The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-01-13-LYMAN WATER SYSTEM AND LYMAN SPRING STUDY(AE2S) I +` 1 w x .. = - `� ^ Err'�- �•- � { ! �.. 'r _ .��- C•-' -_� � .�;�.ff°f .l '{ lam' xo EZS City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study To: Brian Heaston, Project Engineer, City of Bozeman •'••PIT•••• From: Scott Buecker, PE, AE2S � SC60TT Scott Jungwirth, EIT, AE2S Greg Warren, RPG, CH2M a BUECK R Colin Shaw, Montana State University �s No 0/ /? / Kevin Boggs, g PhD RPG CH , CH2M ;•�i o40518PE '• S�'*iCENSSO.G?.• Date: January13`" 2017 ••••• 0.0NAL.... '•. ''•••.......••••' Table of Contents PURPOSE......................................................................................................................................... 5 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................. 5 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 6 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................. 7 Lyman Water Source History and Description............................................................................ 7 Historical Lyman Creek Flow and Lyman Spring Production Records.................................. 12 CurrentLyman Spring Yield....................................................................................................... 14 Purpose of the Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study....................................................... 14 SiteGeology.............................................................................................................................. 21 SurficialGeologic Units......................................................................................................... 21 BedrockGeologic Units......................................................................................................... 22 Structural Geologic Setting....................................................................................................... 23 Structural Control of Groundwater Flow.................................................................................. 24 LymanSpring Aquifer Yield........................................................................................................... 24 LymanSpring Recharge Analysis............................................................................................... 26 Interpretation of Lyman Spring Recession Curves................................................................ 27 City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big.Go Beyond. Pj AE2S www.ae2s.com 1 Site Geologic and Hydrogeologic Setting.................................................................................. 29 Recommendations for Increasing Lyman Spring Yield ............................................................. 34 Recommendation 1: Vertical Exploratory Borehole............................................................. 34 Recommendation 2: Angled Exploratory Borehole.............................................................. 36 Recommendation 3: Horizontal Exploratory Borehole ........................................................37 Summary of Recommended Borehole Advantages and Disadvantages ......................................40 Permitting ....................................................................................................................... ..........40 Recommended Path Forward for Exploratory and Test Well Drilling..........................................44 Addendum —Exploratory Drilling Go/No Go Analysis..................................................................45 LymanSpring Improvements....................................................................................................46 Engineer's Opinion of Probable Construction Project Costs................................................46 Controls Improvements Project to Eliminate Spring Box Overflow ......................................... 48 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. City of Bozeman's Water Rights on Lyman Creek............................................................. 8 Table 2. Lyman Spring Total Yield Exceeding City's Instantaneous Water Right.......................... 13 Table 3. Lyman Spring Recession Curve Decay Coefficients and Estimated Peak Aquifer Flows. 29 Table 4. Recommended Actions to Increase Aquifer Production ................................................ 41 Table 5. Conceptual-Level Total Project Cost Estimate................................................................47 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Aerial Proximity Map for Lyman Spring and Lyman Creek.............................................. 8 Figure 2. Cross-Section of the Main Spring Collector (Gaston Engineering As-Built, 1992)......... 10 Figure 3. General Location of Flow Measurement Structures on the Lyman Creek Source........ 13 Figure 4. Lyman Spring Yield (02/2010—05/2016) ...................................................................... 15 Figure 5. Lyman Spring Yield, Diverted System Yield and Overflow from Spring Junction Box (02/2010—05/2016)..................................................................................................................... 17 Figure6. Geologic Map................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 7. Geologic Map Lyman Spring Production with Sacajawea Snotel Snow Water Equivalent (2009-2015)............................................................... 25 Figure 8. Groundwater Waves from Recharge to Spring Discharge (Kresic and Stevanovic, 2010) ....................................................................................................................................................... 27 Figure 9. Natural Log of Lyman Spring Production with Recession Limb Slopes (2009-2015)..... 28 Figure 10. Site Geologic Features and Outcrop Map.................................................................... 30 City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big.Go Beyond. PJ AE www.ae2s.com Figure 11. Geologic Field Data and Exploratory Borehole Locations ........................................... 31 Figure 12. Geologic Field Data and Exploratory Borehole Locations ........................................... 32 Figure 13. Geologic Cross-Section A-A.......................................................................................... 35 Figure 14. Geologic Profile B-B ..................................................................................................... 38 Appendix A: Lyman Canyon Stereo Nets Appendix B: Lyman Creek and Spring Flow Data I i 1 1 I City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & I yman Spring Study jThink Big. Go Beyond. .. AE-zs www.ae2s.com 1 1 i 1 i J 1 1 � A a PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to evaluate the potential of the Lyman Spring geologic formation to reliably sustain flow rates of at least 5.95 cfs on a year-round basis such that the City can achieve the full measure of its 4,346 acre-feet Lyman water right and preserve the status of the Lyman water systern as groundwater not under the influence of surface water. In essence, the City seeks to determine if a more efficient method of water diversion can be developed for the Lyman water system that increases the annual volumetric reliable yield of the source and maximizes the capacity of existing infrastructure already built to handle the full measure of the City's Lyman water rights. CONCLUSIONS Based on the research conducted and described in detail herein, the consultant project team has drawn the following conclusions: 1. The Lyman water system has sufficient infrastructure capacity to divert and convey the full measure of the city's 5.95 cfs instantaneous water right. Monitoring data show that since the addition of the third spring collector in 2009 that Lyman Spring produces flows in excess of 5.95 cfs for an average of 48 days per year. 2. Since the addition of the third spring collector, monitoring data indicate that the total annual average yield from Lyman Spring is approximately 2,610 ac-ft. Of this total spring yield, an annual average volume of 1,789 ac-ft is diverted into the Lyman water system. The City is not able to capture all of the spring's production. At times the spring produces more than the City's 5.95 instantaneous water right. Furthermore, current manual operations of the spring diversion are inefficient and unable to divert 100% of water from the spring collectors into the Lyman system during those times when the spring is producing less than 5.95 cfs. 3. Though the exact nature of geologic formations underlying Lyman Spring is still unknown, surface investigation and fault mapping indicate an approximately 100 to 200-foot-deep, moderately karstic, Mission Canyon limestone aquifer underneath Lyman Spring that could be conveying significantly more water than that produced at, and collected by, the three existing spring collectors. 4. It is estimated that a well drilled into the Mission Canyon limestone aquifer would likely increase the total diverted yield of the Lyman system by at least an additional 700 acre-feet per year to a total of 2,489 ac-ft per year (ac-ft/yr). City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. J A www.ae2s.com J 5. Further clarification of the additional yield that could be obtained from the Mission Canyon limestone aquifer would require a strategically planned and sequenced exploratory and test well drilling and aquifer pumping project. The conclusions drawn from aquifer pumping will be limited if the aquifer is unable to be fully stressed for at least two days at 3,000 gallons per minute (gpm) or more. The withdrawal and discharge of this amount of flow may be permitted through Department of Environmental Quality's General Construction Dewatering Permit; however, the control, treatment and discharge of this flow to Lyman Creek would be logistically challenging and expensive. 6. Utilization of a well to divert water from the Lyman Spring aquifer formation would require a water rights change to be approved by DNRC to include a new point of diversion for the supply source. 7. Current system operations are inefficient and require operators to manually set diversion rates such that water diverted at the spring collectors constantly overflows the junction box connecting the collectors to the Lyman transmission pipeline. This overflow regime is necessary to prevent air-lock of the downstream PRV stations which is extremely difficult to remedy. 8. n diverted yield increase of approximately 400 to 500 ac-ft/yr, producing a total annual yield of 2,189 to 2,289 ac-ft/yr, could be gained through curtailing overflows at the junction box by installing remote monitoring and controls that automate the diversion rate. This diversion efficiency project would not require a water rights change. 9. The preliminary total project cost estimate for a well drilled into the Mission Canyon limestone formation with related improvements (wellhouse, power, etc.) is $2.36 million, whereas the cost of a remote monitoring and controls project is roughly an order of magnitude less expensive. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the analysis included herein and subsequent workshops and discussions held with City of Bozeman staff, the project team recommends the following path forward: 1. Immediately pursue a project to curtail overflows at the junction box by providing remote monitoring and controls that automate the setting of diversion rates into the Lyman transmission pipeline. Cily of Bozeman I yman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big, Go Beyond.nE5 www.ae2s.com 2. Postpone exploratory and test well drilling for the following reasons: • Drilling presents risks, both hard (harm to the existing spring formation and water quality, disposal of test well water) and soft (uncertainties with the DNRC water rights change process). • The total project cost of a permanent production well installation would be approximately $2.4 million. • A substantial portion of the additional diverted yield that the City could obtain by installing a well at Lyman Spring would result from eliminating the overflow of spring water from the Lyman Spring junction box. This efficiency project can be done for an order of magnitude lower cost and with much less risk. 3. Pursue a project to replace the Lyman Reservoir with a new ground storage tank to eliminate leakage from the existing reservoir, conduct a condition assessment of the Lyman water transmission pipeline and complete condition-based repair and rehabilitation of the pipeline, and complete upgrades to the Pear Street Booster Station. 4. Exploratory drill and test the Lyman Spring aquifer in the future if the City's water supply and system demands warrant the risk and the relatively high cost-benefit ratio. The additional water obtained would likely be relatively small (200 to 400 ac-ft annually), however, the advantage of a vertical well is that the City would have more control over the timing of yields. BACKGROUND Lyman Watei, Source History and Desci-iption Lyman Creek originates from a spring in Lyman Canyon located on the southern end of the Bridger Mountain Range. The creek discharges to Bridger Creek approximately 2 miles northeast of the City of Bozeman. Figure 1 is a Google Earth image showing the spring location in reference to the City. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Siudy Think Big. Go Deyond. J A www.ae25.com µ+ .. ,. k ZOO �pring ' ��'� Ifni � �' .y� � ►f . r �.. �I r- yjf.X� Id04 , �Iic ri � '' ' �• I I t; � 'Np'"'`t v�. 1 1 Figure 1. Aerial Proximity Map for Lyman Spring and Lyman Creek Table 1 lists the City's existing water rights on Lyman Creek. Table 1. City of Bozeman's Water Rights on Lyman Creek WW Water Right Type Maximum Max of Priority Number Flow Rates volume Use Date 41H-140882-00 Lyman Stream 1,683.75 1 3.75 2,740.2 1 1/1 - 12/31 1864 411-1-140883-00 Lyman Stream 987.80 2.20 1,606.0 1/1 - 12/31 1881 Total Right 2,671.55 5.95 4,346.2 From approximately 1889 to 1989, the City diverted surface water from Lyman Creek and conveyed that water to Lyman Reservoir and then into its water distribution system. Surface water diversion and conveyance infrastructure were capable of diverting and conveying the City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. �j A www.ae2s.com city's full instantaneous water right of 5.95 cfs and there are multiple data points in the historic record illustrating that the City did divert its full water right. In 1991 the City initiated a project to construct two spring collectors near the spring source to capture water before it was exposed to the surface in order to protect it from potential contamination and comply with the Surface Water Treatment Rule of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. A water rights change application was filed with the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) to add new points of diversion for the spring collectors. The Notice of Completion for the change was filed in 1993, and the rights were amended in 1994 to reflect the new points of diversion. The historical surface water diversion points remain valid components of the water rights to provide emergency water supply. A third spring collector was constructed in 2008, along with a new junction box to connect the spring collectors to the existing transmission pipeline leading to Lyman Reservoir. Additionally, improvements to the chlorination and fluoridation facility at the Lyman Reservoir were also made at this time. The spring collectors vary in construction specifics, but generally consist of 8 to 12 ft excavated trenches with a perforated pipe or well screen section laid in the invert, backfilled with drain rock and sealed/dammed downstream with either sheet-pile or clay. The "Main Spring Collector", which is at the upper end (northeast) of the spring collector complex, is shown in Figure 2. The water from the Lyman source is classified as groundwater not under the influence of surface water. Therefore, the water supply is not subjected to surface water treatment requirements. The water supply is simply chlorinated and fluoridated at the City's chemical storage and feed facility located at Lyman Reservoir. After treatment, the water is stored in the 5.3 MG Lyman Reservoir that was originally constructed in 1889, and has been rehabilitated on numerous occasions since. The reservoir is a concrete trapezoidal structure that is currently leaking at a rate of 100 to 300 gpm, depending 1 on the water level in the reservoir. Recent operations generally keep a lower operating level to mitigate leakage and as of 2016 the leak was estimated by staff at 200 gpm. There are two pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations between the junction box and the chemical feed plant. Air must be kept out of the transmission line and the uppermost PRV station, or the PRV becomes air locked, and the air is extremely difficult to remove. There is an J air relief valve downstream of the PRV, but not upstream. System operations prevent air from entering the pipeline by continuously allowing some water to pass above an overflow weir in the junction box j City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & I yman Spring Study Think BJg, Go Beyond. AEZS www.ae2s.com J CuNTRACIGR TO REESTABLISH ,-EXIST'NG CONTOURS FUH SURFACE DRAINAGE 6" THICK BENTONITE CLAY SEAL COVERED WITH 6 NATURAL MATERIAI S (SEY NOTE.) ` 1 O SHEE1 FILE 26 L.F. OF 24"UTA, Y 'NATURAL GRAVEL BACKFILL --y PERFORM ED PIPE _FABRIC 74" RESTRAINED �__ - JUIN1 DIP +- o P% SI OPF - I - 5, (FUR GRADE)=IN� lu 111;-IIIIIII (sEE SHT 2) �liI=UII Il)r 41 htt' Wj (RESTRAINED JUINT CLAMP WI'H ALL 5-10' Fit-YOND ENb OF PIPE I FIRE AU 24" SRT DIP K 24" PE PVC I65 P51 Br_UE BkUTE Figure 2. Cross-Section of the Main Lyman Spring Collector (Gaston Engineering As-Built, 1992) that is approximately 3.5 feet above the crown of the inlet to the 16" DIP transmission pipe. This overflow is directed back to the channel of Lyman Creek. The transmission pipe transitions to an 18" asbestos cement pipe before reaching the Lyman Reservoir. All components of the Lyman Spring system have been designed to convey, treat, store and distribute the City's full instantaneous (5.95 cfs) and annual water right (4,346 ac-ft/yr). The following summary describes the capacity of the various hydraulic components of the system, based on design criteria, engineering calculations or production records: Spring Collectors and Pipelines — Design of spring collectors is not an exact science, but the collectors were installed with the intention of capturing as much of the Lyman Spring output as possible, using sheet pile and clay dam walls to force the water into pipes. This is illustrated both by the size of the pipes connecting the collectors to the junction box, as well as the volume of water that has been conveyed in the years since the spring collectors were Completed: ■ The pipeline to the Upper Collector is approximately 400 feet of 16" ductile iron pipe DIP installed at approximate 6% slope (Lyman Creek Water System Improvements Phase III As-Builts, Gaston Engineering & Surveying, 1991). - The capacity of this pipe, using Hazen Williams formula and roughness coefficient of 130, is well over 20 cfs. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. & inE. s www.ae2s.com ■ The pipeline to the lower two collectors (Collector Nos. 2 and 3) is approximately 125 feet of 12" C900PVC at 4.65% slope (Lyman Creek Water System Infrastructure Improvements Record Drawings, Morrison-Maierle, 2009). - The capacity of this pipe, using Hazen Williams formula and roughness coefficient of 140, is well over 10 cfs. • Lyman Transmission Pipeline: ■ There is approximately 6,180 It of 16" DIP transmission pipeline from the junction box to a connection to older 18" asbestos cement (AC) pipe. There is approximately 2,400 feet of 18" AC to the Lyman Treatment Plant. Using a relatively conservative Hazen Williams coefficient of 115 with approximately 400 feet of elevation head indicates the capacity of the pipeline is over 25 cfs. ■ The PRV stations on the transmission line consist of two Model 90-01 8-in diameter Cla-Val pressure reducing valves in series, resulting in a flow rating of 8.2 cfs. (Cla-Val technical literature, www.cla-val.com) • Lyman Treatment Plant — Design drawings verify that the design intent was to convey the full 2,658 gpm of instantaneous water right. The process piping inside the building is 12-inch and is capable of easily conveying 5.95 cfs. • Transmission to City's Distribution System: ■ There is approximately 3,790 ft of 18" cast iron (CI) transmission pipeline from Lyman Reservoir to the City's distribution system. Using a relatively conservative Hazen Williams coefficient of 100 with approximately 280 feet of elevation head indicates the capacity of the pipeline is approximately 31 cfs. Lyman Spring Jiltunction Box Operation The level of water passing over the overflow weir is manually controlled by periodically sending an operator up to the junction box to record the level in the box, and then adjusting the flow setpoint for a flow control valve located at the Lyman Reservoir inlet control building. This is a very labor intensive and inefficient method of setting diversion rates from the Lyman spring collection system. The amount of water overflowing from the junction box generally ranges from 175 to 400 gpm. j The overflow rate varies based on the control valve's position and the instantaneous yield of the spring. If the valve's position is not altered when spring production is increasing, the overflow rate increases proportionally. City operators attempt to strike a balance between the i risk of air entrainment in the transmission line and excessive overflow diverted back to Lyman Creek. In recent years City staff have been able to reduce the average overflow amount through more frequent monitoring of the water level in the junction box and follow-up adjustment of the control valve located in the reservoir inlet control building. l City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big, Go Beyond. AE�S www.ae2s.com J Diversions into the transmission pipeline at the junction box are limited to the City's water right of 5.95 cfs when the instantaneous yield of the Lyman spring collectors exceeds this value. During these times of high yield, excess water passes above the overflow weir in the junction box and is directed back to the channel of Lyman Creek. Historical Lyman Creek Flow and Lyman Spring Production Records Historical flow data on Lyman Spring and Lyman Creek is an intermittent mix of data sourced from five different measurement locations. Figure 3 shows these locations. 1. Upper Weir—this weir was installed in the bed of Lyman Creek in 2001 just upstream of the current location of the junction box overflow. The purpose of the upper weir was to measure water not captured by the original spring collectors. It was removed during construction of the third spring collector in 2009. 2. Trapezoidal Flume — this flume was placed in a manhole installed in the bed of Lyman Creek in 2002, just downstream of the current junction box overflow. Between 2002 and 2008, the flume measured overflow from the original spring collectors as well as discharge from a drain pipe. The drainpipe was reportedly installed during construction of the original spring collectors and was removed during construction of the third spring collector in 2008. The trapezoidal flume still exists. 3. 3-foot Weir — this weir is located immediately upstream of the "Upper Surface Water Diversion Structure". Flow measurements taken from this location date back to 1908. However, the period of record is intermittent, with numerous data gaps between 1915- 3.920, 1925-1961, 1971-2001, and 2009 to present day. 4. 2-foot Parshall Flume — the Parshall Flume is located upstream of the "Lower Surface Water Diversion Structure". Flow measurements were obtained for this flume from 1976 to 1988, and then again from 2001 to 2009. In the spring of 2015, the Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology installed instrumentation to continuously measure and record water level in the parshall flume as well as water levels in the junction box. These data, together with city diversion records for the Lyman system, allow for a better accounting of the hydrologic yield of the Lyman source. 5. City Lyman Plant diversion records. Since February Vt, 2010, overflow at the spring junction box and diverted flows through the Lyman water treatment plant have been measured and recorded approximately weekly. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. J j RE www.ae2s.com «. Upper fit . ' Spring Box �i Complex �r�* -. Spr ngJunction Box (3 Spring Collectors Ira ezoidiil Flume ) Diversion R• L '* r . . r ail into 10-in A +y Pipe L Upper Diy(!rsic�n and if Weir NOTES: r • i / r• 1. 1 acilities in italics no longer . -�'. —Upper."V ' exist. 2. Facilities that are underlined '+ a still exist but are not utilized as part of the current system. `D 3. Facilities that are in bold are 1G" DIP apart of the current Lyman Water System Lower PRV Lower Diversion Pond %—Two ft Parsh,.�all Flume Y PROX LOCATION- F CONNECTION TO 18"AC L 10-Inch Pipe " ------ -70 Lyman Treatment Plant 2 ' 6 (magnetic meter) ' An extensive analysis of pre-2009 flow records was provided in a July 2008 technical memorandum by Morrison Maierle (Technical Memorandum 5.2, Lyman Spring Improvements) to support the design of the third spring collector. This report supplements that flow analysis with additional data collected since 2009. Total Lyman Spi-ing Yield All flow data that could be gathered for Lyman Creek and Lyman Spring were compiled into a spreadsheet to evaluate hydrologic yields. This spreadsheet is included as Attachment A. The frequency of operator visits to the junction box that was installed in 2009 varies across the season, and especially depending on the condition of the road to the junction box. In harsh winters the road can become impassable for extended periods. In these years the frequency of visits, and subsequent overflow measurements and adjustments to the diversion rate decrease. Figure 4 shows total spring production data from February of 2010 through May of 2016. Clearly there is substantial variability in spring production from year-to-year and month-to- month. Instantaneous yield typically peaks in early summer at approximately 3,000 to 4,000 gallons per minute (gpm), or 6.7 to 8.9 cfs, rapidly decreases in late summerand early fall before slowly tapering to a typical base flow of 600 to 700 gpm, or 1.3 to 1.6 cfs, across the winter and early spring months. Due to the intermittent nature of the data, interpolation is necessary to estimate spring production, spring box overflow, and/or the volume diverted by the City on an annual basis. In wet periods, such as 2009 to 2011 period, the spring produces well in excess of the City's instantaneous water right (5.95 cfs). For example, in 2010 and 2011 the spring production exceeded 5.95 cfs for approximately 80 and 110 days, respectively. In dry periods, spring production drops considerably. For example, in 2013, after two dry years in a row, production never reached 5.95 cfs. Estimates of total days that Lyman Spring production has exceeded 5.95 cfs are shown in. Since the completion of improvements to the Lyman system in 2009 (consisting of the addition of a third spring collector and a new spring collection junction box with an overflow weir) Lyman Spring has produced an average of 1,618 gprn, or 2,610 acre feet per year (ac-ft/yr). The best year in the six-year period of record (February of 2010 to May of 2016) was 2011, when the spring produced an average of 2,140 gprn, or 3,451 ac-ft. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Dig. Go Beyond. a in www.ac2s.com i l _ I I a V — — M D -- - TWN -77 c a — -- m MIx v o � v Fi n � N Ln 3 m� — -13 T EJ 1 x a W — on E nL7 � - - —- -- - • it w --- - -- - - - - •�-- O Lq ti cn ry J O N o�q ] )Wd9)MOIJ I Table 2. Lyman Spring Total Yield Exceeding City's Instantaneous Water Right. T Estimated Days Spring Yield Exceeded 5.95 cfs 2010 80 2011 110 2012 — 35 -- _20_1_3 0 - -- 2014 - - - 50 - - 2015 15 Minimum Annual Days > 5.95 cfs 0 Average Annual Days>5.95 cfs 48 Maximum Annual Days > 5.95 cfs 110 Lyman Spring Diverted System Yield and Spring Box Overflow For the purposes of this work, Diverted System Yield refers to the amount of water the City is able to divert into its transmission pipeline and distribution system. The difference between this value and the total spring yield is what is allowed to overflow the weir in the spring junction box. Figure 5 shows total Lyman Spring yield (note this is the same data shown in figure 4), along with diverted system yield and overflow from the spring junction box to Lyman Creek. When spring production exceeds 5.95 cfs, the City is able to divert its full instantaneous water right. When spring production reduces below 5.95 cfs, the City operators attempt to maximize the diversion rate while ensuring that air does not become entrained in the flow into the Lyman transmission pipeline. The maximum annual average spring production (2011) was approximately 2,140 gpm. The overflow measurements across 2011 averaged 970 gpm. The annual average diversion and usage of Lyman water in 2011 was approximately 1,109 gpm, or 1,789 ac-ft/yr. As can be seen in Figure 5, maximizing diversion (minimizing overflow) is easier in years of lower spring production, and more difficult in years of higher production. This is because the more rapidly fluctuating production of the spring requires more frequenL flow control valve adjustments, and the City has not had the labor availability to "dial-in" or closely match the diversion rate to spring production. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond.AE5 www,ae2s.com c L �U lD D Ln N m > 1 ru m 7 LA N O Qj C Q LL _ v i- � x L N 14 n o v 1n CD p c ri C .r _O -- - -- -—I n O E O o _ � u E I N to —1 L. O r Q ry E v o } L 0 4- H _O W Q o � p `� fu V� a, c -a - ry a r m to `� N C J E rq � = i N c� ` ) } u L _ C O m ul 0 Ln C In q rn o' Ln o I rn rn cl N �-� rT O m Y U Purpose of the Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Instantaneous yields of Lyman spring exceed the City's instantaneous water right over a limited period each year. The yield of the Lyman source at the spring collectors is 2,610 ac-ft/yr since the installation of the 3rd spring collector. Monitoring records for the 2' parshall flume, which is located at the historical upper surface water diversion pond, show that Lyman Creek gains water significantly as it advances down gradient from the spring collectors. Reliable yields are much larger at the historical surface diversion location and are likely due to groundwater accretions from the Lyman aquifer formation to Lyman Creek down gradient of the spring collectors. On an annual basis the Lyman water system accounts for approximately 1S to 20 percent of City's total municipal water supply volume. The purpose of this study is to assess the potential to increase the reliable yield of the Lyman water system within the flow and volume limits of existing water rights while also preserving the system's designation as groundwater not under the influence of surface water. In essence, the City seeks to determine if a more efficient method of water diversion can be developed that increases the reliable yield of the Lyman source and maximizes the capacity of existing infrastructure built to handle the full measure of the City's Lyman water rights. Maximizing reliable yields of the Lyman system to the full measure of the Lyman water rights was prioritized in the City's recently completed Integrated Water Resources Plan (IWRP). The Lyman supply is appealing for multiple reasons: • The Lyman Spring source supplies pristine water that does not require water treatment under the surface water drinking rules of the Safe Drinking Water Act. • The source is at a high elevation, requiring little to no pressurization to get into the City's north and northwest pressure zones. Pressurization via the Pear Street Pump Station can push Lyman water further south into the Sourdough / downtown pressure zone. • Water rights are existing. • Existing system infrastructure has sufficient capacity to divert and convey the full measure of the existing water rights. This Lyman Spring study characterizes the aquifer feeding Lyman Spring, to the degree that this can be done from the surface, and provides recommendations for developing a project to increase the reliable diverted yield of the Lyman creek water system to maximize the City's existing water rights. City of Bozeman Lyrnan Water System & Lyman Spring Sludy Think Big. Go Beyond. J IRE5 www.ac2s.com Geologic Setting The Lyman Spring site is in the Rocky Mountains-Great Basin transition, which is characterized by mountain ranges separated by intermontane basins (Locke and Lageson, 1989). The geology of the vicinity was mapped by Roberts (1964) at a 1:24,000 scale. McMannis (1952; 1955) identified aquifer formations and recognized the structural geologic control of the aquifers. Hackett et al (1960) described the geology and groundwater of the Gallatin Valley area. Figure 6 shows the 1:24,000 scale geologic map of the area, adapted from Roberts (1964). This is the smallest-scale geologic map of the project area. The work of Lageson, Roberts, and Betty Skipp was reviewed in regards to its applicability to the further development of Lyman Spring. The spring collection boxes lay immediately up-gradient of the intersection of three faults in the Lyman Creek drainage. These faults control the subsurface geometry of aquifer (primarily the Madison group limestones) and aquitard units (notably the Archean gneisses, also referred to herein as Pre-Cambrian metamorphic rock). Fractured rocks associated with the faults probably allow them to act as conduits for sub- surface water flow. Constraining the dip of the three "triple junction" faults is important to optimally target exploratory drilling: • The Lyman Creek fault that trends NE parallel to the upper reaches of Lyman Creek. • The Bridger-Bear Canyon fault that trends south from the Lyman Spring and parallels the middle N-S reach of Lyman Creek. This fault is likely part of the down-to-the- west Bridger Range bounding normal fault system. • A NW-trending fault that truncates the ridge running along the northwest side of the Lyman Creek drainage. This fault will be informally referred to as the 'Ridge Fault'. McMannis shows this fault merging into the Bridger-Bear Canyon fault. Fault traces shown by McMannis (1955) are correctly located as far as can be determined from available field data. Fault traces shown by Roberts are correct within uncertainty for the Lyman Creek fault and the NW-trending Ridge Fault. Bridger-Bear Canyon Fault south of the spring is not shown by Roberts who interprets the Tertiary/Archean contact as an on-lapping depositional contact. Published maps that cover the area (Roberts, 1964 and McMannis, 1955) show different Jinterpretations of fault dips and relative net sense of slip. 1 l City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & I.yman Spring Study Think Big.Go Beyond. AE-5 www.ae2s.com 1 Figure 6. Geologic Map 'ate.«.:»�.+. 1«•........: � P6 ..r.J I....r 1.. �i I.r•ir�.w ..Cps 1All 11 IVU�I yY.nM. w„ta.n„news � . f Ip y1 Qac /Y 1 FIGURE U Goolo0lc Map(adapted Irom Rctierts 1004) 0 690 1.300 C9y of Barman Lyman WalorSystom F.Lyman Spring Study Feat J Ads C412m. The most recent map of the Bridger Range (Skipp, Lageson and McMannis, 1999 http://pubs.usgS.gov/imap/i-2634/downloads/1-2634 plate.pdf, not included here due to size) that covers an area to the north of the study area suggests yet another interpretation: • Roberts interprets the Lyman Creek and NW-trending fault as a single structure that is twisted from a SW-dipping orientation to a NW-dipping orientation. McMannis shows the Lyman Creek Fault as a steeply SC-dipping reverse fault, the Bridger-Bear Canyon fault as a west-dipping normal fault that bends into the NW- trending Ridge Fault that is shown as a SW-dipping Reverse Fault. Skipp et al. show the northern continuation of the Lyman Creek Fault (Baldy Mountain Fault) as part of a down-to-the-west normal fault system that accommodated collapse of the ancestral Bridger uplift during the Miocene. The dips of the three faults remain uncertain. Direct observations of the dips of the primary faults have not yet been made because of limited exposure. However, field observations allow some inferences about fault dips: • The Ridge fault appears to dip moderately to the SW based on the trace of the fault across the ridge. • The no observations of the Bridger-Bear Canyon fault dip have been made, but it is likely to dip west based on the interpretation that is linked to the normal fault system that bounds the Bridger Range and accommodated subsidence of the Gallatin Valley. • The Lyman Creek fault is reinterpreted as a NW-dipping normal fault based on correlation with structures mapped north of the field area by Skipp et al., by application of modern models of basement cored-uplift geometry and kinematics, and models of Miocene Basin and Range faulting. The spatial disposition of geologic units shown on maps by McMannis (195S) and Roberts (1964) has been verified as substantially correct. Site Geology Sttrficial Geologic Units 1 Surficial geologic deposits consist of unconsolidated alluvium in the canyon and creek bottom, which consists primarily of silt, sand, and rounded gravels. Colluvial deposits mantle the hillslopes on the south side of Lyman Canyon. This unit consists of locally-derived angular boulders in a sand and silt matrix. Talus deposits that consist of locally-derived angular limestone gravels mantle the southeast-facing hillside north of Lyman Creek. Ciiy of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study aThink Big. Go Beyond. J 'Jj Au7s www.ae2s.com fiedrocic Geologic Units The following sections describe the bedrock units observed in the immediate project area. Meftimorpiaic Pre-Cambrian age metamorphic rocks are mapped and were observed on the southwest and southeast sides of Lyman Creek canyon. These rocks consist of intermediate to felsic gneiss, amphibolite, schist, metaquartzite, marble, and numerous small pegmatite (coarse-crystalline) dikes. The total thickness of the metamorphic rocks is unknown. Based on field observations and published mapping, the metamorphic rocks are in fault contact with the Madison Limestone. Flathead Sandstone The Flathead Sandstone is mapped and was observed near the fault contact between the metarorphic racks/Madison limestone on the west side of Lyman Creek, and also on the ridge above the southeast side of Lyman Creek. The Flathead Sandstone (or quartzite) is a resistant, ridge-forming formation that consists primarily of pink and reddish-brown quartz-rick sandstone. The average thickness of the Flathead in the area is approximately 130 feet. Madison Group The Madison Group includes the thick-bedded upper Mission Canyon Limestone and the lower thinner-bedded Lodgepole limestone. Both of these formations were observed at the site and are described as follows. Lodgepole Limestone The Lodgepole Limestone consists of gray and brown limestone and minor dark-brown to black silty shale. It can be further divided into the Paine Shale and the Woodhurst Limestone Members (Reference). The Paine Shale is approximately 330 feet thick and consists of limestone and dolomite that contains silty units. The Woodhurst Limestone is approximately 146 feet thick and is comprised of thin-bedded limestone and dolomite. At the site, the Lodgepole Limestone was mapped on the ridge on the north side of Lyman Creek. Mission Canyon Formation The Mission Canyon Formation overlies the Lodgepole Limestone. The Mission Canyon consists of pale yellow-brown, massive, poorly-bedded limestone that weathers light gray and forms cliffs and castellated ridges. The Mission Canyon is further subdivided into the lower member that averages 330 feet thick and consists of massive, medium- to fine-grained limestone and dolomite. The upper member averages 326 feet thick and is comprised of finely-crystalline limestone and dolomite interbedded with dolomitic solution breccia. The Mission Canyon formation crops out in numerous places in the project area. As will be discussed later, the solution breccias play an important role in the aquifer characteristics of the Mission Canyon. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. 4. A� www.ce2s.com Structural Geologic Setting The structural geology of the vicinity is dominated by large mountain uplifts that formed during the Laramide Orogeny, approximately 65 million years ago (Locke and Lageson, 1989). The Lyman Spring study area is located on the southwest flank of the Bridger Range which was formed by compression and uplift during the Laramide orogeny. The Bridger Range is a high, north-trending, linear mountain range that bounds the Gallatin Valley on the east. This range is comprised of Precambrian-age metamorphic rocks generally overlain by Paleozoic and Mesozoic-age sedimentary rocks. The Paleozoic-age rocks generally strike north- to northwest and form the crest of the range. Many of the Paleozoic-age sedimentary rock units in the project vicinity (the Flathead Sandstone, the Lodgepole Formation, and the Mission Canyon Formation) are folded and overturned to the southeast, and are dipping back to the northwest. However, due to the complex folding and Faulting, the bedding dips in the immediate project vicinity are highly variable. This is confirmed on existing geologic mapping and field measurements, and is discussed later in this report. After compressional folding and uplift, the west flank of the Bridger Range has down-dropped along a normal dip-slip system of faults. The Bridger Range in the project area is generally fault- bounded on the southwest side. Normal faulting is interpreted to have elevated the range, with up to 3,000 feet of displacement along the range-bounding fault. In the immediate project vicinity, the configuration and geometry of the large-offset faults is disputed, and has been interpreted differently by previous mappers. Roberts (1964) interprets an east-southeast trending thrust fault west of Lyman Creek that juxtaposes metamorphic rock against the Madison Limestone, but does not show a south- trending normal fault. In this interpretation, the metamorphic rock has been thrust upward against the Madison limestone (up on the south side of the fault). Roberts (1964) interprets the trace of this fault to bend to the northeast, cross Lyman Creek, and then thrust the Madison Limestone over gneiss and folded Flathead sandstone. The sense of offset on the fault, based on Roberts' interpretation, is that of an overturned thrust fault. Berg et al (2000) adopt an interpretation similar to Roberts, with a fault trending southeast and then bending northeast up Lyman Creek. Hackett et al (1960) interpret a north-northwest-trending range-bounding fault west of Lyman Creek that juxtaposes metamorphic rocks against Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. At Lyman Creek this fault bends to the south and becomes the range-bounding "Bridger Creek-Bear Canyon Fault", which is a down-to-the-west range bounding fault. Where this fault crosses Lyman Creek, a third fault, named the "Lyman Creek-Baldy Mountain fault" trends to the northeast up the south side of Lyman Creek. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. �J A www.ac2s.com Field mapping conducted for this project confirmed the presence and general location of these faults. The team's interpretation is that these are high-angle reverse faults that form a low- permeability boundary across Lyman Creek, and as discussed later in this report, the faulting is very important to structural control of groundwater flow, and evaluating where and how to explore for additional water from Lyman Spring. Structural Control of Groundwater Flow The Precambrian rocks are not considered a potential source of groundwater, because they have very low primary and secondary porosity. Test wells previously drilled into these gneissic rocks yielded small quantities of water, some of which may have been derived from weathered zones (Hackett et al 1960). The Madison group, on the other hand, is an extremely productive aquifer for several reasons, and is used as a groundwater source in the region. The Madison Group, in particular the Mission Canyon Formation, is characterized by solution features, karst, and collapse breccias. Paleokarst features include enlarged joints, sinkholes, caves, and evaporite solution zones. Enlarged joints tend to be either perpendicular or parallel to bedding planes and can be up to one foot wide. These enlarged joints are most common in the uppermost thickly-bedded portion of the Mission Canyon limestone. The thick beds of the Mission canyon concentrate groundwater along the bedding planes and create large conduits where the limestone was removed by dissolution. In addition to the paleokarst features increasing the formations permeability, post-Laramide fracturing imparts even greater permeability to the aquifer (Huntoon, 1985; 1993). This is because the paleokarst features are porous, albeit poorly interconnected. The Laramide fracturing created secondary porosity which (a) channels water through the formation by hydraulically connecting the paleokarst features] and (b) has led to increased dissolution of the carbonates and the development of additional karst features. These fractures are especially prevalent on the flanks of mountain ranges or along the crests of folds. Lyman Spring Aquifer Yield According to previous researchers, groundwater flow in the Mission Canyon Formation is rapid and typically discharges from springs in the Madison aquifer along the mountain front; rather than flow into the basinal aquifer. Mills (1981) noted that groundwater can travel more than 3 miles per day in the karstic aquifers, and that flow directions within the aquifer are different than surface water drainage patterns (due to the fracture flow and structural orientations of fractures). According to Huntoon (1985), some water lost from closing] streams migrates beneath topographic divides and discharges into streams in adjacent drainages. City of Bozeman Lyman Wator System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. J Aus www.ae2s.com McMannis (1952; 1955) notes the Lyman Creek "gains flow from Lyman Springs, which is at the junction of two faults. These faults juxtapose low-permeability Archean gneiss with the high- permeability Mission Canyon Formation". McMannis also shows geologic cross-section interpretations of this relationship. As with Lyman Spring, discharge from karstic springs is continuous Lhroughout the year but increases significantly during snowpack runoff. Therefore, the project team interpretation is that a continuous underground "reservoir" of water exists near Lyman Spring. Flow from Lyman Spring has been captured by the City of Bozeman utilizing spring collectors since 1991. In 2009 the City installed a third spring collector and junction box combining flows from Collector No. 1 and Collector Nos. 2 and 3 and connecting the collectors to the transmission pipeline to the Lyman reservoir facility. To prevent air from entering the transmission pipe to the reservoir facility at bottom of the Lyman valley, the water level in the junction box is kept above the inlet of the transmission line. To ensure that the level is always above the pipe invert, a weir is used to back up water above it, and some flow is allowed to flow over the weir and back to Lyman Creek. The City has only measured this flow, along with the volume that is transmitted to the treatment facility, since 2009, so the 2009 to 2015 data is the only historical data that really captures Lyman spring production (Figure 7). 6000 •-s��Ymm 50.9 Production 2010-2015 -R-SacaJOWee SnoW Water Equivalent 5000 ,I n �1 0 4000 A e c o 3000 7 C r. & 20W 1000 1 , 0 - _ uoud �r r..- no nu-non Sonond p 12/3/09 12/3/10 12/3/11 t1,/J/12 12/2/13 12/2/14 12/2/15 Date 1 Figure 7. Geologic Map Lyman Spring Production with J Sacajawea Snotel Snow Water Equivalent (2009-2015) City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. J AE.S www.ae25.com The temporal discharge variation shown in Figure 7 is the Lyman spring hydrograph. The recession curve is that part of the hydrograph that extends from the peak of the discharge to the start of the next rise. There are two primary factors that dictate the shape of the hydrograph: • Drainage characteristics, including: basin area, basin shape, basin slope, soil type and land use, drainage density, and drainage network. • Nature of the Precipitation: precipitation intensity, duration, and their spatial and temporal distribution. Lyman spring is a descending spring, meaning it drains water from an unconfined aquifer and shows seasonal variation in discharge rate. During the dry season the spring hydrograph shows a continuous decreasing trend (recession limb); the flat portion that typically occurs in winter and early spring, at the end of the recession limb, is known as baseflow. The short period of baseflow, aligns well with the fact that the basin is made up of karst. This is in contrast to groundwater entering a stream from a basin made up of a porous medium (sand or gravel, for example), where the groundwater discharge to a stream occurs relatively slowly over time. As can be seen in Figure 7, spring production has been varying between a low of approximately 640 gprn to a high of 4860. That it never completely "bottoms out" at less than 640 gpm indicates that there may be a sustained reservoir of groundwater underneath the site. Lyman Sp,-ing Recharge Analysis In an attempt to determine the correlation between flows from Lyman spring and level of snowmelt/ moisture in the watershed, the spring flows were graphed with the snowpack water content (inches of snow water equivalent) measured at the nearest snow moisture sensing station, which is the Sacajawea snotel. The Sacajawea snowtel is located approximately 10 miles north of Lyman spring, and is on the eastern slope of the Bridger Range, but is a reasonable assessment of moisture levels in the snowpack across the Bridger Range. Figure 7 shows Lyman Spring flows with snow water equivalent measurements from the Sacajawea snotel, for the same period (2009-2015). The correlation between Lyman spring flows and snowpack at the Sacajawea snotel is strong. In years where snowpack moisture content is high, such as from the winter of 2010-2011, flows from Lyman the subsequent spring are high. When it is low, such as in the winter of 2012-13, flows from Lyman are very low. The cyclical pattern seen in Lyman discharge is referred to as the recharge cycle or groundwater wave, illustrated in Figure 8 below (Kresic and Stevanovic, 2010). The delay between recharge City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. PJ IAu-,s www.ac2s.com and spring discharge depends on the hydraulic characteristics of the snowmelt infiltration into the vadose zone and movement through the saturated zone. The initial response in discharge to a recharge event is "due to propagation of the hydrostatic pressure through the system. In Figure 7, "A" represents the "volume of "old" water discharged under pressure at the spring due to the recharge event." Recharge 1° Co j i / t� �C� I � �C2 Spring Saturated Zone Discharge Figure 8. Groundwater Waves from Recharge to Spring Discharge (Kresic and Stevanovic, 2010) The recharge period for the aquifer indicates that either the snowpack of the current water year moves through the aquifer in a short time period (less than a month), or the snowmelt and infiltration provides the hydrostatic head to drive the previous years' aquifer storage out of the spring. Interpretation of Lyman Spring Recession Curves Quantitative analyses of the recession limb of the hydrographs of descending springs such as Lyman can reveal information regarding the size of the catchment and the volume of water held in storage, potentially revealing whether or not the recharge period for the Lyman spring is on the order of months or a year. The traditional approach of recession limb analysis is carried out by using the baseflow recession equation: Q = Q„e-kt [Equation 1] City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond.Acs: www.ae2s.com Equation 1 is appropriate for a linear reservoir without recharge, where the discharge is proportional at any Linde to the water volume stored. Rearranging; log(Q) = log(Qo) + log(e—") [Equation 2] log(Q) = log((),) — kt [Equation 3] where Qo is peak discharge, k is decay rate (slope), and t is time. In this case, log(Q) versus t is a straight line with slope —k; log(%) is the intercept (log flow at Lime 0). These values are illustrated on the Lyman Spring recession curves in Figure 9 and tabulated in Table 3. 3.00 --- -}-Lyman Spring Production 2010•2015 —2012 - -2013 --2014 2.50 ---- -- - - -- - -2015 -2011 E 0 p a` 150 - —- -- -— - on c a o � an g 1.00 -- — - - y- o,00sax,l3.u;6 0.0056x.5.033 R'-0 9595 R' 0.9178• z y=-0.0056x r 6.6309 0.)0 - — --- ---- R8.0.9699 - - — _ y 0.0052x 10.214 } Rt=0.9723 y--0.0051x-7.6989 R°-0.9286 0.00 - - —� o soo iota 1500 2000 2500 Elapsed Time(day) Figure 9. Natural Log of Lyman Spring Production with Recession Limb Slopes (2009-201S) Since there are five years of quality data, an average —k (slope) can be estimated. Similarly, log(Qo) can be averaged and exponentiated to obtain an average Qo. This averaging followed by exponentiation is equivalent to assuming a log-normal distribution for Qc, so the result is not biased high by a few large Qo values. The unbiased estimate of Qo will be slightly lower than what we would calculate if raw Qo values were averaged. For Lyman, the average slope (k) is 0.0055 day-', and the average Qo is 7.2 ft3/second, or 622,080 ft3/day. Table 3 presents the average slope and flow data. City of Bozeman I ymc ii Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. J 'J AF-5 www.ae2s.com Table 3. Lyman Spring Recession Curve Decay Coefficients and Estimated Peak Aquifer Flows. • 2011 _ _ 0.0056 10.83 2012 0.0056 6.24 2013 0.0051 5.08 2014 0.0052 7.82 2015 0.0058 6.11 Average 0.0055 7.20 The total amount of water in the aquifer is the amount that would discharge over an infinite amount of time, without any additional recharge. This is: W f Qoe-k`dt = Q0 f k 0 Dividing 622,080 ft3/day by 0.0055 results in an estimated total storage value of 113,105,455 ft3 or approximately 2,600 acre-feet. To put this in perspective, Hyalite Reservoir holds approximately 10,000 ac-ft at full pool and 5,600 ac-ft at winter pool. At an average flow of 7.2 cfs, the average "residence time" of water in the Lyman aquifer would be approximately 182 days, or about six months. Site Geologic and Hydi•ogeologic Setting The above discussion provides background, evidence, and rationale for attempting to increase capture of water from the aquifer feeding Lyman spring. Site-specific geologic mapping was conducted to refine the previous interpretations. In particular, mapping the extent of the Mission Canyon Limestone aquifer in the vicinity of the existing spring boxes, and interpreting the 3-dimensional configuration of the fault-bounded aquifer. Figure 10 shows an aerial-photograph based view of the vicinity, with mapped faults, distribution of pre-Cambrian metamorphic rocks (non-aquifer bearing), the contact of the Mission Canyon and Lodgepole limestones, and the interpreted faulted boundaries of the Mission Canyon Limestone aquifer. Outcrops of the major rock units are shown by colored l polygons. In addition, Figure 10 shows the locations of Geologic Cross Sections (A-A' and B-B'). I Interpretations of the geologic cross sections are presented later in this Study. 1 Figure 11 and Figure 12 shows the interpreted surface traces of the faults. The locations and ! orientations of the faults that bound the lower- portion (discharge area) of the Mission Canyon Limestone aquifer are crucial to evaluating the potential to capture additional flow. Figure 6 and Figure 10 show previous geologic interpretations of the fault locations. The project geologists have interpreted the trace of the "thrust" fault trend west-northwest up the Swale City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. PV in Es www.ae2s.com Figure 10. Site Geologic Features and Outcrop Map R � � ' Lodpapole «M Llmesbone !� Mlsslon Canyon Limestone � •a pre-Cambrlan pre-Cambrian Metamorphic rock Metamorphic rock 1 Flathead Sandstone y �1 r r r 1 � IN may. j A LEGEND Horizontal Borehole Contour 10 ft Notes: Angled Borehole c -uantact of Mlp and DJ Survey data by TD&FI 0 Collection Box Contact of Mmc and Mlp(dashed where Inferred) Engineering,2015 A•A'Cross SectionfProtlle Location-urag Fotd FIGURE 10 �(SeeFlguro Mapped Outcrops s 5and6) N Site Geologic features and Outcrop Map Inferred Fault ii pre-Cambrian Metamorphic Clock Flathead Sandstone 0 175 350 City o/Bozeman Lyman Water System&!ymen Thrust Fault Lodgepole Limestone Feet Spring Study Mission Canyon Umestone 1\(3i 111'PF'111 FUU{)91DULIr{nV�4u_lvurri95uuG:hm:;dQ prof' 1miali,;I ,G I:i%14: 411-:A llJi S1la_l;eolmin:J ealway.mgd 0001111511111JA 16 J Allch2m. Figure 11. Geologic Field Data and Exploratory Borehole Locations M Dtm 07 L R i MI �64 60 66 / "�07 60 ' li>r�+rU 88 A t 79 48 46 63 69 47 � 74 46� i. 82N449 — 65' X10 . . -. 1� 38 l , 1 Note: 1. XAggf- pre-Cambrian metamorphic rock 2. MI-Madison Limestone (undivided) 3. MDlm -Three Forks Shale/Jefferson Dolomite I PAND Strike and Dip or Bedding -A-A'Crusn Section/Profile Location Contour 1n ft (See Rgures G and 6) SMI<0 and Dlp ofJolnts Mapped Outcrops �aCnntart or Nimc and Mlp(dashed =pm-Camhdan Metamnrphlr.Rnck Collection Box where Interred) FIGURE 11 1 Horizuntai Borehuie —nran Foio at Fault �L.odgeetl Sandstone Geologic Field Data and c----a1 Contact Mission C Limestone Exploratory Bore Hole Locations Vertical Borehole QMlsslon Canyon Limestone P ry 1 Angled Borewic Inferred Fault o ion ?on City of Bozeman Lyman water system J Thrust Fault Feet`Lyman Sprrng Study y \tFJ01FPPDlkireups�De�gnV3ec TesrnY3eolechnioallLyrnrrn5plinyGl5u;ff>Jd.priln µig4a_I�unlarlir_F*lrl Data.nodCU02185011�5/1U1G �FIE, U. Figure 12. Geologic Field Data and Exploratory Borehole Locations e� Ifi 60� T�i 66 67 • +� ` . •60 of r �► f .. •"• 'fir * 86 ' �g' • 'a. �� 448 A6 83 A 7� 69y 40 fir' .yY. • , 82 ,49 BCi t' 1 i r r o •,1� M 38 �w- 4 LEGEN0 Stoke and Dip of Bedding—A•A'Cross sectlon/Profile Location Contour 10 h Stoke and DI of Joints (See Figures 5 and 6) P Mapped Outcrops 'Contact of Mme and Mlp(dashed re-camonan Metamorphic flock Collection Box where Inferred) (�p FIGURE 12 Horizontal Borehole Drag Fold at Fault =Flathead Sandstone Geologic Field Data and ♦ vertical Borehole 4MMWJ Contact Lodgepole Limestone Exploratory Bore Hole Locations J� Angled Borehole ■—Inferred Fault Omission Canyon OUmestone 100 pp City of Bozeman Lyman Water System 1.Thrust Fault Fee&Lyman Spring Study 0lliW4>tapFHeexFis)4hGedogic Field Oata.m G6021050 U'S201G J A� ch M• west of the spring collection boxes, and the fault plane to be at a relatively steep angle (>60 degrees). The fault was mapped in this vicinity based on outcrops of limestone on the northeast side of the swale, and outcrops and float of metamorphic rock and Flathead Sandstone on the southwest side of the Swale. The limestone beds adjacent to the fault trace were tightly folded, potentially related to fault movement. The trace of this fault was mapped down the Swale to the approximate bend in the creek, where it is covered by talus and colluvium. The "reverse" fault (Lyman Creek fault) is interpreted to trend in a northeast direction up the southeast side of Lyman Creek canyon. In the vicinity of the spring collection boxes, the trace of the fault is buried by thick colluvium on the north-facing, southeast canyon slope. However, east and northeast of the spring collection the trace of the fault is evidenced by Mission Canyon Limestone juxtaposed against Flathead Sandstone and metamorphic rock (Figure 10). The geometry of the triple-junction of the three faults in canyon bottom, downstream of the spring collection boxes, could not be precisely mapped. These faults are interpreted to be relatively high-angle (>60 degrees), based on the geometry of the outcrops and canyon. The south-trending fault may transmit groundwater southward along its fractures. It is possible that groundwater may also flow downward to deeper portions of the Mission Canyon aquifer beneath the "reverse" fault. Figure 11 and Figure 12 show a lower elevation view of the spring collection area with a geologic maps background and an aerial photograph background, respectively. These figures show structural geologic measurements and the proposed—drilling locations. The geologic structural parameters are the strike and dip of bedding and Fractures. These are important because the secondary porosity of the bedrock aquifer is dictated by the permeable openings along the bedding and joints. In general, on the hillslope above the springs the Mission Canyon and Lodgepole Limestone dip to the southeast at angles between 45 and 60 degrees. The primary joint set is perpendicular to bedding and is northwest-trending and near-vertical. However, other outcrops in the vicinity exhibited vertically-folded, north-trending bedding and faulting; demonstrating the relatively complex geology of the site. Appendix A contains geologic stereonets that represent the orientation of geologic I discontinuities (planar features). The stereonets show poles (perpendicular) to the contoured bedding planes and joints. The trend of plunge of the average pole to bedding is to the northwest at approximately 32 degrees, which equates to a northeast-southwest strike and 58 degree average dip. The discontinuity orientations in the immediate vicinity of the spring collection area were used in part to decide which direction/azimuth to drill in order to intercept the greatest number of water-bearing geologic discontinuities and bedding planes. The orientations of these faults and their control of groundwater flow within the Mission Limestone aquifer are discussed in greater detail in the next sections. J City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study JThink Big. Go Beyond. PJ Al�s www.ae2s.com Recommendations for Increasing Lyman Spa•ing Yield Based on the field evaluation and data analysis described in the previous sections, the project team interprets that there could potentially be a larger "reservoir" of groundwater that is not discharging at the spring collection area. The project team presented the work contained herein to the City of Bozeman and discussed potential approaches to increasing the yield from Lyman spring with City staff. Based on that workshop, the project team has developed three potential exploratory drilling operations to further define the geometry of the aquifer and obtain additional water from the aquifer. These are described in the following section. lleco►nmendation 1: Vertical Exploratory Borehole Based on the site-specific geologic mapping, interpreted fault locations, and the orientations of bedding planes in the immediate vicinity of the Lyman Spring collection boxes, a Vertical Exploratory Borehole is recommended for the following reasons: 1. This borehole would intersect high-permeability bedding planes of the Mission Canyon Limestone at a roughly 42 degree angle; and intersect numerous bedding planes in a nominal 100-foot drilling depth. 2. At a depth of 100 feet or more, this borehole will likely intersect the contact of the top of the less porous Lodgepole Limestone; presumably the lower elevation of the most productive aquifer. This will yield good information regarding the geometry of the aquifer. 3. This vertical borehole may also possibly intersect the reverse fault plane, depending on the exact trace, dip angle, and most importantly the dip direction of this fault, which would enable further characterization of the aquifer's subsurface geometry. 4. A vertical borehole will enable measurement of the static hydraulic gradeline (HGL) in the aquifer, and, if pumped, an aquifer test. Figure 11 and Figure 12 show the areal location of the proposed vertical exploratory borehole. presents a Geologic Cross Section that shows proposed depths/angles of drilling in relation to the interpreted subsurface configuration. As previously noted, the exact trace, dip angle, and dip direction of the high-angle reverse fault (contact of the Pre-Cambrian and Mission Canyon is not known; therefore a range of high-angle fault limits from northwest-dipping to southeast- dipping is shown. A northwest-dipping fault would create a cutoff on the bottom of the aquifer. Conversely, and southeast-dipping fault would indicate that the Mission Canyon Limestone could extend to a much greater depth, and thus could be used to produce significantly more water. City of l3ozernan Lyman Water Systen-i & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. �� Ru7s www.ae2s.com 40 op QW 40 ,c op Ku fn .� LL v s c r "foo �u773 21— �n LT LL'v E 41 a , u uCR Li ,. / m a / o � c Y O cc J L 80tF'oy�,Q,� U c 1.o / , y � ,i p c a) o 3 9 z= Q c a O JCL a d kA O CL in Q •� .o E / y / O � /y y i OC E / a z LL o Y o Drilling a small-diameter (-4-inch) "pilot hole", using diamond coring, would provide continuous core samples and enable a precise evaluation of lithology, fracture density, void spaces, porosity, and contact with other rock types. The alternative drilling technology is a downhole air hammer, but this is not recommended as it would only return rock chips for logging and provide less accurate characterization of the rock mass. When diamond coring, clean water must be pumped downhole, and therefore measuring water levels or production during drilling is difficult. The borehole would need to be cased for subsequent static water measurements. At the point Pre-Cambrian metamorphic rock or non-productive limestone is encountered, the borehole could be progressed approximately 25 more feet to confirm the contact. After coring, casing could be placed in the hole for longer-term monitoring of the HGl_ near the springs. If, based on the findings of the pilot hole and subsequent monitoring of the HGL, it appears that this vertical configuration can produce a significantly greater long-term volume of water, a larger-diameter (12 to 24 inch) borehole could be drilled to install a large, high-volume pump (based on anticipated discharge). Installation of a vertical well would require power be brought up Lyman Canyon. In an effort to estimate the costs of this, Northwestern Energy was contacted, as it would be their voltage feeder extension to the site. However, without a new service application submittal, Northwest Energy was not responsive. Therefore, the project team developed an estimate based on other, recent power supply extensions. The approximately two miles of underground primary voltage feeder extension, from the existing chemical storage and feed building to the proposed location of the vertical well, is estimated to cost approximately $500,000. The low voltage electric service, a fiber optic line laid in the same trench as the power line, instrumentation and controls, and small pump station building are estimated to cost $300,000. Recoiumc iidl ion 2: Angled Exploratoiy Borehole Based on the results of the vertical exploratory borehole, an angled exploratory borehole could be drilled in a southeast direction, roughly parallel to the dip of the bedding planes in the Mission Canyon Limestone. The purpose of this borehole would be to intersect fractures and to locate, and thus define, the reverse fault plane. If this fault plane is found to dip to the southeast, this angled borehole would enable additional volume of underground aquifer storage to be tapped. As with the vertical borehole, a small-diameter "pilot hole" using diamond coring is recommended, to enable a more precise subsurface characterization. Figure 11 and Figure 12 show the location of the proposed angled exploratory borehole — it would essentially be very close to the vertical borehole. Figure 12 shows the proposed angled City of BozerTlan Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. ) www.0e2s.com borehole and intersecting subsurface geology. This borehole would be drilled until contact with either the fault plane or the underlying Lodgepole Limestone (if folded or faulted) is contacted, or to a maximum depth of 200 feet. A field decision can be made regarding conducting the angled borehole after the vertical borehole is completed and the information gleaned is interpreted. There are angled wells in use for municipal water supply in the United States. However, the vast majority of these installations are shallow and installed in unconsolidated formations such as alluvium along rivers for riverbank filtration applications. Deeper installations in consolidated formations could not be referenced for this project. Even in shallow, unconsolidated formations, angled well installation costs are significantly higher than for vertical wells, primarily due to the need for more bearings inside the casing, to keep the pump column concentric and stable during operation. For this reason, the initial plan for an angled well would be just aquifer characterization and as a second monitoring point for the hydraulic gradeline during pump testing from the vertical borehole. Only if it appeared that the angled well could access substantially more water would it be considered for ultimate development into the long-term municipal production well for the City. Recommendation 3: Horizontal Exploratory Borehole A third possible exploratory borehole would consist of a relatively long (400 to 500 feet), near- horizontal (approximately 2 percent slope) borehole. This borehole would be drilled up-canyon to the south of and at lower elevation than the existing spring collection infrastructure. This borehole would be drilled initially through the metamorphic rock, but should intersect the thrust fault that juxtaposes the low-productivity pre-Cambrian rock with the Mission Canyon Limestone aquifer within approximately 50 feet. The goal of this borehole would be to penetrate the "sidewall" of the low end of the interpreted underground reservoir. Ideally, after the borehole penetrates into the Mission Canyon Limestone, it could be terminated well short of the spring collection system. Figures 10a and 10b show the location of the proposed horizontal borehole. shows the up-canyon profile, the approximate elevation of the proposed horizontal borehole, intersections of key J geologic features, and the approximate existing spring collection infrastructure. The elevation in the middle of the profile is also approximate. j This borehole would not likely intersect a large number of bedding planes, but would be perpendicular to several joint planes and fractured rock in the fault zone that may be permeable. This borehole could be cased with perforated pipe and provide additional water via City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Sludy 1 Think Big. Go Beyond. J 'J AE5 www.oe2s.com on .v, G ' CCra71 �y0n Q �GG U W (J � on �,✓ n ff c n �y p n PL j6pjaA pasodOAd d .j rR m t' � r �q i C t i Vc t . 4 9 / a ¢ ,v 4 Q. i►� ,R a - cco I _r ftb , u� v o ° cc W L ,a �D W. ul 11 m G , 0J C si Zr= M U4 a � O m f m iti w Gl C7 �u L rl U W LL ' Z. � <i A z Lm Q t�W gravity flow, the primary advantage of a horizontal well over a vertical well. Other advantages of horizontal wells include potentially better contact between the well screens and the aquifer unit, due to the potentially greater horizontal dimension of the aquifer than the vertical dimension. It remains to be seen what the true geometry of the Lyman aquifer is. Drilling a horizontal borehole presents the following installation challenges: • Borehole collapse and/or other potential damage to water bearing conduits in the Mission Canyon Limestone - this could occur during the drilling, prior to installation of the casing. • Potential for leakage around the borehole in weak and weathered rock—this may not be as much of an issue with the Pre-Cambrian metamorphic rock between the initial drill entry point and the Mission Canyon limestone, however, it is still a risk and may require grouting or other mitigation efforts. • More difficult casing installation — horizontal well casings are subjected to significantly greater stress during installation than vertical wells of similar size. The horizontal well for Lyman would have to be a single-ended installation, which means compression force would be necessary to push in the casing, which would have to overcome pressures from soils over the borehole, and overcome minor bends in the borehole that are inherent in horizontal drilling. Slots in the casing make it less resistant to these compression forces. • Somewhat unpredictable and uncontrollable return water flow—there would be a period during installation where the driller would have no control over the rate of return water flowing from the borehole. A short casing with a valve on it can be used as a sleeve for the drilling, so that the valve could be closed upon withdrawal of the drill, but this would be challenging if several hundred gallons a minute of return water was exiting the starter casing. Managing the temporary storage and dispersion of this water would be challenging and add significant cost to the drilling operation. In addition, as the City pointed out in the project workshop, a horizontal well would only produce significant flow when the hydraulic grade line in the aquifer is significantly above the well. Well production would be critically limited by its installation elevation. This is contrast to a J vertical well, which although would require a pump and motor, could still access water even when the aquifer hydraulic grade line is well below the surface. 1 1 Due to the risks of a horizontal installation, and its elevation limitation on production, it was decided at the workshop that the horizontal well would be put on hold. The horizontal exploratory drilling would only proceed if the vertical and angled bores yielded information that 1 indicated that a horizontal well was the best option for increasing Lyman Spring yield. 1 City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study ] Think Big. Go Beyond. A www.ae2s.com J Summary of Recommended Borehole Advantages and Disadvantages Table 4 provides a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of the three recommendations, and relative costs of each. For now, the horizontal borehole is included even though it has been put on hold. Permitting Drilling boreholes will require water for the drilling fluid, and there will be some return water from this operation. Additionally, significant water will be generated during aquifer pump testing. If the horizontal bore were conducted, substantial water would likely drain from the formation during drilling. All of these sources would need to be permitted and handled accordingly. At minimum, a State of Montana Construction Dewatering General Permit would be required. This permit states that "water discharged from well development" and "well pump tests" are sources of water eligible for coverage. The effluent turbidity limits and monitoring requirements preventing impact to discharges to rivers, lakes and wetlands would be complied with (20 NTU maximum day, 10 NTU monthly average). Section 17.30.610 of the Administrative Rules of the State of Montana, Water-Use Classifications, designates the Lyman Creek drainage "to the Bozeman water supply intakes" as A-Closed. This designation means that no discharge is allowed to the waterbody at this location. Therefore, any return or pump test water would be treated, if necessary to comply with the Construction Dewatering General Permit turbidity limits, and then discharged down-gradient from the City's spring collection infrastructure. This document may be used as the basis for discussions with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality on the drilling operation. City of Bozeman Lyrnan Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. P,)AE-5 www.ae2s.com Table 4. Recommended Actions to Increase Aquifer Production RECOMMENDED ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES ACTION VERTICAL Can most likely avoid impacting existing spring Clean (potable) water EXPLORATORY collection system and aquifer integrity by drilling during required for core drilling. BOREHOLE low flow time and/or shutting off spring collection. Will have to • Can advance small-diameter pilot hole to log lithology manage/contain discharge of this water • Will intersect Mission Canyon Limestone aquifer with Need to bring power on- high certainty site for pumping, from • Provides static hydraulic gradeline information the chemical feed plant o Can install a pump and conduct aquifer testing, this would cost 0 monitoring vertical drawdown to enable better approximately (±30/o) characterization of the aquifer $750,000, not including the motor and the o Can ream out for large-diameter borehole for larger pump. pump installation and more robust pumping test • Relatively easy to contain cuttings/purge water in truck and discharge elsewhere • Relatively shallow (< 200 feet max estimated to contact with bottom of water-bearing strata) • No long-term management of production water needed (the well will not produce water unless it is pumped) • Vertical well would provide long-term access to the entire vertical dimension of water-bearing strata, increasing the flexibility of timing and rate of water withdrawal Cily of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. Ac,2s www.ae2s.com .@ 2 U) (D O -a-0 § Uc ± £ 0 3 m = 4 k w 4 c c m © « j / CO w o o m 2 ± 609, > o > E7 0 M \ E % a % \ E o- c / [ o ƒ E ¥ _ c o a e ® a E a.y n w® 2 _0 m2 322 & \ � JEf § E \ g ® 7 _ ° G = G - 2 � - s n E y0 cr % .\ 0J */ \ 7 - cl) / S 0 3 T 2 c o (b o x c o @ b ƒ ƒ \ � * 8 o E � 7 J o Co m o x G 2 0 m ± o .E k/ m § 3 .R E E E » m v m o E 2 'G 3 F@ 0 £ ( . , . » ± ® w 2 0 0 } E « / o - yCD a a £ o ± � § 2 � � R \ § n 2 GU = 2 '±a - 2 a 2 a 0 f c / m E .g / / m 2 .g o - m % 0-t 2 0 y c a % ) $ 2 § E > 8 § \ E e / m 2 0 m C, 9 a O / ƒQ ƒ� 2f7m E _ 9 CL . c = m - ƒ [ $ CDk > / ƒ k § / > 0 ./ƒ Cc E E T 2 $ J R 6 E 6 % ® '\ / � � E o � E 0 � � , 9 f £ 2 � •- 2 E / � * ° G /�a '® « y ® /_ ƒ % n & w ? .0 2 2 @ � k E7E2g3 n £ 7 w ° e 2 G 9 / E s a e 0 - / \ � / f % / / / c o �q © % > ® 3 i E / w ® o \ © 7 � F - 2 0 0 , = 0 e o ® 0 e m m » .@ m \ CD- C: � I o ' 2 \ R 7 C ) E \ / 0 / / 2 ƒ 2 E ` S » = L a 2 U b U \ > e e O E , E » � \ E o _ * 0q \ § m o ® ] -J _j W 0 jz 1 Z x 0 _ # « w m U § O fY] U_ U a) Q) m 0) L C cn N Q) UaC) OU D "a_) •"C_ N> UJ +CJ C CL _ OLCD toO O(10 U 0 0)— - O C O O M (D COC U M U p O m ` CNU — OU N M L- ()) � L L O N 07m -0 O > E D cD r � o0 a) � c3x � E O N O (D d p 0 O L ? n m (v � N p E -0 t`ll L w- a N �� MEoO � E ° ° oO NUO cU (n U � c0 Ca - D C 'D a) O U c _ O O u o> mE 7 O � 0) o p Oc U o CQ c CT Ya) CD am) p Cc a) m U ° a, n -a0 cn c a O o O 0 C mO ) _ U > J n C O cOL m a CY2 oe 3 - 0 O Z EO :3 CCD a C co l -0 O a) U (n m a) O � -0n . O a O ;3o cn p .N tOn _ COL tOn O N O U) = O OC > J > N m .- ` j c a) (D C -- U aa)) N T a) N O M p M c O a) c0 � (n p O U O cn a o w = U n � "0 U J .� � .� cca n d .o .E p .G c c c C c� 0 E 0 O O N J p O a) � (a N G 0> > c 0 0 m e U > a) C m 2 U O cn T m 0 (n 0 a) Q) U C W to m O d) U C U U i () 0 m C C O) �— N O Q) -,U C C 0 O v C 0 ` C J oC .S w C) Q = O w J LL o Q v ANO cu F— J N m zgo m 0 O _j W 0 jz O X O 2 W m U ti Recommended Path Forward for Exploratory and Test Well Drilling 1. Authorize the project team to procure the services of a drilling contractor that is qualified for municipal groundwater aquifer exploration and test well development, to drill a vertical test well and an angled borehole. 2. Shut down the Lyman Spring collection system and commence drilling operations in September of 2016. The drilling period would last approximately 4 to 8 weeks. 3. Utilize spring box overflow for drilling fluid and discharge return and testing water to Lyman Creek while maintaining compliance with the State of Montana Construction Dewatering General Permit. 4. Depending on the results of the drilling operation (including lithology of the aquifer formation, static hydraulic gradeline and pump testing), cap the pilot holes and drill a new larger diameter well in close proximity to the pilot hole, for long-term drinking water production from the Lyman Aquifer. Should the vertical and angled borings yield information that indicates a horizontal well would be a better long-term solution for accessing the water-bearing strata, the horizontal well would be pursued at this time. 5. Once all drilling activity has stopped, equipment is removed, and the site has been fully restored, begin testing the water from the existing Lyman Spring collection system. Once water quality testing results verify that the water is in compliance with State and Federal drinking water standards, bring the water from it back online. The existing Lyman spring system would be utilized until power and/or other site improvements (well house, instrumentation and controls, connecting piping) can be constructed and the new well can be commissioned for long-term use. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & LyFT)an Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. pJ AIE5 www.ae2s.com Addendum - Exploratory Drilling Go/No Go Analysis Multiple workshops were held with the City of Bozeman in May and June of 2016, regarding the risk, cost and potential benefits of well drilling at Lyman Spring. The outcome of these meetings was a drilling Go/No Go technical memorandum prepared to assist the City with making a decision as to proceed with drilling at the spring or postpone drilling indefinitely, and potentially pursue a reduced improvements scope. The outcome of this work has been added as an addendum to this study and is included in the following pages. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. P.REs www,ae2s.com Lyman SpHr►g Inilwoveme►its The City is considering exploratory and test well drilling of the aquifer feeding Lyman Spring and Lyman Creek, with the objective of increasing the firm yield of the spring, while remaining within the City's existing water right. Desktop and field geologic and hydrogeological investigations completed to date, described herein, indicate that additional yield may be attainable. The biggest unknown is how much more water could be obtained via the installation of a well to access water from the aquifer feeding the Lyman Creek Spring. The following should be considered when assessing the merits of drilling a well: • At minimum, a well installation should allow better capture of the water currently lost as overflow to the headwaters of Lyman Creek. Based on the 330 measurements of the overflow since 2010, the rate of flow averages 513 gpm. It appears that management (minimization) of this overflow has improved over time, but it still averages over 250 gpm and ranges well above 500 gpm during the periods of highest spring production, even when the City's use is below their instantaneous water right. • It is probable that there is some seepage of spring water below or around the existing spring collectors that flows through the alluvial deposits in the canyon and enters Lyman Creek further downgradient. Based on limited differential measurements between the three foot weir and the Parshall Flume, and anecdotal reporting from system operator Randy Morin, the rate of seepage probably ranges from 200 to 500 gpm. • Finally, if there is significant leakage of groundwater along or down the fault between the Mission Canyon limestone and the metamorphic rock, a well could reduce the amount of this leakage by lowering the water surface elevation in the aquifer. Given the available data and to be relatively conservative, an average annual improvement of 700 ac-ft/yr will be utilized as the minimum probable benefit of installing a well at Lyman Spring. Engineer's Opinion of Probable C:o►►struction Project Costs The cost items to improve the yield from Lyman Spring include the following: • Exploratory/Test well drilling • Water rights change application to add a new point of diversion. • Final production well installation, including engineering and construction costs. Construction costs will include the pump, motor, piping and valving to connect to the existing transmission line, flow meter, power feed from the existing chemical feed facility, monitoring and control systems, site access and site improvements, and a well house (unless the City elects for a pitless installation). Cily of Bozeman I yman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big.Go Beyond. J J Ac www.ae2s.com • A 25% "Total" Project contingency to capture the uncertainty at this stage in administrative, legal and engineering costs, rather than just construction. Table 5 presents conceptual-level total project cost estimates. Table 5. Conceptual-Level Total Project Cost Estimate 7Drilirling ry and Test Well Drilling $75,000 ll Pumping/ Return Water $25,000 Observation, Sampling& Analysis and $40,000 Exploratory and Test Well Drilling Subtotal $140,000 Legal Fees associated with Water Rights $60,000 Final Production Well Project: Well Installation $200,000 (assumes 18-inch well, 150 ft depth, 75 hp Power line, Service, MCC $900,000 Site Improvements (Access, Security) $30,000 Metering/Instrumentation/Telemetry $80,000 Well House $40,000 Construction Subtotal $1,250,000 Contractor Overhead and Profit(IS%) $187,500 Engineering and Construction Administration $250,000 Production Well Project Subtotal $1,687,500 Project Subtotal $1,887,500 Total Project Contingency(25%) $471,875 Total Project Cost $2,359,875 City of Bozeman I yrnan Water Syslorri & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. P.AEs www.ae2s.com Controls Improvements Project to Eliminate Sprint; Box Overflow For comparison purposes, the cost/benefit of a project that would reduce or eliminate the overflow at the junction box has been evaluated. Flow control from the junction box can be automated by continuously monitoring the water level in the junction box and using the level to automatically adjust a flow rate setpoint that the existing Cla-Val flow controller can use to adjust the flow control valve in the Lyman reservoir inlet control building. The level in the junction box would be measured with a submersible pressure transducer that will be anchored to measure the water level above it. The level signal from the transducer would need to be transmitted to the Sourdough WTP. This would be done via radio between the junction box and the reservoir inlet control bldg. The level transducer and radio would both be run using 12V direct current (DC) power, which can be provided by a conventional battery system since very little power is required. Installing power from the reservoir inlet control bldg would be very expensive for the little power that will be required for the radio, The battery could instead be charged by installing power from a small solar panel array, or by installing pico hydropower on the Lyman transmission pipeline. Solar would need to be installed up and out of the canyon to provide consistent power, along with a signal repeater for the radio. The signal cable for the level transducer would need to be direct buried from the transmitter and solar panel to the junction box. Pico hydropower could be installed within the upper- pressure reducing vault. This would simplify burial of the signal cable, as it would follow the existing road. However, a radio repeater would still be needed near the mouth of the canyon, or a signal would need to "flood" Lyman canyon to be transmitted to the inlet control bldg. The determination of how to power the radio signal will be made after further preliminary design and cost estimation. The junction box water level will be received by another radio at the Sourdough WTP and read into a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC). The PLC can convert the level to a flow rate setpoint that the existing flow controller for the Cla-Val can use. The level can be converted to a flow setpoint through pre-configured stages, where several ranges of water level can each be configured to have a corresponding flow set point. The PLC could also directly calculate the flow setpoint by using Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID) control that is integral to the PLC. The setpoints can be adjusted by an operator through an operator interface installed in the PLC control panel at the Sourdough W"rP. A preliminary cost for this work has been prepared for the purpose of the go/no go decision: Preliminary Engineering Report: $15,000 Spring Box control panel: $20,000 Pressure Transducer and local transmitter: $6,000 City of Bozeman Lyman Waior System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. PJ AE-IS www.ce2s.com Radio repeater (either on ridge or near canyon opening): $2,000 WTP Control Panel: $20,000 - Programming/Startup: $8,000 Electrical installation: Direct bury of cable between transmitter and spring box (—2,000 ft): $100,000 (difficult estimate to make without further investigation, due to terrain. - Air Relief Station between Springbox and first PRV Station: $50,000 Approximate Total Cost: $221,000 This is a conceptual level cost estimate, applying a f 25% range to this value is recommended for planning purposes. Source "Seasonality" A well project on Lyman would ideally dampen the peak spring production rate by taking more water from the spring source in the spring months (April and May) ahead of the historical peak spring production period. As a result, peak City usage of Lyman may be stretched from April through the summer months. From probably mid-fall through winter, the well's production would capture the historic baseflow (approximately 640 gpm in drier years) plus any water that is currently seeping into the fault or shallow alluvium. City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study Think Big. Go Beyond. tQ AE.-S www.ae2s.corn �� RCS APPENDIX A: Lyman Canyon Stereo Nets City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study APPENDM A think Big. Go Beyond, nu s www.aels.car» r • • \ •.; 77 �1 • 11��e� • a Poles to Bedding Planes I •y. • • • ---------- Pales from Planes 10/19/15 at 21:33 ---------- calculated from 83 planes from Data set: 'LYC_bedding_10-19.txt' ----- 1% Area Contouring 1 10/19/15 at 21:33----- Data set name= poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt Contour Int. = 2%; Counting Area = 1% of net area ----- Bingham Analysis 1 10/19/15 at 21:34----- Data set: poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt Axis Elgenvalue Trend Plunge tmin ±max 1. 0.6603 313.1,31.4 6.8 9.6 2. 0.2062 220.2,04.8 3. 0.1334 122.4.58.2 6.9 31.8 Best fit great circle (strike, dip RHR) = 212.4, 31.8 ----- Fisher Mean Vector 1 10/19/15 at 21:34----- Data set: poles to LYC.-bedding_10-19.txt N Trend Plunge a95 a99 kappa mean length all 83 307.5 50.4 -- -- 2.6 0.6160 ----- Fisher Mean Vector 1 10/19/15 at 21:35----- Data set: poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt N Trend Plunge a95 a99 kappamean length all 83 307.5 50.4 -- -- 2.6 0.6160 l J • Poles to Joint Planes L4 • - �r ;Y'N` J f" ---------- Poles from Planes 10/19/15 at 21:33 ---------- calculated from 83 planes from Data set: 'LYC_bedding_10-19.txt' ----- 1% Area Contouring 1 10/19/15 at 21:33----- Data set name = poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt Contour Int. = 2%; Counting Area = 1% of net area ----- Bingham Analysis 1 10/19/15 at 21:34----- Data set: poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt Axis Eigenvalue Trend Plunge ±min Amax 1. 0.6603 313.1,31.4 6.8 9.6 2. 0.2062 220.2,04.8 3. 0.1334 122.4,58.2 6.9 31.8 Best fit great circle (strike, dip RHR) = 212.4, 31.8 ----- Fisher Mean Vector 1 10/19/15 at 21:34----- Data set: poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt N Trend Plunge a95 a99 kappamean length all 83 307.5 50.4 -- -- 2.6 0.6160 ----- Fisher Mean Vector 1 10/19/15 at 21:35----- Data set: poles to LYC_bedding_10-19.txt N Trend Plunge a95 a99 kappa mean length all 83 307.5 50.4 -- -- 2.6 0.6160 P,\, REIS Appendix B: Lyman Creek and Spring Discharge Data City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study APPENDIX B Think Big.Go Beyond. 4a FIEwww.ae2s.com Bowing"WTp Lymnn Crock llpisme Voull Overflow Date Innuent Q weir Level Overflow Intiil(rnlion Gallery Production GPNI Ft GPNI Total GPBI Total in CFS Days Cumulative Vohuae Cumulative OF Vol Cumulative Consumption 2/1/2010 800 0.35 82 882 2.0 1 1.270,0110 118,080 1,152,000 2301 days 2/2/2010 800 0.35 82 8N2 2-0 1 1.270,080 118,080 1.152,000 330 measuremems 2/8/2010 800 0,27 42 842 1.9 6 7,274,880 362.880 6,912000 7.0 Jays/measurement 2M/2010 750 038 Iol 851 19 1 1.225,440 14S,440 1,080.000 2/14/2010 7$0 033 71 821 1,8 5 5,911,200 511,2m) 5,400.000 2/21/2010 675 0.47 171 846 1.9 7 8,527,680 1.723,690 6,Rn4,000 2/25/2010 550 0.59 289 839 1.9 4 4.912,640 1.664,640 3,168,000 3/32010 600 0.50 200 800 18 6 6,912,000 1,728,000 5,184,000 3/102010 600 0.55 233 853 1.9 7 8,398,240 2,550,240 6,048,000 3/152010 600 O.S4 242 $42 1.9 5 6,062,400 1,743,400 4,320,000 3/18/2010 720 0.59 101 821 IA 3 3,546,720 436,320 3,110,400 3/2212010 600 0.58 289 880 20 4 5.120,640 1,664,640 3.456,000 3/29/2010 600 0.61 329 928 2.1 7 9,3$4,240 3,306.240 6,048,000 41813010 600 0.61 J28 928 2.1 10 13,361,200 4,723,200 8,640,000 4/20/2010 450 1.20 17oU 2210 49 12 38.188,800 30,412,800 7,776,000 3/17/2010 1200 0.97 109(1 2200 5.1 27 $9,033,200 42,379,200 46,63000n 6124/2010 1900 1.30 1940 3740 83 38 204,61!,800 106,156,800 98,496,000 BestYeor(20111= _ 7/IO2o10 2600 1.00 1120 3720 R.l 25 U3,920,000 40,32O,0U0 93,600,000 %,sm 2,140GPM (3,451ac-11/yr) 7212010 2500 0.98 IUbO 3$60 7.9 2 10.252,900 3,052,900 7.200,000 sum 8/I32010 2400 074 530 2930 6.5 23 97.041,600 17,553.600 79,499,000 Int wanwu,anti Mnual W"tcr light- $90/2010 2400 0.68 429 2829 6 3 3 12,221,280 1,853,280 l0,"468,000 -y-Instan[ancou:Sprina Pruducion 2,671 GPM(4,546 rrt/yr) 0/720I11 2000 0.64 369 2369 5 3 22 75,049,920 11,689,920 63,360.000 9/16/2010 1700 0." 200 1000 4.2 1) 24,624,000 2,592,000 22,032AU 4,M) 10/18/2010 1000 0.74 S30 1530 3.4 32 70,502,400 24,422,400 46,080,000 4/22/2011 600 0.52 220 820 1.8 186 219,628,900 58,924 N00 160,704,000 3,sw I tv. Average SpringProductiun- 5/132011 8110 0.94 956 1754 3.9 21 53.101.440 28,909,440 24.192,000 1 61R GPM(2,6 "I 5/1 Ono I1 1000 112 2000 3000 67 5 21,600,000 14,400,000 7,200.000 1.000 616/2011 1200 1.51 31U(, 4306 9,6 10 117,912.160 94 080.161) 32,932.000 Yr, •W 032011 1(,00 1.54 3203 4803 108 17 119,046,240 79,978_40 39.168,000 ; 2,500 62820I1 1800 1.43 2809 4609 103 5 33,184,800 20.224,900 12,960,000 7/62011 2200 1.28 249n 4260 0.5 8 49,075,200 21.731.201) 25.34-1,000 2paa 7/11/2011 2400 1.15 1579 3979 9.9 5 29,648,300 11,36R,80U 17.280,000 7/19/2011 2600 0.90 361 3461 77 8 39.870,720 9.919.720 29,912,000 7/2V201 1 2600 0,92 906 1506 7 8 3 15,145.920 3,913,920 11,232,000 l _ . 726/2011 2300 0.70 402 3400 76 a 19,58A,000 2,6DI,120 I3,248.000 s'0°° Su',. 7/20/2U11 2100 0.90 861 3361 7.5 1 14.519.520 3,719,520 10,800,00O 8/lf?011 2500 0.34 727 3227 72 3 13,940,640 3,140,640 10,800,000 sa6 -�-"�'- 1 � 8/5/201 I 2J00 0.88 N 12 3112 6 h 4 17,925,120 4,677,120 13,2•t8,000 0 8/02011 2100 0.82 682 2982 6.6 4 17,176,320 3,928,320 13,248000 12/13/09 at14r10 "Ails0 eneni WIWI 6/17/1) 1210112 611L13 lxlulss ml12/14 u17114 6nui5 1:n:ns a/11/7a 8/122011 2300 0,78 601 2001 6.5 3 12,332,320 2.596,320 9,936,000 $/162011 2300 0.72 49S 2795 62 .1 16,099,200 2,851,200 13,248,000 b4Tr 8/19/2011 2300 0.70 462 2762 6 2 1 11,931,840 1,995,840 9,936,0nn 8/23/2011 2300 0.63 355 2655 5.9 ! 15,202,800 2,044.800 13,249,000 8/26/2011 2300 0.59 302 2602 5.8 3 11,24U,640 1,304,640 9,936.000 8/2012011 2100 0.69 445 2545 5.7 1 10,994,400 1.9221-100 0.072,000 9/2/2011 2100 0.85 7.15 2945 6 3 16,307,200 4,291,200 12,096,000 9/6/2011 2000 0.85 745 2745 61 •1 15,811,200 4,291.200 11520,000 9/7/2011 2100 0.90 641 7741 61 1 3,947.040 923.040 3,024,000 9/11@011 2100 0.77 583 2693 6.0 4 15,454,080 3,353.090 12,096,000 9/14/2011 2100 0,7S 347 2647 59 3 11,435.040 2,363.040 9,072,000 9/16/2011 2100 0.75 $47 2647 59 2 7.623,360 1,573,360 6.048,000 9/19/2011 191N3 0.82 682 2542 5.8 3 11.114.240 2,946.2-10 9,208,000 9/22/2011 1900 0.78 601 2501 5.6 3 10.804,120 2,596.320 8.208,000 9/28/2011 1900 0.70 462 2362 3.3 6 20,407,690 3,991,620 16:116.000 W30/2011 1900 0.75 547 2447 5.5 2 7.047,360 1,575,360 1.472,000 10/3/2011 1Wo 0,66 399 2299 5.1 1 9,931,690 1,723.680 8,209.000 10/10/2011 1500 0.84 72S 2225 S.0 7 22.428.000 7,3081000 15,120,000 10/17/2011 1000 1.00 1118 2119 4.7 7 21,349,4.10 11,269,440 10,0mu.not) 10/24/2011 000 130 21.10 2080 4.6 7 20,906.400 21,571.200 9.072,000 10/312011 900 1 01) I I18 2019 4.5 7 20,341,440 11,269.440 9,072,000 11/6/2011 900 0.70 402 1750 319 6 15,120,000 3,091,690 7.776.000 11282011 800 0.91 $84 1084 3.8 22 53,349,120 28.005,120 25,344,000 12/82011 SUO 084 725 1525 3.A 10 21,960,000 10.440,000 11.520,000 12113/3011 800 0.94 724 152.1 3.4 5 10,972,8110 5,212,800 5,760.000 2011 Total Production. City Use. Overflow: 1 11320:2 800 0.75 547 1347 3.0 21 40.733.280 16,541.290 24,192,000 Tot Production 1.124,632,960 3,451 sail 614.966,400 1,887 aril 1,564 ac-fl I/101202 700 0.82 682 1392 3.1 7 13,930560 6.874,560 7,056,000 3.081,241 gpd 1.684,839 gpd 1.396,401.53 Bpd 1/312012 800 DOS 384 1194 2.6 21 35,204,160 11,612,160 24.192.000 2,140 Spat 1,170 $pm 970 gpm I 2/7/2012 800 0.66 398 1198 2.7 -1 12,075,840 4.011,840 8,004,000 228/2012 Soo 0.59 302 1102 315 21 13.124.480 9,132.480 24,191,000 3/29/2012 Soo 0.57 277 1077 2A 30 •16.526.400 11.006.400 34,560.000 4/3/2012 800 0.64 369 1169 2,6 5 8.416,800 2,656,800 5,760,000 4/102012 900 0.64 369 1169 2.6 7 11,703,520 3,719,520 9,064,000 4242012 901) 0.86 767 1667 3.7 14 33,606,720 1$.462,720 18,14.1,000 5182012 1 100 1.02 1 176 2276 511 14 •15.884,160 23,708,160 22.176.000 $/14/2012 1200 1.3 2611 2400 5.3 0 20,736,000 19,498,240 10,368,000 5212012 1000 0.84 727 2527 5.6 7 25,472.160 7.328,160 19,144,000 3/292012 1800 0.81 66-1 246d 5$ 8 28.385,280 7,649,230 20,736.000 0/72012 1700 1.01 I I44 2844 6.3 9 36.858,240 14,82ti 240 22,032,0(11) 6119/20 2 1800 1 117 2017 6 5 12 50,405,700 19,301,760 31.104,000 6/252012 25SO 0.67 •113 2963 66 6 25.600,320 3,568.320 22,032.000 W292012 2550 064 369 2919 65 4 16.813.440 2,125,440 14.683,000 7/312012 2550 0.6 313 2865 64 1 16,Sn2,4n0 1,814,400 14.608,000 7/62012 2500 0.59 302 2802 6.2 3 11-104,640 1.304,640 10.800.000 I 7/102012 2345 0,56 265 2610 1.8 4 15.033.600 1,526.400 13,307,200 7/132012 2286 0.56 20S 2551 5.7 3 11.020,320 1,144,800 9,R73,520 7/172012 2739 0.51 21U 2448 3.5 4 14.100,480 1,209,600 12,690,880 720/2012 2190 0,42 122 2312 1.2 3 9,987,840 $27.040 9,460.800 7/23/2012 2002 0.S7 277 2279 51 3 9.845,280 1.196.640 8,648,640 712.52012 1988 0.56 231 2230 5.0 2 6.448,320 722.880 5.725,440 I7272012 1024 0.56 251 2235 50 2 6,436,800 722,8N0 5,713,920 7/30/2012 1964 0.47 171 2130 4.8 3 9,227,520 741,040 8.484,480 8/'3/2012 1765 0,62 3.11 2106 4.7 3 %007,920 1.473,120 7,624,8W 8/6/2012 1749 0.6 315 2064 4.6 4 11,889,640 1,814,400 10,074,240 8/9/2012 1751 0.58 219 2040 43 2 5.875,200 032,320 5,042,880 8/1012012 1721 0,16 265 1986 4.4 2 1,710,620 763,200 4,956,480 4so4 $11312012 1721 0.53 7)1 1952 4.3 3 9.432,640 997.920 7,434,720 -LynrMSpAngProducBon -e-0aaflow(anml Olvenednow 8115/2012 1613 0.515 10 logo 4.2 2 5,414,400 763,200 4,651.200 s,00a 811712012 1511 005 314 1895 4,2 2 5.457,000 1,103,920 4,351,680 500 8/20/2012 1483 0.62 341 1824 4.1 3 7.179,680 1.473,120 6,406,560 �' Imtantana0ut and Annual Wat4r Right< 822/2012 1490 0.61 12N Is18 4.1 2 5.235,940 944,640 4,291,200 4.000 2,671GPM(4,346at•ft/yr) 8/24/2012 1478 0.6 314 1792 4.0 2 5,160.960 904,320 4,256,640 8127/2012 1378 0.62 711 1719 3.8 3 7,426,080 1,473,120 5,952,960 3,10 8/31/2012 1372 0.62 141 1713 3.8 4 9,866,890 1,964,160 7,902,720 9/4/2012 1242 0.65 314 1626 3.6 4 9,365,760 2,211,840 7,153,920 a•� 9/4/2012 1259 064 lb9 1628 3.6 0 - 9/7/2012 1245 0.62 342 1587 3.5 1 6,133,840 1,477,440 5,378,400 7f00 9/12/2012 1235 0.6 114 1349 3.5 5 11,152,800 2,260,N00 8,892,000 f- 9/17/2012 1228 0,58 219 1517 34 5 10.922,400 2,080,800 8,84[,No 9/20/2012 1170 0,6 714 1484 3.3 3 6,410,980 1.356,480 5,054,400 y I rS 9/24/2012 1100 0.58 119 1449 3.2 4 8,346,240 1,6&1,640 4,681ANCLA O2812012 1104 0.0 IN 1419 32 4 8,167,680 1,11011,640 6,359.040 Loco ' 5r 10/30/2012 513 085 745 1258 2.9 32 57968,640 34,329,600 23,639,040 10/31/2012 958 0.511 ?09 1247 2.9 1 1,795,680 416,160 1,379,520 rL i 11/5/3012 751 0.69 445 1202 2.7 5 8,654;100 3,204,000 5,450,400 VU 11115/2012 781 0.08 00 1211 2.1 10 17.438,400 6,192,000 11.246,400 ° u/ra/as ehaha tt/laho rirairl 0111111 0/17/12 ra/ia/ia alWia ulu/ts 6n2J44 1711L14 wuns tinzlts ahUie 11/19/2012 737 069 430 1167 2.6 4 6.721920 2,476,800 4,245.120 1 1/2612 01 2 (435 0.75 537 1142 2.5 7 11.511,360 5,412,960 0,098,400 6nrc 12/4/2012 698 0.55 253 951 2.1 8 10,955,520 2914,360 9.040,960 12/11/2012 699 0,54 2.12 041 2.1 7 9,483,280 2,439,360 7,045,920 12/18/2012 645 0.55 253 1108 2.0 7 9,0$1,840 2.550,240 G,501,600 1/2 212 0 1 3 $84 0.53 211 785 1.7 35 30,5&1,000 11,642,400 27,921,600 2/7/2011 350 0.5 200 750 17 16 17,280,008) 4.608,0W 12,672.000 2/1MOD $52 0.5 200 752 1.7 12 12,994,S60 3,456,000 9,538160 2/27/2013 549 0.48 loci 729 1.6 8 8,398,080 2,073,600 024,480 36/2013 548 0.47 172 720 1.6 6 6,220,800 1,486,090 4,734.720 3/12/2013 555 044 146 701 1.6 7 7,n6GAtl0 1,471,680 5,594,400 40-12013 548 0,45 IN 702 LIS 21 21,228,480 4,656.960 16,571,$20 4l6/201) $33 0.46 Ibl 716 14 4 4,12-1,160 938,840 3,115,280 4/16/2013 554 0.44 146 700 1.6 10 10.030,000 2,102,400 7,977.600 4119/2013 553 044 146 699 1.6 3 3,019,680 630,720 2,349,960 4/23/2013 553 0.41 122 075 15 4 3,888,000 702,720 3,185,280 4/29/2013 551 0.111 210 761 17 6 6,575,040 1,814,400 4,760,640 5/1/2013 550 051 210 760 0 2 2.189,800 604,900 1,534.000 S/Y=3 $50 0.54 712 792 1.9 2 2,280,960 696960 1,584.000 .4M2013 $96 0.52 220 816 is 4 4.700,160 1,267,200 3.432,960 S/8/2013 698 051 210 908 2.0 1 1,307,520 302,400 1,005,120 5/9/2013 698 0.51 710 908 2.0 1 1.107,320 302,400 1.005,120 3/10/2013 747 0.48 loll 927 2.1 1 1,134,860 259.200 1,073,680 ,VIV2013 7,18 0.57 277 1025 2,1 2 2,952.000 797,760 2.154,240 5/13/2013 875 0,56 165 1140 2.5 1 1.641,600 381,600 1,260,0n0 5/14=13 871 0.52 711 1092 2.4 1 1,572,490 318.240 1,254,240 MOW 1048 0.5 '[N1 1248 28 2 3.594.240 576,000 3,018.2.10 5/17/2013 1032 0,46 16) 1215 2.7 I 1,749,600 134,720 1,514,880 5119,2013 1050 0.57 277 1327 3.0 1. 3.821.760 797,760 3,024,000 5120I2013 1326 073 112 1939 4.1 1 2,646,720 737,280 1,909,440 3/21/2013 1467 073 512 1979 44 1 2,949,760 737,290 2.112,480 5/22/2013 1804 0.64 369 2173 4.8 1 3.129,120 531,360 2,S97,760 512412013 logs 0.62 342 2240 5.0 2 6,451.200 984,960 5,466,240 3/211/2013 1910 0.61 328 2238 3.0 4 12,890,880 1,889,280 11,001,600 5/30/2013 1804 0,62 341 2141 4.8 2 6,177.600 982,090 5,195,520 6/512013 1787 0.72 44,1 2281 5.1 6 19,707.940 4,268.160 15.439,680 6111/2013 2104 0.4 I I5 2219 49 6 19,172,160 993.600 19.178.560 W140013 20a1 0.5 200 2204 4.0 3 9,521,280 804,000 8,657,280 6118/2013 logs 0.5 ?00 21911 4.9 4 12,660,490 1.152,000 1l,S0o,480 61211201) 2005 0.48 I80 2183 4.9 3 9.439.200 777,600 8,661,600 6/25/2013 2004 0.4 IIS 2119 4,7 4 12,205.440 662,400 11,343.040 6/21,2013 1900 0.41 122 2022 4.5 3 8,73,1.040 527.040 8,208.000 6/29/2013 1847 0.46 172 2019 4.5 1 2.907,360 247,680 2,659,610 7/1/2013 1847 0.38 IUI 1948 4.) 2 5.610,240 290,880 5,319,360 7/2/2013 1745 0,40 191 1936 4.3 1 2,787.840 273,040 2,512,800 7/5/2013 1748 0.46 162 1910 47 3 8,2$1,200 699.840 7,551,360 7/812013 1752 0.32 66 Isis 4.1 3 7.953.760 295,170 7,568,640 7/10/2013 1646 0.41 1i2 1768 3.9 2 5,091,840 3$1,360 4,740,480 7/122013 1604 0,44 1•16 1750 3.9 2 3,040,000 420.480 4,617520 7/15/2013 1600 0.4 115 1715 318 3 7,408,800 496.800 6,012,000 7116/2013 1534 0.41 122 1676 3,7 1 2,413.440 175.600 2.237,760 7/17/1013 1453 0.49 191 1644 3.7 1 2,367,360 275,040 2,092.320 7/19/2013 1454 0.46 162 1616 3.6 2 4,654,080 466,560 4,187,$20 7122/2013 1402 0.5 290 1602 36 6,920,&10 864,000 6,036,640 71+3@013 1400 0.4 Il5 1515 34 3 6,544,800 496,900 6.048,000 7/26/2013 1344 0.45 15-1 1498 3.3 1 2,157,120 221,760 1.935,360 7/29/2013 1348 0.38 101 1449 3.2 3 6,259,680 430,320 3,823,360 713112013 1279 0.44 No 1425 3,2 2 4.104,000 420,480 3,613,520 e-nO13 1248 05 21A 144H 3.2 2 4,170,240 576,000 3,594,240 8/5/2013 1250 0.39 108 135N 3.0 1 3,166,560 466.560 1,400,000 8/642013 IISI 0.5 2n0 1351 3.0 1 1,945.440 288,000 1,657,440 90120l3 1146 0.49 WI 1337 3.6 3 5,775,840 925,120 4,950,720 0/1=013 1150 0.43 137 12117 2.9 3 5,$59,840 591,840 4,968,000 8/14/2013 IISI 0.42 130 1281 2.9 2 3,689.290 374,400 3,3t4,880 8116/2013 1129 041 122 1251 28 2 3,602,880 351.360 3,251,520 8/19,2013 1074 0,45 IS-1 1728 2.7 3 5,304,060 665,290 4,639,680 8/20/2013 1071 0.43 U7 1208 2.7 1 1,739,520 197.290 1,542 24U W23/2013 1041 0.46 161 1210 2.7 3 3.227,200 699,840 4,527,360 V26/2013 1052 04 Its 1167 2.6 3 5,041,440 496,800 4.544.640 8/29=13 998 0.44 146 1144 2.5 1 4,942,080 630.720 4,311,360 8/30/2013 999 044 146 1145 2-6 1 1.648,900 210,240 1,438.560 9/I2013 999 0.41 123 1122 2.5 2 3,23I 360 354.240 2.877,120 9/3/2013 940 0.46 162 fill 2.3 2 3,199.600 466,560 2,733.120 9/3/2013 955 0.44 146 f 101 25 2 1.170.890 420,490 2,750,400 9/9/2013 926 0.49 Of 1117 2.5 4 6,433,920 1,100,160 4,333,760 9/132013 921 0.43 137 1059 2.4 4 6,094,080 799,120 5,304,960 9/16/2013 897 0.41 123 1020 23 3 4,406,400 $31.360 3,875.040 9/18/2013 847 0,49 191 1033 2.3 2 2,999,440 550.080 2,439,360 9/23/3013 832 0.46 162 1014 2.3 5 7,30U,8(81 1.166,400 6,134.400 9/25/2013 945 0.47 172 1017 2.3 2 2,928,960 495,360 2.433,600 10/12013 854 0.45 154 1008 2.2 6 8.709.120 1,330.560 7.378.560 10/7/2013 750 064 369 1119 2.5 6 9,668.160 3.198,160 6,480.000 10/82013 751 0.56 265 1016 2.3 1 1,463.040 381,600 1,081,440 10/16/2013 743 031 210 953 2.1 8 10,978,560 2,419,200 8,559,360 10232011 749 0.5 200 949 2.1 7 9,565.920 2,016.000 7,549,920 10/2912013 700 0.53 212 932 2.1 6 8,052,480 2,004,490 6.049.000 11/6/2013 700 0.2 200 900 2.0 8 10,368.000 2,304,000 8,064,000 11/192013 700 0,46 IN 303 1.9 13 16,155,360 3,051,360 13,104.000 11262013 700 0.4 115 81S 1.6 7 8,215,200 1.159,200 7,050000 12/182013 000 248 192 782 1.7 22 24,773.760 S,765,760 19,008,000 12/24Q013 600 041 1.18 738 1.6 6 6.376.320 1,192,320 5.184,000 12/31/2013 600 0.44 146 746 1.7 7 7.519.680 1,471,680 6,o48,000 1/7/2014 600 OAI 123 723 1.6 7 7,287.940 1.239,840 6.048,000 I/9/2014 600 041 123 723 1,6 2 2.092,240 354240 1.728.000 1/14/2014 600 0,33 71 Of 1.5 5 4,831,200 511,200 4,320.000 1/16/2014 550 0.42 110 680 1.5 2 1,958,400 374,400 1,584,000 1/2 112 0 1 4 $50 0.41 1:4 674 15 5 4,852,800 802,81R1 3,960,000 128/2014 550 0,41 124 674 I'S 7 6.793,920 1,249,020 5,544,000 2/272014 550 0.36 89 031) 1.4 30 27,604,800 3,944,900 23,760.000 4/142014 550 0.6 314 964 1.9 46 57,231,360 20,799,360 36;132,000 4212014 630 0.6 314 964 it 7 9,717.120 3,163,120 6,552,000 4242014 650 0.76 565 1215 2.7 3 5.148,800 2.440.900 2,808,000 5/12014 650 0.76 565 1215 2.7 7 1247,200 5,695,200 6,552,000 5/82014 000 1.09 1382 2292 5.1 7 23,002,560 13,930,360 9.072,000 3/142014 1100 0,6 1ow 2100 4.7 6 18,144.000 9.640.000 0,504,rM 51152014 1100 0.94 96u 2060 4.6 1 2'766,400 1.382,400 1,584,000 $/102014 1100 0.93 982 2092 4.6 1 2,999,000 1.414,000 1.584,000 5/22/2014 1300 1.13 1580 2880 04 4 24,893.200 13,651,20u 11,232,000 5129/2014 1700 1,23 1867 3567 7.9 7 35,954,360 18,819,360 17.136,000 6/52014 2000 1.13 1512 3512 78 7 33,400,960 15,240.960 20,160.000 6/10/2014 2400 0.02 907 3307 74 5 23,810,400 6.330.400 17.290,000 6/182014 2000 0.96 1010 3010 67 8 34,675,200 11,635.200 23.040,000 7/12014 2100 0.85 743 2845 63 13 53.238,400 13 946.400 39,312,000 M12014 2100 0.79 62.1 3724 6.1 0 23,535,360 5,391,360 18,144,000 7/102014 2100 0.73 601 2701 6.0 3 11,668.320 2,596,320 9,072.000 7/122014 2300 0.62 341 2641 51 2 7,606,080 982,080 6,624,000 7/142014 2300 0.6 314 2614 38 2 7,529,320 904,320 6,624,000 7/172014 2300 0,57 277 2577 5.7 3 11,132.640 1.196.6,10 9,936,000 7/19/2014 2300 0.53 211 2531 5.6 2 7,289,28U 665,280 6,624,000 7212014 2300 0.47 172 2472 !13 2 7.119.360 403,360 6,624,000 MOON 2200 0.46 163 2363 S.3 5 17.013,600 1.173.600 15,840,000 7282014 2200 0.43 I38 2338 5.2 2 6,713,440 397.440 6.3.6,000 1/302014 2150 0.42 130 2290 S.1 2 6,566,400 374.400 6,192,000 82201a 2000 0.54 242 7242 5.0 3 9,685,4.10 1,045,440 0,640,000 8/42014 2000 0.5 200 2200 4.9 2 6.3.16,0U0 576,000 5,760,000 8/02014 2000 0.47 172 2172 4.8 2 6.235,160 40S,360 5,760,000 8I92014 2000 0,39 108 2108 4.7 3 9,106,560 466,360 8,(40,000 $11112014 1900 0.48 I80 2080 4.6 2 S,990,400 518,400 3.472.000 8/15/2014 1600 0.51 210 2010 4.5 4 11,577,600 1.309,600 10,368,000 8/192014 1775 0.44 1.16 1921 4.3 4 11,06.1,960 940.960 10,22.4,000 8212014 1773 0,43 138 1913 4.1 2 5,309,440 397,440 5,112,000 8282014 1050 0.93 933 1993 4.4 7 19.928."0 9,404,640 10,58.1,000 9/42014 1000 092 900 1906 4.2 7 19.212.490 9,132,480 10,080.000 9/52014 1200 081 664 1864 4.2 1 2,694.160 956,160 1,728,000 9/102014 700 12 1764 Iµ20 4.1 5 13,104.000 12.700,800 5,040,0uu 9/162014 700 0.90 1091 1791 4.0 6 15,474,240 9,420,240 6,048,000 9252014 600 099 1091 1691 3.8 9 21,915.360 14.119,360 7,776.000 IW-nO 4 700 0�! 987 1687 3.6 7 17,004,960 9.948,960 7,056,00 10/10/2014 750 0,87 790 1540 14 8 17,740,800 9,1181,800 8.640,000 10412014 775 0.8 6.12 1417 32 11 22,445.290 10,169,280 12,276,000 1027/2014 775 079 (123 1398 3.1 6 12,078.720 5,393,720 6,696,000 11/14/2014 725 0.76 565 1290 2.9 IB 33,436.800 14,644,900 18.792.000 I 120120:4 775 0.7 -162 1237 2.8 6 10,687.690 3,991,680 6.696.000 1"26204 0 1.1 1413 I413 3.1 0 12,308,320 12,208,320 12/42014 350 0.58 280 1139 2.5 8 13,121,200 3,329,280 9,792,000 IVS2014 800 0.61 328 1128 2 5 4 6.497,290 1,899,200 4,608,000 12232014 800 0.5.3 231 1031 23 15 32,269,600 4,989,600 17,280,0ff0 1/132015 750 0.33 231 981 2.2 21 29,665,440 6,995,440 22.690,001) I/212015 750 0.53 231 991 22 8 11,301,120 7,661.120 8,640,000 2/112015 Tiff 0.4 115 865 19 21 26,157,600 3,477.600 22,680,000 2/122015 700 0,48 181 µ81 2.0 1 1,208,w 260,640 1,008,18f0 2/192015 700 0.31 2lu 910 2.0 7 9,172,800 2,116,800 7,056.000 J 31720:5 700 0.4 115 BIS 1 ri 16 19777,600 2,649,600 16,128,000 3/14201 6SQ 0.45 15.1 804 1.8 7 8:104,320 1,532,320 6,552,000 MUMS 650 0,56 265 915 2.0 13 17,128,800 4,960.800 12,169,000 I 4/102015 932 0.57 277 1209 27 14 24,37314.10 5,584,326 18,799,120 4212015 700 0.65 38.1 1084 24 11 17,170,560 6,082,560 11,088,000 5/520tS 900 091 604 1564 3.5 14 31,$30,240 13,396.240 18,144,000 5182015 900 0.81 7u•1 1604 3.6 3 6.929.280 3,041,280 3,988,000 5212015 1000 0.98 1063 2063 46 13 38.619,360 19,899,360 18,720,000 6142013 1650 1 111µ 2768 62 14 53,802,88U 22,539.880 33,264,000 1 6/9/2015 2330 07 a62 2792 5 20,102,400 3,326.400 16,776.000 6/11/2015 2330 0.67 •114 2744 a I 2 7,902,720 1,192,320 6,710,400 6/10/21115 2330 0.61 328 2659 SQ $ 19,137,600 1361,600 16,776.000 6/102015 2370 0.52 U4 704 5 Q 3 11,463,280 1.726,880 10,238,400 6/24/2015 2310 0A8 181 2491 5.6 5 17.935,200 1,303.200 16.632,000 626/2015 2310 0.5 200 2510 3.6 2 7,228,800 576.000 6.642.800 6/29/2015 2300 0.4 115 2415 SA 1 10,4)2,800 496.800 0,936,000 7/12015 2270 0.41 123 3393 5.3 2 6,191,840 354.240 6.537,600 7/2/2015 2240 0.42 130 2370 $.3 1 3,412,800 187200 3,225,600 7152015 2120 0.44 MS 2265 3.0 3 9,784,300 626,4D0 9,158.400 7/72015 2140 0,41 123 2263 5.0 2 6,517.440 354,240 6.163.200 7182015 2060 48 181 2241 5.0 1 3,227,04n 260,640 2,966,400 7/10/2015 2050 0.46 W 2212 4.0 2 6,370,S60 466,560 5,904,000 7/132013 1050 0.42 Ou 2080 4.6 3 8,085,600 561.600 1,424,000 7/142015 1990 0.42 00 2110 4.7 1 3,039,400 187.200 2.831.200 7/152015 1930 0.47 112 2102 4,7 1 3,026,880 247,680 2,779,200 7/172015 1930 0.4 115 2045 4.6 2 5,889,600 331.200 S08,400 7/190-015 1850 0.46 162 2012 4.5 2 5,794,560 466,560 5,321.000 7/2112015 1830 0.44 lay 1975 4.4 2 5.688.000 417,600 5,270.4011 7/232011 1830 0.41 123 1953 4.4 2 5,624.640 354.240 5,270.400 723/2015 1770 0.46 162 1932 4.3 2 5.564.160 466,560 S,097,600 7/272015 1720 0.49 181 1901 4.2 2 5,474,890 121.280 4.953,600 7/302015 1670 0.48 111 1951 41 3 7.990,320 781,920 7,214,400 8112015 1720 0,42 110 1850 4.1 2 5,328,OW 374,400 4,933,600 02015 1690 043 I38 1820 4.1 2 5,26.1.640 397,440 4,867,200 $162015 1640 0.46 163 1902 4.0 3 7,784,640 609,940 7,094.800 8/102015 1550 0.42 130 1080 3.7 4 9,676,800 7-18.800 8.0211000 8/122015 1590 041 123 1713 3.9 2 4,933.440 354,240 4,S79,200 $117/2015 1530 0.43 Ila 1668 3.7 5 12,OD9,600 991.600 11,016,000 8119/2015 1500 0.44 146 1646 37 2 4,740,480 420,490 4,320,000 8211201S 1420 0.5 :nu 1620 3.6 2 4,66$,600 576d100 4,089.600 82512015 1390 0.38 101 1401 33 4 9.393,160 581,760 9,006,400 8292015 13W 0.48 181 1541 3A 3 6,657.120 781,920 5,875,200 8/312015 11&0 0.40 162 1522 3.4 3 0,$7$,040 699,8.10 5,873,200 9/32015 1360 0.44 145 1505 3A 1 6.301.600 626,400 5,875 200 9192015 1330 0.41 123 1453 3.2 6 12,553,920 1,062.720 11,491,200 9/142015 1290 0.43 Ila 1419 3.2 5 10,209,fr0u 993.600 9,216,000 9222013 1250 0,42 110 1380 311 8 15,897.600 1.497,600 14.400,000 9282015 1190 0.45 I5'1 1344 3.0 6 11.612.160 1,330.164) 10,291,600 10/62015 1150 0.42 130 1290 2.9 8 14,745,600 1,497,6U0 13,248,000 10/12/2015 1090 0.41 121 1213 2.7 6 10,480.320 1,062,720 0,417.600 10/192015 1050 0.47 172 1222 2.7 7 12,117.760 1,733.76n 10,584,000 1028/2015 920 0.55 29.1 1214 2.7 9 15,733.440 3,810.240 11.923,200 11/242013 020 0.49 191 IIII 2S 27 43,195.680 7,426.080 35,769,600 12/102013 910 0.42 11u 1040 2.3 16 2.1,961.600 2,995,200 20,960,400 2U15 1/14/2016 860 0.33 77 937 2.1 35 47,224,600 3,880,800 43,344,000 6J7,J41,120 .1.1 156 oc41 1,74 2232016 807 0.3 A. 863 lA 40 49,708.800 3,225,600 125,600 46,483,200 gpd 3/102016 800 0.42 1Ju 930 2.1 16 21.427,200 2,995,200 18.432,000 ,213 gPn1 41142016 802 0.75 519 1330 3.0 33 68,040,000 27,619,2W 40,420,800 4202016 1030 0.67 01 1444 32 6 12,470,160 3,576,960 8.899.200 5/3/2016 1036 0.91 $94 1920 4.3 13 31,042.400 16,549,480 19,303,920 $/3/2016 1695 0„49 J02 1997 4A 2 3.751,360 869,760 4.8111.600 U8095 Days 5/17/2016 1907 0.8 612 2549 $.7 12 44,046,720 11.093,761.) 32,952,960 Tai Pro3ucfian Overltuw Use 5252016 11100 1.17 102 3542 T9 8 40.803.840 19,031,040 71,772,300 Gal 766 3-16,400 136,313,020 629.772,490 663,036,480 2,035 nc-n Days Total Flow Ovarnow Consumption GPD 2,132,658 393,63461 1,769.023.92 1,816,53H gpd Total Days in Record 2306 6.32 yr! 1,494.90 266.41 1,228 49 1.261 gpm Total Flow Over Period orRacurd Tot Gal 5.372.775.360 1,705,079,520 3,683.112,480 gal Average Daily Flaw Over Period of Record GPD 2,329,911 739,410 I,1197,187 gpd Use Weir Level OF T0141 GPM 1,618 313 1.109 pro Min 54a 0.2 42 639 Max 26uo 48 R63 4863 A,S 1352 0.8 427 1775 nc-IUyr 2.610 828 1,769 3 FOOT WEIR I PIPE (NORTH RESERVOIR INFLL PARSI IALL FLUME 1 TRAPEZOIDAL FLUME Date CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM 1/1/1908 1.7 763 2/3/1908 1.275 572 , 4/15/1908 1.275 572 5/24/1908 3.875 1,739 PROJECT t^ t 6/9/1908 8 3,591 AREA DETAIL, 8/21/1908 3.125 1,403 " 10/1/1908 2.675 1,201 12/30/1908 1.7 763 1/1/1909 1.7 763 2/27/1909 1.25 561 - 4/12/1909 2 898lop �. 4/27/1909 1.5 673 •, 5/27/1909 6.65 2,985 7/6/1909 4.75 2,132 8/9/1909 4.2 1,885 + ` ' 9/27/1909 3.375 1,515 BpZ �1lA�I•- ` 10/18/1909 3.7 1,661 11/9/1909 2.625 1,178 '''-=----- - -- 12/6/1909 2.625 1,178 VICINITY MAP „"`° "`r 12/29/1909 2.125 954 1/1/1910 2.125 954 r^ ' 3/2/1910 1.9 853 3/12/1910 2.125 954 6/18/1910 5 2,244Al EXISTING.Apo _ a AD 6/27/1910 4,625 2,076 8/3/1910 3.625 1,627 8/21/1910 3.5 1,571 8/24/1910 3.375 1,515 8/27/1910 3.125 1,403 9/15/1910 2.75 1,234 11/16/1910 2,775 1,246 12/30/1910 2.15 965 1/2/1.911 2.125 954 1/12/1911 2.125 954 1/18/1911. 1.95 875 2/15/1911 1.8 808 3/6/1911 1.7 763 LYMAN 3/12/1911 1.7 763 5/3/1911 2.45 1,100 6/3/1911 4.5 2,020 6/15/1911 5.925 2,659 tfi�'k 6/17/1911 4.5 2,020 EXISTINGWAlER 7/15/1911 4.25 1,908 SUPPLY LINE 7/2.4/1911 3.65 1,638 9/1/1911 3.65 1,638 9/27/1911 2.75 1,234 1/2/1912 2 898 1 1/9/1912 1.875 842 LYMAN CREEK 1/21/1912 2.375 1,066 BUILDING 2/7/1912 1.7 763 3/6/1912 1,575 707 3/20/1912 1.5 673 4/9/1912 1.8 808 ° 4/24/1912 2.5 1,122 IdoRom 5/17/1912 5.85 2,626 .J �. :ALERLE,tsc. 6/6/1912 6.65 2,985fit,_ 1 6/24/1912 6.65 2,985 7/7/1912 7.3 3,276 7/24/1912 5.05 2,267 10/28/1912 2.8 1,257 12/28/1912 2.625 1,178 1/1/1913 2.625 1,178 2/15/1913 2.25 1,010 4/7/1913 2.3 1,032 7/1/1913 3.25 1,459 3 FOOT WEIR 8/1/1913 3.6 1,616 8/15/1913 3.8 1,706 9,000 8/22/1913 3.375 1,515 12/24/1913 3,375 1,515 8,000 • 1/2/1914 3.375 1,515 0 1/15/1914 2.875 1,290 soon 2/3/1914 2.65 1,189 • 2/9/1914 2.55 1,145 �,000 • 3/1/1914 2.25 1,010 � • 3/9/1914 1.7 763 3:5,000 r 3/12/1914 1,75 785 0 0 3/27/1914 1.875 842 LL4,000 5/23/1914 5.925 2,659 0 0 0 6/4/1914 5.05 2,267 3,000 0 0 • 7/18/1914 4.75 2,132 ~• • :° 7/24/1914 4.75 2,132 2,000 8/15/1914 3.8 1,706 ° 12/29/1914 2,075 931 1,000 2/1/1915 1.65 741 • 7/1/1920 6.734 3,022 7/2 8/19 2 0 5.344 2,399 �y7� np o m o '"' to o en w oa n, to m to m "' `° o' `o m "' `° °' '4 in 0) r v L n gg�� O� O, ON T U, Q m m M `M 01 Qi a, m rn m m m of m `�', m m m CO v, m m m m 0 0 2S 8/1/19"2 0 4.761 2,137 - -4 W H � � � � � � .� � � � - .., � N N \. \ \ \ \ \ ` \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ L \ \ \ ` 1 \ \ 1 `n 2 \ 14 8/9/1920 4,478 2 010 1 vi o0 oti .-, n oo` M v n �d �n n o rn to 00 o v m ry in n a` m n m r„n n ao 8/12/1920 3,34 1,499 ., rn -4N mN� n -' ^' to °� N� d n ' ^r rn � an , N rn � vr� 8/16/1920 4.2 1,885 8/2.2/1920 4.065 1.,824 8/26/1920 3.535 1,587 8/31/1920 3.665 1,645 9/5/1920 3,665 1,645 9/11/1920 3.15 1,414 10 IN PIPE 9/19/1920 3.15 1,414 9,000 9/26/192.0 3.03 1,360 10/4/1920 3.15 1,414 a,000 • 10/7/1920 2.788 1,251 0 v 10/10/1920 2.9088 1,306 7,000 • • �, 10/12/1920 3.03 1,360 0000 • ° e v ° 10/15/1920 2.9088 1,306 • •1•• e•0 10/17/1920 2.67 1,198 2 s,0oo e =• 1 000 S • 10/19/1920 2.788 1,251 =• 0 �� • 10/22/1920 2.788 1,251 p 4,000 :� Ole a see* �s0• • • 10/25/1920 2.788 1,251 LL ��• •• •°0 0 title:° S 10/29/1920 2,67 1,198 3,000 a � • °+• • 11/5/1920 2,55 1,145 •�v r- to'' =�NII/11/1920 2.55 1,145 2,000 •11/17/1920 Z.438 1,094 �• tt� �� 11/23/1920 2,438 1,094 11000 11/29/1920 2.103 944 12/8/1.920 2.324 1,043 0o V n Ql N In 00 O m to m -A Q n 01 N In 00 12/30/1920 2.103 944 rn m a rn m m m m m m m m m rn m m 0 0 0 2/24/1921 1,5$ 709 -� N N N \ \ 0) rn rn ui o,' ,n .� oo �i oo' LA o v ,-: n m -4 ni 0) u, rq 3/7/1921 1.683 755 = 00 In N N a - .-i N ? ." n 7 .--1 to M fV m 4/1/1921 1.785 801 5/9/1921 4,34 1,948 7/20/1921 3.28 1,472 6/2.6/1922 4.86 2.,1.81 12/8/1922 2.103 944 12/19/1923 2 898 5/7/1924 3.665 1,645 3/3/1925 1.78 799 3/29/1961 1.525 684 1.5 686 PARSHALL FLUME 4/14/1961 1.525 684 1.5 686 5/23/1961 3.725 1,672 3.7 1,676 9,000 6/8/1961 5.25 2,356 5.3 2,362 0 6/17/1961 5 2,244 5.0 2,250 1,000 7/10/1961 3.725 1,672 3.7 1,676 7/21/1961 3.425 1,537 3.4 1,541 7,000 7/28/1961 3.325 1,492 3.3 1,496 0 8/2/1961 3.125 1,403 3.1 1,406 6,000 0 8/12/1961 2.925 1,313 2.9 1,316 a- • 8/25/1961 2.75 1,234 2.8 1,237 5,000 = • 10/3/1961 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 0 • s • • 4/12/1962 2.025 909 2.0 911 4,000 • % • i • • • ` 4/16/1962 2.6 1,167 2.6 1,170 • • • i • 0 • • j 4/17/1962 3.025 1,358 3.0 1,361 3,000 M w • • • _ • • • 4/18/1.962 3.225 1,447 3.2 1,451 •• a _ •• •• • • • } • i 4/19/1962 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 = •• • 2,000 j .. • • M�M e 4/23/1962 4.5 2,020 4.5 2,025 S : •� • :; . • •e j 4/26/1962 5.15 2,311 5.2 2,317 j • •• • ��• 0000 �� `•� • 5/5/1962 4.35 1,952 4.4 1,957 1,000 • • • 0 • 0 5/8/1962 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014 90 5/12/1962 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 to n m N Cn m s 0 oN 0 o n $ o 5/19/1962 5.07.5 2,255 5.0 2,261 m m m m m m a, cn m m m m m � a No o o N r o a \ \ \ \ -r \ \ \ \ \ 1 t \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ 5/24/1962 6.2 2 783 6.2 2 790 ^� m to n n ct, m N m cn w m a N N m w lD\ m w I = N r\-I IV l\D � � 1-1\ N � \ •-1 \ \ \ 6/2/1962 6.95 3,119 7.0 3,127 ^ m t° ^ D' w a -" rn to N o 6/9/1962 6.7 3,007 6.7 3,015 6/16/1962 6.825 3,063 6.8 3,071 6/23/1962 6.7 3,007 6.7 3,015 7/3/1962 5,975 2,682 6.0 2,689 7/17/1962 6.1 2,738 6.1 2,745 UPPER WEIR 8/6/1962 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 500 8/11/1962 4.8 2,154 4.8 2,160 8/27/1962 4.05 1,818 4.1 1,822 450 0 9/7/1962 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 9/15/1962 3.425 1,537 3.4 1,541 400 0 11/10/1962 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 ° ° ].2_/l.7/1962 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 350 00 g o m o 000 3/20/1963 2.1 943 2.1 945 a 00 0 4/13/1963 2.55 1,145 2.6 1,147 (? 300 0 4/29/1963 3,325 1,492 3.3 1,496 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 5/4/1963 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014 750 0 0 0 0 5/15/1963 7.725 3,467 7.7 3,476 0 ® (D 200 Cp 0 O O o CM000 OOm 5/16/1963 8 3,591 8.0 3,600 °�m mom CD 5/27/1963 8.25 3,703 8.3 3,712 150 0 6/6/1963 9.2 4,129 9.2 4,140 6/1.3/1.963 9.6 4,309 9.6 4,320 100 6/18/1963 9.5 4,264 9.5 4,275 6/27/1963 8.775 3,938 8.8 3,949 50 7/5/1963 7.85 3,523 7.9 3,532 7/15/1963 7.325 3,288 7.3 3,296 - o 0 0 0 .--i 14 N N N [V m m m rn �n V) V1 to %D 0 lD fn n r w w 7/20/1963 6.7 3,p007 (.7 3,015 $ $ $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ` $ 8 00 7/24/1963 6.45 2,895 6.5 2,902 N N N N N N N fV N fV rV N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N \ \ \ \ C \ \ \ O w D to Vl N O .--i m n 1D cf N p O m to LAN .--i r4 m n u'1 [r N p w 8/].7/1963 5.25 2,356 5.3 2,362 N \ ry N N ti N \ N N " N ri coti Q1 CO 'n XJ \i V n --4 f_V 11 N fn O .-� -T .-4 r_i 8/31/1963 4.575 2,053 4.6 2,059 9/7/1963 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014 9/25/1963 4.05 1,818 4.1 1,822 10/8/1963 3,725 1,672 3.7 1,676 10/29/1963 3.425 1,537 3.4 1,541 11/27/1963 2.825 1,268 2.8 1,271 1/2/1964 2.55 1,145 2.6 1,147 2/6/1964 2.2 987 2.2 990 TRAPEZOIDAL FLUME 3/4/1964 2.2 987 2.2 990 2,500 3/25/1964 1.95 875 2.0 877 4/24/1964 1.95 875 2.0 877 4/29/1964 2.025 909 2.0 911 5/13/1964 5.25 2,356 5.3 2,362 2,000 5/18/1964 7.45 3,344 7.5 3,352 5/23/1964 9.05 4,062 9.1 4,072 5/25/1964 9,475 4,253 9.5 4,264 6/2/1964 9,475 4,253 9.5 4,264 1D1,500 0 6/9/1964 10.75 4,825 10.8 4,837 r 6/16/1964 10,325 4,634 10.4 4,646 u- 6/24/1964 9.75 4,376 9.8 4,387 0 000 cstt� 7/1/1964 8,925 4,006 8.9 4,016 1, 0 7/6/1964 8.65 3,882 8.7 3,892 (o .:ro 0C)0 aml 7/14/1964 7.85 3,523 7.9 3,532 8/4/1964 6.1 2,738 6.1 2,745 500 0 8/13/1964 5.5 2,469 5.5 2,475 0 ,L 9/1/1964 5.725 2,570 5.7 2,576 1/6/1965 2.925 1,313 2.9 1,316 2/19/1965 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 2/25/1965 2.55 1,145 2.6 1,147 0 rd o 0 0 0 0 `�' `�' o 0 0 0 0 ° CO 3/10/1965 2.55 1,145 2.6 1,147 S � rq rN 0 0 N 0 0 N N N hJ N N N N N N N N N rJ rV N fV ry N N ry N rJ N N O Oq n U) •7 N O O M V rV .--4 O 01 n Lt V fV p ryi N i N m .-1 fJ AI rn m 4/24/1965 4.35 1,952 44 1,957 to m r4 l0 Ol %D 0) N V n O Ln W 4/28/1965 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 5/18/1965 10.75 4,825 10.8 4,837 5/27/1965 11.05 4,960 11.1 4,972 6/2/1965 11.2 5,027 11.2 5,040 6/29/1965 12.25 5,498 12.3 5,512 7/13/1965 10.75 4,825 10.8 4,837 7/16/1965 10.05 4,511 10.1 4,522 8/13/1965 8.125 3,647 8.1 3,656 10/8/1965 5.725 2,570 5.7 2,576 12/8/1965 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014 1/10/1966 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 1/24/1966 3.825 1,717 3.8 1,721 2/24/1966 3,025 1,358 3.0 1,361 4/1/1966 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 4/12/1966 3.825 1,717 3.8 1,721 4/25/1966 3,625 1,627 3.6 1,631 5/4/1966 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 5/6/1966 4.7 2,110 4.7 2,115 5/13/1966 6.325 2,839 6.3 2,846 5/25/1966 6.2 2,783 6.2 2,790 6/1/1966 6.7 3,007 6.7 3,015 7/8/1966 5.5 2,469 5.5 2,475 7/14/1966 5.5 2,469 5.5 2,475 7/19/1966 5.25 2,356 5.3 2,362 7/21/1966 4.925 2,2.10 4.9 2,216 7/26/1966 4.8 2,154 4.8 2,160 7/30/1966 4,575 2,053 4.6 2,059 8/4/1966 4.35 1,952 4.4 1,957 8/10/1966 4.35 1,952 4.4 1,957 8/16/1966 4.2 1,885 4.2 1,890 9/7/1966 3.825 1,717 3.8 1,721 9/13/1966 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 12/29/1966 1.95 875 2.0 877 1/31/1967 1.7 763 1.7 765 4/10/1967 2.1 943 2.1 945 5/2/1967 2.375 1,066 2.4 1,069 5/10/1967 3.425 1,537 3.4 1,541 5/19/1967 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014 5/22/1967 5.5 2,469 5.5 2,475 6/6/1967 7.2 3,232 7.2 3,240 8/7/1967 5.5 2,469 5.5 2,475 8/8/1967 5.975 2,682 6.0 2,689 8/10/1967 5.2 2,334 5.2 2,340 8/12/1967 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 8/15/1967 4.925 2,2.10 4.9 2,216 8/19/1967 4.8 2,154 4.8 2,160 9/22/1967 4.7 2,110 4.7 2,115 11/7/1.967 4.25 1,908 4.3 1,912 11/27/1967 3.95 1,773 4.0 1,777 12/13/1967 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 1/8/1968 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 1/30/1968 3.525 1,582 3.5 1,586 2/7/1968 3.325 1,492 3.3 1,496 2/14/1968 3.225 1,447 3.2 1,451 2/22/1968 3.225 1,447 3.2 1,451 3/1/1968 3.225 1,447 3.2 1,451 3/7/1968 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 3/15/1968 3.525 1,582 3.5 1,586 3/22/1968 3.425 1,537 3.4 1,541 3/29/1968 3.825 1,717 3.8 1,721 4/5/1968 4.05 1,818 4.1 1,822 4/11/1968 4.2 1,885 4.2 1,890 4/19/1968 4.35 1,952 4.4 1,957 4/27/1968 4.25 1,908 4.3 1,912 5/2/1968 5.2 2,334 5.2 2,340 5/10/1968 6.7 3,007 6.7 3,015 5/17/1968 7.725 3,467 7.7 3,476 5/23/1968 9.475 4,2.53 9.5 4,264 5/31/1968 11.2 5,027 11.2 5,040 6/6/1968 12.4 5,565 12.4 5,580 6/13/1968 13.775 6,183 13.8 6,199 6/19/1968 14.55 6,530 14.6 6,547 7/6/1968 11.2 5,027 11.2 5,040 7/12/1968 10.7 4,802 10.7 4,815 7/22/1968 9.625 4,320 9.7 4,331 9/29/1968 6.95 3,119 7.0 3,127 10/3/1968 6.7 3,007 6.7 3,015 10/7/1968 6.95 3,119 7.0 3,127 11/14/1968 5.475 2,457 5.5 2,464 12/11/1968 4.975 2,233 5.0 2,239 12/19/1968 4.75 2,132 4.8 2,137 1/6/1969 4.525 2,031 4.5 2,036 1/15/1969 4.2 1,885 4.2 1,890 1/21/1969 4.2 1,885 4.2 1,890 1/30/1969 4.025 1,807 4.0 1,811 2/5/1969 3.925 1,762 3.9 1,766 2/24/1969 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 3/13/1969 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 J 4/11/1969 4.975 2,233 5.0 2,239 5/16/1969 8.325 3,737 8.3 3,746 5/28/1969 8.925 4,006 8.9 4,016 6/18/1969 10.05 4,511 10.1 4,522 7/8/1969 17.175 7,709 17.2 7,729 7/10/1969 17 7,630 17.0 7,650 7/12./1969 16.2 7,271 16.2 7,290 i 7/22/1969 12.55 5,633 12.6 5,647 7/25/1969 12,25 5,498 12.3 5,512 7/29/1969 11.875 5,330 11.9 5,344 8/1/1969 11.275 5,061 11.3 5,074 8/8/1969 9.475 4,253 9.5 4,264 8/13/1969 9.2 4,129 9.2 4,140 8/15/1969 8.65 3,882 8.7 3,892 8/22/1969 8.325 3,737 8.3 3,746 8/2.9/1969 7.25 3,254 7.3 3,262 11/26/1969 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 12/10/1969 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 1/6/1970 3.5 1,570 3.5 1,566 1/22/1970 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463 2/11/1970 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 2/26/1,970 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/13/1970 3.5 1,570 3.5 1,566 5/5/1970 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 5/18/1970 9.1 4,081 9.1 4,0%1 5/25/19'/0 13.9 6,232 13.9 6,216 6/2/1970 15.0 6,750 15.0 6,732 6/16/1970 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/25/1970 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 7/27/1970 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 8/26/1970 6.1 2,727 6.1 2,720 9/14/1970 6.0 2,673 5.9 2,666 10/6/1970 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 1.0/22/1970 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/4/19/0 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 12/l/1970 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 12/22/1970 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 1/14/1971 3.5 1,570 3.5 1,566 1/29/1971 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463 2/l/1971 3.8 1,696 3.8 1,692 2/12/1971 3.6 1,611 3.6 1,607 3/30/1971 3.5 1,570 3.5 1,566 4/6/1971 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 4/15/1971 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 4/23/1971 5.4 2,403 5.3 2,397 4/30/19/1 6.5 2,925 6.5 2,917 5/3/1971 7.3 3,271 7.3 3,263 5/14/1971 11.3 5,085 11.3 5,072 5/19/1971 11.9 5,355 11.9 5,341 6/7/1971 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/14/1971 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/24/1971 11.6 5,220 11.6 5,206 7/9/1971 10.5 4,725 10.5 4,713 7/16/1971 10.2 4,567 10.2 1,556 7/30/1971 9.1 4,081 9.1 4,071 8/5/1971 8.5 3,825 8.5 3,815 8/24/1971 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 9/8/1971 7.0 3,141 7.0 3,133 9/23/1971 6.3 2,826 6.3 2,819 10/22/1971 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 11/3/1971 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 12/17/1971 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 1/18/1972 3.9 1,732 3.9 1,728 2/4/1972 3.5 1,564 3.5 1,560 2/16/1972 3.5 1,564 3.5 1,560 2/28/1972 3.9 1,732 3.9 1,72.8 3/9/1972 3.5 1,564 3.5 1,560 3/21/1972 4.3 1,91.2 4.3 1,908 4/3/1972 4.1 1,822 4.1 1,818 4/27/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 5/9/1972 6.1 2,722 6.1 2,715 5/17/1972 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 6/12/1972 10.2 4,567 : 10.2 4,556 6/26/1972 9.9 4,444 9.9 4,432 7/6/1972 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 7/24/1972 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 8/4/1972 6.1 2,722 6.1 2,715 8/15/1972 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 8/28/1972 5.1 2,306 5.1 2,300 9/21/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 10/2/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 10/18/1972 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 10/31/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 11/13/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 11/20/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 11/28/1972 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 12/19/1972 3.5 1,564 3.5 1,560 1/5/1973 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 1/16/1973 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 1/29/1973 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 2/9/1973 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 2/27/1973 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/4/1973 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/13/1973 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 4/26/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 5/8/1973 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 5/11/1973 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 5/16/1973 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 5/18/1973 11.3 5,085 11.3 5,072 5/23/1973 13.7 6,165 13.7 6,149 6/5/1973 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/28/1973 11.3 5,085 11.3 5,072 7/13/1973 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/27/1973 8.5 3,825 8.5 3,815 8/3/1973 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 8/13/1973 6.5 2,925 6.5 2,917 8/17/1973 6.5 2,925 6.5 2,917 8/24/1973 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 8/27/1973 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 8/31/1973 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 9/11/1973 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 10/3/1973 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 10/29/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/7/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/14/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/30/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 i 12/3/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 12/21/1973 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 1/9/1974 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 1/18/1974 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 1/25/1974 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 1/31/1974 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 2/7/1974 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 2/28/1974 3.1 1,386 3.1. 1,382 3/1/1974 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 3/15/1974 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 I 3/27/1974 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/5/1974 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 4/12/1974 3.7 1,651 3.7 1,647 4/19/1974 4.3 1,912 1.3 1,908 4/25/1974 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 4/26/1974 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 5/3/1974 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 5/9/1974 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 6/6/1974 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/11/19/4 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/1.2/1974 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/19/1974 11.9 5,355 11.9 5,341 6/27/1974 11.9 5,355 11.9 5,341 7/8/1974 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/15/1974 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/26/1974 8.5 3,825 8.5 3,815 8/14/1974 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 8/15/1974 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 8/23/19/4 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 8/30/1974 6.5 2,925 6.5 2,917 9/11/1974 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 9/20/1974 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 9/25/1974 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 10/7/1974 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 10/17/1974 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 10/28/19/4 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 11/1.4/1.974 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/21/1974 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 12/9/1974 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 1/16/1975 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 1/30/1,975 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 3/13/1975 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 4/7/1975 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 4/21/1975 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 5/12/1975 11.3 5,085 11.3 5,072 6/2/1975 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 6/25/19/5 13.7 6,165 13.7 6,149 7/2/1975 13.7 6,165 13.7 6,149 7/3/1975 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610 7/8/1975 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 8/8/1975 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 8/18/1975 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 8/21/1975 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 9/2/1975 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 9/4/1975 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 9/16/1975 6.5 2,925 6.5 2,917 9/29/1975 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 10/30/1975 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 11/13/1975 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 1/14/1976 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 2/19/1976 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 3/24/1976 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 4/12/1976 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 4/1.3/1976 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 4/14/1976 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 4/16/1976 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 4/27/1976 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 5/3/1976 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 5/7/1976 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 5/14/1976 11.9 5,355 11.9 5,341 5/20/1976 11.9 5,355 11.9 5,341 5/24/1976 11.9 5,355 11.9 5,341 6/2/1976 11.3 5,085 11.3 5,072 6/18/1976 10.2 4,567 10.2 4,556 6/29/1976 10.8 4,860 10.8 4,847 7/1/1976 10.8 4,860 10.8 4,847 7/13/1976 10.2 4,567 10.2 4,556 7/22/1976 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/30/1976 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 8/19/1976 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 8/31/1976 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 10/13/1976 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 10/22/1976 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 11/9/1976 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 11/23/1976 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 12/14/1976 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 1/6/1977 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 2/2/1977 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 2/16/1977 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 3/14/1977 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/12/1977 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 4/18/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 4/23/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 4/25/1977 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 4/29/1977 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 5/10/1977 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 5/16/1977 6.3 2,824 6.3 2,816 5/31/1977 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 6/6/1977 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 6/27/1977 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 7/12/1977 7.3 3,271 7.3 3,263 7/22/1977 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 8/2/1977 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 8/31/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 9/27/1977 4.1 1,827 4.1 1,822 10/14/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 10/24/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/8/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/16/1977 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 11/29/1977 3.7 1,651 3.7 1,647 1/12/1978 3.7 1,651 3.7 1,647 2/15/1978 3.7 1,651 3.7 1,647 3/15/1978 3.7 1,651 3.7 1,647 3/29/1978 4.9 2,209 4.9 2,204 4/10/1978 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 4/20/1978 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 5/2/1978 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 5/26/1978 9.6 4,322 9.6 4,311 6/19/1978 9.6 4,322 9.6 4,311 8/2/1978 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 8/24/1978 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 9/26/1978 9.4 4,201 9.3 4,190 10/17/1978 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 11/14/1978 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 1/23/1979 4.5 2,025 4.5 2,020 2/15/1979 3.7 1,651 3.7 1,647 3/5/1979 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 4/16/1979 5.1 21304 5.1 2,298 4/18/1979 5.8 2,596 5.8 2,590 5/8/1979 8.8 3,942 8.8 3,932 I 7/6/1979 9.4 4,201 9.3 4,190 8/13/1979 6.8 3,033 6.7 3,025 I 10/9/1979 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 10/29/1979 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 I 11/27/1979 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 12/21/1979 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 2/l/1980 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 2/25/1980 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 4/17/1980 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732. 4/21/1980 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 5/12/1980 8.5 3,825 8.5 3,815 5/29/1980 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/15/1980 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 7/23/1980 7.5 3,379 7.5 3,371 7/30/1980 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 9/2/1980 4.7 2,115 4.7 2.,110 10/15/1980 4.5 2,025 4.5 2,020 10/22/1980 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 11/15/1980 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 12/19/1980 3.1 1,386 3.1 .1.,382 2/20/1981 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 3/24/1981 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/2/1981 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 4/14/1981 4.1 1,82.7 4.1 1,822 4/20/1981 4.1 1,827 4.1 1,822 4/29/1981 6.1 2,749 6.1 2,742 5/22/1981 18.4 8,280 18.4 8,258 6/11/1981 15.9 7,155 15.9 7,136 6/18/1981 15.3 6,885 15.3 6,867 6/23/1981 15.9 7,155 15.9 7,136 6/29/1981 10.2 4,567 10.2 4,556 7/10/1981 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/2.7/1981 9.6 4,322 9.6 4,311 8/20/1981 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 9/1/1981 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 9/23/1981 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,718 10/27/1981 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 12/31/1981 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 4/22/1982 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 4/26/1982 5.4 2,403 5.3 2,397 6/10/1982 13.8 6,210 13.8 6,194 8/6/1982 10.5 4,725 10.5 4,713 9/29/1982 6.1 2,749 6.1 2,742 11/24/1982 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 2/3/1983 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 3/17/1983 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 4/18/1983 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 5/17/1983 8.0 3,600 8.0 3,591 6/3/1983 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 7/26/1983 8.5 3,825 8.5 3,815 10/13/1983 4.7 2,115 1.7 2,110 11/9/1983 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 2/27/1984 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 5/24/1984 14.4 6,480 14.4 6,463 6/18/1984 9.9 4,44.1 9.9 4,430 7/26/1984 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 8/10/1984 7.0 3,139 7.0 3,131 9/25/1984 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 1/24/1985 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 3/8/1985 2.6 1,156 2.6 1,153 4/22/1985 4.9 2,209 4.9 2,204 5/30/1985 5.4 2,403 5.3 2,397 6/13/1985 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 6/20/1985 5.1 2,304 5.1 2,298 7/2/1985 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 7/10/1985 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 7/18/1985 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463 7/26/1985 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463 8/6/1985 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382 9/9/1985 2.8 1,269 2.8 1,266 1/9/1986 1.9 853 1.9 851 2/27/1986 2.6 1,156 2.6 1,153 3/27/1986 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463 4/21/1986 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 4/26/1986 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 6/23/1986 7.3 3,271 7.3 3,263 7/1/1986 7.8 3,487 7.8 3,478 8/21/1986 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 9/25/1986 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908 1.1/18/1986 3.5 1,568 3.5 1.,564 12/15/1986 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463 3/12/1987 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 4/30/1987 5.4 2,403 5.3 2,397 5/6/1987 5.8 2,596 5.8 2,590 5/19/1987 5.7 2,547 5.7 2,540 6/3/1987 9.1 4,084 9.1 4,073 6/30/1987 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491 8/21/1987 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 9/29/1987 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564 10/5/1987 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 11/18/1987 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 3/25/1988 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 4/20/1988 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 5/5/1988 3.9 1,737 3.9 1,732 6/8/1988 7.8 3,487 7.8 3,478 7/11/1988 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110 9/23/1988 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 10/26/1988 2.7 1,228 2.7 1,225 3/14/1991 0.6 250 4/15/1991 0.8 350 5/13/1991 0.8 350 5/17/1991 1.9 875 5/31/1991 1.8 815 6/17/1991 1.9 845 6/30/1991 1.8 800 7/11/1991 1.9 850 7/23/1991 1.8 820 8/3/1991 1.4 625 8/17/1991 1.3 605 9/3/1991 1.2 520 9/15/1991 1.1 500 9/30/1991 1.0 450 10/8/1991. 0.9 425 10/21/1991 0.9 390 10/30/1991 0.8 360 11/9/1991 0.8 345 11/17/1991 0.7 325 11/21/1991 0.7 300 11/27/1991 0.5 240 11/30/1991 0.5 225 12/3/1991 0.4 175 12/9/1991 0.4 160 12/15/1991 0.3 140 12/31/1991 0.4 175 1/3/1992 0.4 165 1/24/1992 0.4 170 2/14/1992 0.4 180 3/2/1992 0.4 180 3/6/1992 0.4 180 3/13/1992 0.4 178 3/20/1992 0.4 180 4/20/1992 0.4 175 5/15/1992 0.8 380 6/5/1992 2.2 1,000 6/30/1992 1.1 500 5/3/2001 2.254901961 1,012 1.2 534 3.0 1,345 5/10/2001 2.254901961 1,012 1.2 535 3.3 1,467 5/18/2001 2.606951872 1,170 1.2 532 3.9 1,737 5/25/2001 2.606951872 1,170 1.2 534 3.9 1,737 5/31/2001 2.606951872 1,170 1.2 536 3.7 1,651 6/8/2001 2.245989305 1,008 1.2 535 3.5 1,568 6/22/2001 3.429144385 1,539 1.2 550 4.9 2,210 6/28/2001 3.22-860962.6 1,449 1.2 550 4.7 2,115 7/6/2001 2.936720143 1,318 1.2 550 4.1 1,827 7/13/2001 2.606951872 1,170 1.2 550 3.5 1,5/0 7/1.9/2001 2.415329768 1,084 1.2 550 3.1 1,386 8/2/2001 1.905080214 855 1.2 550 2.7 1,228 8/9/2001 1.905080214 855 1.2 550 2.4 1,080 8/16/2001 1.693404635 760 1.2 558 2.1 954 9/13/2001 1.314616756 590 1.2 560 1.9 855 10/19/2001 1.232174688 553 1.2 550 1.6 720 10/26/2001 1.232174688 553 1.2 555 1.5 661 11/2/2001 1.091800357 490 1.2 540 1.6 720 11/9/2001 1.091800357 490 1.2 5,10 1.5 690 11./13/2001 0.6 11/20/2001 1.091.800357 490 1.2 545 1.5 661 0.6 2 12/4/2001 1.091800357 490 1.2 525 1.4 630 0.5 2 12/12/2001 0.955882353 429 1.2 522 1.5 661 0.4 2 1/3/2002 0.824420677 370 1.1 504 1.5 661 0.4 y. 1/9/2002 0.824420677 370 1.1 500 1.5 661 0.4 1 4/4/2002 0.554812834 249 1.0 458 1.1 499 0.4 Z 4/11/2002. 0.668449198 300 1.1 487 1.3 58.5 0.5 4/19/2002 0.95811.0517 430 1.2 518 1.5 690 0.5 2 5/2/2002 1.091800357 490 1.1 495 1.8 790 0.6 Z 5/17/2002 1.532976827 688 1.1 497 2.4 1,080 �.8 3 5/31/2002 4.050802139 1,818 1.1 495 6.0 2,673 0.9 3 6/7/2002 4.427361854 1,987 1.1 491 6.8 3,033 0.8 3, 6/20/2002 4.98885918 2,239 1.1 498 7.0 3,138 0.8 3 6/25/2002 4.320409982 1,939 1.1 488 6.3 2,824 0.8 3 7/10/2002 3.429144385 1,539 1.1 500 5.1 2,304 0.8 3 7/2.5/2002 3.128342246 1,404 1.1 500 4.4 1,957 0.6 28,: 8/2/2002 2.606951872 1,170 1.1 500 4.1 1,827 0.6 265 8/9/2002 2.606951872 1,170 1.1 500 3.8 1,694 0.0 - 8/14/2002 1.1 500 3.6 1,609 0.0 8/24/2002 2.51114082 1,127 9/13/2002 2.419786096 1,086 0.4 200 3.7 1,651 10/3/2002 2.245989305 1,008 0.4 200 3.5 1,568 10/10/2002 2.16 13 19073 970 0.4 200 3.5 1,568 10/18/2002 2.1.61319073 970 0.4 191 3.3 1,467 0.0 10/25/2002 2.245989305 1,008 0.4 198 3.4 1,528 0.0 11/l/2002 2.185828877 981. 0.4 198 3.1 1,386 0.0 11/8/2002 2.245989305 1,008 0.4 198 3.0 1,365 0.0 11/27/2002 2.286096257 1,026 0.0 - 3.3 1,467 0.5 21`) 2,245989 1,008 12/4/2002 1.905080214 855 0.4 185 3.1 1,386 0.4 20t 2.406417 1,080 1.2/13/2002 1.820409982 817 0.4 180 2.9 1,305 0.5 2-1� 2.245989 1,008 12/27/2002 1.820409982 817 0.4 175 2.9 1,305 0.5 2' 2.2,15989 1,008 1/10/2003 1.820409982 817 0.4 175 2.8 1,269 0.4 20G 2.245989 1,008 1/17/2003 1.820409982 817 0.4 175 2.7 1,210 0.4 196 1.864973 837 1/31/2003 1.163101604 522 0.4 175 2.7 1,192 1.864973 837 3/21/2003 1.532976827 688 0.4 175 2.7 1,228 1.644385 738 4/4/2003 1.693404635 760 0.4 198 2.9 1,305 1.934046 868 4/11/2003 1.693404635 760 0.4 198 3.0 1,345 2,094474 940 4/2.2/2003 2.702762923 1,213 0.4 185 4.3 1,912 3.268717 1,467 5/2/2003 3.629679144 1,629 0.4 198 5.8 2,596 4.612299 2,070 5/9/2003 3.73885918 1,678 0.4 175 5.8 2,596 5/16/2003 3.529411765 1,584 0.4 175 6.1 2,725 5/29/2003 5.503565062 2,470 0.3 157 8.3 3,712 6/5/2003 5.744206774 2,578 0.4 180 8.8 3,942 7/11/2003 5.102495544 2,290 0.0 - 7.0 3,138 7/29/2003 1.463903743 657 0.0 - 2.7 1,228 9/12/2003 3.228609626 1,449 0.0 - 5.0 2,259 9/19/2003 3.128342246 1,404 0.0 - 4.7 2,115 10/3/2003 3.036987522 1,363 0.0 - 4.7 2,115 10/16/2003 3.036987522 1,363 0.0 - 4.3 1,912 10/24/2003 1.022727273 459 1.6 740 2.1 922 5/1.4/2004 4.540998217 2,038 0.0 - 4.7 2,115 6/17/2004 7.290552585 3,272 0.0 - 10.9 4,905 7/2/2004 4.050802139 1,818 1.4 650 7.8 3,487 7/13/2004 4.050802139 1,818 1.4 650 6.9 3,087 7/21/2004 3.128342246 1,404 1.9 875 5.4 2,403 7/29/2004 2.938948307 1,319 1.9 875 4.9 2,210 8/20/2004 2.245989305 1,008 1.9 875 4.1 1,827 9/2/2004 1,613190731 724 1.9 875 2.3 1,044 10/14/2004 2.702762923 1,213 0.0 - 3.4 1,528 10/26/2004 2.51114082 1,127 0.0 - 3.6 1,608 11/12/2004 1,38368984 621 1.6 700 1.9 853 12/8/2004 1.091800357 490 1.6 700 1.6 722 12/29/2004 2.069964349 929 0.0 - 3.0 1,345 2/1/2005 0.668449198 300 1.2 550 1.2 531 2/11/2005 0.610516934 274 1.2 525 1.5 690 3/4/2005 0.73083779 328 1.1 510 1.5 661 3/16/2005 0.668449198 300 1.1 495 1.4 632 3/25/2005 0.668449198 300 1.1 485 1.4 632 0.4 5/20/2005 1.820409982 817 2.2 1,000 3.2 1,426 0.6 6' 6/17/2.005 5.102495544 2,290 2.2 1,000 7.5 3,380 0.8 36 1.782531 800 6/24/2005 4.215686275 1,892 2.9 1,300 6.0 2,673 0.8 360, 1.782531 800 6/30/2005 5.744206774 2,578 0.0 - 8.3 3,712 0.8 36& 1.782531 800 7/8/2005 3.036987522 1,363 3.1 1,400 4.3 1,912 0.8 346 7/22/2005 2.330659537 1,046 3.1 1,400 3.5 1,568 0.7 305r, 8/5/2005 1.532976827 688 3.1 1,400 2.7 1,192 0.4 199 8/19/2005 1.232174688 553 3.1 1,400 2.1 956 0.4 1991 9/l/2005 1.163101604 522 3.0 1,350 2_.0 905 0.4 199, 9/14/2005 0.989304813 444 2.7 1,200 2.0 905 0.4 199 9/2.9/2005 0.989304813 444 2.2 1,000 2.0 905 0.4 199 j 10/21/2005 2.5557041 1,147 0.0 - 3.5 1,550 0.4 199 11/17/2.005 1.091800357 490 1.8 825 2_.0 905 4 1 1/3/2006 1.4 650 2.4 1,080 3/3/2006 0.955882353 429 1.3 600 1.9 853 032,1153 325 5/5/2006 2.936720143 1,318 3.0 1,350 5.4 2,403 1,782531 800 5/31/2006 3.429144385 1,539 3.1 1,400 5.2 2,3531,782531 800 I 6/9/2006 3,128342246 1,404 3.1 1,400 5.1 2,3041.782531 800 6/23/2006 3.228609626 1,449 3.1 1,400 5.1 2,304 1.782531 800 8/3/2006 1.163101604 522 3.0 1,350 2.7 1,192 1.114082 500 8/18/2006 1.314616756 590 2.2 1,000 2.8 1,269 0.757576 340 1 9/22_/2006 1,232174688 553 1.8 800 2.7 1,192 10/13/2006 1.312388592 589 1.8 825 2.7 1,228 11/3/2.006 2.836452763 1,273 0.0 - 5.0 2,259 1.782531 800 12/13/2006 2.606951872 1,170 0.0 - 4.6 2,070 1.782531 800 1/25/2007 2.42201426 1,087 0.0 - 4.2 1,870 0.4719911.782531 800 3/14/2007 1.532976827 688 1.1 500 3.2 1,426 4/6/2007 1.09.1.800357 490 1.9 875 3.2 1,426 5/3/2007 3.429144385 1,539 2.0 900 6.6 2,979 5/11./2007 2.836452763 1,273 3.1 1,400 5.2 2,353 1.782531 800 6/1/2007 4.761586453 2,137 2.9 1,300 8.0 31600 1.782531 800 6/8/2007 5.984848485 2,686 2.9 1,300 10.5 4,725 1.782531 800 6/22/2007 5.218360071 2,342 3.1 1,400 8.4 3,771 1.782531 800 6/29/2007 4.215686275 1,892 3.3 1,500 6.8 3,033 1.782531 800 7/6/2007 3.429144385 1,539 3.3 1,500 6.1 2,724 1,782531 800 7/13/2007 2.606951872 1,170 3.3 1,500 5.2 2,353 1.782531 800 8/9/2007 1,532976827 688 3.3 1,500 3.2 1,426 0.94697 425 9/5/2007 1.532976827 688 2.2 1,000 3.5 1,568 9/19/2007 1.163101604 522 2.3 1,050 3.1 1,.386 i 10/4/2007 1,163101604 522 2.2 1,000 1.4 632 10/24/2.007 1.232174688 553 2.1 950 1.4 632 0.824421 370 11/9/2007 0.73083779 328 2.1 925 1.4 632 0.735294 330 11/27/2007 0.889037433 399 1.7 775 1.2 531 12/6/2007 0.955882353 429 1.7 775 0.7 319 5/2/2008 1.232174688 553 1.8 800 2.1 956 5/14/2008 2.51114082 1,127 2.3 1,050 3.5 1,568 5/30/2008 6.225490196 2,794 3.1 1,400 9.4 4,200 6/3/2008 5.623885918 2,524 3.1 1,400 7.4 3,325 7/3/2008 6.2-25490196 2,794 3.3 1,500 9.1 4,083 ) 1.782531 800 //11/2008 6.225490196 2,794 3.3 1,500 8.0 3,600 1,782531 800 7/18/2008 5.7-14206774 2,578 3.3 1,500 7.0 3,138 7/25/2008 4.540998217 2,038 3.3 1,500 6.3 2,823 , 1.8 808 8/1/2008 4.320409982 1,939 3.3 1,500 5.8 2,596 1.782531 800 8/8/2008 3.83912656 1,723 3.3 1,500 5.1 2,304 1.782531 800 8/15/2008 3,629679144 1,629 3.3 1,500 4.8 2,164 8/29/2008 3.036987522 1,363 3.3 1,500 4.0 1,782 9/5/2008 3,036987522 1,363 3.3 1,500 3.7 1,651 9/26/2008 1.532976827 688 3.3 1,500 2.8 1,269 11/14/2008 1.532976827 688 11/14/2008 2.2 1,000 6/26/2009 4.0 1,800 7/14/2009 4.4 1,975 8/3/2010 2.1 938 10/19/2010 2.73 1,225 2/15/2011 1./2 772 3 FOOT WEIR I PIPE (NORTH RESERVOIR INFLL PARSHAI I FLUME �. _- � TRAPEZOIDAL FLUME CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM AVERAGE 4.1 1,819 4.8 2,173 5.5 2,451 0.5 240 1.8 819 MAXIMUM 17.2 7,709 18.4 8,280 18.4 8,258 1.0 459 4.6 2,070