HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-13-LYMAN WATER SYSTEM AND LYMAN SPRING STUDY • v
-�,•. ^,ft�YrN 11
y �?r a d'• IL
t`,`�•.1 83,,.:•sae
R1111E
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
To: Brian Heaston, Project Engineer, City of Bozeman 01•••••N7•••" '•
�� .
From: Scott Buecker, PE, AE2S ;•ylr .� •;
Scott Jungwirth, EIT, AE2S s SCOTT '•
Greg Warren, RPG, CH2M BUECK R { _
Colin Shaw, Montana State University �1�
No.40518PE oAl:
Kevin Boggs, PhD, RPG, CHg, CH2ME�•• � •
S+S•..,FNS, �G•�
'••.. ANAL ..•
Date: January 13th, 2017 ,.•••...
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
Current Lyman Spring Yield....................................................................................................... 14
Purpose of the Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study....................................................... 14
SiteGeology.............................................................................................................................. 21
SurficialGeologic Units......................................................................................................... 21
BedrockGeologic Units......................................................................................................... 22
StructuralGeologic Setting....................................................................................................... 23
Structural Control of Groundwater Flow................................................... 24
jLyman Spring Aquifer Yield........................................................................................................... 24
LymanSpring Recharge Analysis............................................................................................... 26
Interpretation of Lyman Spring Recession Curves................................................................ 27
J City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond. FIE
www.ce2s.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. 2.9
Table 4. Recommended Actions to Increase Aquifer Production ................................................ 41
Table S. 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)...I..... 10
Figure 3. General Location of Flow Measurement Structures on the Lyman Creek Source ........ 13
Figure 4. Lyman Spring Yield (02/2.010— 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. &J AE5 www.ae25.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
Figure14. Geologic Profile B-B ..................................................................................................... 38
Appendix A: Lyman Canyon Stereo Nets
Appendix B: Lyman Creek and Spring Flow Data
l
f
a
J
J
l
J
l
City of Bozeman Lyman Water Syslerri & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. J A www.ae2s.com
J
1
�`
1
1
1
l
1
I
A
1
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 system 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
JThink Big. Go Beyond. PJ Au2s www,ae2s.com
i
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. A 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.
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond. jk? nF—
s www.ae25.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
Lytnaii Water Source History and Description
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.
I
1
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond.AEZS www.ae2s.com
4
14 iN.
I L`-
ae
u Y
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
W, ater Right Maximum Max of Priorit
. ,,ft,umber Flow Rates Volume Use Date
41H-140882-00 Lyman Stream 1,683.75 3.75 2,740.2 1/1- 12/31 1864
41H-140883-00 Lyman Stream 1 987.80 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. P.AEs 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
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.
1
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
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
City of Bozeman Lyman Wealer Syslern & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. A www.ae2s.com
CONTRACTOR TO REESTABLISH
,-EXISTING CONTOURS FOR
SURFACE DRAINAGE
G" THICK FIENTONITE CLAY SEAL
COVERED 'NJI-I 6" NATURAL
MATERIALS (SEE NOTE) i l
UI
sNEEy cllE 5
1 --_'NATURAL GRAVEL BACKFILL ^-f
26 L.F 01 211 ula.
PERFORM ED PIPE -FABRIC
JUiNI DIP r 0 'l% SLOPE
5'
( F(FOR
SHADE)-IIII I �IIII �III —
I_ (RESTRAINED JUtNTUIl0) 4) III=1111 �
—III
lit IIII CLAh1P WIIit ALL 5-10' BLOND FNr) Ur PIPE
1HREAD
24" SOT DIP R 24" PE PVC 165P51 6l_UE BkLITE
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. P All�s www.ac2s.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 ft 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 Junction 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.
1 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
Jrisk of air entrainment in the transmission line and excessive overflow diverted back to Lyman
j Creek. In recent years City staff have been able to reduce the average overflow amount through
J 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.
J
J City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond. LI-a)A www.ae2s.com
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-
1920, 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 151, 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 I.yman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond. PJ AE7S www.ae2s.com
61
+. .`rI J a
Upper Weir Spring Box
r� 0 Complex
`rye I P g
+' Spring Junction Box-- � 3 S rin
Trapezoidal Flume �� Collectors)
Diversion
w T �nl♦U .l.}0
• it s.+M+ ' ..�'\.1�'�]� -fin
Pipe
A► ,'y.'+ Upper Diversion Pond'
•.. 'or
N •��
rr
1. Facilities in italics no longer �"!F=. - U r
� PPer PRV
exist.
2. Facilities that are underlined �►
still exist but are not utilized as
part of the current system. ""` �' � "_.;�'
3. Facilities that are in bold are 16" DIP
apart of the current Lyman
Water System
Lower PRV
Lower Diversion Pond N Two fk Parshall Flume
.� V
t
PROX LOCATION
F CONNECTION
TO 18"AC
30-inch Pipe
�. ---Lyman Treat nt Plant II Q 16 G oag
(magnetic meter) 1
r
C •
. :
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 Spr•inci 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 gpm, 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 gpm, or 3,451 ac-fit.
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. AE www.ae2s.com
M
3
F.
v to
N v
A C _
C H
'ten Ui — O
fV
- —- — Ln
- o o — - -• ^�1 0
zs a
_ Q _
40
u
I _ 4 H V)
� N Q
C �
C
—- E
hoop
-- - Ct J
_ 4JCC
ap
- - - - --
� M a
i 0 - -
o C
co
�r C H
� J
0
N m
cc
-- - - m
IUl
8 S 8 8 8 8 8
vi o -f m rP N r: .r
I (WdOl MOii
Table 2. Lyman Spring Total Yield Exceeding City's Instantaneous Water Right.
I&Li6.1-- _IAL ALi
2010 80
- 2011 110 - -
2012 _ 35
2013 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
I.ymaia Spi-iiig Dive►-ted System Yield aaad SpOng Box Ovefflow
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 frorn 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 2.011 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 frequent 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. Pj IAE,,S www.ae2s.com
u Z6
�J
Ln
ru r lD
a �
c " ' o
B LO � p
C '•7 uw ri
U.
d
�� .i N
c m CD
O
.✓ C 1
m
> uD m
p c ri y C
A .4 O
rodi
— c O
t r cV
V CL
-- — 3
w O
7
N
i--
O
G � _C
cv (A C
E � �
J
wl
v 1
ry w o�6 CC
- o E
Cn
GO `
C
4-
CL
- v v
i Ep
LL
� m
o 0
8 8 CD Ln M 8 8 S
vi ui -1' �� fYi ffi ff N rl o m
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 Vj 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 15 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 5ystem'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 creel( water system to maximize the City's
existing water rights,
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. Pj AE2S www.ae2s.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
interpretations of fault dips and relative net sense of slip.
1
i City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. Pv AE2_S www.ae2s.com
Figure 6. Geologic Map
Aft
S i t
At
k I 1:I.n:•� • .�.i.. ra«r
A
, ?6 'y
1>Trl'w..W�M1,I,W
Ik
♦Iu..wnu•rnw .n Nn.Y.+
.»
i
1. ryrnw.rw �.... • �
J ,
•��[O49 I/IKNfi
JI
r
-Cw
wr11..N[ry O+ww.M NY • .
IWM.I wWM>•h
QaC �.1 �59
1 FIOURE 0
0oofo0ic Map(adaAtod from Ftcbarte IOU4)
0 6:00 1.300 C.tyof�cremnnlyrr,LnlhslurSyafvm.?Lyrnan5pnn1+5:uJy
Feat J„
J HE�S Ch?AU-
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 SE-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 (1955) and Roberts
(1964) has been verified as substantially correct.
Site Geology
Surficial Geologic. Units
I 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
j 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.
I
Cily of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. Jk%)AE-)-S www.ae2s.com
Beciroclt Geologic Uiiits
The following sections describe the bedrock units observed in the immediate project area.
Hetamm•hhic
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 Saiaclstone
The Flathead Sandstone is mapped and was observed near the fault contact between the
metamorphic rocks/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.
III ucli,sorl GI-oilp
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. p A — www.ae2s.com
St►-ucturol 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
I 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
I up Lyman Creek.
-� Hackett et al (1960) interpret a north-northwest-trending range-bounding fault west of Lyman
I Creek that juxtaposes metamorphic rocks against Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. At Lyman Creel(
j 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
J the south side of Lyman Creek.
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. JA�v AF-5 www.ae2s.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 Gvoimdwatea- 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 [losing] streams migrates
beneath topographic divides and discharges into streams in adjacent drainages.
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond.AE7S 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 throughout 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 -- — 110
-T--Lyman Spring Production 2010-2015
Sacajewea Snow Water Equivalent
5000
AWO
E zo
30002000
—
'p _ C
� C
C � N
(/ 10
r
rf I
i
1000
o. d
0 ,�,.I ws won see --- ...,�,. ,.�_ _ — .rww�d,� 0
12131M 12/3/10 t2/3/11 1212112 12/2/13 12/2/14 12/2/15
Date
Figure 7. Geologic Map Lyman Spring Production with
Sacajawea Snotel Snow Water Equivalent (2009-2015)
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Sludy
Think Big. Go Beyond. AI www.ae2s.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 gpm 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 Spring Recharge Analysis
In an attempt to determine the correlation between flows frorn 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 Flange, 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.AE-5 www.oe2s.corn
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
t° —,•Co
C
C2 Spring
Saturated Zone Discharge
A
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.
Interi)retation of Nyman 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 = Qr,e—kt [Equation 1]
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond.Aus www.ae2s.com
Equation 1 is appropriate for a linear reservoir without recharge, where the discharge is
proportional at any time to the water volume stored. Rearranging:
log(Q) = log(Qo) + log(e-i") [Equation 21
log(Q) =log(Qo) - kt- [Equation 3]
where Q0 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(Qo) is the intercept (log flow at time 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
2015
- -2011
E
a 2.00 i - --- -- -------
b
0
a � i'
Y
.s a
1.00 -- - - —
_ 1
y�•O.o056z«13.166
q -0.0056x+5.033 u R�-0.9595
A R'=0.9178
Z
y=-0.0056x*6.6309
0.50 R'-0.9699 ...—
y -0.0052x 10.214
W-0.9723
Y-O.00Six 7.U989
R°-0.9286
0 Ou ---_
0 ,00 1000 1500 2000 2500
Elapsed Time(day)
Figure 9. Natural Log of Lyman Spring Production with Recession Limb Slopes (2009-2015)
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 Q0. This averaging followed by
exponentiation is equivalent to assuming a log-non-nal distribution for 00, so the result is not
biased high by a few large Qo values. The unbiased estimate of Q0 will be slightly lower than
what we would calculate if raw Q0 values were averaged.
For Lyman, the average slope (k) is 0.0055 day-', and the average Q0 is 7.2 ft3/second, or
622,080 ft3/day. Table 3 presents the average slope and flow data.
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. jA�,j.,AF-,s, www.ac2s.com
Table 3. Lyman Spring Recession Curve Decay Coefficients and Estimated Peak Aquifer Flows.
Year Decay Coefficient (k) Peak •
2011 0.0056 10.83
2012_ 0.0056 6.24
2013 0.0051 5.08
20_14 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:
f Q0
J 2ne-icrdt. = —
lc
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 I-Iydi-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
polygons. In addition, Figure 10 shows the locations of Geologic Cross Sections (A-A' and B-B').
Interpretations of the geologic cross sections are presented later in this Study.
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 Siudy
Think Big. Go Beyond. J Acs www.ae2s.com
Figure 10. Site Geologic Features and Outcrop Map
Alit
Lodgepole M
Limestone �� Mission Canyon
t• nl '�' 1~ Limestone
pre-Cambrlan
�,,�,`• pre-Cambrian Metamorphic rock
Metamorphic rock rr� Flathead
Sandstone
• tr11► �
.'*.1*
. •tip`, a .
11R�-
•�a
LEGEND
Horizontal Borehole Contour 10 It Notos:
Angled Borehole ®ta®tcontact of Mlp and DJ Survoy data by TD&I-1
l7 Collecbon Box COMCon[act of Mmc and Mlp(dasnea where InrerrPd)
Enginooring,2015
A-A'Cross SectloruProflle Locab Drag Foltlon FIGURE 10
"'(See Figures Sand 6 Mapped Outcrops
1 pre-CambdanMetamorphlcRock Slte Geologic Features and Outcrop Map
ar Interred Fault FIaMead Sandstone 0 175 050 City of Bozeman Lyman Mter System&Lyrnan
_,L Thrust Fault Lodgepole Limestone Feet Spnng Study
MMlsalon Canyon Limestone A
1 nlFf'F01Viroupsi0esynY,eo TueinV�eol?rhn¢:d�LyrrgnSprinyGt8�3iuWfapfdu,Yirll,Ctdo �;aolula_Fo;ilury n,:l 911H5n III?/;UIG
-
Figure 11. Geologic Field Data and Exploratory Borehole Locations
/f
i
MDtm
/'66/7
/ ry6
I M //63
64
00
/ T7 48 �l7:Jui11►'ILIJ:�A�
.74' Lr
fB2j„'49. �66'
MR-0 0.11
XAggf
36
t S '
Note:
1. XAggf-pre-Cambrian metamorphic rock
1 2. MI-Madison Limestone (undivided)
3. MDtm -Three Forks Shale/Jefferson Dolomite
1
1 LEGEND
Strike and Dip at Bedding A-A'Cross Section/Nrniile Lnr.atinn Cnntnur in it
Strike and Dip of Joints (See Figures Sand fi) Mapped Outcrops
Contact or Mrnc and M I p(dashed
lLJ Collection Box where Inrened) Wnre•Camhdan Metamo Rock
m.hic FIGURE 11
Horizontal 6oreinnie - �Flatheaa Sandstone
Drag Fuld at Fault LodtJepole Limestone N Geologic Field Data and
Vertical Dorehoie 40011DJ Contact UMlssion Canyon Limestone Exploratory Bore Hole Locations
Lyman WaterL. System
j� Angled Borehole -�+�Inferred caul[ o too 200 y
.l,Thrust Fault F`el City of Bozeman&Lyman Spring Study .
11G!rIFPPUtt(lwup L�wgnlGuu_7namVunluchm��ISi.yrnynSpnngGl3�ri13V�apFile4FirtAa_Gnoluyu_fwW_Dutart.xdr-Gu,,Itl561!_'S/,lulb JtRES 0h2AW
• • • iff 1- um
� . • • • • i • • • •
10
It ,tl '�� `•h �. ` � '' '
Y
� r
7r, - "I yman Creek/[laIdyMotnu III n Fault"
Interpreted by Hackett el al (1960)and
'4 � [�, M(Mdlln�5(��1,5y)(approxlman�location) '
Location of Thrust Faun, w�
tilrilcrpreLed by Robertson(1196 l)
Lyman Collrc lion Box 2 Op
100
.
Localion of Thrust Fault, t' +� I'roposrd Verlicol
interpreted in this study S-� + t I.xploralory Borehole•;
�� Proposed Angled
`r I xplorntory lJorehole; r
1 yman collection[lox 1
� ,fir« � ,.R � � � +r'.r"' : ', �!� ` •4 r�r•1 `; ���i`� 4
. J roposcilflorimnlnl,r~ •. , ; D
r Exxplo ra tory BoreholeAV
` ,;-, ate. ��.1,�i.,:� �"��, � ,.yti-' r;•
l •,./ 1. '1 •edt� • •�•y/�� ..�j� -y;.
l-J. rNy1'� �1 J ?, .�1W` ,i,rJ r �.r,MJI•' 1 ,� ` 1
- 1 11
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
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.
City of Bozer nan Lyrnan Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. W 'J AExS www.ac2s.corn
Recommendations for Increasing Lyman Spring 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.
Recoinmenclation 1: Vei- ical Lxl loratory 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 recornmended 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 1.00 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 (HGI.) 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 Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond. P.",All[�,s www.ae2s.com
cr . .
op
ggg
00
l,
Q .2 1U *� � t ._ LL �7 Vni'
ol
V '
i�
.�
a
a.m
U •
n �J
Su
in
E / acc
ac
o0
� a
y / o41
Lto f �/ C
/ y /'
O �o
// a
LW
v� (A C o 9i
IA
O` a / LA$ c
U /
,
QJ YCp u
/17 C
V Wu y
M
0 0
j O
I LL
1
1
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.
Reconunendalion 2: Angled ExploraLory 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 Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. to AEzs www.ae2s.coni
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
alluviurn 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 he 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
geologic features, and the approximate existing spring collection infrastructure. The elevation
in the middle of the profile is also approximate.
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
Clly of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond.AE5 www.ae2s.com
C
c
t30 Y ,1 t
Q Cal (-)
.0 n ti Cc:
iU U
A.1 „ m
v a
4tiiaa�Fu�tt�ta�dx� �.' m .,
lv.)jjjaA pijsodOJd
� 6
.Lo
v`Ji n
U °J l9
xM.
AR
= f
y b ,A
U Cco00:
•
C wi
m� , 11
�0
O
in
11
[a
t
m UD t, f
N C
4=. �X c i nJ m
W U c
a C
u u
U ti b
�n
C t?
to
V' V �A
tu,
d' ut m
N U 5-
O Q P
p0 II to
L4 1
m z
u, O
5
d y
m
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 rack—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
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.
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
indicated that a horizontal well was the best option for increasing Lyman Spring yield.
City of Bozoman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. flu-,s www,ae2s.com
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 Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond. Pj FIE_
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 gr•adeline information the chernical feed plant
o Can install a pump and conduct aquifer testing, this would cost
monitoring vertical drawdown to enable better approximately (t30/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
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
l Think Big. Go Beyond. AExS www.ae2s.com
1
1
I
l
l
1
1
CO
M
Q �� Lai
U � cv , o
(a)
w o 0
� ,.._ co
Q) -0
0
ca � 75
O U U U
U) h— w O Q)
LIJ cf? > U >
= N C Q� Q
` I O C C E
L U N Q L E m o p C
O @ •C (n — p a C) C a
O Q a) ""'
ca a) > Q a) p U 0-- O O
a)> zt=U � Oa.Cu, 7 'OU C EC O n -0 :0::'- EO a
O OO u cr C X O O
N p UO O h
o m m o oX - -o o v O cn a v o
.E E E E a) co U E Z 'v) cp V) 3
3
o c
o ac) E
O > C
s (D (D >1 Z3 a) a) 3 � (D a
0 o � mC o � cu
C: M U c o CL ro
o c � o � � `n
o ro � o •U) 730 ao 0o c
w c > m a
in cl
a E O a) c C: c
Q) U > >O C ? C U E V
t0 U O ? ` O N O d)
CO C (0 C L
C
a) p c7] C Q O a m CD CO
U > () C 'C cn a) a) C Q) L L
_ ?i U +
a o 0 i M0 o N � o cn co � �
> a c U U7 N ? -O a) U »-•
O = Y cu w a o m oIE
c
Q- -a'o U b U a > c a
ro-
F— W N alp
Q _I O O
0 0 c
w Q S "-
--� J W O m
(- W -�_ e
Qwm U
0
00
F—
as c
O U M N U m
@ U) — U N L � C C C
N J C U 4— 00 0)v .� O O O O m
'(0 Ur q� C O C CfS V O N U
N O O C m
c>0 O O cr O = x O E C O cD w `O
� ` 0 N O O M CL p p Ql 'Z U p c m N O c U)
oc � EaE � � � vCL � � a� ncE o0
° � � � � d> a � o � � E ° a� 0 c � E
Q C p U) •C C N ` L c U E (6 C U C in
O
` Cl N .C O O L C7 C p
ZY O � C W 0 a) OU C CL � .—� m N M 7+ro O i N
L d 0 Of r C Q. - O CAL i 0 = 0 = Y - C 2 O 0 0
"- O _ c� O N C_ U Z E
O a in @ p 0 C U L 0 .'- C L o w O U1 C
U C O
U N O O (II O C 00 O .� C L .. O ,m
N
OC ) E c>O J C _ M O •� j .� N ci3 U ` c�0
�. N (7 N O O cD p p 0 0 [u +, in O C U C O to
c �
aj N C
O N
O a C N -0 .0 J
.� (_- UO
O C
N c u>
_ O] O
ct7 C U 0
O C CJ cD U
U V�
_ U) -p N O
E •` of cn c u —
L N N cn m O
N O m C =
CM— N O N -p E C
C O U a C U ` C
o o OU o ? a
1
J
1
O J m
Z O o
N
I J L1J � w
i O X O _
• 2 W m U ti
I
1
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.
S. 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 Waler Sysiom & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. P"J AEJS 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.
I
l
1
l
1
City of Bozeman I yman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. Pj IF E-,S www.ce2s.com
J
Lyman Spring lmproveiiients
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 Marshall 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 Constrdectiola Pi-olect 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).
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big. Go Beyond. PJ AE2S 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
Item W, Estimate 1�
Exploratory and Test Well Drilling_ $75,000
Test Well Pumping/Return Water _ $25,000
f Drilling 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(M) $187 500
Engineering and Construction Administration $250,000
Production Well Project Subtotal $1,687,500
Project Subtotal $1,887,500
Total Project Contingency(M) $471,875
Total Project Cost $2,359,875
1
l
1
1
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Big.Go Beyond.AEs www.ae2s.com
Conti-ok Improvements Project to Eliminate SpHnI2,, Rol 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 LIP 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 WTP.
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 Wafer System & Lyman Spring Study
Think Dig, Go Beyond. pJ AE2S: www.ae2s.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 ± 25% range to this value is recommended for
planning purposes.
Source "Seasorralily"
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.
1
i
i
i City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyrnan Spring Study
IThink Big. Go Beyond. AE7S www.oe2s.com
I
'�� RE
DS
APPENDIX A: Lyman Canyon Stereo Nets
1
I
1
1
1
1
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
J APPEIVDI)(A
Think Big. Go Beyond. J AE2S www.ac2s.com
���-(�' / '` Poles to Bedding Planes 1
f
• � 1
14
---------- 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 Elgenvalue Trend Plunge tmin tmax
11. 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 circlo (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 kappa mean length
all 83 307.5 50.4 -- -- 2.6 0.6160
J
•n 1 •
� r
- - Poles to Joint Planes 1'��II •
fj
1
JI' •, • •
11 40,f •
vy�
---------- 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_bodding_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 tmax
1. 0.6603 313.1,31.4 6.8 9.6
2. 02062 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
i
i
1
1
J
1
1
I
1 �i
l
Appendix B: Lyman Creek and Spring Discharge Data
City of Bozeman Lyman Water System & Lyman Spring Study
APPENDIX B
Think Big. Go Beyond. PJ AU2S www.ac2s.com
Bozeman WTP
Lyman Creek Upper Vault Overnow
Dale innaenl Q Weir Level Overnoo Innllralion Gallery Praducllon
GPpI Ft GPAI Twill GPM Total In CPS Days Cunmlallve Volume Cumulative OF Vol Cumulmivc Consumption
2/1/2010 900 0,35 82 882 20 1 1,270.090 118,080 1.152,W0 2305 days
VV2010 800 0.35 82 882 2.0 1 1,270,080 118,080 1,152,000 330 mcasutc0tents
2/8n010 800 0.27 42 8.12 1.9 6 7.274,880 362,890 6,912,000 7,0 days/mcasuremont
2/92010 750 0.39 101 8S1 119 1 1,223,440 145,440 1,080,000
V142010 750 033 71 821 1.8 5 5,911,200 511.200 5,400,000
2/21/2010 675 0.47 171 8•16 1.9 7 8,527,680 1,723,600 6.804,000
2n5n010 530 0.58 289 831) 1.9 4 4,832,640 1.664.640 3,168,000
3/3/2010 600 0.50 200 800 1.9 6 6,912,000 1,728,000 5,184,000
3/10n010 600 0.53 7c3 853 1.9 7 8.598.240 2,550.240 6,048,000
3/15/2010 600 0.5.1 _"1_ 842 1.9 5 6,002.400 1.742,400 4,320,000
3/19/2010 720 0 58 101 821 1.8 3 3,546,720 436,320 3,110,400
32V2010 600 0"58 289 989 2.0 4 5,120,640 1.664,640 3,456,000
3/29/2010 600 0.61 328 928 2.1 7 9,354,240 3,306,240 6,048,000
4182010 600 0.61 328 928 21 10 13,363,200 4,723.200 8,o40,00o
420/2010 450 1,20 1760 2210 49 13 38,138,800 30.412.800 7,776,000
5/172010 1200 0.97 1090 2290 51 27 89,035,200 42,379,200 46,650.000
6n4n010 I H(8) 1.50 19.10 3740 8 3 38 204,652.000 106,156,800 98,496,000 Bast War(2011)
7/192010 2000 1.00 1120 3720 8 3 25 133,920,000 40.320,000 93,600,000 2,140 GPM (3,451 ac•ft/yr)
12►2010 2500 098 8n6) 3560 79 2 10,252,800 3,052,800 7,200,000
8/13201u 2400 0.74 530 2930 65 23 97,041,600 17,553,600 79,488.000 �� iI'. I III I' u,iantaneausandAnnualWatorRiht
- -
9/16n010 2400 0.68 429 2829 6 3 3 12,221,290 1,85]280 10,368,000 V R (�
9n/2010 2000 0,64 369 2369 5.3 22 75,049.920 11,689,920 63.360,000 4590 -v-ImtenlatteousSprinBProds..,. 7,671GPM(4,34Gac-ft/yr)
0/162010 1700 0.50 2OU 1900 4.2 9 24,624,000 2,592,000 22,032.000
10/192010 1000 0.7.1 530 1530 3.4 32 70.502,400 24,422,400 46,080,Ix10 III
4/222011 600 0.52 220 820 1.8 186 219.629,800 18,924,800 160,704,000 ),mot - _ _
Avcraac SPrinR Produ[tlan-
5/13201I 800 094 956 1756 3.9 21 53,101,440 28,409,440 24,192,000 '� I vj� I j 661RC,rn1(7,i,t6ac-0/yr) I I'�I
5/18201/ 1000 1.32 Nils) 3000 67 5 21,600,000 1.1,400,000 7,200,000 s,coe Mil6
6/6n011 1200 1.51 3106 4306 90 19 117,912,160 94,930.160 32,832,0(iu F 1111,
623/2011 1600 154 3263 4863 109 17 119.046.2-10 79,978,240 39,169.000 !9. a.:ooj An
0 S 0 n n II 1800 1.45 _1109 4609 103 5 33.184.800 20.224,900 12,960.000 1 1I
7/62011 2200 1.28 2060 4260 9S 8 49.075,200 23,731.200 25,344,000 r,000 - I K
... t
7/112011 24001 15 1579 ]9M 8,9 5 28,648,800 11,368,800 17,28U,Otw �+
7/192011 2600 0.90 $61 3461 77 8 39.970.720 9,919,720 29.952,000 I'tw -• `L..
7/2712011 2600 0.92 900 3506 7;0 1 1S.145.920 3.913,920 11,212,001) L ) 't9
LOW
v
7/26/2011 2300 0.70 l0^_ a4nn 7 e 4 19,584,000 2.601.120 13,248.00i)
729/2011 2500 0.90 861 3.61 7 5 3 14,519.320 1,719,520 10,800,000
8/12011 2500 084 727 3227 7 2 3 a0° -
13,940,640 3,I40,640 u),80n.000 l
8/5n011 2300 0.88 t 12 3112 6 9 4 17,925.120 4.677,120 13,248,000 i l
_
819/3011 2300 092 682 2992 66 4 17,176,320 3,928.320 13,2.18,000
8/12 wtaNa ahr/ta u vnann smear :neat a/l:n: unam enfna vn:nr cn7n+ unvla a/taps spa/1s Ent/tel
2011 2300 0 78 601 2901 (15 3 12,532,320 2,596,320 9,936,000
8/162011 2300 0 72 J95 2795 0 2 .1 16,009.200 2,851,2DO 13,248,000 onn
9/19/2011 2300 010 •162 2762 02 1 11,931.8,10 1.993.840 9.936,000
8/23/2011 2300 0.63 341 2655 5A 4 15,292,800 2,044,900 13,248,000
91262011 2300 0.39 102 2602 S.R 3 11,240,640 1,304,640 9,936.000
8/29/2011 2100 060 415 2545 5.7 3 10,994.400 1.922,400 9,07'000
9/22011 2100 083 74� 2945 6.3 4 16,387.200 4,291,200 12,0%,000
9/6/2011 2000 0.85 745 2745 6.1 •I 15,811,200 4.291.200 ll,320,000
9/72011 2100 0,80 6.11 2741 6.1 1 3,947,0d0 923,040 3.024.000
9/112011 2100 0.77 583 2683 6.0 4 15,454,000 3.359,090 12,096.000
9/14/2011 2100 0.75 547 2647 So 3 11,435,040 2.363.040 9,072,000
9/18n011 2100 0,75 547 2647 3.9 2 7.623,360 1,57S,360 6,048.000
9/1912011 1900 0,82 682 2582 5.8 1 11,154.240 2,946,240 9.208.000
9222011 1900 0.78 6U1 2501 $.6 3 10,804,320 2,596,320 8,208,000
9/2812011 000 0.70 dot 2302 5.3 6 20,407,680 3.991,690 16,416,000
9/30n0I1 1900 0,75 547 2447 5.5 2 7,047.360 1,573.360 5.472,000
10/1/2011 1900 0.66 399 2299 3.1 3 9,931,680 1,723,610 8,208,000
IWI02011 ISnO 0.84 725 2225 S0 7 22,,128,000 7,308,000 15.120,000
10/17/2011 1000 1.00 Ills 2119 •1.7 7 211349,440 11.269,440 10,080,000
10/2A2011 900 1.30 n140 2080 4.6 7 20.066,400 21,571,200 9,072,000
10/314011 900 1.00 Ills 2018 4,5 7 20,341,440 11,269,440 9,072,000
111 2011 900 0.70 462 17so 39 6 15,120,000 3.991.080 7,776,000
11282011 800 0,91 894 1694 3.8 22 53.349.120 29,005,120 25,344,000
12/82011 Soo 0.94 725 1525 3A 10 21,960,000 1Q440,000 11,520.000
122113/2011 800 0.94 724 1524 3A 5 10,972,900 5.212.800 5,760.000 2011 9'otal Producdom. City Use. Overflow
1/32012 800 0.75 547 047 3.0 21 40,733.280 16,541,280 24.192.000 lit Production 1.124,652,960 3,451 ac-11 614,966.400 1,887 ac-Il 1,$64 ac-fl
1/10/2012 700 0.82 (182 1382 3.1 7 13,930,560 6.874,560 7,056,000 3,091,241 gpd 1,694,939 Bpd 1.396,401.53 Upd
1/312012 800 0.65 384 1184 26 21 35,904,160 11.612,160 24,192,000 2,140 gpm 1.170 gpm 970 8pm
2n/2012 80o 0.66 398 1198 2.7 7 12.075.840 4,011.840 8,064,000
228/2012 800 0159 302 1102 2.5 21 33„324,480 9,I32,480 24,192,000
3n04012 800 0.57 277 1077 2.4 30 46,520,400 11.966.400 341,50,000
•1/3/2012 Nno 0.64 369 1169 2.6 5 8,416.800 2,656,800 5.760,000
4/10n012 800 0.64 369 1169 3.6 7 11,783.520 3,719,520 8,064,000
4/24/2,012 900 0,86 767 1667 3.7 14 33,606,720 15.462.720 18,144,000
5/82012 1100 1.02 1176 2276 5.1 1.1 '15,88.1,160 23.708.160 22.176.000
5/14/2012 1200 IJ 2141 2400 5.3 6 20,736,000 19,499.240 10.368.000
5/21/2012 1800 0.84 727 2527 5.6 7 25,472.160 7,328,160 18,144,000
3292012 1800 0.81 6(rl 2464 5.$ 8 28,395,280 7,649,280 20,736,000
6n2o12 1700 1.01 11.1.1 28" 6.3 9 36.859,240 14,826.240 22,032.000
0/192012 1800 1 1117 2917 65 12 50,405,760 19,301,760 31,104.000
6/25/2012 2550 0-67 411 2963 66 6 25,600,320 3,568.320 22,032,000
6/292012 2550 0.64 369 2919 0,5 4 16.913,440 2.125,440 14.698.000
7/32012 2550 0.6 315 2965 64 4 16.502.400 1.914,400 14,688,000
7/62012 2500 0.59 302 2902 62 3 12.104.640 1,304,640 10,800,000
7/102012 2345 0.56 20 2610 is 4 15,033,600 1,526,400 13,507,200
7/13n012 2286 0.56 265 2551 5.7 1 11,020,320 1.144,800 9,975.520
7/172012 2238 0.51 210 2448 5.5 4 14,100,480 1,209,600 12,800,880
7/2012012 2190 0.42 122 2312 $2 3 9,9R7,840 527,040 9,460,800
7/232012 2002 0.57 277 2279 5.1 3 9,8.15,280 1,196,640 8,648,640
7125/2012 1989 0.56 2Sl 2-139 5.0 2 6.448,320 722,980 5,723,440
727/2012 1984 0,56 251 2235 SV 2 6,436,800 722,880 3,713,920
713012012 1964 0.47 172 2136 4.8 3 9,227,520 743.040 8,494,480
82/2012 1765 0,02 141 2106 47 3 9,097,920 1.473,120 7,624,800
1162012 1749 06 115 2064 4.6 4 11,899,640 1,814,400 10,074,240
8/8/2012 1751 0.5B 289 2040 4.5 2 5,875,200 832120 5,042,880
8/10/2012 1721 0.56 265 1986 44 2 5,719,630 763,200 4,956,430 5.500
8113/2012 1721 0.53 241 1952 43 3 8.432.040 997,920 7,434,720 -u-LymanSpAnlpradUttlOM f 0y41fi6w(8Pm) -u-UI=.dFI-
8115/2012 1615 0.56 265 1880 42 2 5,414.400 703.200 4,651,200
$11712012 1511 0.65 314 1893 42 2 5,457.600 1,103,920 4,351,690 -
8/20/2012 1483 0.62 141 1824 41 3 7,879,080 1,473,120 6,406,160
Annual Water Right812212012 t490 0,61 121 1818 4.1 2 $,235,840 944.640 4,291,200 0o 00 40 Inilan[Anrnuc M1, -
3,671 GpM 14,34E ac-R/yr)
912-1/2012 1478 0.6 3N 1792 4.0 2 5,160.960 904,320 4_56.6-10
8/27/2012 1178 0.62 At 1710 3.8 3 7,426,020 1,473,120 5,952,960 3,500 -
9/31/2012 1372 002 141 1713 is 4 9,11166.880 1,964,160 7,902,720
9/4/2012 1242 0.65 391 1626 3.6 4 9,365,760 2,211,840 7,153,920 s,099
9/412012 1259 0.64 3(19 1029 3.6 0 -
9/7/7012 1245 062 142 IS87 is 3 6,855,840 1,477;W0 5,378,400
e 5 11,152,400 2,260,800 8,892,000
9/122012 IJS U.O 114 1549 ].5
0/172012 1228 0.58 289 1317 3.4 5 10,922,400 2,080,800 8,941.600 w
9/20/2012 1170 0.6 114 1484 3.3 3 6,410,880 1,356,480 5,054,400 swo V \ 1 r y y
9/24/2012 1160 o.58 289 1449 3 2 4 8,346,240 1,664,640 6,681,600 '
0/2811012 1104 0.6 114 1418 3.2 4 9,167,690 1.809,040 6,350,040 -
1020/2012 513 0.95 745 1258 2.8 32 57,968,640 34,329,600 23,639,040
10/31/2012 M 0.58 289 1247 2.8 1 1,795,680 416,160 1,379,530 SOO V~�
11/32012 737 0.69 441 1202 2.7 5 8,654,400 3 204,000 5,450,400
II/13/2012 781 0.69 430 1211 2.7 10 17,438,400 6,192.000 11.246,400 °
t:/ti/as elii/t9 :)!t1/w wfilti is/u/11 a/u/tt tthy)2 Ht7n7 tr/tini elir/to )9/12✓)4 Wti/ts filulss AliVie
11119/2012 737 0.68 410 1167 2.6 4 6,721,920 2,470,900 4,245,120
11/26/2012 605 0.75 ))1 1142 2 S 7 11,511.360 5,412,960 6,098,400 CATS
12/4/2012 698 055 133 951 21 8 10.935,320 2,914.560 8.040,960
IV]1/2012 699 0.54 242 041 2.1 7 9,485,280 2,439,360 7,045,920
12/1 Sao 12 645 01
S 2 1 998 20 7 4051,840 2,550,240 6,501,600
112=01) 554 0 S3 )11 785 1.7 35 39,364,000 11,642,400 21,021,600
2172013 550 0.5 750 1.7 10 17.280,000 4,608,000 12,672,000
2/192013 552 0.5 752 1.7 12 12,994,560 3,456,UU9 9,339,360
2271201) 549 0.48 It11 729 16 8 8.198.000 2,073,600 6,324,480
3/5/2013 548 0.47 172 720 1.6 6 6.220.800 1,486,060 4,734.720
3/122013 555 0.44 Nu 701 1.6 7 7,066,030 1.471,680 51594,400
4212013 $48 0.45 114 702 1.6 21 21,223.480 4.63o,960 16.571,570
4/6/2013 533 046 161 716 1.6 4 4,124,160 938,990 3,185 280
4116/2013 554 0.44 110 700 1.6 10 10,080,000 2.102,400 7,977,600
4/192013 $53 0.44 146 699 1.6 3 3,019,690 630,720 "388,960
4/23201.1 333 0.41 122 675 15 4 3.888,000 702,720 3,111.210
4292013 351 0.51 !10 761 1.7 6 6.375.040 1,81.1,400 4.760,640
5/l2013 550 0.5 l 110 760 17 2 2.188.800 604,800 1.584,000
5/32013 S30 0.54 242 792 1.8 2 2,280,960 696,960 1.584,000
WWII 596 052 i_'0 916 1.8 4 4,700,160 1,267,200 1,432960
5/8/2013 698 0.51 210 908 2.0 1 1.307,520 302.400 1,005,120
5/92013 698 0.51 NO 908 2.0 1 1.307,520 302,400 1,005,120
3/10/2013 747 0,49 180 927 2.1 1 1,334,880 259,200 1.075,680
5/122013 748 0.57 277 1025 2.3 2 2,952,000 707,760 2,154.240
5/13/2013 873 0.56 265 1140 25 1 1,641,600 381,600 1260,000
5/142013 871 0.52 271 1092 24 1 1,572,480 319,240 1,254,240
3/162013 1048 0.5 200 1248 2.9 2 3,394,240 576,000 3,018,240
5/17/2013 1052 0.46 163 1215 2.7 1 1.749.600 134,720 1,514,810
5/192013 lost) 0.57 277 1327 3.0 2 3,821.760 797,760 3,024,000
S/202013 1326 0,73 312 1938 41 1 2,646,720 737.280 1909,440
5/21.2013 1467 0.73 $12 1979 4.4 1 2,949,760 737,28() 2,112,480
5222013 1804 0.64 369 2173 4.8 1 3,129,120 531,360 2,397,760
5/242013 1998 0,62 )42 2240 SO 2 6,431,200 99.1,960 5.406,240
S28/2013 1910 0.61 )28 2238 5.0 4 12,890,880 1,889.280 11,001,600
5/302013 1904 0.62 341 2145 4.8 2 6,177,600 982,080 5,195,520
6/5/2013 1787 0.72 494 2281 $.1 6 19,707,340 4,268,160 15,419,680
01112013 2104 0.4 I15 2219 4.9 6 10,172,160 993,600 18.179,560
61142013 2004 0.5 200 2204 4.9 3 0.521,280 864,000 8,657,280
6/132013 1998 0.5 2no 2108 49 4 12.660,480 1.152,000 11.508,480
62112013 2005 0.48 Ito 2185 49 3 9,439.200 777,600 8,661,600
60-5=13 2004 0.4 115 2119 4.7 4 12,203,440 662,400 11,543,040
6282013 1900 0.41 Q2 2022 4.5 1 9,735,040 327,040 8,208,000
61292013 1847 0.46 172 2019 4.5 1 2,907,360 247,690 2,65(>,610
7111201) 1847 0.39 101 1948 4.3 2 1,610.240 290,890 5,319,360
7/22013 1745 0.49 191 1936 4.3 1 2,797,140 271,040 2,512,800
7/5/2013 1748 0.46 162 1910 4.3 3 3,251200 699,840 7,551,360
713/2013 1732 0.32 (91 I818 41 3 7,953,760 295.120 7,568,640
11101201) 1646 0.41 12i 1768 3.0 2 1,091,940 351,360 4,740,410
7/12/2013 1604 0,44 146 1130 3.9 2 5,040,000 420,480 4.619.520
7/15/2013 1600 0.4 Ili 1713 318 3 7.408.800 496,900 6,911.000
7/1612013 1534 0.41 122 1676 3.7 1 2,413,440 175.680 2,237.760
71172013 1453 0.49 191 1644 3.7 1 2,367,360 275,040 2,092,320
7/192013 1454 0.46 162 1616 36 2 4,654,080 466,560 4,187,520
7222013 1402 0.5 20t) 1602 3,6 3 6,920.640 864,000 6,056,640
7252013 1400 0.4 115 1515 3.4 3 6,344,800 496,800 6.048,000
7/262013 1344 0.45 154 1498 3.3 1 2.157,120 221.760 11935,360
7/29/2013 1148 0.38 101 1449 32 3 6.159,480 436,320 $,823,360
7/31/2013 1279 0,44 146 1425 3.2 2 4,104,000 420.480 3.683,520
8/2/2013 1248 0.5 200 1448 3.2 2 4,170,240 376,000 3,394,240
8/520p 1250 0.39 108 1358 3.0 3 5,866,560 466.560 5,400,000
8/62013 1151 0.3 200 1351 3.0 1 1.945,440 288,000 1,657,440
8/9/2013 1146 0,40 191 1337 3.0 3 5,773.140 925.120 4,930,720
11/122013 1150 0.43 137 1287 2.9 3 5,559,840 501,840 4,968,000
9/142013 IIs1 0.42 130 1281 2.9 2 3.689,280 374.400 3,314,980
8/10/2013 1129 0.41 122 1251 2.2 2 3,602,890 351,360 3,251,320
8II92013 1074 0.45 154 1228 2.7 3 5,304,960 065.280 4,639,610
820/2013 1071 0.43 137 1209 2.7 1 1,739,520 197,290 1.542,240
9/23/2013 1042 0.46 IQ 1210 2,7 3 .1,227 200 699,840 4,527.360
8/26/2013 1052 O.A 115 1167 2.6 3 5.041,440 496,800 4,544,640
8292013 998 0.44 146 1144 2.5 3 4,942,090 630.720 4,311,360
8/30/2013 91N 0.44 146 1144 2.6 1 1,648,800 210.240 1,439,560
0/1/2013 999 0.41 123 1122 2,5 2 3.231,300 354,240 2.877,120
9/3/2013 949 0.40 162 1111 2.5 2 3,199,690 466,560 2.733,120
9/5/2013 9S5 0.44 146 1101 2.5 2 3.170.880 420,480 2,710,400
9/9/2013 016 0.49 191 1117 2.5 4 6.413.920 1,100,160 5,333,760
9/13/2013 921 0.43 137 1058 2.4 4 6,094,080 789,120 5,304.960
9/16/2013 997 0.41 123 1020 2.3 3 4,406,400 531,360 3.973,040
9/18/2013 847 049 191 1038 2.3 2 2,989,440 550,080 2,439,360
9/23/2013 952 0.46 162 1014 2.3 5 7.300,800 1.166.400 6,134,400
945/2013 845 047 172 1017 2.3 2 2,928,960 493,360 2,433,600
10/1/2013 834 0.45 154 1009 2.2 6 2,700.120 1,330,56D 7,378,360
10/7/2013 750 0.64 369 1119 2 5 6 9.668,160 3,188,160 6.480,000
10/8/2013 751 0 56 265 1016 2.3 1 1.463,040 381.600 1.081.440
10/162013 743 0.51 210 953 2.1 8 10,978,560 2.419.200 8,559,360
10/23/2013 749 0.5 21x) 949 3.1 7 9,565.920 2.016,000 7,549,920
10/29/3013 700 053 232 932 21 6 8,052,480 2.004.480 6,048,000
11/62013 700 0'2 200 900 2.0 8 10.369.000 2,304,000 8,064,ODO
11/19/2013 700 0.46 163 S61 1.9 13 16,135,360 3,051.360 13,104,OOD
11/26/2013 700 0.4 113 815 I's 7 8.215,200 1,159.200 7,056.000
12/182013 600 0,48 192 782 1.7 22 24,773.760 $,765,760 10,008,000
IM42013 600 0.43 $111 738 1.6 6 6.376,320 1.192,320 5,194,000
12/312013 600 0.44 1.16 746 1.7 7 7,519,690 1,471.680 6,049.000
1/7/2014 600 041 123 723 1.6 7 7,297,840 1.239.840 6,D48,000
1/9/2014 600 0.41 123 723 1.6 2 2,092,240 354,140 1,728,000
1/14/2014 600 0.33 71 671 1.5 S 4,831200 511,200 4.320,000
1/10/2014 550 0.42 130 680 1.5 2 1,958;100 374,400 1,584,000
1/21112014 550 041 124 674 1.5 5 4,852,800 892,900 3,9G9,000
128/2014 $50 0.41 114 674 1.5 7 6,703,920 1,249,920 5,344,000
V27/2014 530 0.36 89 619 14 30 27,604,800 3.844.900 23,760.000
4/14/2014 550 0.6 314 864 1.9 46 17,231,360 30,799,360 36,432,000
4/21/2014 650 0'6 314 904 2.1 7 9,717,120 3,163,120 6,552.000
4/242014 630 0.76 565 1213 2.7 3 5,249,900 2,440,900 2,808,000
5/12014 630 0.76 565 1215 2.7 7 12.247,200 3,695,200 6,552,000
5182014 900 1,00 1382 2282 5.1 7 23,002.360 13,930,550 9.072,000
5/142014 1100 0.6 1000 21011 4.7 6 19.144,000 8.640,000 9.504,000
S/132014 1100 0.94 9GU 2060 46 1 2,966.400 1,382.400 1,584,000
3/162014 1100 005 092 2092 4.6 1 2.999.080 1,414,080 I,S84,000
5222014 1300 Ills 1580 2880 64 6 24,913,200 13,651.200 11,232,000
529/2014 1700 1.23 1807 3367 79 7 35,955,360 18,819,360 17,136,000
6/52014 2000 1.13 1512 3512 78 7 15,400,960 IS,240,960 20,160,ODO
6/102014 2400 0.92 907 3307 74 t 23.810,400 6,530,400 17,290.000
6/182014 2000 0.96 1010 3010 (1 7 8 34,675,200 11,635,200 23,040,000
7/12014 2100 0,85 743 2845 63 13 53,258,400 13,946,400 30.312.000
7172014 2100 0,79 624 2724 6.1 6 23,51$.360 5,391,360 IS,144,000
7/102014 2100 0.76 601 2701 6.0 3 11,669.320 2,596,320 9,072,000
7/122014 2300 0.62 341 2641 3.9 2 7,606,080 932,080 6,624,000
7/142014 2300 0.6 314 2614 5.9 2 71528,320 904,320 6,624,000
7/172014 2300 0.57 277 2577 5.7 3 11,132.640 1,196.640 9,936,000
7/19/2014 2100 0.53 231 2531 3.6 2 7,289,280 665,290 6.624.000
7212014 2300 047 172 2472 5.5 2 7.110.360 495,360 6,624,000
7/262014 2200 046 16) 2363 S3 5 17,013,60D 1,173,600 15,940.000
7/282014 2200 043 138 2338 3,2 2 6,733.440 397,440 6.336,000
7/302014 2150 0.42 130 2280 5.1 2 M66,400 374,400 6.192.000
822014 20M 0.34 242 2242 5.0 3 9.695,440 1,045,440 8,640,000
8/42014 2000 0.5 200 2200 4.9 2 6,336,000 576,000 5,760,000
8/62014 2000 0.47 172 2172 4.0 2 6,211.360 49$.360 5,760,000
8/92014 2000 0.39 108 2108 4.7 3 9.1D6,560 466.560 8,640,000
8/112014 1900 0.48 180 2090 46 2 5,990,400 519.400 5.472.000
8/15/2014 1800 0.31 210 2010 •15 4 11,577,600 1.200.600 10.368.000
IV192014 1775 0,44 146 1921 4.3 4 11,064.060 940,960 10,224,000
8/212014 1775 0.43 138 1913 41 2 5.509,440 397.440 5,112.000
8282014 1050 0.93 933 1983 4,1 7 19,988,640 9,404,640 10.584,000
9/42014 1000 002 906 1906 4 2 7 19,212.480 9,132,480 10.080,000
9/5n014 1200 0.81 664 1864 4.2 1 2.684,160 956,160 1,729.000
9/102014 700 1.2 1764 1920 41 5 13,101,000 12,700,900 5.040,000
91162014 700 0.99 1091 1791 4.0 6 15.474.240 9,426,240 6,048,000
9252014 600 0.99 1091 1691 31 9 21,013,360 14.139,360 7.776,000
1022014 700 0.92 987 1697 3.8 7 17.004,960 9,948.960 7,056,DDO
10/102014 750 087 71)0 1540 3.4 8 17,740,800 9,100,800 8,640.000
10212014 775 O,8 6.12 1417 3.2 11 22,445,280 10,169,200 12,276,000
1027/2014 775 0.79 (123 1308 3.1 G 12,078,720 5,392,720 6.696,000
11/14/2014 723 0.76 565 1290 2.9 18 33,436,800 14,044,800 18,792,000
11202014 775 0.7 462 1237 2.8 6 10,687,680 3,991.680 6,696,000
1262014 0 1.1 1413 1413 3.1 6 12,208,M 12.209,220
IV42014 830 0.58 289 1139 2.$ 8 13,121.290 3,329,280 9,792,000
12/84014 800 0.61 328 1128 2.5 4 0.407,230 1,880,280 4,608,000
12232014 800 0,53 231 1031 2.3 15 22,260,600 4,989,600 17,280,000
MUMS 7S0 0.53 231 081 2.2 21 29,665.440 6,985.440 22,680,000
1212015 750 0.53 231 981 2.2 8 11.301,120 2,661,t20 8,640,000
v112013 750 0.4 115 865 1.9 21 26,1$7,600 3,477,600 22,680.000
2/1220IS 700 049 181 88I 2.0 1 1,268.640 260,640 1,008,000
2/19/2015 700 0.51 210 910 2.0 7 9,172.800 2.110,800 7,050,000
3/72013 700 04 113 815 1.9 16 18.777,600 2,649.600 16,129,001)
3/14/2011 650 0,45 1!0 8141 1.9 1 9,104,320 1,552,320 6,552.000
3272015 650 0.56 265 915 2.0 13 17,128,900 4.960,900 12.168.000
4/102015 932 0.57 277 1209 2.7 14 34,373.440 3,584,320 18,780,120
4212011 700 0 63 38.1 1084 2.4 11 17,17M60 6,092,560 11.088,00()
5/52013 900 0.81 664 1564 3.3 14 31.530,240 13,386,240 18,144,000
5/82015 900 0.83 704 1604 3.6 3 6,929,280 3,041,280 3.888,000
3212015 1000 008 1Oo3 2063 4.6 I3 38,619,360 19.899,300 18,720,000
6142011 1650 1 Ills 2768 62 14 55,802,880 22.338,980 33.264,000
6/92015 MO, 0.7 462 2792 62 5 20,102,400 3,336,400 16.776.000
6/112015 2330 0.67 414 2744 6.1 7,902,720 1,192,320 6,710.400
6/16201$ 2330 061 328 2638 S.0 5 19,137,600 2,361.600 16,776,000
6/192015 2370 0.58 284 2654 3.9 3 11,465.280 1.226,880 10,238.400
624/2015 2310 0.48 111 2491 5,6 5 17,935,20n 1,303,201) 16,632,000
6/26/2015 2310 0.5 ,IN) 2310 5.6 2 7,228,800 576,000 6,052,800
6/292015 2300 0.4 115 2415 5.4 3 10,432,800 496,800 9,936,000
7/1/2015 2270 0,41 123 2393 5,3 2 6,991.840 334,240 6.537,600
7/21201S 2240 0.42 13u 2370 $3 1 3.412,800 187,200 3,225,600
1152013 2120 0.44 145 2265 5.0 3 9,784,800 620.400 0,119,400
7/72015 2140 0.41 12) 2263 3.0 2 6,517.440 354,240 6,163,200
7192015 2060 48 I81 2241 5,0 1 3,227,040 260,64n 2,966,400
7/10/1015 2050 046 162 2212 4.9 2 6,370,560 466,560 5,004.000
7113M15 1950 0.42 110 2080 4.6 J 8,083,600 561,600 8,424.000
7/14/2015 1960 0.42 130 2110 4.7 1 3,038.400 187,200 2,851.200
7/152015 1930 0.47 172 2102 47 1 3,026,880 247,680 2,779,200
71172015 1930 0.4 115 2045 to 2 5,889,600 331200 5,08,400
7/19/2015 1850 0.46 162 2012 4.5 2 5,794,560 466,560 5,328,000
7212015 1830 0.44 Ids 1975 4,4 2 5,685,000 417,600 5,270,400
7/232015 1830 0.41 111 1933 4.4 2 5,614.640 354,240 5170,400
7/252013 1770 046 102 1932 4.3 2 S,564,160 466,360 .4,007,600
727/2015 1720 0.48 181 1901 42 2 5.474,880 521280 -1,953.600
7/302015 1670 0.48 181 1951 41 3 7,996,320 781,920 7,214.400
8/12015 1720 0.42 110 IBSU 4.1 2 5,122.000 374,400 4953,600
822015 1(too 0.43 138 1829 41 2 3,264,640 397,440 4,867,200
8/62015 1640 0.46 162 1802 4.0 3 7,784,640 699,840 7,084,800
$1102015 IS50 0.42 Ito 1680 3.7 a 9,676.800 748,800 8,929.000
$1120-015 IS90 041 123 1713 3.9 2 4,931,440 3S4?40 4,579,200
9/17/2015 1530 0.43 138 1669 3 7 5 12,009,600 993.600 11,016,000
8/19/201S 1500 044 146 1646 37 2 4,740.480 420.480 4.320,000
8121/1015 1420 0.5 2o0 1620 3.6 2 4,665,600 576,000 41189,600
225/2015 1390 038 101 1491 3.3 4 8,599,160 381.760 9,006,400
9282015 1360 0.49 181 1541 34 3 6,657,120 781,920 5,875,200
8/312015 1360 0.46 162 1522 3.4 3 6,575.040 699,840 5.875 200
0132015 1360 0,44 145 1505 3 A 3 6,301,600 626,400 S,875,2U0
9/9/2011 1330 0.41 123 1453 32 6 12,553,920 1,062.720 11,491,20n
9/142015 1280 0.43 13H 1418 32 S 10,209,600 993,600 9,216,000
9/222015 1250 0.42 110 1.180 3.1 8 15,807,600 1,491,600 14,400,000
9282015 1190 0,45 15,1 134.1 3.0 6 11,612,160 1.330,560 10,281,600
I O 2011 1130 0.42 130 1280 39 8 14.745,600 1,497,600 13,249.000
10/122013 1000 0.41 123 1213 2,7 6 10,480,320 1,062,720 9,417,000
JO/I92015 1050 0.47 172 1222 2.7 7 12,117,760 1.733,760 10,584.000
10/28/2013 020 0.55 294 1214 2.7 9 15.733,440 3.810.2.10 11,923 2M
11/24/201 S 920 0.49 01 1111 2 5 27 43.195,680 7,426,080 35,769,00
I1 02015 910 0.42 trip 1040 2.3 16 2.3,961,600 2,995,200 20,006,400 201s
21 637)41120 I,950 oc•R
1/142016 860 0.3.1 77 937 2.1 35 47,221,800 3,880.800 43,344,000 , ,
14
2232 1,2U gpm
010 $07 0.3 56 $63 L9 40 49,709.800 3,225.600 46.483,200 1, ,140 gpd
3/102016 800 0.42 130 930 11 16 21.427,200 2,995,200 18,432,000
4/142016 802 0,75 5.18 1350 3.0 35 08,040,000 27,610,200 40,420,900
•1120/2016 1010 0.67 41-1 1444 3.7 r, 12,470,160 3,576,960 8,899,200
5/311.016 1036 0.91 $84 1920 43 13 35,942.400 16,548.430 19,393,920
5/5/2016 1695 059 102 1007 4!I 2 5,731,360 869,760 4,881.600 Lns1J65 Days:
S/17/2016 1907 0.8 6.12 2549 5.7 12 44.046,720 11,093,760 32,952,960 Tot Production Overflow Use
5/252016 1890 1.17 1052 3542 7A 8 40,803.840 19,031,040 21,772.800 Gal 766.346,400 136.473,920 620,772,480 663,036,490 2,035 ac-fl
Days Total Flow Overflow Consunlpdoo GPD 2.152.658 393,634.61 1,769,023.92 1,916.538 gpd
Total Days in Record. 2306 6.32 yrs 1,49490 20041 1,228,40 1,201 gpm
Total Flow Over Period of Record Tot Gal 5,372,775.360 1,705,079.520 3,683,112.400 yn1
Average Daily Flow Over Period orRecurd GPD 2,329,911 739,410 1,507,187 gpd
Uso Woir I..ov91 OF Toml GPI 1,619 513 1,109 pill
Min 548 0.2 42 639
Max 2600 48 3763 4803
Avg 1352 0.8 427 1775
ac•Nyr 2,610 828 1,789
3 FOOT WEIR I PIPE (NORTH RESERVOIR INFLL PARSI-IALL FLUME 91111IN11611W TRAPEZOIDAL FLUME
Date CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM CFS GPM
1/l/1908 1.7 763
2/3/1908 1.275 572
4/15/1908 1.275 572
5/24/1908 3.875 1,739 PROJECT
6/9/1908 8 3,591 1 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 2 898 / -
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 I; A
9/27/1909 3.375 1,515 807ZEMAlJ _
10/18/1909 3.7 1,661 _
11/9/1909 2.625 1,178 -
12/6/1909 2.625 1,178 VICINITY MAP -
12/29/1909 2.125 954
1/l/1910 2.125 954
3/2/1910 1.9 853 Y.
3/12/1910 2.125 954
6/18/1910 5 2,244 "
EXISTING ACC .
-� �
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
1/2/1911 2.125 954 f,
1/12/1911 2.125 954
1/18/1911 1.95 875
2/15/1911 1.8 808 4w
3/6/1911 1.7 763 .L '•
3/12/1911 1.7 763 tc Y"'v "r ?� ►y
5/3/1911 2.45 1,100
6/3/1911 4.5 2,020
6/15/1911 5.925 2,659
6/17/1911 4.5 2,020 `y'
7/15/1911 4.25 1,908
7/24/1911 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 842LYMAN CREEK
2
1/21/1912 2.375 1,066 rlk
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 _
5/17/1912 5.85 2,626 A
�'1gH'R sm }'Y """�_ 14
v.�cr i< ::rntivno ,rt�rny y .
R AIEIZI.C`Isc. "
6/6/1912 6.65 2,985
6/24/1912 6.65 2,985
7/7/1912 7.3 3,276
7/24/1912 5.05 2,267
1
10/28/1912 2.8 1,257
12/2.8/1912 2.625 1,178
1/l/1913 2.625 1,178
2/15/1913 2.25 1,010
4/7/1913 2.3 1,032
7/l/1913 3.25 1,459 3 FOOT WEIR
8/l/1913 3.6 1,61.6
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 s
1/15/1914 2.875 1,290 7,000
2/3/1914 2.65 1,189 °
2/9/1914 2..55 1,145 2,000
s
3/1/1.914 2.25 1,010 C • 41
3/9/1914 1.7 763 ;5.000
3/12/1914 1.75 785 0
3/27/1914 1,875 842 4,000
5/23/1914 5,925 2,659 • ° °
6/4/1914 5.05 2,267 3,000 ° •
7/18/1914 4.75 2,132 4b• ® �•
7/24/1914 4.75 2,132 2,000 ol
8/15/1914 3.8 1,706 10
12/29/1914 2.075 931 1,000 •
2/l/1915 1.65 741
7/l/1920 6.734 3,022
dl rr o mo �m D �o D m �W li m lD �Q1 �m �1DD Cl) �Nr �=1D �=Q' �N �- 1Q �I �u 11 1N �1 �Ol7/28/1920 5.344 2,399 p QQmrnmy mmmm `° m D1 i00al M m m Q rn m m m m o rn m Ol M Q a 0
� „ � A8/l/1920 4,761 2,137 �
mao
8/9/1920 4,478 2,010 oo r co v rom o0 o v m m Ln 1n on
rn , rn r4C
N .d ry
8/12/1920 3,34 1,499 ar � N m � -rr .� n7 rn � �rn � N a)
8/16/1920 4.2 1,885
8/22/1920 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
9/26/1920 3.03 1,360
10/4/1920 3.15 1,414 a,0oo
10/7/1.920 2.788 1,251 0 7,000 0
10/10/1920 2.9088 1,306 , g
10/12/1920 3.03 1,360 0 0 0
c,on0
10/15/1920 2.9088 1,306 a�•° 00°°
10/1"'//1920 2,67 1,198 a 5,000 �• } • •_
10/19/197.0 2.788 1,251
• �t • ° •
10/"22/1920 2.788 1,251 o n,000 0• o0°° 'R�00 0 ° •
10/25/1920 2.788 1,251 •0 000 $ s • '_ _
dj _: °e • 'a v `d :• • 0
10/29/1920 2.67 1,198 3,000 ��•� + • • •_go°
11/5/1920 2.55 1,145 ` • 4% y•�
11/11/1920 2.55 1,145 2,000 0 ; •�
11/17/1920 2.438 1094 ° * °
11/23/1920 2.438 1,094 1,000 °• ` •
11/29/1920 2.103 944
12/8/1920 2.324 1,043 '
12/30/1920 2.103 944 Ln 00 to � to h � °r° ca w coo m m o, a o 0 m
cry m m m m m m rn m m m m m m Q, m o o 0
2/24/1921 1.58 709 ` m` 1n m` v`i � c N `0 1n o` `+ r- en co m` m n
3/7/1921 1.683 755 co Ln N N ti N N 0) ti
ry c-1 Y �. ` '-1 O ` 1n m
.-+ ao u�l .-1 � � O r a .--1 1D m �i ai
4/l/1921 1.785 801
5/9/1921 4.34 1,948
7/20/1921 3.28 1,472
6/26/1922 4.86 2,181
12/8/1922 2,103 944
1.2/19/1923 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
5/23/1,961 3.725 1,672 3.7 1,676
6/8/1961 5.25 2,356 5.3 2,362 •
6/17/1961 5 2,244 5.0 2,250 8,000
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 •
8/2/1961 3.125 1,403 3.1 1,406 6,000 •
8/12/1961 2.925 1,313 2.9 1,316 •
8/25/1961 2.75 1,234 2.8 1,237 = 5,000 • •
10/3/1961 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 o i • • •
4/12/1962 2.025 909 2.0 911 - 4,000 • % ® ® i • • • S
4/16/1962 2,6 1,167 2.6 1,170 M s • « • s • • j •
4/17/1962 3.025 1,358 3.0 1,361 3,000 N • • • • • •
4/18/1962 3.225 1,447 3.2 1,451 • • •• •• • • • S • •
4/19/1962 3.625 1,627 3.6 1,631 2000 • 6 • • 00 •o � • •� � • ~ �
4/23/1962 4.5 2,020 4.5 2,025 Z • • •• of
_• • • • e j
4/26/1962 5.15 2,311 5.2 2,317 • �` 0000
aim •R •
5/5/1962 4.35 1,952 4.4 1,957 1.000 • • •• • �• •• •
5/8/1962 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014
5/12/1962 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 o r m r, N n r m N 7 n m O N LA r m O
I'. r n ca 00 COcd DO 00 OUi Ql m Vi m m O CDO O .-i
5/19/1962. 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 m °1 m m m m m m rn m m m m m 0 0 o $ 0 0
5/24/1962 6.2 2,783 6.2 2,790 a m r m a Ch o N N Ln LO
eq
6/2/1962 6.95 3,119 7.0 3,127 Ln
ni
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
7/3/1.962 5.975 2,682 6.0 2,689
7/17/1962 6.1 2,738 6.1 2,745 UPPER WEIR
8/6/1.962 5.025 2,255 5.0 2,261 50o
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///1962 3,625 1,627 3.6 1,631
9/15/1,962 3.425 1,537 3.4 1,541 400 o
11/10/1962 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 0
12/17/1962 2.65 1,189 2.7 1,192 35U O 0 G7 0 000
Oo ` O 0
3/20/1963 2.1 943 2.1 945 2 oo 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 o o a o 0
5/4/1963 4.475 2,009 4.5 2,014 ° 250 0 0 0 0 O a O o
5/15/1963 7.725 3,467 7.7 3,476 0 ® o
5/16/1963 8 3,591 8.0 3,600 200 w 0 0�m (Do m � OcmOOO Oc�
5/27/1963 8.25 3,703 8.3 3,712 150CD
6/6/1963 9.2 4,129 9.2 4,140 0
6/13/1963 9.6 4,309 9.6 4,320 100
6/18/1963 9.5 4,264 9.5 4,275
6/2.7/1963 8.775 3,938 8.8 3,949 so
7/5/1963 7.85 3,523 7.9 3,532
7/15/1963 7.325 3,288 7.3 3,296 0® 0 0
7/20/1963 6.7 3,007 6.7 3,015 0 g d o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $ o o o S 0 0 0 o o o 0
7/24/1963 6.45 2,895 6.5 2,902 N N N N N N N = N N N N N N N N N N lV N N N N N N cV IV N cV
o w v v, ry o rn n o v N o d m v u� N ; m r Ln 7 N o co
8/17/1963 5.25 2,356 5.3 2,362 r'I fN � ."� N � .-i N N � .-I N � .--I N N �
m a r r N m co m . v n ti N v`i Cl m
8/31/1963 4.575 2,053 4.6 2,059
9/7/1.963 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
3/4/1.964 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 LD1,500
6/9/1964 10.75 4,825 10.8 4,837
0
6/16/1964 10,325 4,634 10.4 4,646 LL
6/24/1964 9.75 4,376 9.8 4,387 n
�00 diD
7/1/1964 8.925 4,006 8.9 4,016 1, Q
7/6/1964 8,65 3,882 8.7 3,892 a) Q CIO 000 cm
7/14/1964 7,85 3,523 7.9 3,532
a
8/4/1964 6.1 2,738 6.1 2,745 Soo 0
08/13/1964 5.5 2,469 5.5 2,475 91
9/1/1964 5,725 2,570 5.7 2,576
1/6/1965 2.925 1,31.3 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 o g 0 0 o g 0 0 0 " o o n o o 8 8 0 o m
3/10/1965 2,55 1,145 2.6 1,147 ,•� ry ,-., � N ry � N �„ � � a o o a o o $ � o o g
N N O oD' R vl �' ry O' O an
4/24/1965 4,35 1,952 4.4 1957 N �' ry ry �^r, m r, r,
I rl iC'i Q7 ry Ir d r-i Vi �0 .-� �D T N `7 I+ O v7
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 il.l 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
S/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
%/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 2,210 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 1825 1,717 3.8 1,721
9/13/1966 3,625 1,627 3.6 1,631
12/2.9/1966 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 21475
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 2,210 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
11/7/1967 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 4,253 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
4/1.1/1969 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
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/l/1969 11.275 5,061 11.3 5,074
8/8/1969 9A75 4,253 y 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
8/29/1969 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
1/22/19-/0 3.3 1,467 3.3 1,463
2/11/1970 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382
2/26/1970 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 4,071.
5/25/1970 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
6/2S/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
10/22/1970 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908
11/4/1970 4.3 1,912 1.3 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
4/30/1971 6.5 2,925 6.5 2,917
S/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 4,556
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
11/3/1911 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 1,732r 3.9 1,728
3/9/1972 3.5 1,564 3.5 1,560
3/21/1972 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908
4/3/1972 4.1 1,822 4.J 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
12/19/1 972 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
11/1.4/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908
11/30/1973 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908
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
2/2.8/1974 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
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 4.3 1,908
4/25/1974 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,/18
4/26/1974 7.0 3,139 /.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
6/11/1974 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610
6/12/1974 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
8/23/1974 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
10/28/1974 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110
11/14/1974 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
1/30/1975 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
5/12/197S 11.3 5,085 11.3 5,072
6/2/1975 12.5 5,625 12.5 5,610
6/25/1975 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
8/18/19'I5 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
4/13/1976 5.6 2,497 5.6 2,491
4/14/1976 6.1 2,725 6.1 2,71.8
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
11/16/197'/ 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
4/20/1.978 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 2,304 5.1 2,298
4/1.8/1979 5.8 2,596 5.8 2,590
5/8/1979 8.8 3,942 8.8 3,932
7/6/1979 9.4 4,201 9.3 4,190
8/13/1979 6.8 3,033 6.7 3,025
10/9/1979 4.7 2,115 4.7 2,110
10/29/1979 4.3 1,912 4.3 1,908
1.1/27/1979 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 2,02.0
10/2.2/1980 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
3/2.4/1981 3.1 1,386 3.1 1,382
4/2/1981 3.5 1,568 3.5 1,564
4/14/1981 4.1 1,827 4.1 1,82.2
4/20/1981 4.1 1,827 4.1 1,822
4/29/1981 6.1 2,749 6.1 2,742
5/2.2/1981 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
7/27/1.981 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 4.7 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 4,441 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
11/18/1986 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 1,22.5
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
5/5/1.988 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
6/1.7/1991 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 s 0.4 180
3/13/1992 0.4 178
3/2.0/1992 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 2.25,1901961 1,012 1.2 534 3.0 1,345
5/10/2001 2.254901961 1,012 jl 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 1,73/
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 3.228609626 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 1,570
7/19/2001 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 1.2 540 1.5 690
11/13/2001 0.6 26'
11/20/2001 1.091800357 490 1.2 545 1.5 661 _ 0.6 284,
12/4/2001 1.091800357 490 1.2 525 1.4 630 0.5 246
12/12/2.001 0.955882353 429 1.2 522 1.5 661 0.4 200
1/3/2002 0.824420677 370 1.1 504 1.5 661 0.4 199
1/9/2002 0.824420677 370 1.1 500 1.5 661 0.4 '_9'd
4/4/2002 0,554812834 249 1.0 458 1.1 499 0.4 200
4/11/2002 0.668449198 300 1.1 487 1.3 585 0.5 21
4/19/2002 0.958110517 430 1.2 518 1.5 690 0.5 21,'
5/2/2002 1.091800357 490 1.1 495 1.8 790 0.6 28�t
5/17/2002 1.532976827 688 1.1 497 2.4 1,080 0.8 346
5/31/2002 4.050802139 1,818 1.1 495 6.0 2,673 0.9 38S,
6/7/2002 4.427361854 1,987 1.1 491 6.8 3,033 0.8 36"
6/20/2002 4.98885918 2,239 1.1 498 7.0 3,138 0.8 3
6/25/2002 4.32_0409982 1,939 1.1 488 6.3 2,82.4 0.8 3
7/10/2002 3.429144385 1,539 1.1 500 5.1 2,304 0.8 3
7/25/2002 3.128342246 1,404 1.1 500 4.4 1,957 0.6 2
8/2/2002 2.606951872 1,170 1.1 500 4.1 1,827 0.6 2
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 2.161.319073 970 0.4 200 3.5 1,568
10/18/2002 2.16 13 19073 970 0.4 191 3.3 1,467
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 20 2.406417 1,080
12/13/2002 1.820409982 817 0.4 180 2.9 1,305 O 5 21_ 2.245989 1,008
12/27/2002 1.820409982 817 0.4 175 2.9 1,305 0.5 21i 2.245989 1,008
1/10/2003 1.820409982 817 0.4 175 2.8 1,269 0.4 20, 2.245989 1,008
1/17/2003 1.820409982 817 0.4 175 2.7 1,210 _ 0.4 19l 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
4/22/2003 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
5/14/2004 4.540998217 2,038 0.0 - 4.7 2,115
6/1.7/2004 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 0.
9/2/2004 1.613190731 724 1.9 875 2.3 1,044 0.
10/14/2004 2.702762923 1,213 0.0 - 3.4 1,528 0,
10/26/2004 2.51114082 1,127 0.0 - 3.6 1,608 0.
11/12/2004 1.38368984 621 1.6 700 1.9 853 0.
12/8/2004 1.091800357 490 1.6 700 1.6 722 0,.
12/29/2004 2.069964349 929 0.0 - 3.0 1,345 0.
2/1/2005 0.668449198 300 1.2 550 1.2 531 0.0
2/11/2005 0.610516934 274 1.2 525 1.5 690 0.3
3/4/2005 0.73083779 328 1.1 510 1.5 661 0.4
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 1
5/20/2.005 1.820409982 817 2.2 1,000 3.2 1,426 0.6 26
6/17/2005 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 36 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 34
7/22/2005 2.330659537 1,046 3.1 1,400 3.5 1,568 0.7 30
8/5/2005 1.532976827 688 3.1 1,400 2.7 1,192 0.4 19
8/19/2005 1.232174688 553 3.1 1,400 2.1 956 0.4 19
9/1/2005 1.163101604 522 3.0 1,350 2.0 905 0.4 19
9/14/2005 0.989304813 444 2.7 1,200 2.0 905 0.4 19
9/29/2005 0.989304813 444 2.2 1,000 2.0 905 0.4 199-
10/21/2005 2,5557041 1,147 0.0 - 3.5 1,550 i OA 199
11/17/2005 1.091800357 490 1.8 825 2.0 905 0.4
1/3/2006 1.4 650 2.4 1,080
3/3/2006 0.955882353 429 1.3 600 1.9 853 0.724153 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 2,353 0.8 368: 1.782531 800
6/9/2006 3.128342246 1,404 3.1 1,400 5.1 2,304 0.8 360 1.782531 800
6/23/2006 3.228609626 1,449 3.1 1,400 5.1 2,304 0.8 368` 1.782531 800
8/3/2006 1.163101604 522 3.0 1,350 2.7 1,192 0.6 264 1.114082 500
8/18/2006 1,314616756 590 2.2 1,000 2.8 1,269 0.4 199 0.757576 340
9/22/2006 1,232174688 553 1.8 800 2.7 1,192 0.4 199
10/13/2006 1,312388592 589 1.8 825 2.7 1,228 0.4 199
11/3/2006 2.836452763 1,273 0.0 - 5.0 2,259 0.4 199L, 1.782531 800
12/13/2006 2,606951872 1,170 0.0 - 4.6 2,070 0.4 199 1.782531 800
1/25/2007 2.42201426 1,087 0.0 - 4.2 1,870 0.4 199 1.782.531 800
3/1-1/2007 1.532976827 688 1.1 500 3.2 1,426
4/6/2007 1.091800357 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/l/2007 4.761586453 2,137 2.9 1,300 8.0 3,600 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 10.445633 200 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 0.445633 2003
10/4/2007 1.163101604 522 2.2 1,000 1.4 632
10/24/2007 1.232174688 553 2.1 950 1.4 632 0.445633 20:) 0,824421 370
11/9/2007 0.73083779 328 2.1 92S 1.4 632 : 0.445633 2�t� 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 6.225490196 2,794 3.3 1,500 9.1. 4,083 1.782531 800
7/11/2008 6.225490196 2,794 3.3 1,500 8.0 3,600 1.782531 800
7/18/2.008 5.744206774 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 1.320409982 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./ 1,651
9/26/2008 1.532976827 688 3.3 1,500 2.8 1,269 0-
11/14/2008 1.532976827 688
11/14/2008 2.2 1,000
6/26/2009 4.0 1,800
7/14/2.009 4.4 1,975
8/3/2010 2.1 938
10/19/2010 2.73 1,225
2/15/2011 1.72 772
3 FOOT WEIR 1 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 '/,709 18.4 8,280 18.4 8,258 1.0 459 4.6 2,070