74468 1646L1 "f ;rr ' a T t~~-4 F'ys , 77- -M niAll Mal ` ,4 r ~+°1 '~'xT--'.^?r, 'e :°°se.n•m AUBREY LAKE RR ---5S---------------- IN PERIOD- PERIOD ELEVATIONF STORAAGEr PUMP GE INFLOW DRAFT MEAN APEA ACE EVVAPORATIONT# I NhT STOORRAGE SPIL4 MONTH YEAR NUMBER FT MSL AC FT AC FT AC FT AC FT ACRES INCHES AL FI AC FT AC F7 JAN 1951 373 630.64 739328 133 1100 8087 27585 2.04 4689 -11543 FEB 1451 374 630.22 727785 120 5650 7304 27427 -0.96 -2194 660 MAR 1951 375 630.25 728445 133 2050 8087 27236 3.40 7898 -13802 APR 195L 376 629.74 714643 129 1950 7826 26875 3.60 8063 -13810 MAY 1951 377 629.23 700833 133 3350 8087 26582 1080 3987 -8591 JUN 1951 378 628.90 692242 129 45100 7826 26976 --0.60 -1349 38752 JUL 1951 379 630.34 730994 133 9350 BOB-/ 27317 6n48 14751 -13355 AWG 1951 380 629.85 717639 j 133 200 8087 26749 9.72 21667 -29421 SEP 1951 381 628.75 688218 129 200 7826 26027 5.76 12493 -19990 e. OCT 1951 302 627498 668228 133 350 8087 25536 3.84 8172 -15776 NOV 1951 383 627.36 652452 129 350 '7026 25199 2.52 5292 -126:19 DEC 1951 384 626.06 639813 133 200 8087 24817 2.28 4715 -12469 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 69850 95217 39.96 88184 -111984 JAN 1952 385 626.36 627344 133 200 8U87 24413 2.28 4638 -12392 FEB 1952 386 625.85 614952 125 700 i565 24079 1.56 3130 -9870 MAR 1952 387 625.44 605082 133 3350 8087 238Zti 1.32 2621 -722p APR 1952 388 625.14 597857 129 22850 7826 23962 -0.6U -1198 16351 MAY 1952 309 625.82 614208 133 7500 8007 24135 2.04 4103 °4557 JUN 1952 390 625.63 609651 129 400 7826 23739 V.68 15193 -22490 JUL 1952 391 624.69 587161 133 0 8081 23111 8.188 .1110?_ -25056 AUG 195'1 392 623.60 562105 133 0 8067 22327 10.08 10755 -267G9 SEP 1952 393 622.40 535396 129 0 7826 21563 7.44 13,369 -21066 OCT 1952 394 621.43 514330 133 100 8087 20884 7.32 12i'39 -20593 NOV 195?. 395 620.44 493737 129 1150 7826 20487 1.80 3W3 -9620 DEC 1952 396 619.97 484L17 133 1750 8087 20095 -0.12 -201 -6603 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1572 38000 95470 49.68 93324 -149230 vm „ t C'AT .T¢'-j >r -`T,`~T IT' ..l :.:.u { ; !.r' 1 " r .:,t,. Jr 1' i t t r t r ~ l~ r T 11 r u tf i r j! r, r r , a • I AUBREY LAKE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PERIOD ---START NET MONTH YEAR NUMBED EF V%ION SpC11f~E PUAGaFTR IAGLF3 AGAF3 MEANT ERAFACE 1H„j R T~ONFT NAC FTAfl AL ILL JAN 1953 397 619.67 478114 133 500 8087 19427 2.04. 3303 -10757 FEB 1953 398 619.12 467357 120 450 7304 18759 1.20 1876 -8610 MAR 1953 399 618.66 458747 133 2800 8087 18562, 0.48 743 -5897 APR 1953 400 618.34 452650 129 26900 7826 18148 -0.24 -375 19576 MAY 1953 401 619.38 472428 133 19600 B087 19694 2.64 4333 7313 JUN 1953 402 619.75 479741 129 100 4826_ 19141 8.52 13590 -21187 JUL 1953 403 618.65 458554 133 1450 B087 184,28 5.88 9030 --15534 AUG 1953 404 617.81 443020 133 200 8087 17920 7.68 11469 -19223 SEP 1953 405 616.74 423797 129 950 7826 17389 7432 10607 -17354 OCT 1953 406 615.74 406443 133 5250 8087 17064 1.20 1706 -4410 NOV 1953 407 615.48 402033 129 7200 7826 16970 0084 1188 -1685 DEC 1953 408 615938 400348 133 2700 808 16813 2440 3363 -8617 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 113100 95217 39.96 60833 -86383 JAN 1954 409 614.87 391731 133 51756 8087 16653 0.00 0 -2704 FEB 1'154 410 614.71 389027 120 200 73U4 16454 3.84 5265 -12749 MAR 1954 411 613.96 376778 133 0 8087 16066 4.68 6266 -14220 APR 1954 412 613.x06 362559 129 800 7826 15114 1.32 1729 -8626 MAY 1954 413 612.53 353932 133 20050 8087 15780 -0.72 -941 13043 JUN 1954 414 613.35 366975 129 9500 7826 15898 5.40 7154 -5351 JUL 1954 415 613.02 361624 133 0 8087 15479 11.40 14705 °22659 AUG 1954 416 611.55 338965 133 0 8087 14822 11.16 13784 -21138 SEP 1954 417 610009 317227 129 0 7626 14189 0.88 10500 -18197 OCT 1954 418 608080 299030 133 3500 8007 13013 1.80 2072 -6526 NOV 1954 419 608.33 292504 129 300 7826 13547 3.36 3793 -11190 DEC 1954 470 607.50 281314 133 1550 8087 13228 1.56 1720 -814?4 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 41150 95217 52.68 66041 -118541 v ~a f,r ~~?SY``a~f'~ -.mr,~,-s.t x yt .R 1 h t "S' AUBREY LAKE _ _ pp-------------- - IN PERIODy-A-- MONTH YEAR NUMBER LFTWMSLDNF SACRFTE PUAG PAGER IAGLFT AC AFT MEAAR EURF S ACE IECHES AC PO I Fi IN4STORA8U AGlFT JAN 1955 421 606.84 273190 133 1050 8087 12955 1.56 1684 -8568 FEB 1955 422 606.23 264602 920 3200 7304 12737 U972 764 -4748 MAR 1955 423 605.86 259854 133 2750 8087 12585 2.28 2391 -7595 APR 1955 424 605025 252259 129 3500 7826 12417 2.16 2235 -6432 MAY 1955 425 604.73 245827 133 38100 6087 12678 1680 1902 28244 JUN 1955 426 606.96 274071 129 14200 7826 13184 2.52 2769 3734 JUL 1955 427 607.24 277805 133 300 8087 12985 7.68 8310 -15964 AUG 1955 428 606.91 261841 133 0 8D87 12530 7.92 8270 -16224 SEP 1955 429 604.71 245617 129 1350 7826 12046 4.08 4096 -10443 OCT 1955 430 603.85 235174 133 IOU 11745 11531 6.72 6457 -17969 NOW 1955 431 602.29 217205 129 0 12935 10915 5.28 4803 -17LU9 DEC 1955 432 600.68 199596 133 0 12179 10348 3.12 2690 -14736 TOTAL IN YEARz 1567 64550 108076 45.84 46371 -88330 JAN 1956 433 599025 184860 133 0 10706 9842 1.80 1476 -12049 FEB 1956 434 598.03 17L911 125 2000 7565 9506 0.60 415 -5915 MAR 1956 435 597.40 166896 133 0 9386 9182 4.44 3391 -12650 APR 1956 436 596.03 154246 129 200 11i60 8682 4.44 3212 -14043 MAY 1956 437 594.41 140203 133 3000 8087 8287 3.48 2404 -7358 JUN 1956 438 593.52 132845 129 200 20444 7687 8.04 5150 -25265 JUL 1956 439 590.23 107580 193 0 24477 1.969 12.00 6569 -30873 AUG 1.956 It 40 585.52 76707 133 0 26494 5158 13.44 57'17 -32138 SEP 1956 441 579.24 44569 129 0 9961 4035 12.2.4 4116 -13948 OCT 1956 442 575.76 30621 133 1300 8726 3336 4.56 1268 -8561 NOV 1956 443 573,18 22060 129 400 6312 2726 2.40 545 -6328 0L'G 1956 444 510.85 15732 133 3000 6767 2172 1000 195 -3629 TUTAL IN YEAR: 1572 10100 150045 61452 34504 -171957 ^-rf,4'[x.tlR,T"!" ti 77777 77777 lS . AUBREY LAME - - - pFRIOD 1iLSVART OF PERIOD STORAGE PUAPAGFA INFLOW DRAFT MEAN Ajgk ACkR1UAY ~0~ED NET 3hTST OAG~ ^ SPILL MONTH YEAR NUMBER F MSL AC FT AC FT AC FT AC FT ACRE~S INCHES AC Ff AC FT AC FT JAN 195'7 445 1-69.08 11903 133 1000 6461 1466 1020 147 -5481 FEB 1957 446 565.22 6422 120 5450 6214 979 0.00 0 -644 MAR 1951 447 564.56 5778 133 8200 6881 1043 -0.24 -21 1473 AP1i 1957 448 565.99 7251 129 227700 1488 7775 -6.84 -4432 23077,3 MAY 1957 449 604.09 238024 133 243300 2398 15820 -4.92 -6486 247521 JUN 1957 450 620.04 485545 129 44550 1309 20815 4.08 7097 36273 JUL 1957 451 621,78 521818 133 2700 369 21254 8.52 15090 -12626 AUG 1957 452 621.18 509192 133 400 184 20879 6.36 11066 -10717 SEP 1957 453 620.67 498475 129 6000 298 20735 3.48 6013 -182 OCT 1957 454 620.66 498293 133 7800 369 20783 2.16 3741 dB23 NOV 1957 455 620.85 502116 129 102400 417 72520 -1.92 -3603 305115 DEC 1957 456 625.56 607831 133 10550 430 24098 2.28 4579 .5674 TOTAL IN YEARS 1567 660050 26824 14.16 33191 601602 JAN 1958 457 625.19 613505 133 26500 8087 24466 0400 0 18546 FEB 1958 458 626.55 632051 120 6200 7304 24703 1.44 2964 -39411 MAR 1958 459 626.39 628103 133 30800 BOB? 2505 -1020 -2505 25351 APR 1956 460 627.40 653454 129 33650 7826 25710 -1.20 -2571 28524 MAY 1958 461 628.51 681978 133 146800 --8067 27691 -0.12 -217 110404 20719 JUN 1950 462 632.50 792382 129 17650 1426, 29260 5016 12582 -2629 JUL 1950 463 632.41 789753 133 19150 8087 29149 6.48 45740 -4544 AUG 1958 464 632.26 785209 133 1350 8087 28690 8.16 19509 -26113 SEP 1958 465 631.34 759096 129 1250 3826 28102 3.84 8993 -15440 OCT 1950 466 630.80 743656 133 850 8087 27643 3.96 9122 -16226 NOV 1958 467 630.21 727430 129 100 7826 27216 2.52 5715 -13312 DEC 1950 468 629.72 714118 133 300 8087 26899 1.44 3228 -10882 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 204600 95217 30,48 72500 89731 28719 ^'I " 110, 11 TIC kl 47 IiEA PERIOD PURAN Sf MA~PA R 1tIFlFT AC- START AA A AGEiNADDS El CHES OONF; - - INA 7 CHAN I E- - AC1FT AM0NT1i LAYEAR HUMBER EFTVA5LONF SAQRFRE- ^ w _ - JAN 1959 469 629.32 70443236 133 'j 300 8087 26605 1.80 3991 -11645 FES 1959 470 628.88 691591 120 400 1304 26297 1008 2367 -9151 MAR 19,59 471 628.53 682440 133 1350 8087 25943 3036 7264 13868 APR 1959 472 628.00 668572 129 400 7826 25562 3024 6902 -14199 MAY 1959 473 627.44 654373 133 3100 8087 25271 2.64 5560 -10414 JUN 1959 474 627403 643959 129 30900• 7826 25401 0.84 1778 2,1425 JUL 1959 475 627.87 665384 133 8550 8087 25614 1.92 4098 -3502 AUG 1959 476 627.73 661882 133 350 8087 25305 7008 14930 -•22534 SEP 1959 477 626.84 639348 129 1100 7626 24104 5076 11858 -18455 OCT 1959 470 626.10 620893 133 39750 8087 24945 °0.72 -1497 3,3293 NOV 1959 479 627.43 654186 129 2050 7826 25245 3.12 4564 -12211 DEC 1959 480 626.95 641975 133 24550 8087• 25297 0.00 0 16596 1OTAL IN YEAR: 1567 112800 95217 30.12 63815 -44665 JAN 1960 481 627.60 658571 133 41900 8087 25949 -0.12 -259 34205 FEB 1960 482 628.92 692776 125 9400 7565 26480 0.72 1589 371 MAR 1960 483 628.94 693147 133 8650 8087 26443 1956 3438 -2742 APR 1960 484 628.83 690405 129 3400 7826 26210 3.72 8125 -12422 MAY 1960 485 628.36 677903 133 4300 8087 25872 2.76 5951 -9605 JUN 1960 486 627.99 668378 129 2300 7826 25538 4.92 10471 ^-15868 JUL 1960 487 627.37 652510 133 ?1550 `6081 25219 4.56 9606 -6010 AUG 1960 488 627.13 646500 133 950 8087 24961 4.80 9984 -16988 SEP 1960 489 626.45 629512 129 1850 7826 24447 4.32 8801 -14640 OCT 1960 490 625.85 614864 133 950 8087 24083 1.20 24UB -9412 NOV 1960 491 625.46 605452 1,.9 0 7826 23735 3.36 6646 -14343 OEC 1960 492 624.05 591109 133 4650 8087 23546 -2.04 -.1003 699 TUTAL IN YEAR: 1572 69900 95478 29.76 62751 -66763 ~7 -7, 7 77' 1771, AUBREY LAKE - START OF PERIOD rT-p-- - SFER - - - - - - - - - ~-t4E - --URFACER100D -7E I-p~-T - - - CHANGE- - - - - MONTH YEAR NUMBER EFTVMS1 N SACRFTE PUAACCC FT IAC FT AGAFT ACRES INNCHES AC FT 1NAE7F AGIFT JAN 1961 493 624.88 591808 133 12950 8087 23619 0400 0 4996 FEB 1961 494 625.10 596804 120 12900 7304 23775 00+30 0 5716 MAR 1961 495 625.33 602520 133 23000 8067 24097 -0.60 -1205 16251 uPR 1961 496 626.01 618771 129 5150 7826 24188 3.72 7496 -10045 MAY 1961 497 625.59 608726 133 2250 8087 23898 2.04 4063 -9767 JUN 1961 418 625.19 590959 129 51.50 7826 23704 0.48 948 -3495 JUL 1961 499 625.04 595464 133 iZ50 OB 87 23439 4.92 9610 --16314 AUG 1961 500 624.34 57 .50 133 350 8087 22956 6.60 12626 -20230 SEP 1961 501 623.46 5 X920 129 2050 7826 22481 2.52 472! -10368 OCT 1961 502 623.00 48552 133 3700 8087 22179 2.52 4658 -8912 NOV 1961 503 622.60 539640 129 3050 7826 21948 0.48 878 -5525 DEC 1961 504 622.35 534115 133 6450 8087 21819 0.60 1091 -2595 TOTAL AN YEAR: 1567 78250 95217 23.28 44888 -60288 JAN 1962 505 622.23 531520 133 1050 8087 21636 1008 1947 -8851 FEB 1962 506 621.82 522669 120 600 7304 21326 1.92 3412 -9996 MAR 1962 507 621.35 512673 133 2450 8087 21011 2,04 3572 -9076 APR 1962 508 620.92 503597 129 30300 7826 21245 -0.36 -637 23240 MAY 1962 509 622.01 526837 133 2450 8087 21386 5.16 9196 -14700 JUN 191,12 511) 621.72 5.12137 129 30000 9826 21556 -1.08 -19/10 25043 JUL 1962 511 622.48 537180 133 2650 / 0087 21755 4.08 7397 -12701 AUG 1962 512 621.90 524479 133 600 8087 21243 6.36 11259 -18613 SEP 191.2. 513 621.03 505,866 129 140100 7826 23120 -3.00 -5780 138183 OCT 1961 514 627.03 644049 133 3900 8087 24998 2.76 5750 -9804 NOV 1962 515 626.64 634245 129 34800 7826 25223 U.60 1261 25842 UEC 1962 yl6 621.66 660081 133 11300 8087 25503 2.6% 5611 -2265 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1567 261000 95217 22.20 4 4041) 126302 s'^.c,;L? rro r x-s . s _.t.: r~ff .s. : "jfig?ar;.i;tc?"F,?ut' :~P i 2^ 1-.:-n:r r.s tm..,o •n 'ry"^_i7'st 5 F? °-e1';g.x'~ }Px IT-77 r r +;x.~vc r T °cc~} W : +'+i l S ' ` 7 r ,e zf i5 `I' } 5 r ' q ~i . } AUOREY LAKE pp - STAR7 OF PERIOD - -TRpp-~SEER - - _ - - _ - MEAN SURFACER10AD US -SO -T M T -HANGE- _ - - MONTH YEAR NWISER E 7YNSLON SACRPTE PIJA`AFT IALLFT AGAFi ACRES INCAES TA FT I AGJFTAGE ALIFT JAN 1963 517 627.58 657822 133 2700 8007 25371 1.68 3552 -8806 FED 1963 518 627.23 649016 120 1600 7304 25153 1092 4024 -9608 MAR 1963 519 626.85 639408 133 7156 8087 24904 2.64 5479 -6283 APR 1963 520 626.59 633125 129 14800 1826 24897 0.60 1245 5858 MAY 1963 521 626.83 636983 133 14000 81187 25051 1.56 32!i7 3589 JUN 1963 522 626997 642572 129 1750 7826 24851 4080 9910 -15867 JUL 1963 523 626.33 626685 133 300 8087 24409 1.80 3661 -11315 AUG 1963 524 625.87 615370 133 100 8087 23886 8.04 16004 -23858 SEP 1963 525 624.81 591512 129 100 7826 23305 5.76 11186 -18703 OCT 1963 526 624.07 572729 133 100 8087 22169 6.12 11612 -194:+6 NOY 1963 527 623.21 553263 129 200 7826 22270 2.74 5122 -12619 DEC 1963 528 622.64 540644 133 600 8087 21927 U.84 1535 -8889 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1567 44200 95217 38052 76617 -126067 JAN 1964 529 622.24 531735 133 300 8087 21542 0.72 1299 •-8953 FED 1964 530 621.82 522802 125 100 7565 21332 1.44 2560 -9900 MAR 1964 531 621436 512902 133 11100 6087 21206 0048 848 2298 APR 1964 532 621.47 515200 129 15300 7826 21327 1.44 2559 5044 MAY 1964 533 621.70 520244 133 5300 8087 21353 U.48 854 -3508 JUN 1964 534 621.54 516736 129 4700 7826, 21096 5.16 9071 -12068 JUL 1964 535 620.97 504668 133 200 6087' 20569 10.20 17486 -25230 AUG 1964 536 619.74 479430 133 300 6087 19249 6.36 10202 -17856 SEP 1964 537 610.81 461574 129 67400 7826 20574 -0.96 -1646 61349 OCT 1964 538 621.83 522923 133 4000 0087 21290 4.92 8129 -12683 NOV 1964 539 621.23 510240 129 110200 '7826 22150 -0.96 -1620 104323 DEC 1964 5fi0 625.84 614563 133 12.500 430 24330 2004 4136 0067 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1572 231400 87821 31.32 54276 90875 Tzm . r." ;.:!ar T!!,rC r ;ti*nvkfi ~~f '•P:. .7 ° ,.tri. 2rF~' 'P f- If f7 7777 . ty F + J. ti 1 <n [ y~ nS YaTV j'e . r 1c 3AAUBREY LAKE - - START~I ppF PERIOD - TD~iANSgFgER MEAN SURFACER10 O US EO - NET - - NET CV} NGE - - MONTH YEAR NUMBER EFTYMSLOH SACRFGE PACAFT lACLFY ACaFT ACHES INCHEE S AC FT iNACTFFTTAGE ACIV1 JAN 1965 541 626.17 62263220 133 16550 8087 24589 0.36 738 7858 FED 1965 542 626,49 630488 120 29750 7304 25111 -0.84 -1758 24324 MAR 1965 543 627.46 65+4812 133 5200 8087 25333 1.56 3293 -6047 APR 1965 544 627.22 648765 129 3200 7826 25148 2.40 5030 -9521 MAY 191!, 545 626,84 639238 133 27200 8087 25314 -2004 -4303 23549 JUN 1965 546 627.77 662787 129 14850 7826 25618 2.40 5124 2029 JUL 1965 547 627.85 664816 133 900 8087 25396 6.48 13713 -20767 AUG 1965 548 627.03 644049 133 1000 8087 24854 5.64 11681 -18635 SEP 1965 549 626.28 625414 129 29850 7826 24831 2„40 4966 17187 OCT 1965 550 626.98 642601 133 3000 8087 24912 3.48 7224 -12178 NUV 1965 551 626.48 630423 129 5650 7826 24613 2.04 4184 -6231 UEC 1965 552 626.23 624192 133 1200 8087 2433 1.92 3894 -10648 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1567 138350 95217 25.80 53786 -9086 JAN 1966 553 625.79 613544 133 2500 8087 24123 -0.72 -1447 -4007 FEB 1966 554 625.63 609537 120 54050 7304 24797 0.00 0 46866 MAR 1966 555 627.52 656403 133 11350 807 25416 2.64 5592 ••2196 APR 1966 556 627.43 654207 129 182250 - 7826 27287 -U.60 -1364 138175 37742 MAY 1966 557 632.50 792382 133 50900 8087 29301 1.08 2637 0 40309 JUN 1966 558 632.50 792382 129 4450 7826 29093 4.20 i0183 -13430 JUL 1966 559 632.04 770952 133 1450 UOR7 28592 5.88 14010 -20514 AUG 1966 560 631.32 758438 133 10600 8087 28204 4.08 9589 -6943 SEP 1966 561 631.08 751495 129 9550 7826 28096 1.08 2529 -676 OCT 1966 562 631.05 750819 133 1250 8087 27856 3.96 9192 -15896 Nov 1966 563 63p.48 734923 129 950 7826 27431 2.88 6583 -1333U DEC. 1966 564 630.00 721593 133 850 8087 27127 0.60 1356 -8460 TUTAL IN YEAR: 1561 330150 95217 25.08 581360 99589 18o')1 i 9°y 7• 5 ri•: i1 t B°3 tii < ~,r 'i •°.6 1 fw ~r it ;~:i Y i~4. 177 1~ ~...i Et r i , AUBREY.LAKE - 57ARRT OF PERIO - TRpp-~S- - - - - - - - _ - - -MEA,N IN PERIOD -NET - N T CHANGE - - - - MONTH YEAR NUMBER E~~YI~TLON SACRFTE PU~AIPCAF€ IAC FT AG AFT ACRES ING~ES ~AGNFT 1AA,TFTTAGt ASP FT JAN 1967 565 629.6A 713233 13+3 900 6087 26850 2.52 5639 -12693 FEB 1967 566 629.21 700440 120 800 7304 26569 1.08 2391 -8775 MAR 1967 567 628.88 691665 133 1350 8087 26278 1080 3942 •-10546 APR 1967 568 628.48 681119 129 17800 7826 26275 -0.12 -263 10366 MAY 1967 569 628,87 691485 133 57150 8087 21090 O.I2 271 48925 JUN 1967 570 630.68 740410 129 21900 7026 27801 5.64 13066 1137 JUL 1967 571 630.72 741547 133 1150 8087 27531 5.64 12940 -19744 AUG 1967 572 630.01 721803 133 450 8087 26947 6.72 15090 -22594 SEP 1967 573 629.17 699209 129 600 7826 26506 1.68 3711 -10808 OCT 1967 574 628.76 688401 133 300 8087 26122 3.00 6531 -14185 NOV 1967 575 628.21 674216 129 400 7826 25760 0.96 2061 -9358 DEC 1967 576 627.85 664858 133 1050 8087 25561 0.00 0 -6904 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1567 103850 95217 29.04 65379 -55179 JAN 1968 577 627.58 657954 133 18050 8087 25599 0.00 0 10096 FEB 1960 578 627.98 668050 125 5250 7565 25680 0.46 1027 -3217 MAR 1968 579 627.85 664833 133 88900 8087 26818 --0424 -536 81482 APR 1968 580 630.89 746315 129 43550 7826 28446 0.60 1422 34431 MAY 1968 581 632.10 780746 133 87200 8087 29121 0.94 2330 11636 65280 JUN 1968 582 632.50 792382 129 26500 7026 29301 3.00 1325 0 11478 JUL '968 583 632.50 792382 133 6100 8087 29110 4.32 104RU -12334 AUG 1968 584 632.08 780048 133 850 8087 28615 5088 14021 -21125 SEP 1968 585 631.34 750923 129 2950 7826 28161 2.64 6195 -10942 OLT 1968 586 630.95 747981 133 4500 8087 27866 2.b4 6131 -9585 NOV 1968 587 630.61 738396 129 7450 7826 27666 1.68 3873 -4120 DEL 1968 588 630.46 734276 133 1600 8087 27454 1.80 4118 -10472 10TAL IN YEAR: 1572 292900 95478 23.76 56306 65850 7675 ~i ylrl({ti t /A. t~ f t. ici r, g tl z 1 { r t(•. AI{ s t~~c {P#~~. `',GI ,77 r n_;q { 1 ^ r.F l.1t AUBREY LAKE - STARE OF PERIOD - TR NSFER - _ - - - - _ MEAN 5UpHFACf:R10AV~+- - TEO-- - - - GRANGE MONTH YEAR NUMBER EF7 St. N SACRFiE PUACAFT lAAG1FT ACAFT ACRES ING11 RATACNNE7FT 1NAGTFTAGE AL FT JAN 1969 589 630.08 723804 133 14400 8087 27384 0.36 622 5624 FEB 1969 590 630.28 729428 120 41750 7304 27980 -0.36 -839 35405 MAR 1969 591 631.55 764833 133 66500 --8087 28875 0.24 578 275119 30419 APR 1969 592 6321,50 792382 129 22500 ---7826 29301 -1020 -2930 0 11733 MAY 1969 593 632.50 792382 133 141890 --808: 29301 0.36 879 0 132967 JUN 1969 594 632950 792382 129 16900 7326 29248 5.16 12547 -3374 JUL 1969 595 632,.38 789008 133 1850 8087 28792 8.52 20442 -26546 AUG 1969 596 631.46 762462 133 800 8087 28167 4.44 10422 -17576 SEP 1969 597 630.84 744886 129 1350 7826 21742 2.40 5548 -11895 OCT 1969 59d 630.41 732991 133 15350 8087 27572 3.12 7169 227 NOV 1969 599 630.42 733218 129 950 1826 27374 3.12 7117 -1,3864 OEG 1969 600 629.91 7193V* 133 24900 8087 27407 0.36 622 16124 TOTAL IN YEAR. 1567 349050 95217 26052 62607 11674 181119 c .AN 630.50 735478 133 5150 8007 27565 1.08 2481 -5285 FEN J 1970 602 630.31 730193 120 40400 7304 17975 °0.12 -280 33496 MAR 1970 603 631.51 763609 133 51200 8087 28857 0.72 1131 26693 128,'.,2 APR 1970 604 632.50 792382 129 76950 7826 29301 -1.68 -4102 0 15353 MAY 1970 605 632.50 792382 133 24650 8087 29301 1.44 3511 0 1.3180 JUN 1970 606 632.50 792382 129 10800 7826 29177 4.56 11087 --7984 JUL 1970 607 632.23 784398 133 600 8087 28697 6.96 16644 •-23998 AUG 1970 608 631.39 76OA00 133 300 0067 28006 7.32 17084 -24738 SEP 1970 609 630.51 735662 129 62350 7826 26427 0.12 284 5436%1 TOTAL IN YEAR: 1172 274400 71217 20.40 48445 54553 101351 AUBREY LAKE TT - r-_------ IN PERIOD _ - _ _ - PER iiUO ELEVATION STORAGE} PUNPAGER IW LOV DRAFT -MkANAREAFACE EV PORAT OON7* INTS~ RAGE SPILL MONTH YEAR NUM9ER F7 MSL AC F7 AG FT AC F! AC FT ACRES INCHES AL FT AC FT AC F7 OCT 197D 610 632.42 790031 TOTAL FOR 609 MONTHS: 19587 9214092 4186614 2915302 -2351 1594914 MEAN MONTHLY ELEVATION: 622.22 FT MSLs AVERAGE DRAFTS 84.1 M&D 130.2 LES 94318 AC FpT/YR l~ # PRECIPITATIONEOYERRTjiEUKESCRV0Ia5LESSPTHETRUNOFFNEQIVALENTo SEECTEXAS7iIlA7ER DEVELOPMENTRBOARD REPOORRT164a}f)CTOBERs 1970) I !Y?Fa} .,r r ^i i r-m~-'-.w, ^^°'F'j t,•. . Kr 7Rr7Y1 P'J:k' '"`K . r"`t1{+}7 `li nen r ~,MTW7MT77 -v 11 t' S ~~1 17W' te'E)f. {I _ i5 tl t~ +l~ ~~~1 ~fi. i i3~T"T.i _ I V t ~.hr {5 i 1:~1 it 1 t .~t 1.~AUBREY LAKEv STUDY 2 - DALLAS MAYER SYSTEM OPERATION WITH AUBREY LAKE MAU 019-AU.RS2AU CAPACITY TABLE ELEV C A P A C I T Y A C R E F E E T FT MSL 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 530 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 18 32 50 540 72 100 133 172 219 274 337 408 487 573 550 669 779 905 1047 1202 1379 1585 1823 2096 2406 560 2784 3251 3817 4481 5265 6187 7263 8523 10006 11749 570 13770 16081 18662 21491 24570 27897 31459 35246 39261 43496 580 47936 52600 57503 62636 68009 73632 79514 85671 92103 98835 590 105876 113187 120758 128609 136755 145206 153971 163083 172519 182306 600 192473 203010 213927 225235 236933 249092 261661 274590 287951 301737 610 315948 330616 345739 361314 377369 393896 410903 428422 446463 465024 b20 484617 505262 526529 548498 571168 594491 618466 643194 668624 694758 630 721645 749286 717731 807032 837238 868403 900538 933638 967688 1002688 640 1038688 1075588 1113388 1152188 1192038 1232988 1274988 1310038 1362288 1407838 v i f ss1 757" 7p~ ~i l 1 W ~Ti 77 "77 J1 c . CJs t i s s•i 5 .15,I. s . F s t~ st' i AUBREY LAKEm STUDY 2 - DALLAS WATER SYSTEM OPERATION WITH AUBREY LAKE DWU 079-AU.RS2AU AREA TABLE A R E A A C R E S ELEV FT MSL 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 530 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 12 16 20 540 24 31 35 43 51 59 67 75 83 90 550 102 .118 134 149 161 193 220 255 291 334 560 418 516 615 714 853 992 1160 1359 1608 1877 570 2166 2456 2705 2954 3203 3452 3672 3901 4130 4340 580 4539 4789 5018 5240 5498 5747 6017 6297 6567 6897 590 7166 7436 770b 7'496 8296 8606 8936 9276 9596 9911 600 10357 10717 11118 11490 11898 12419 12719 13140 13581 13991 610 14432 14903 15344 15805 16306 16747 17260 17770 18311 18812 620 20374 20916 21618 22319 23022 23624 24326 25129 25732 26535 630 27239 28043 28848 29753 30660 31670 32600 33600 345UO 35500 640 36500 37300 38300 39300 40400 41500 4"1.500 43600 44900 46200 ii i II 777c 11 i'' t ~ ti s 1 . RESULTSUQFEf7PEHATION RUN TOTAL NUMBER OF MONTHS RUNS 609 RESERVOIR SPILLS 45 MONTHSo 7.43; OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF MONTHS RUN WITHEMEAN HONTlH-L)' WIT~iEN1AN MONTHLY ELEVATION ABOVE ELEVATION ABU E REFERENCE OR EQUAL TO THE OR EQUAL TO ]HE ELEVATION REFERENCE ELEVATION REFERENOE ELEVATION 631.0 64 10.5 631,0 93 15.3 629.0 166 27.3 626.0 204 33.5 627.0 242 39.7 625 m 1 307 50..4 62-4.0 316 51.9 622.0 338 55.5 620.0 381 62.6 615.3 496 61.8 610.0 567 93.1 600.6 592 9702 59000 59Y 98.4 NUMBER OF MONTHS WITH MEAN MONTHLY ELEVATION BELOW 590.0 15 10 MONTHSt 1.6% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF MUNII:S RUN