Martin Rule Curve Study Ashley McVicar, APC Maurice James, Water Resources Consulting LLC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir John H. Kerr Dam and Reservoir U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District.
Advertisements

Detention / Infiltration Structure. Figure 21–1 Point Discharge and Downstream Stability Analysis Procedure.
Yellowtail Dam & Bighorn Lake Water Supply & Operations Meeting Billings, Montana October 8, 2009 RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West.
Line Efficiency     Percentage Month Today’s Date
Hydrology and Hydraulics. Reservoir Configuration.
Unit Number Oct 2011 Nov 2011 Dec 2011 Jan 2012 Feb 2012 Mar 2012 Apr 2012 May 2012 Jun 2012 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sep (3/4 Unit) 7 8 Units.
Upper Brushy Creek Flood Study – Flood mapping and management Rainfall depths were derived using USGS SIR , Atlas of Depth Duration Frequency.
Long Term Storage Long term storage means to store water during high inflows years for the benefit of low inflows years. Long term storage means to store.
Start Audio Lecture! FOR462: Watershed Science & Management 1 Streamflow Analysis Module 8.7.
Monroe L. Weber-Shirk S chool of Civil and Environmental Engineering Reservoirs Balancing Supply and Demand Ashokan Kensico Hillview Croton Reservoir Spillway.
Lecture Topic - Hydrology Introduction to Hydrology Reservoir Storage CE-321 Introduction to Environmental Engineering.
31 DECEMBER VARIABLE FLOOD CONTROL DRAFT FOR LIBBY RESERVOIR U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division, North Pacific Region.
Modeling the Boise Reservoir System with Climate Change Leslie Stillwater, Pacific NW Region.
CRFS Technical Committee Fall Meeting LC Operations Update November 20, 2014.
Responding to Drought (and other) Conditions on the Colorado River Urban Water Institute’s 21 st Annual Conference August 14, 2014.
Hood River Basin Study Water Resources Modeling (MODSIM) Taylor Dixon, Hydrologist February 12, 2014.
History and Evolution of the PMP/PMF
CRFS Technical Meeting LC Operations Update November 8, 2011.
Yellowtail Dam & Bighorn Lake Operating Criteria Review Billings, MT September, 2010 RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West.
FERC Relicensing of the Toledo Bend Project – Hydroelectric Power Generation Drought Hydroelectric vs. Water Supply Sabine River Authority Issues.
Water Supply Reallocation Workshop Determining Yield and Space Requirement.
Analysis of Raleigh’s Drought Triggers May 8, 2013 and.
1 Potential Project Betterments to be studied further during Relicensing June 20, 2006 Stakeholder Meeting Middle Fork American River Hydroelectric Project.
Cowichan Lake Storage Assessment – 2015 Final Results Craig Sutherland, M.Sc., P.Eng. July 27, 2015.
Subcommittee on Hydrology/ACWI New Extreme Storm Work Group Status and Plans.
Modeling Development CRFS—Technical Meeting November 14, 2012.
Martin Rule Curve Study Ashley McVicar, APC Maurice James, Water Resources Consulting LLC.
USBR Updates: Green River CRFS Meeting March 27, 2014.
Overview of Alabama Power’s Tallapoosa River Operations Martin Dam Relicensing Informational Meeting April 1, 2008 Andy Sheppard, P.E. Project Mgr. - Hydro.
Yellowtail Dam Modeling Results Brian Marotz Hydropower Mitigation Coordinator.
Yellowtail Dam & Bighorn Lake Water Supply & Operations Meeting Billings, Montana October 9, 2008 RECLAMATION Managing Water in the West.
YCWA Flood Management for Relicensing 9/24/14 9/24/20141.
Millbrook Dam Environmental Assessment Study Dan Marinigh CAO/Secretary-Treasurer Otonabee Region Conservation Authority October 20, 2015 Otonabee Conservation.
USACE Managing a Drought  Overview  Timeline  Depletion Scenario Current Status– 17 Oct 07.
Penny Coombes Sarah Wharton Gary Davies Simon White River Bee, Desing FLOOD ALLEVIATION FEASIBILITY.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Mark Twain Lake Water Control Manual Update Joan Stemler St. Louis District Water Control.
NON-TREATY STORAGE AGREEMENT “Introduction to Operations and the Non Treaty Storage Scenarios” Presenter: Jim Gaspard.
PCWA MFP Operations Model All Models are Wrong But Some Models are Useful.
Lake Powell Operations CRFS Spring 2015 March 25, 2015.
1 Upper Basin Snowpack as of 3/26/2014
CRFS Technical Committee Fall Meeting LC Operations Update December 8, 2015.
CRFS Technical Meeting LC Operations Update March 27, 2014.
Wyoming Association of Rural Water Systems Harry LaBonde Jr, P.E. Director Wyoming Water Development Office April 19, 2016.
City Council March 4, Introduction The UCRA recommends the development of a storm water storage basin just to the east of FM 1223, south of Avenue.
1 Hydrological Regime of the Mekong River Hydrological Regime of the Mekong basin depends on climatic conditions of the wet and dry seasons. High water.
CRFS Technical Committee Spring Meeting LC Operations Update March 15, 2016.
Jan 2016 Solar Lunar Data.
Se-Yeun Lee1, Alan F. Hamlet 1,2, Carolyn J. Fitzgerald3, Stephen J
Hazards Planning and Risk Management Flood Frequency Analysis
December 2017 Dynamic Position Analysis Modeling Assumptions
Average Monthly Temperature and Rainfall
SAFETY IS TVA’S NUMBER ONE PRIORITY
Constructing Climate Graphs
Gantt Chart Enter Year Here Activities Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Flood Frequency Analysis
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PRODUCT ROADMAP TITLE Roadmap Tagline MILESTONE MILESTONE
Calendar Year 2009 Insure Oklahoma Total & Projected Enrollment
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PRODUCT ROADMAP TITLE Roadmap Tagline MILESTONE MILESTONE
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Text for section 1 1 Text for section 2 2 Text for section 3 3
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 PRODUCT ROADMAP TITLE Roadmap Tagline MILESTONE MILESTONE
Pilot of revised survey
Presentation transcript:

Martin Rule Curve Study Ashley McVicar, APC Maurice James, Water Resources Consulting LLC

Martin Rule Curve Study  Purpose Preliminary modeling study to determine the feasibility of a higher winter pool at Martin in accordance with MIG 3 Project Operations Study Plan. Preliminary modeling study to determine the feasibility of a higher winter pool at Martin in accordance with MIG 3 Project Operations Study Plan.

Martin Rule Curve Study  Design Flood Study Approach Determine historical flood event to model for the 100 year design flood Determine historical flood event to model for the 100 year design flood Replicate operations for the actual flood event in an operation spreadsheet Replicate operations for the actual flood event in an operation spreadsheet Evaluate a higher winter pool vs. baseline of elevation 480’ Evaluate a higher winter pool vs. baseline of elevation 480’ Compare Results Compare Results

“100 Year Flood”  Has a specific definition US Dept of Interior Bulletin 17B US Dept of Interior Bulletin 17B  Applied by Regulating Agencies (FEMA, COE, FERC, the States, etc.)  Frequency Analysis of Maximum Annual Flood Events.  1% chance of occurrence in each year.  Generally concerned with peak flow  For Reservoirs – volume also critical

How is this Analysis Done?  Select Maximum Flood Event for each year. Prefer 30+ year record. Prefer 30+ year record.  Apply a specific frequency analysis to data. COE Frequency Analysis program COE Frequency Analysis program Project to 1% probability of exceedence. Project to 1% probability of exceedence.

Monthly Analysis  Not an established procedure.  Referred to as a “Partial Duration” Only considering part of the record. Only considering part of the record.  Maximum event in month for the period of record.  Annual peak procedures may not apply.  Will still have a probability of exceedence but not necessarily 1%.

What does all this say?  There is a chance that the 100 year flood could occur in any month of the year.  The greatest chance would be during the months of Dec. through April.  Not necessary for the record to have an event near or greater than the 1% event.

Martin Rule Curve Study  APC Flood Frequency Analysis Model developed by COE – Hydrologic Engineering Center in Davis, CA Model developed by COE – Hydrologic Engineering Center in Davis, CA Utilizes the COE unimpaired flow database created as part of the ACT Comprehensive Study Utilizes the COE unimpaired flow database created as part of the ACT Comprehensive Study Submitted to the COE by APC in November 2005 Submitted to the COE by APC in November 2005

Martin Rule Curve Study  Martin flow 100 yr flow unregulated = 130,000 cfs-days 100 yr flow unregulated = 130,000 cfs-days March 1990 flow unregulated = 125,019 cfs- days (96% of 100 year flood) March 1990 flow unregulated = 125,019 cfs- days (96% of 100 year flood) March 1990 inflow regulated used in Martin Rule Curve evaluation (with Harris and Martin in place) = 92,307 cfs-days (71% of 100 year unregulated flood) March 1990 inflow regulated used in Martin Rule Curve evaluation (with Harris and Martin in place) = 92,307 cfs-days (71% of 100 year unregulated flood)

Basin Wide Rainfall

Current Martin Flood Control Guidelines Pre-Turbine Upgrades

Martin Rule Curve Study Post Turbine Upgrades  General Assumptions Martin Turbine Capacity = (based on upgrades completed in 2004) Martin Turbine Capacity = (based on upgrades completed in 2004) Yates Turbine Capacity = Yates Turbine Capacity = Thurlow Turbine Capacity = Thurlow Turbine Capacity = spillway gates 20 spillway gates Ability to open 2 spillway gates an hour Ability to open 2 spillway gates an hour

Martin Rule Curve Study  Design Flood Evaluation Operational criteria set forth in model accurately replicated historical conditions Operational criteria set forth in model accurately replicated historical conditions

Martin Rule Curve Study  Evaluation of Winter Pool of 480’ vs. 483’ Used current operational criteria set forth by March 1990 flood historical operations and began pool at both 480’ and 483’ Used current operational criteria set forth by March 1990 flood historical operations and began pool at both 480’ and 483’

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Martin Rule Curve Study  Elevation 480’ vs 483’ Results Martin pool kept below top of easement elevation 490 for both Martin pool kept below top of easement elevation 490 for both Beginning winter pool elevation of 483’ results in earlier releases as well as approximately 25-30k higher discharge during the peak Beginning winter pool elevation of 483’ results in earlier releases as well as approximately 25-30k higher discharge during the peak  Resulting outflows passed downstream with HEC-RAS model

Martin Rule Curve Study  Results Elevations downstream result in a 1’ – 3’ higher elevation downstream to Alabama River. Elevations downstream result in a 1’ – 3’ higher elevation downstream to Alabama River. COE uses FEMA’s requirement of “no increase of peak elevation downstream” COE uses FEMA’s requirement of “no increase of peak elevation downstream” FERC defers to the COE for flood analysis FERC defers to the COE for flood analysis FERC would require a full analysis of flood, environmental and recreational impacts of proposed vs. current operation FERC would require a full analysis of flood, environmental and recreational impacts of proposed vs. current operation

Martin Rule Curve Study  Further Study during Relicensing Required MIG 3 proposals evaluated MIG 3 proposals evaluated Look at different winter pool elevation and/or shape of Rule Curve Look at different winter pool elevation and/or shape of Rule Curve Look at different operational plans Look at different operational plans Further evaluate downstream flood & environmental impacts and present these effects and associated mitigation measures to FERC Further evaluate downstream flood & environmental impacts and present these effects and associated mitigation measures to FERC FERC will then evaluate and balance all interests FERC will then evaluate and balance all interests