Tributary Reservoir Regulation Activities 20052005 AnnualAnnual ReportReport (August 2004 – September 2005)

Holmes Dam and Lake Lincoln, Nebraska

Water Control and Water Quality Section Hydrologic Engineering Branch Engineering Division Omaha District January 2006

2005 ANNUAL REPORT TRIBUTARY RESERVOIR REGULATION ACTIVITIES (AUGUST 2004 – SEPTEMBER 2005) NORTHWEST DIVISION OMAHA DISTRICT

CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1

CHAPTER 2 – RESERVOIRS IN THE OMAHA DISTRICT ...... 2-1 a. Reservoirs with Flood Control Storage ...... 2-1 b. Reservoirs without Flood Control Storage ...... 2-2

CHAPTER 3 – TRIBUTARY RUNOFF AND FLOODS...... 3-1 a. General Hydrologic Conditions...... 3-1 i. Long-Term Trends ...... 3-1 ii. Rocky Mountain Snow Conditions ...... 3-1 b. Significant Weather Events, August 2004 through September 2005...... 3-6 i. Late Summer 2004 ...... 3-6 ii. Fall 2004...... 3-7 iii. Winter of 2004-2005 ...... 3-8 iv. Spring 2005 ...... 3-9 v. Summer 2005 ...... 3-11 c. Runoff into Tributary Reservoirs...... 3-12

CHAPTER 4 – RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS...... 4-1 a. Flood Damages Prevented...... 4-1 b. Recreation Usage...... 4-6

CHAPTER 5 – RESERVOIR OPERATIONS...... 5-1 a. Previous Year Operations ...... 5-2 i. Corps of Engineers Lakes...... 5-2 ii. Bureau of Reclamation Dams ...... 5-2 b. Proposed Operations...... 5-3 i. Corps of Engineers ...... 5-3 (1) Colorado ...... 5-3 (2) Nebraska ...... 5-3 (3) North Dakota...... 5-4 (4) South Dakota...... 5-4 ii. Bureau of Reclamation ...... 5-4 (1) Canyon Ferry...... 5-5 (2) Tiber (Lake Elwell) ...... 5-5 (3) Yellowtail...... 5-5 (4) Others...... 5-5

i CHAPTER 6 – MAJOR REGULATION ISSUES ...... 6-1 a. Water Quality...... 6-1 b. Downstream Channel Capacity ...... 6-1 c. Releases for Purposes other than Authorized Project Functions...... 6-1 d. Potential Hazardous Conditions ...... 6-2 e. Dam Safety Issues ...... 6-3 i. Corps of Engineers Dams...... 6-3 (1) Cherry Creek Dam...... 6-3 (2) Cold Brook Dam ...... 6-3 (3) Salt Creek Dams ...... 6-3 ii. Bureau of Reclamation Dams ...... 6-3 (1) Clark Canyon Dam ...... 6-3 (2) Canyon Ferry Dam ...... 6-3 (3) Tiber Dam...... 6-4 (4) Boysen Dam...... 6-4 (5) Yellowtail Dam...... 6-4 (6) Heart Butte Dam...... 6-4 (7) Jamestown Dam...... 6-4 (8) Keyhole Dam...... 6-4 (9) Pactola Dam...... 6-4 (10) Shadehill Dam ...... 6-4 (11) Glendo Dam ...... 6-4

CHAPTER 7 – WATER CONTROL MANUALS ...... 7-1 a. Current Manual Status...... 7-1 b. Work Priorities ...... 7-1

CHAPTER 8 – DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES...... 8-1 a. Water Control Data Collection ...... 8-1 i. Sources...... 8-1 ii. Storage ...... 8-1 iii. Data Collection Equipment ...... 8-1 b. Cooperative Hydrologic Programs...... 8-2 c. Water Quality...... 8-2 d. Sediment ...... 8-4 i. Bed and Suspended Sediment Sampling ...... 8-4 ii. Sedimentation Surveys...... 8-4

CHAPTER 9 – OTHER WATER CONTROL ACTIVITIES...... 9-1 a. Water Control Initiatives ...... 9-1 i. Missouri River Region Water Control Data System Master Plan ...... 9-1 ii. Model Development...... 9-1 (1) HEC-HMS...... 9-1 (2) HEC-RAS ...... 9-1 (3) HEC-ResSim ...... 9-1 (4) HEC-FIA ...... 9-1

ii

b. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Applications...... 9-2 c. Personnel ...... 9-2 d. Training ...... 9-3

LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE

2-1 Corps of Engineers Tributary Reservoirs, Omaha District...... 2-1

2-2 Bureau of Reclamation Tributary Reservoirs, Omaha District ...... 2-2

3-1 Mountain Snowpack Moisture as a Percent of Normal...... 3-2

3-2 Runoff Amounts and Peak Pool Levels...... 3-12

3-3 Provisional 2004 Water Year Peak Stages and Discharges...... 3-13

4-1 Omaha District Projects Flood Damages Prevented FY 2004 - Local and Mainstem Reductions...... 4-1

4-2 Bureau of Reclamation Projects Flood Damages Prevented FY04 - Local and Mainstem Reductions...... 4-5

4-3 Flood Damages Prevented by State, Omaha District, FY 2004 ...... 4-6

4-4 Recreation Visitation Hours...... 4-6

5-1 Tributary Reservoir Flood Control Operation (2004 Water Year) ...... 5-1

5-2 Utilization of Exclusive Flood Control Zone Omaha District Tributary Projects ...... 5-2

6-1 Water Quality Issues and Concerns...... 6-2

7-1 Work Priorities for Updating Water Control Manuals...... 7-1

7-2 Schedule for Revision of Water Control Manuals, FY 2004 - FY 2013...... 7-2

8-1 Cost of FY 2002 NWS and USGS Cooperative Programs ...... 8-2

8-2 Projects Sampled and Types of Sampling...... 8-3

8-3 Sediment Sampling Stations ...... 8-4

9-1 FERC Permit Applications...... 9-2

9-2 List of Personnel ...... 9-3

9-3 Training Attended...... 9-3

iii LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

1-1 Tributary Reservoir Projects...... 1-3 3-1 Fall 2003 Long-Term Palmer Drought Severity Index ...... 3-4 3-2 Fall 2004 Long-Term Palmer Drought Severity Index ...... 3-4 3-3 Spring 2005 Long-Term Palmer Drought Severity Index...... 3-5 3-4 Summer 2005 Long-Term Palmer Drought Severity Index...... 3-5 3-5 Late Summer & Early Fall Precipitation...... 3-6 3-6 Late Fall and Early Winter Precipitation ...... 3-7 3-7 Late Winter and Early Spring Precipitation...... 3-9 3-8 Late Spring and Early Summer Precipitation...... 3-10 3-9 July 2005 Percent of Normal Precipitation ...... 3-11

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – COE PROJECT PERTINENT DATA SHEETS Bear Creek Reservoir ...... A-1 Bowman-Haley Dam and Lake...... A-1 Bull Hook – Scott Coulee Dams ...... A-1 Cedar Canyon Dam (Red Dale Gulch) ...... A-1 Chatfield Reservoir ...... A-1 Cherry Creek Reservoir...... A-2 Cold Brook Dam and Lake ...... A-2 Cottonwood Springs Dam and Lake ...... A-2 Kelly Road Dam...... A-2 Dam No. 11 – Glenn Cunningham Dam and Lake ...... A-3 Dam No. 16 – Standing Bear Dam and Lake ...... A-3 Dam No. 18 – Zorinsky Dam and Lake...... A-3 Dam No. 20 – Wehrspann Dam and Lake...... A-3 Dam No. 2 – Olive Creek Dam and Lake ...... A-4 Dam No. 4 – Bluestem Dam and Lake ...... A-4 Dam No. 8 – Wagon Train Dam and Lake...... A-4 Dam No. 9 – Stagecoach Dam and Lake ...... A-4 Dam No. 10 – Yankee Hill Dam and Lake ...... A-4 Dam No. 12 – Conestoga Dam and Lake...... A-5 Dam No. 13 – Twin Lakes Dam and Lake ...... A-5 Dam No. 14 – Pawnee Dam and Lake ...... A-5 Dam No. 17 – Antelope Creek Dam and Holmes Park Lake ...... A-5 Dam No. 18 – Branched Oak Dam and Lake ...... A-5 Pipestem Dam and Lake ...... A-6 Snake Creek Dam and Lake Audubon ...... A-6 Spring Creek Dam and Lake Pocasse...... A-6 Westerly Creek Dam ...... A-6

iv

APPENDIX B – COE PROJECT OPERATION SUMMARIES B1-Bear Creek Reservoir ...... B1-1 B2-Bowman-Haley Dam and Lake ...... B2-1 B3-Bull Hook – Scott Coulee – Cedar Canyon Dams...... B3-1 B4-Chatfield Reservoir ...... B4-1 B5-Cherry Creek Reservoir ...... B5-1 B6-Cold Brook Dam and Lake...... B6-1 B7-Cottonwood Springs Dam and Lake ...... B7-1 B8-Kelly Road Dam ...... B8-1 B9-Westerly Creek Dam...... B9-1 B10-Dam No. 11 – Glenn Cunningham Dam and Lake...... B10-1 B11-Dam No. 16 – Standing Bear Dam and Lake...... B11-1 B12-Dam No. 18 – Zorinsky Dam and Lake ...... B12-1 B13-Dam No. 20 – Wehrspann Dam and Lake ...... B13-1 B14-Pipestem Dam and Lake...... B14-1 B15-Dam No. 2 – Olive Creek Dam and Lake...... B15-1 B16-Dam No. 4 – Bluestem Dam and Lake...... B16-1 B17-Dam No. 8 – Wagon Train Dam and Lake ...... B17-1 B18-Dam No. 9 – Stagecoach Dam and Lake...... B18-1 B19-Dam No. 10 – Yankee Hill Dam and Lake...... B19-1 B20-Dam No. 12 – Conestoga Dam and Lake ...... B20-1 B21-Dam No. 13 – Twin Lakes Dam and Lake...... B21-1 B22-Dam No. 14 – Pawnee Dam and Lake...... B22-1 B23-Dam No. 17 – Antelope Creek Dam and Holmes Park Lake...... B23-1 B24-Dam No. 18 – Branched Oak Dam and Lake...... B24-1 B25-Snake Creek Dam and Lake Audubon...... B25-1 B26-Spring Creek Dam and Lake Pocasse ...... B26-1

APPENDIX C – USBR PROJECT PERTINENT DATA SHEETS Boysen Dam and Reservoir...... C-1 Canyon Ferry Dam and Reservoir ...... C-1 Clark Canyon Dam and Reservoir ...... C-1 Glendo Dam and Reservoir ...... C-1 Heart Butte Dam and Reservoir (Lake Tschida)...... C-2 Jamestown Dam and Reservoir...... C-2 Keyhole Dam and Reservoir...... C-2 Pactola Dam and Reservoir...... C-2 Shadehill Dam and Reservoir...... C-3 Tiber Dam and Reservoir (Lake Elwell) ...... C-3 Yellowtail Dam and Reservoir...... C-3

APPENDIX D – USBR PROJECT OPERATION SUMMARIES D1-Boysen Dam and Lake/Yellowtail Dam and Reservoir...... D1-1 D2-Canyon Ferry Dam and Reservoir ...... D2-1 D3-Clark Canyon Dam and Reservoir ...... D3-1

v D4-Glendo Dam and Reservoir ...... D4-1 D5-Heart Butte Dam and Reservoir (Lake Tschida) ...... D5-1 D6-Jamestown Dam and Reservoir...... D6-1 D7-Keyhole Dam and Reservoir...... D7-1 D8-Pactola Dam and Reservoir...... D8-1 D9-Shadehill Dam and Reservoir ...... D9-1 D10-Tiber Dam and Reservoir (Lake Elwell) ...... D10-1

vi CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

The Omaha District is within the jurisdiction of the Northwestern Division, Corps of Engineers. Annually the Omaha District is requested to provide pertinent data about the operation and activities of reservoirs on tributary rivers to the Missouri River, for which they are responsible. This annual report summarizes significant tributary reservoir regulation activities and tributary flooding within the geographic boundaries of the Omaha District (Figure 1-1) for the period covered by this report. This period is 1 August 2004 through 30 September 2005 and is referred throughout the report as “the reporting period”. This is a transition year for the period of coverage so that future annual reports can match the USGS Water Year period of October through September.

Topics in this report include general information about the reservoirs, significant weather events and run-off into the reservoirs during the reporting period. Additional chapters discuss the accomplishments of the reservoirs, including the flood damages prevented and recreation uses. Operational data from the reporting period and an outlook for next year is also included. Final chapters of this report will discuss topics pertinent to tributary reservoir regulation activities such as: major regulation issues, water control manuals, data collection program and procedures, water control initiatives, federal energy regulatory commission applications, and personnel issues.

The following references were used in the development of this Annual Report:

• ER 1110-2-1400, 24 April 1970. • ER 1110-2-240, 8 October 1982. • Missouri River Division Letter, 1 October 1970, Subject: Reservoir Regulation Reports.

Included as appendices to this report are operational reports for all reservoirs within the District boundaries. The information contained in the appendices includes pertinent data sheets, operational summaries, historical as well as reporting period minimum and maximum data, and plots detailing flow and discharge data.

1-1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

This page left intentionally blank.

1-2 ym—h—2histri™t2found—ry €e€svvsyx2g‚iiu2hewƒ2@gFiFA

w —ri—s2‚ive il r r—vre w k2‚iv 5ƒhel˜y „i˜er2h—m2 er @fF‚FA 5 r v—ke2 ‡ full2rook ‰ xorth2h—kot— 2TR 2 ‡‰ I h—m2@gFiFA gul˜ertson ‡illiston ƒ—k—k—we— r „eton2‚iver †irgelle x—shu— ‡olf2€oint Q 5 5 Q 5 port2€e™k 5 5 w h—m2@gFiFA 5 H iss port2€e™k ƒn—ke2greek TV ou ƒ sE ri2‚iv u er ƒidney r n2‚iv 5 h—m2@gFiFA er qre—t2p—lls te ‡‰ x qlenn2gunnungh—m es m r 5 r ip t—mestown o v—ke2@€e2IIA ‡ e 5‚iverd—le € r ƒt—nding2fe—r g—s™—de h—m2@fF‚FA 2 t port2€e™k2v—ke Q v h 5 v—ke2@€e2ITA ‰ i v un q—rrison2 €ingree I 2 if f ywere 2

e 5 i

‚ 2‚ U

r f t

2 i t

i v er h—m@gFiFA — l S i e r n g €ipestem 2 ™ 2 €

u re re—rt2futte 5 € — h wos˜y r fsƒwe‚gu h—m2@gFiFA ‰2TR — 5 o r‡ — t p wont—n— 2 h—m2@fF‚FA t—mestown p rivixe g—nyon2perry s ‚ â i s i il ll i ve l i sERVH w â h—m2@fF‚FA r io o w n n i 2 2 s w 2 g s usse e v—woure ‡‰2T g lshe er l 5 r r o ll iv t r „oston 2‚ e e u 5 wiles2gity t freien5 e r i r e 5 e k g—nnon i v v i ˜ k 2 2‚ fowm—n —l ‚

r l2 i

ive sto ne 5 5 ‚ iver v

2‚ w guster r‡‰2QV sEVH e lo r—ley r e l 5 l e sv golum˜i— o ‰ r 2‚ ƒpring2greek r vivingston fillings r fowm—nEr—ley q d er ‰2PUS r 5 e r— n 5 ox2il r‡ r f e 5 e h—m2@gFiFA de 2 e v h—m2@gFiFA r i r v v 2 i g v i i i ‚ ‰ellowt—il 2 ƒh—dehill ‡ orinsky2v—ke

‚ ‚ ‚ r v—ke2 f 2 2 ‚ h—m2@fF‚FA 2 w h—m2@fF‚FA ‰ @€e2IVA d 2 e k ƒonnette r

— 5hillon n r e d n 5 o y—he 2

u Q ‡ o v

e i o w re 2‚i e r f gl—rk t g —u H

I s n2gree

h i k V ‡

i n o io

— p g ll E ‰ r gorwin2ƒprings G i

l 2 s

T l € p g—nyon2 d 5 o e

2 2

e k — s t U

— „ ƒ € t

— r 2 2€

v h—m r h —p

t S q e — il

— — i u lio

w l iv o o n2gre e @fF‚FA f m ek

g 2‚ u ƒ f e e o e ‡ehrsp—nn r 5 l le2p ur™ enn x UH s 2 2Q ve ƒherid—n he ey y—he2h—m2@gFiFA ‚ v—ke2@€e2PHA r‡‰ i 552 h ruron 2

‚ ‚ ‚ r g i

2 qrey˜ull felle2pour™he i gherry2greek v—ke2 5 v e e 5 v

n e â€si‚‚i i e

v uey2role ged—r2g—nyon v r o i r ƒh—rpe

h h—m2@fF‚FA r e

s ‚ h—m2@gFiFA e r 2 v o d2‚ i fig2fend h n f— ƒ r €—™tol— h—m2@gFiFA o h—m2@fF‚FA gh—m˜erl—in r r 5 2 ive 5 g te2‚ i i goldfrook ‡h v—ke2pr—n™is ƒioux2p—lls ‡i f h—m2@gFiFA n heyenne g—se q—vins2€oint d2‚ foysen2h—m g 2‚F h—m2@gFiFA r iv 5 ƒouth2 r—w—rden e e @fF‚FA 5 v r rot2ƒprings port2‚—nd—ll i gottonwood h—m2@gFiFA ‚ h—kot— 2 ƒprings ƒpen™er5 x 5 ‡yoming 5 u h—m2@gFiFA 5 xio˜r—r— o ‚iverton g—sper xorden i 5 r vewis2—nd l ƒ ive i kho 2 yrin ‚ r n2‚ gl—rk2v—ke e —2 i l 5 r v t €—thfinder2‚esF e t — i xio˜r xF2voup2 r qlendo2h—m ‚iv v el™ov—2‚esF@fF‚FA er xorfolk x 5 ‡est2€oint r or e th 5 v ƒeminoe2‚esF r 2 € i e l— ‚ iv 5 tte 2 ‚ 2‚ — xe˜r—sk— r n 2 wit™hell iv e e iv t e r ym—h— o i 2‚ 5 5 up ˜ m fridgeport v—ke2 o v —

— n

r w™gon—ughy

h — v xorth2€l—tte is gri‰ixxi 5 qr—nd2ssl—nd â x €l 5 vsxgyvx ⠗tt 5 er e2‚iver r—m˜urg „‚sEveuiƒ2hewƒ2@gFiFA iv 5 2‚ e ydess— golor—do tt l— r fe—r2greek ‚ulo5 r e € S 2 ‡ iv h—m2@gFiFA2 h 2V ƒout ‚ ‰ 2 ‰ 2 T Q e 2U t ‡ ‰ T t 5 r ‡ — r ptF2worg—n

l x v S ptF2vupton i € o t P 2 r t 2 5 h t l t h e r ‰ u 2 2 y ‡

o hix†i‚ ƒ

‡ P gherry2greek ƒ 2 — — k ‰

r ‰ l

2 t 2

â h—m2@gFiFA g 2 U ‡ fr—n™hed2 g t r r re U o y—k2@IVA e e rd k e k — ree k n gh—tfield2 2g lt2g r ƒ— h—m2@gFiFA y e —k ek 2greek 2T eek ‡e ‰ r r r2g st2y ‡ e— —k ‡ r gl 2g H x ree ‰ sEV sEU gheesm—n2‚esF ilm k 2 H 2g U ƒ— re W RH H RH VH IPH wiles SV nd ek ‰2 hix†i‚ 2gre ilevenmile2g—nyon2‚esF r‡ ek r‡‰2QR uelly2‚o—d ƒpinney2wtnF2‚esF ‡ i H h—m2@gFiFA EU entero2‚esF s ‡esterly2greek r‡‰2T €—wnee2@IRA h—m2@gFiFA ‰2QR g vsxgyvx r‡ ƒ he „win2 V viqixhX rr sE H e ƒ y v—kes2@IQA t 2g n e S t re e rolmes v e P w lop e @gFiFA2gorps2of2ingineers k P id e n E dle2greek 2 v—ke2@IUA fe—r2greek s s r‡‰2T s E 2 P g

g g h—m2@gFiFA S r @fF‚FA2fure—u2of2‚e™l—m—tion s e r

e

e x gherry2greek gonestog—2@IPA k fe— ™h e

r2gr r‡‰2P k n k eek h—m2@gFiFA ree 2fr—

g es r s2 r—in „ e dwe frF r lm g—r ll2 2P e o ek r k r‡‰ ‚ e v e gr i e ‰—nkee „urkey2 2gr e ‚ e 2 s rill2@IHA

e y S ƒ e e t r t V h — 2 ‡ — g l l t ‰

2 € g € ‰

h 2 r ‡ 2V h s e t r Q itt tru pihi‚ev2„‚sf „e‚‰2‚iƒi‚†ys‚2€‚ytig„ƒ ‡ ™ e u k k

gh—tfield o 2g „ h—m2@gFiFA ƒ rF r‡‰2RUH ‡—gon2 ‡s„r2pvyyh2gyx„‚yv2ƒ„y‚eqi ‰2QQ g

‡ i r fluestem2@RA „r—in2@VA „

r

‡ FƒF2e‚w‰2ixqsxii‚2hsƒ„‚sg„D2ywere ‚

s ƒ ‰ p y rF 2 r U f i e 2 n U gy‚€ƒ2yp2ixqsxii‚ƒ

v 2 ylive yli g ƒt—ge™o—™h2 2

x

greek2@PA f 2222222@WA

s

r I F ywereD2xif‚eƒue

E ƒev„2g‚iiu2hewƒ2@gFiFA Q ‚i†sƒih2t xi2PHHP CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

This page left intentionally blank.

1-4 CHAPTER 2 RESERVOIRS IN THE OMAHA DISTRICT

The Omaha District, Corps of Engineers, civil works boundaries include 414,900 square miles that comprise the Missouri River watershed upstream of Rulo, Nebraska (Figure 1-1). The following section is divided into two parts. One part describes the reservoirs that are within this watershed with flood storage and the other part describes those reservoirs without flood storage.

a. Reservoirs with Flood Control Storage. This report presents information for 36 tributary reservoirs with allocated flood control storage, including 25 Corps of Engineers dams and 11 Bureau of Reclamation dams. The Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation dams are listed on Tables 2-1 and 2-2, respectively. The locations of the tributary reservoirs are shown in Figure 1-1, in Chapter 1, and pertinent data for the tributary reservoirs are presented in Appendices A and C of this report.

TABLE 2-1 CORPS OF ENGINEERS TRIBUTARY RESERVOIRS, OMAHA DISTRICT

Exclusive Flood Drainage Area Control Storage Name of Dam Location River Date of Closure (sq. miles) (Acre-Feet) 1. Bear Creek Denver, CO Bear Creek July 1977 236 28,715 2. Bowman-Haley Bowman, ND N. Fork Grand August 1966 446 72,717 3. Bull Hook Havre, MT Bull Hook Creek October 1955 54 6,500 4. Cedar Canyon Rapid City, SD Deadman Gulch September 1959 0.4 123 5. Chatfield Denver, CO South Platte August 1973 3,018 206,945 6. Cherry Creek Denver, CO Cherry Creek October 1948 386 110,037 7. Cold Brook Hot Springs, SD Cold Brook September 1952 70.5 6,680 8. Cottonwood Springs Hot Springs, SD Cottonwood Crk May 1969 26 7,730 9. Kelly Road Denver, CO Westerly Creek November 1953 10.8 360 10. Papillion No. 11 (Glenn Omaha, NE Knight Creek August 1974 17.8 13,899 Cunningham Dam) 11. Papillion No. 16 Omaha, NE Big Papio Creek October 1972 6 3,591 (Standing Bear Dam) 12. Papillion No. 18 Omaha, NE Boxelder Creek July 1984 16.4 7,649 (Zorinsky Dam) 13. Papillion No. 20 Omaha, NE S. Br. Papio September 1982 13.1 6,119 (Wehrspan Dam) Creek 14. Pipestem Jamestown, ND Pipestem Creek July 1973 594 133,163 15. Salt Creek No. 2 (Olive Lincoln, NE S. Olive Branch September 1963 8.2 3,857 Creek Dam) 16. Salt Creek No. 4 Lincoln, NE N. Olive Branch September 1962 16.6 7,129 (Bluestem Dam) 17. Salt Creek No. 8 Lincoln, NE N. Hickman September 1962 15.6 6,676 (Wagon Train Dam) Branch 18. Salt Creek No. 9 Lincoln, NE S. Hickman August 1963 9.7 4,413 (Stagecoach Dam) Branch 19. Salt Creek No. 10 Lincoln, NE Cardwell Branch October 1965 8.4 5,841 (Yankee Hill Dam) 20. Salt Creek No. 12 Lincoln, NE Holmes Creek September 1963 15.1 7,655 (Conestoga Dam)

2-1 CHAPTER 2 RESERVOIRS IN THE OMAHA DISTRICT

TABLE 2-1 CORPS OF ENGINEERS TRIBUTARY RESERVOIRS, OMAHA DISTRICT

Exclusive Flood Drainage Area Control Storage Name of Dam Location River Date of Closure (sq. miles) (Acre-Feet) 21. Salt Creek No. 13 Lincoln, NE Middle Creek September 1965 11.0 5,021 (Twin Lakes Dam) 22. Salt Creek No. 14 Lincoln, NE N. Middle Creek July 1964 35.9 20,299 (Pawnee Dam) 23. Salt Creek No. 17 Lincoln, NE Antelope Creek September 1962 5.4 5,845 (Antelope Creek Dam) 24. Salt Creek No. 18 Lincoln, NE Oak Creek August 1967 88.7 71,686 (Branched Oak Dam) 25. Westerly Creek Denver, CO Westerly Creek July 1991 9.3 4,150 26. Spring Creek Dam Pollock, SD Spring Creek 1961 660 0 (Lake Pocasse) 27. Snake Creek Dam Riverdale, ND Snake Creek 1952 250 0 (Lake Audubon)

TABLE 2-2 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION TRIBUTARY RESERVOIRS, OMAHA DISTRICT

Exclusive Flood Drainage Area Control Storage Name of Dam Location River Date of Closure (sq. miles) (Acre-Feet) 1. Boysen Thermopolis, WY Wind October 1951 7,710 150,632 2. Canyon Ferry Helena, MT Missouri March 1953 15,900 101,089 3. Clark Canyon Dillion, MT Beaverhead August 1964 2,320 79,090 4. Glendo Glendo, WY North Platte June 1956 14,330 271,900 5. Heart Butte Glen Ullin, ND Heart August 1949 1,710 147,027 6. Jamestown Jamestown, ND James May 1953 1,300 189,486 7. Keyhole Morcroft, WY Belle Fourche March 1952 1,950 140,500 8. Pactola Rapid City, SD Rapid Creek August 1956 319 43,057 9. Shadehill Shadehill, SD Grand July 1950 3,120 230,004 10. Tiber Chester, MT Marias October 1950 4,850 400,900 11. Yellowtail Hardin, MT Bighorn December 1966 19,626 258,330

b. Reservoirs without Flood Control Storage. Two Corps of Engineers tributary reservoirs without allocated flood control storage are included in this report. Both are subimpoundments of the Missouri River Main Stem Projects and were formed by the construction of relocations for transportation facilities and utilities. Lake Audubon, a subimpoundment of Lake Sakakawea, is located just northeast of Riverdale, North Dakota. Lake Pocasse, a subimpoundment of Lake Oahe, is located near Pollock, South Dakota. Both lakes are used for fish, wildlife and recreational purposes. The two reservoirs are listed on Table 2-1. Their locations are shown on Figure 1-1 and pertinent data are presented in Appendix A.

2-2 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

The following chapter gives a description of weather related events that occurred in the District during the reporting period. It is useful to understand previous weather events, since they affect the activities of the Water Control personnel and how they regulate the tributary reservoirs.

a. General Hydrologic Conditions

i. Long-Term Trends. Since Fall 1999, below average precipitation began contributing to increasing drought conditions in the Omaha District. By Fall 2001, much of the District was affected by drought, which has persisted into the Fall of 2003 (Figure 3-1). Abnormally Dry conditions at a minimum covered much of the District. Extreme Drought caused by multi-year rainfall deficits affected Western Nebraska and South Dakota, western Montana, and northwest Wyoming. Normal Northern Plains precipitation as well as above normal plains snowpack in northern Montana and North Dakota allowed substantial alleviation of drought conditions in northern and eastern Montana and North Dakota, and eastern Nebraska and South Dakota through 2004 (Figure 3-2). An El Nino winter, however, would sustain Extreme and Exceptional Drought conditions in Wyoming (Figure 3-3) until a favorable weather pattern set up in May and June. This pattern brought abundant precipitation to the Northern Rockies and Northern Plains helping to reduce some of the most severe drought conditions experienced recently. By mid-summer, the District was in a much improved drought situation, yet was still experiencing Moderate and Severe drought throughout much of Montana and Wyoming (Figure 3-4).

ii. Rocky Mountain Snow Conditions. The Rocky Mountain region of the Omaha District experienced a relatively strong start to the Water Year 2005 winter. October and early November were uncharacteristically and received abundant snow and precipitation in the Central and Northern Rocky Mountains. This trend however changed quickly with the formation of a weak El Nino phenomenon in the eastern Equatorial Pacific Ocean. Though sea surface temperatures in the eastern Pacific Ocean did not rise enough to warrant a full El Nino Winter, the impacts to the southwestern and northwestern U.S. were very noticeable. El Nino winters are characteristically dry and warm in the Northwest and Northern Plains, while the Southwest are wet and cool. Throughout the winter, the Omaha District experienced a drier than normal and warmer than normal winter, while the Southwest, Great Basin, and Colorado River Basin received abundant snow and cooler temperatures.

By November 1, 2004, mountain snow packs were well above normal for the season (Table 3-1) due to the favorable moisture influx from the southwestern U.S. Southwestern temperatures in October had been 3.0 to 5.0 degrees F above normal, while the Northern Plains and Northern Rockies were below normal. Snowfall rates quickly diminished in November as warmer, drier air dominated most of the District. The Northern Rockies and Northern Plains were especially affected by the dry conditions receiving 25 to 50% of normal precipitation. Declines in snowfall precipitation were evident in the Snowpack Moisture data reported by the NRCS on December 1,

3-1 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

2004 (Table 3-1). With the exception of the South Platte River Basin, most major mountain river basins had well below normal snowpack.

December was again exceptionally dry in the Central and Northern Rocky Mountains. Wyoming was especially impacted the hardest. Much of the eastern half of the state received less than 25% of normal precipitation as snow, while the western half received 50 to 75% of normal precipitation. The Northern Rockies in Montana received between 25 and 50% of normal precipitation. Temperatures in Montana and Wyoming were 5.0 to 9.0 degrees F above normal. By January 1, 2005, accumulated snow in mountain river basins was 91% of normal or less (Table 3-1).

January was another dry month for the mountain basins in the Omaha District. Montana and all of the Northwest received 25 to 50% of normal snowfall precipitation extending into northern Wyoming. The Belle Fourche, Powder, and Tongue River Basins received 25% of normal precipitation during January. In contrast, the Upper South Platte River Basin received between 100 and 150% of normal precipitation, reflecting the mild El Nino effects on precipitation in the southwestern U.S. Average temperatures for the month were above normal in Colorado and Wyoming, while temperatures were much cooler in Montana. By February 1, 2005, there was little evidence of snowpack improvement in the Omaha District.

TABLE 3-1 MOUNTAIN SNOWPACK MOISTURE AS A PERCENT OF NORMAL Missouri Basin Upper Upper North South Platte Date Headwaters Yellowstone Platte River Basin River Basin River Basin 01-Nov-04 146 124 155 105 01-Dec-04 80 74 95 107 01-Jan-05 85 77 88 91 01-Feb-05 77 69 91 90 01-Mar-05 69 66 88 94 01-Apr-05 74 71 86 84 01-May-05 78 69 80 89 01-Jun-05 51 51 60 48

February and March were again dry and warm months in the Northern Rockies and the Northern Plains. In February the Rockies received less than 50% of normal precipitation, but in March El Nino impacts began to break down across the Rockies. In March the Rockies received almost normal precipitation in Montana and less than 75% of normal precipitation in Wyoming and Colorado. Temperatures in February were 3.0 to 7.0 degrees F above normal, while in March they were only slightly cooler. Percent of normal snowpack declined throughout the mountain basins with the exception of the South Platte River Basin.

In April, a trough of low pressure generated some heavy rain and snow in central and western Montana and the foothills of the South Platte Basin, but despite that there

3-2 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

was essentially no improvement to high elevation snow pack in the Omaha District. Precipitation was a mix of above and below normal percent of precipitation, while average temperatures in April were mostly normal in the Rocky Mountains.

The height of the snow accumulation season usually occurs in May. May is also a relatively wet period for the Northern and Central Rockies in which a mix of moderate rain and snow occurs throughout the month. May was an unusually wet period for a stretch of the District extending from western Wyoming into North Dakota. A closed low pressure system moved from the Great Basin into the Northern Rockies and Plains. At the onset of the storm, heavy rain in the amount of 4.0 to 8.0 inches fell southeast of Billings, MT, and 2.0 to 4.0 inches of rain fell in the Absaroka Range southwest of Billings. Also, 2.0 to 3.0 inches of rain fell southeast of Riverton, WY. Another low pressure system mixed in colder air two days later and produced widespread snow in northern and central Wyoming and southeast Montana. The Wind River Mountain Range in Wyoming received 1.0 to 2.5 inches of snow water equivalent while the Bighorn Mountain Range received 1.0 to 2.0 inches of snow water equivalent. The rain and snow from this system dramatically improved snowpack and increased runoff into the Wind, Tongue, and Powder Rivers which are all tributaries to Lake Sakakawea. Also, this three-day storm was instrumental in alleviating very severe drought conditions in Montana and Wyoming.

3-3 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

FIGURE 3-1 Fall 2003 U.S. Drought Monitor

FIGURE 3-2 Fall 2004 U.S. Drought Monitor

3-4 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

FIGURE 3-3 Spring 2005 U.S. Drought Monitor

FIGURE 3-4 Summer 2005 U.S. Drought Monitor

3-5 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

b. Significant Weather Events, August 2004 through September 2005

i. Late Summer 2004. Precipitation in the Omaha District was for the most part normal throughout southern and central regions, but below normal in the Northern Plains and Montana (Figure 3-5). At the same time, temperatures during the July through September period were generally normal to slightly below normal.

August was very dry and hot with the exception of portions of the Central Rockies. As a deep trough of low pressure made its way through the District on August 18, the foothills region of Colorado from Fort Collins to Denver, received 1.0 to 2.0 of heavy rain, while the Denver Metro area received rainfall amounts ranging from 2.0 to 3.0 inches and as high as 5.0 inches. At the same time the Wind, Yellowstone, and Upper Missouri River basins received about 2.0 inches of rain for the week.

In September a series of cold fronts moved across the Northern Plains producing moderate to heavy rainfall in Nebraska, South Dakota, and northern Iowa primarily. Rainfall totals from these storms produced anywhere from 4.0 to 8.0 inches of rain. In northern Iowa, impressive rain (6.0 to 12.0 inches in 48 hours) caused some sustained low level flooding on the Little Sioux River near Spencer and Cherokee, IA. Two-day rainfall amounts were 11.0 inches at Linn Grove, IA; 9.4 inches at Spencer, IA; and, 7.4 inches at Spirit Lake, IA.

FIGURE 3-5 July through September 2004 Percent of Normal Precipitation

3-6 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

ii. Fall 2004. Fall precipitation accumulations in the Omaha District were generally less than 75 % of normal In central Wyoming, Montana, and along the Missouri River from Sioux Falls, SD, south (Figure 3-6). North central Wyoming received less than 50% of normal precipitation during this three-month period. Though El Nino was weak, the impact to Rocky Mountain precipitation was evident. Elsewhere very few locations in the District received greater than 100% of normal precipitation.

Dry weather prevailed throughout the Rocky Mountains and the Nebraska-Iowa Plains during October. Nebraska and Iowa were especially dry receiving less than 50% of normal precipitation during the month. At that time, Extreme and Exceptional drought conditions were impacting a large portion of northern Wyoming and southern Montana, while Moderate and Severe Drought extended eastward into Nebraska and South Dakota (Figure 3-2). Near the end of October, good moisture inflow from the Southwest caused heavy snowfall in the mountains getting the winter off to a very good start.

FIGURE 3-6 October through December 2004 Percent of Normal Precipitation

November, however, was a different story as moisture inflow and low pressure systems to initiate precipitation were almost shut off. A split jet stream pushed the polar jet stream north to the Canadian border and the southern jet stream through the Southwest and Southern Plains. This confined moisture to the Southwest and Southern Plains, and held the colder air in Canada. The result was a very dry month in which the Dakotas, Wyoming and Montana received less than 50% of normal

3-7 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

precipitation in most regions, while temperatures were 3.0 to 7.0 degrees F above normal. This warm, dry weather was evident in the percent of normal snowpack in mountain basins on December 1, 2004 (Table 3-1).

At the beginning of December, a Pacific storm system tracked across the Central Rockies producing up to 2.0 feet of snow in higher elevations of the Central Rockies. This system boosted snow totals temporarily in the Upper Yellowstone, Upper North Platte, and Upper South Platte River basins. One other major snow event occurred at mid-month aiding snow packs in the Northern Rockies. Overall most of the District received less than 50% of normal precipitation in December with slightly better precipitation in the Central and far Northern Rockies. Temperatures were 5.0 to 9.0 degrees F above normal.

iii. Winter 2004 – 2005. Winter precipitation improved some in the Central Plains, but was limited again to 75% of normal precipitation in the Northern Plains and the Rocky Mountains (Figure 3-7).

The Central Plains finally received some snow in early January when a stationary front moved through the District bringing snow showers to much of the Central Plains including most of Nebraska and western Iowa. The heaviest snow fell when a low pressure system moved out of eastern Colorado and produced 4.0 to 16.0 inches of snow. Snow water equivalents ranged from 0.4 to 1.0 inches. The Rockies continued to receive limited precipitation.

In February, a shortage of precipitation once again fell in the District, especially the Northern Plains of Montana and North Dakota, Wyoming and northeast Colorado. Split jet stream flow once again prevailed in the western U.S. During the first week of February, a passing front produced moderate snow ranging in depth from 4.0 to 8.0 inches in depth in eastern Nebraska and western Iowa. In mid-February temperatures were warm enough to produce rain from a classic low pressure system moving through the Plains. Rainfall amounts for eastern Nebraska and western Iowa were between 0.5 and 2.0 inches, with Nebraska City recorded 2.35 inches.

Warm, dry weather continued through to the middle of March, when the blocking weather patter finally broke down, allowing moisture to stream into all portions of the District. The Rockies benefited substantially from moderate snows, and the Central Plains received 1.0 to 2.0 inches of rain. Also, Sioux Falls, SD, received 12.2 inches of snow with the passage of a potent low pressure system.

At the end of the period, Extreme and Exceptional drought conditions remained in Wyoming and Montana (Figure 3-3).

3-8 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

FIGURE 3-7 January through March 2005 Percent of Normal Precipitation

iv. Spring 2005. The El Nino weather pattern broke down in March and April, allowing better moisture inflow and some improvement from the persistent drought conditions affecting the District. Precipitation from the April through June period was relatively normal throughout the entire District, and well-above normal from western Wyoming through North Dakota (Figure 3-8)

April brought mixed weather to the Omaha District. Portions of the Northern Plains were severely limited in precipitation, while central Montana, southern South Dakota, and northern Nebraska received greater than 150% of normal precipitation. Most rainfall activity did not pose any threat of flooding.

At the onset of May, this active weather pattern brought heavy rain and snowfall to several Rocky Mountain ranges in Wyoming and the Northern Plains. This system, though far from a drought breaking event, was instrumental in alleviating the Extreme and Exceptional drought conditions in Wyoming.

This series of precipitation events began on May 8 when a low pressure system passed from Montana through the Dakotas producing torrential rains in the vicinity of Billings, MT. Rainfall amounts of 2.0 to 3.5 inches were recorded by cooperative observers, while Doppler radar estimated amounts as high as 8.0 inches of rain and snow water equivalent combined in the Bighorn and Absaroka Mountain Ranges. Two days later, another potent low pressure system dropped southeast out of Idaho, and

3-9 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

produced very heavy snow in the Absaroka, Wind River, and Bighorn Mountain Ranges. Snow water equivalent depths from this storm were generally 1.0 to 2.5 inches, but some amounts ranging from 3.0 to 5.0 inches occurred at higher elevations. Runoff produced from this early May event boosted Lake Sakakawea inflows, and filled many small reservoirs in Wyoming and Montana.

Another notable runoff event was caused by thunderstorms associated with this same system as it moved through Nebraska. A warm front from this system moved north through Nebraska on May 11, 2005, spawning severe thunderstorms that produced 4.0 to 12.0 inches of rain in the Grand Island area. Fortunately, antecedent conditions were relatively dry and much of the water infiltrated or was stored in flat barren fields limiting flood damages. Additionally, the recently completed federal flood control project on the Wood River at Grand Island prevented significant flooding from occuring in Grand Island.

Near the end of May a blocking high set up over the Midwest which blocked moisture and trained weather systems through the Omaha District. The Northern and Central Plains received abundant precipitation during the month of June, while the Northern Rockies and Central Rockies in Colorado also benefited from this pattern. May and June precipitation helped to erase 30 and 90-day precipitation deficits throughout the Omaha District.

FIGURE 3-8 April through June 2005 Percent of Normal Precipitation

3-10 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

v. Summer 2005. By mid-summer, drought conditions in the Omaha District had drastically improved especially in Wyoming and Montana. All areas of Extreme and Exceptional Drought had been removed from the District, something that had not occurred for nearly five years (Figure 3-4). The summer, however, was drastically different for the western U.S. Though some areas received nearly normal precipitation, most of the Omaha District fell back into a dry weather pattern (Figure 3-9). The Central and Northern Plains, and portions of the Central and Northern Rocky Mountains received between 50 and 75% of normal precipitation during the three month period. This did allow some expansion of Abnormally Dry and Moderate Drought conditions, but intensification to Extreme and Exception Drought conditions did not occur during the summer of 2005.

FIGURE 3-9 July through September 2005 Percent of Normal Precipitation

3-11 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

c. Runoff into Tributary Reservoirs

Table 3-2 lists runoff and peak pool statistics for the tributary reservoir projects during the report period. Table 3-3 lists peak discharges at selected gaging stations including many reservoir release control points used by the Omaha District.

TABLE 3-2 RUNOFF AMOUNTS AND PEAK POOL LEVELS FOR WATER YEAR (OCT 01 - SEP 30)

RECORD ANNUAL 2005 2005 ANNUAL AVERAGE RUNOFF % 2005 INFLOW INFLOW INFLOW OF PEAK RECORD PEAK NAME OF DAM (ACRE- (ACRE-FEET) (ACRE-FEET) NORMAL POOL POOL (YEAR) FEET) CORPS OF ENGINEERS Bowman-Haley Dam 2,747 58,000 (72) 21,240 13 2752.18 2762.6 (78) Bear Creek Dam 40,001 91,900 (83) 36,002 111 5559.88 5587.1 (95) Chatfield Dam 109,045 450,000 (83) 151,309 72 5432.12 5447.6 (80) Cherry Creek Dam 20,404 30,900 (84) 10,179 200 5551.43 5565.8 (73) Cold Brook Dam 561 1,070 (94) 687 82 3585.32 3585.6 (99) Cottonwood Dam 18 300 (99) 36 50 3856.78 3872.7 (00) Kelly Road Dam n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Papio Dam 11 4,877 18,700 (80) 7,248 67 1121.75 1125.3 (99) Papio Dam 16 1,412 3,490 (98) 1,227 115 1105.58 1107.8 (84) Papio Dam 18 2,914 11,000 (93) 4,233 69 1112.07 1116.8 (93) Papio Dam 20 2,396 9,710 (93) 2,101 114 1095.63 1103.2 (93) Pipestem Dam 23,050 148,000 (97) 45,241 51 1451.74 1487.0 (97) Salt Creek Dam 2 71 12,500 (87) 2,418 3 1333.15 1342.6 (93) Salt Creek Dam 4 309 15,500 (93) 4,732 7 1305.83 1316.5 (74) Salt Creek Dam 8 500 12,900 (97) 4,915 10 1286.69 1295.4 (74) Salt Creek Dam 9 1,351 10,400 (87) 3,250 42 1271.69 1279.0 (74) Salt Creek Dam 10 0 16,600 (93) 5,517 0 1232.00 1252.3 (74) Salt Creek Dam 12 113 25,000 (84) 4,972 2 1231.17 1241.1 (87) Salt Creek Dam 13 296 13,300 (93) 3,825 8 1339.89 1346.9 (83) Salt Creek Dam 14 1,339 23,300 (87) 7,373 18 1243.66 1249.1 (93) Salt Creek Dam 17 409 11,100 (93) 3,409 12 1240.92 1250.0 (93) Salt Creek Dam 18 5,060 74,400 (83) 26,064 19 1280.49 1287.9 (87) Spring Creek Dam (Lake n/a n/a n/a n/a 1613.5 1625.0 (87) Pocasse) Snake Creek Dam (Lake n/a n/a n/a n/a 1847.3 1848.6 (76) Audubon) Westerly Creek Dam n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Boysen Dam 945,192 1,476,000 (97) 1,010,383 94 4724.92 4730.8 (67) Canyon Ferry Dam 2,701,426 5,786,000 (97) 3,765,087 72 3798.51 3800.0 (64) Clark Canyon Dam 106,843 718,000 (84) 256,983 40 5519.98 5564.7 (84) Glendo Dam 796,246 2,230,000 (84) 1,167,250 68 4633.94 4650.9 (73) Heart Butte Dam 35,527 307,000 (82) 86,161 41 2066.46 2086.2 (52) Jamestown Dam 29,600 211,400 (97) 43,422 68 1432.30 1445.7 (97) Keyhole Dam 0 100,000 (78) 18,998 0 4086.54 4100.4 (78) Pactola Dam 13,871 102,100 (97) 35,977 39 4564.72 4585.9 (65) Shadehill Dam 0 284,000 (97) 68,860 0 2267.55 2297.9 (52) Tiber Dam 339,567 1,150,000 (75) 602,236 56 2985.52 3005.6 (65) Yellowtail Dam 1,848,011 3,516,000 (97) 2,378,484 78 3642.82 3656.4 (67)

3-12 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

TABLE 3-3 PROVISIONAL 2005 REPORTING PERIOD PEAK STAGES AND DISCHARGES Max Discharge and Associated Stage & Max Known Discharge and Alternate Peak Stage if Different Associated Stage Drnge Comments Stream/ Area Record Flood Dschrg Alternate Dschrg Station (SqMi) Since Stage Date Stage (cfs) Date Date Stage (cfs) Red Rock River 570 1911 1.1 01 Jun 3.32 542 15 May 5.40 2,500 below Lima Res, 2005 1993 MT Beaverhead River 3,619 1935 5.2 17 Feb 4.30 263 12 May nr 3,130 nr Twin Bridges, 2005 1944 MT Jefferson River nr 9,532 1978 na 22 May 5.64 4,990 09 Jun 9.00 17,000 Three Forks, MT 2005 1995 Madison River nr 2,186 1901 4.4 23 Jun 5.48 4,470 12 Jun 8.01 9,550 McAllister, MT 2005 1970 Gallatin River @ 1,795 1893 7.5 18 Jun 7.14 4,050 8.47 21 Jun nr 9,840 Logan, MT 2005 7 Jan 2005 1899 Ice Affected Missouri River @ 14,669 1890 10 18 Jun 7.67 12,500 12 Jun 12.22 33,300 Toston, MT 2005 1997 Missouri River nr 20,941 1957 13 05 Jun 6.80 8,970 01 Jun 17.00 35,000 Ulm, MT 2005 1953 Sun River nr 1,854 1897 10 18 May 4.33 3,850 09 Jun 23.40 53,500 Vaughn, MT 2005 1964 Missouri River @ 34,379 1935 17 5 June 7.06 18,000 05 Jun 23.40 122,000 Virgelle, MT 2005 1953 Missouri River nr 40,987 1934 na 6 Jun 19.55 17,700 19.67 06 Jun nr 137,000 Landusky, MT 2005 22 Jan 1953 2005 Milk River @ 5,785 1899 10 4 Aug 4.78 1,260 12 Apr nr 20,000 Harvre, MT 2005 1899 Milk River nr 17,670 1977 20 7 Aug 4.11 644 4.14 03 Apr 24.20 12,400 Saco, MT 2005 11 Jun 1979 2005 Milk River @ 22,332 1939 20 11 Jun 11.35 4,540 18 Apr 31.38 45,300 Nashua, MT 2005 1952 Missouri River nr 82,290 1928 10.9 13 Jun 3.72 9,630 6.83 25 Mar 14.40 66,800 Wolf Point, MT 2005 8 Jan 2005 1939 Missouri River nr 91,557 1941 19 14 Jun 5.79 10,000 7.19 26 Mar 15.12 78,200 Cultbertson, MT 2005 28 Dec 1943 2005 Musselshell River 4,023 1946 5.1 29 Jun 4.71 971 18 Jun 12.45 9,610 nr Roundup, MT 2005 1967 Yellowstone River 11,795 1904 13 22 May 10.13 35,900 12 Jun 15.00 82,000 @ Billings, MT 2005 1997 Wind River @ 2,309 1906 8 23 June 8.87 6200 15 Jun 10.15 13,300 Riverton, WY 2005 1935 Wind River below 7,701 1951 na 26 Jun 9.06 5,619 07 Jul 13.35 13,500 Boysen Res, WY 2005 1967 Bighorn River @ 15,765 1928 8 12 May 6.95 11,700 16 Jun 11.10 25,200 Kane, WY 2005 1935 Bighorn River nr 22,414 1981 17 11 May 8.72 11,300 20 May nr 59,200 Basin, WY 2005 1978 Yellowstone River 48,253 1922 13 26 Jun 8.97* 40,000 *Estimated 22 May 16.50 102,000 @ Miles City, MT 2005 max daily 1978 discharge, gage house destroyed Tongue River @ 5,379 1938 5.8 9 June 7.40 3750 15 Jun 11.33 13.300 Miles City, MT 2005 1962 Powder River nr 13,194 1938 8.4 28 June 5.65 4920 19 Feb 11.23 31,000 Locate, MT 2005 1943 Yellowstone River 69,103 1910 19 29 Jun 13.49 48,100 21 Jun nr 159,000 nr Sidney, MT 2005 1921

3-13 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

Max Discharge and Associated Stage & Max Known Discharge and Alternate Peak Stage if Different Associated Stage Drnge Comments Stream/ Area Record Flood Dschrg Alternate Dschrg Station (SqMi) Since Stage Date Stage (cfs) Date Date Stage (cfs) Knife River @ 2,240 1928 12 01 July 9.32 1,670 24 Jun 27.01 35,300 Hazen, ND 2005 1966 Missouri River @ 186,400 1927 16 08 May 6.82 21,400 06 Apr 27.90 500,000 Bismarck, ND 2005 1952 Heart River nr 3,310 1924 17 08 July 4.02 1,420 19 Apr 23.64 30,500 Mandan, ND 2005 1950 Cannonball River 4,100 1934 10 08 Jun 10.97 7,080 19 Apr 22.30 94,800 @ Breien, ND 2005 1950 N Fork Grand 509 1908 17 Discont’d 07 Apr 17.03 14,100 River @ Haley, 1952 ND Grand River @ 5,370 1958 15 09 Jun 12.72 4,600 23 Mar 19.16 31,000 Little Eagle, SD 2005 1987 Moreau River nr 4,880 1954 21 30 Oct 7.84 2,470 23 Mar 27.01 30,000 Whitehorse , SD 2004 1997 Belle Fourche 3,280 1946 14 13 May 5.80 327 18 Jun 15.59 4,400 River @ WY-SD 2005 1962 State Line Fall River @ Hot 137 1937 13 6 Sept 4.99 1590 04 Sept 18.40 13,100 Springs, SD 2004 1938 Rapid Creek @ 410 1942 7 11 Aug 4.62 274 09 Jun 19.66 50,000 Rapid City, SD 2005 1972 Cheyenne River 23,900 1960 14 12 Aug 4.99 1,590 22 May 15.77 55,900 nr Plainview, SD 2005 1982 (1) Cheyenne River 12,800 1934 n/a 5 Sept 7.99 10,200 01 May 16.25 26,900 nr Wasta, SD 2004 1957 Bad River nr Ft. 3,107 1928 21 12 May 11.89 4,870 01 Jul 32.90 70,000 Pierre, SD 2005 1905 Niobrara River nr 12,600 1958 12 11 Jun 4.06 5,230 6.21 23 Jan 27 Mar 10.10 39,000 Verdel, NE 2005 2005 1960 Vermillion River nr 2,302 1983 21 5 Jun 17.99 3,660 23 Jun 31.77 21,400 Vermillion, SD 2005 1984 Pipestem Creek 700 1973 10 16 Jun 5.88 92 20 Apr 11.60 2,520 nr Pingree, ND 2005 1979 James River nr 1,060 1968 12 15 July 7.38 476 28 Jul 13.82 3,786 Grace City, ND 2005 1993 James River @ 2,820 1928 12 08 Jun 6.53 519 13 May 15.82 6,390 Jamestown, ND 2005 1950 James River @ 4,390 1957 14 17 Jun 9.96 1,370 14 Apr 16.17 6,800 Lamoure, ND 2005 1969 James River @ 7,393 1988 11 10 July 15.65 1250 17.21 14 18 Apr 19.02 5,000 Columbia, SD 2005 Jun 2005 1997 James River @ 9,742 1945 13 16 July 13.84 2010 08 Apr 25.85 8,330 Ashton, SD 2005 1997 James River nr 20,653 1928 13 15 Jun 12.60 3,420 23 Jun 20.45 29,400 Scotland, SD 2005 1984 Big Sioux River nr 1,007 1972 6.8 14 Jun 7.84 565 06 Apr 12.05 7,680 Watertown, SD 2005 1997 Big Sioux River nr 4,483 1948 12 25 Sept 8.11 1,800 09 Apr 16.47 41,300 Dell Rapids, SD 2004 1969 Skunk Creek @ 622 1948 na 5 Jun 5.80 564 17 Jun nr 29,400 Sioux Falls, SD 2005 1957 Big Sioux River @ 5,216 1962 16 4 Jun 5.29 1,200 10 Apr 27.45 40,700 Sioux Falls, SD 2005 1969 Rock River nr 1,592 1948 16 27 Sept 9.68 4,460 07 Apr 17.32 40,400 Rock Valley, IA 2005 1969 Big Sioux River 8,424 1928 16 6 Jun 16.20 7,640 09 Apr 22.99 80,800 @ Akron, IA 2005 1969 Missouri River @ 314,600 1897 36 9 Jun 17.91 40,900 14 Apr 24.28 441,000 Sioux City, IA 2005 1952

3-14 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

Max Discharge and Associated Stage & Max Known Discharge and Alternate Peak Stage if Different Associated Stage Drnge Comments Stream/ Area Record Flood Dschrg Alternate Dschrg Station (SqMi) Since Stage Date Stage (cfs) Date Date Stage (cfs) Perry Creek @ 65 1945 15.5 25 Jun 10.47 Measure 19 May 28.54 8,670 Sioux City, IA 2005 ment 1990 discont’d Floyd River @ 268 1955 12 17 Sept 11.09 20 Jun 18.54 16,300 Alton, IA 2004 1,280 1983 Floyd River @ 886 1934 26 15 Sept 16.87 3,910 08 Jun 25.30 71,500 James, IA 2004 1953 Missouri River @ 316,200 1987 23.2 9 Jun 24.7 43,300 16 Jul 32.04 75,400 Decatur, NE 2005 1993 Little Sioux River 1,548 1927 20 19 Sept 20.94 9,570 02 Jul 20.69 17,399 @ Linn Grove, IA 2004 1993 Little Sioux River 2,500 1918 19 24 Sept 17.94 11,100 07 Apr 25.86 29,800 @ Correctionville, 2004 1965 IA West Fork Ditch 403 1939 20 15 Sept 12.23 1,190 28 Mar 22.46 12,400 @ Hornick, IA 2004 1962 Little Sioux River 3,526 1958 20 25 Sept 18.85 11,400 21 Jun 26.54 31,200 nr Turin, IA 2004 1983 Maple River @ 669 1941 16 28 Jun 10.16 2,540 12 Sep 16.74 20,800 Mapleton, IA 2005 1978 (2) Soldier River @ 407 1940 28 14 Feb 9.83 2,900 10.68 Ice 12 Jun 28.17 22,500 Pisgah, IA 2005 Affected 13 1950 Feb 2005 Boyer River @ 871 1918 19 14 Feb 10.23 4,520 17 Jun 22.54 30,800 Logan, IA 2005 1990 Missouri River @ 322,800 1928 29 10 Jun 19.96 47,800 18 Apr 40.20 396,000 Omaha, NE 2005 1952 Missouri River @ 410,000 1929 18 14 May 14.27 61,100 19 Apr 27.66 414,000 Nebraska City, 2005 1952 NE West Nishnabotna 609 1959 14 11 Jun 10.45 5,350 02 Apr 24.76 29,257 River @ Hancock, 2005 1993 IA West Nishnabotna 1,326 1948 19 13 May 16.12 6,670 26 May 24.50 40,800 River @ 2005 1987 Randolph, IA East Nishnabotna 436 1960 17 13 May 14.01 11,000 12 Sep 22.81 26,700 River nr Atlantic, 2005 1972 IA East Nishnabotna 894 1918 18 13 May 18.18 12,900 15 Jun 29.39 60,500 River @ Red Oak, 2005 1998 IA Nishnabotna 2,806 1922 36 13 May 25.16 18,000 17 Jun 33.18 65,100 River above 2005 1998 Hamburg, IA Missouri River @ 414,900 1949 17 13 May 17.19 85,900 22 Apr 25.60 358,000 Rulo, NE 2005 1952 North Platte River 4,175 1939 19 07 Jun 8.23 8,720 11 Jun 11.30 16,200 nr Sinclair, WY 2005 1986 North Platte River 13,538 1959 4.5 04 Aug 3.80 4,312 14 May 7.10 16,000 nr Glenrock, WY 2005 1965 North Platte River 16,425 1909 4.5 25 Jul 7.04 2,270 26 Jun 9.85 22,000 below Whalen 2005 1955 Res, WY Laramie River nr 4,564 1915 na 04 Aug 3.05 172 10 May 9.40 6,260 Ft. Laramie, WY 2005 1973 North Platte River 22,218 1929 4.5 26 Jul 3.64 2,060 02 Jun nr 17,900 @ WY-NE State 2005 1929 Line North Platte River 25,300 1905 8 5 June 4.28 1190 26 Jun 5.39 24,900 @ Bridgeport, NE 2005 1899

3-15 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

Max Discharge and Associated Stage & Max Known Discharge and Alternate Peak Stage if Different Associated Stage Drnge Comments Stream/ Area Record Flood Dschrg Alternate Dschrg Station (SqMi) Since Stage Date Stage (cfs) Date Date Stage (cfs) North Platte River 28,600 1937 7 14 June 5.93 1180 04 Jun nr 13,500 @ Lewellen, NE 2005 1971 North Platte River 30,900 1895 7 11 June 4.87 890 11 Jun nr 29,600 @ North Platte, 2005 1909 NE South Platte River 880 1933 na 5 Aug 1.87 262 27 Apr 7.60 3,970 nr Hartsel, CO 2005 1970 South Platte River 2,621 1928 6 28 Apr 2.58 1,260 23 Apr 5.68 5,700 @ Waterton, CO 2005 1942 N. Fk South Platte 127 1908 na 9 Jul 1.84 623 07 Jun nr 990 River @ Grant, 2005 1912 CO Bear Creek @ 260 1914 8 19 Aug 4.01 366 07 May 10.50 8,150 Sheridan, CO 2004 1969 Bear Creek @ 164 1887 7.5 11 May 7.21 306 24 Jul nr 8,600 Morrison, CO 2005 1896 South Platte River 3,861 1889 9 18 Aug 8.83 6,660 17 Jun 18.66 40,300 @ Denver, CO 2004 1965 Clear Creek @ 400 1974 7 25 Jun 6.90 1,010 10 Jul 6.44 2,370 Golden, CO 2005 1983 Clear Creek @ 575 1916 8 18 Aug 3.58 1,970 24 Jul 8.97 5,070 Derby, CO 2004 1965 South Platte River 4,713 1926 11 19 Aug 9.98 9,050 06 May 11.67 33,000 @ Henderson, 2004 1973 CO South Platte River 9,598 1901 10 5 Jun 9.49 9,510 08 May 11.73 31,500 nr Kersey, CO 2005 1997. South Platte River 23,193 1902 10 15 Jun 7.43 3072 Peak gage 20 Jun 10.44 37,600 @ Julesburg, CO 2005 referenced 1965 to channel one South Platte River 24,300 1897 12 17 June 7.95 640 03 Jun 14.02 37,100 @ North Platte, 200 1935 NE Platte River @ 56,200 1935 5 19 June 1417 29 Jun nr 23,500 Brady, NE – North 2005 1983 Channel Platte River nr 58,200 1982 6 13 May 4.53 3,230 4.53 29 Jun 7.42 23,700 Kearney, NE 2005 13 May 1983 2005 Platte River nr 58,800 1933 4 12 May 5.85 7,510 5.85 06 Jun 5.99 30,000 Grand Island, NE 2005 12 May 1935 2005 Middle Loup River 8,090 1894 8 04 Jun 4.35 7,340 4.53 23 Jun nr 72,000 @ St. Paul, NE 2005 14 Jan 1947 2005 North Loup River 4,290 1894 5.5 12 Jun 4.12 3,360 4.12 06 Jun nr 90,000 @ St. Paul, NE 2005 12 Jun 1896 2005 Elkhorn River @ 2,790 1945 10 12 Jun 8.05 5,340 8.05 14 Jun 8.52 16,900 Norfolk, NE 2005 12 Jun 1967 (1) 2005 Elkhorn River @ 5,100 1940 12 5 Jun 10.37 7,180 10.37 09 Mar 19.30 90,658 West Point, NE 2005 5 Jun 1933 2005 Elkhorn River @ 6,900 1928 17 12 May 9.80 13,600 9.80 12 Jun 16.60 100,000 Waterloo, NE 2005 12 May 1944 2005 Platte River @ 77,100 1949 8 06 Feb 6.56 Ice 6.56 29 Mar 10.04 112,000 North Bend, NE 2005 affected 6 Feb 2005 1960

3-16 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

Max Discharge and Associated Stage & Max Known Discharge and Alternate Peak Stage if Different Associated Stage Drnge Comments Stream/ Area Record Flood Dschrg Alternate Dschrg Station (SqMi) Since Stage Date Stage (cfs) Date Date Stage (cfs) Platte River @ 85,800 1953 9 14 May 6.64 27,000 6.64 24 Jul 12.12 164,231 Louisville, NE 2005 14 May 1993 2005 Logan Creek nr 1,030 1941 16 13 May 8.62 2,360 8.62 20 Feb 20.15 25,200 Uehling, NE 2005 13 May 1971 2005 Salt Creek @ 648 1940 20.5 26 Jul 11.05 5,410 11.05 14 Jun 18.61 15,300 Lincoln, NE 2005 26 Jul 2005 1998 Salt Creek @ 1,051 1951 20 26 Jul 10.73 5,940 10.73 13 Jun 26.50 46,800 Greenwood, NE 2005 26 Jul 2005 1984 Little Papillion 32 1948 17 01 Jun 4.4 77 03 Jun 23.00 nr Creek @ Ivington, 2005 1943 NE Big Papillion 126 1966 na 01Jun 29.5 8,960 05 Jul 38.54 25,824 Creek @ Fort 2005 1998 Street, NE Papillion Creek 384 1948 29 na na na 21 May 30.68 12,700 @ Fort Crook, NE 1982 1 Ice affected 2 Datum Shift of plus 5 ft in 2000 on Maple River at Mapleton.

3-17 CHAPTER 3 TRIBUTARY AND RUNOFF CONDITIONS

This page intentionally left blank.

3-18 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

The Omaha District, during this reporting period, again saw substantial flood damages prevented and recreation usage by the general public. This chapter documents the accomplishments for all reservoirs in the District.

a. Flood Damages Prevented. Flood damages prevented in Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) by Corps of Engineers mainstem reservoirs, tributary reservoirs and local protection projects, and Bureau of Reclamation projects are summarized in Table 4-1 and 4-2. These two tables also show cumulative totals of flood damages prevented for each of the projects. Flood damages prevented in each state are shown in Table 4-3. Rounding errors may be present.

TABLE 4-1 OMAHA DISTRICT PROJECTS FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED FY 2005 LOCAL AND MAIN STEM REDUCTIONS

Cumulative Total FY Cumulative Omaha District Locatio Thru FY04 MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST 2005 Thru FY05 Projects n ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) Missouri River MRO 2,448,758.1 19,616.8 37,663.1 57,279.9 2,506,038.0 Mainstem Reservoirs

Tributary Reservoir Projects

Aurora Dam/D.S. CO 7,413.2 0 7,413.2 Channel Improv.

Bear Creek Dam CO 2,137.0 0 2,137.0

Bowman-Haley Dam ND/SD 6,505.8 0 6,505.8

Chatfield Dam CO 5,552.5 0 5,552.5

Cottonwood Springs SD 0 0 0 Dam

Cherry Creek Dam CO 164,784.4 0 164,784.4

Cold Brook Dam SD 0 0 0

Papillion Creek NE 35,404.5 0 35,404.5 Dams/Chnl. Im.

Pipestem Dam ND 37,940.0 26.9 26.9 37,966.9

Salt Creek NE 89,866.8 0 89,866.8 Dams/Levees

Subtotal: 349,604.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 26.9 0.0 0.0 26.9 349,631.1

Missouri River Levee System

L-601 IA 121,152.3 2115.8 306.6 2,422.4 123,574.7

L-594 IA 85,950.4 1,496.1 216.8 1,713.0 87,663.4

L-575 IA/MO 90,331.1 694.3 83.2 777.5 91,108.6

L-561/L-550 MO 71,856.5 593.2 71.1 664.3 72,520.8

4-1 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TABLE 4-1 OMAHA DISTRICT PROJECTS FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED FY 2005 LOCAL AND MAIN STEM REDUCTIONS

Cumulative Total FY Cumulative Omaha District Locatio Thru FY04 MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST 2005 Thru FY05 Projects n ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) L-536 MO 20,660.7 162.4 19.5 181.8 20,842.5

R-613 NE 26,450.9 464.7 67.4 532.1 26,983.0

R-573 NE 3,812.0 29.8 3.6 33.4 3,845.4

R-562 NE 11,153.1 92.8 11.1 103.9 11,257.0

R-548 NE 8,252.2 64.6 7.7 72.4 8,324.6

R-520 NE 2,354.7 19.9 2.4 22.3 2,377.0

Subtotal: 441,973.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5,733.7 789.4 0.0 6,523.1 448,497.0

Local Protection Projects

Belle Fourche R. @ SD 379.6 0 379.6 Belle Fourche

Big Sioux R. @ IA 6,129.2 0 6,129.2 Sioux City

Blackbird Creek @ NE 2,167.2 653.8 653.8 2,821.0 Macy

Broken Bow, Mud NE 349.3 0 349.3 Creek

Clarkson, Maple Ck. NE 2,683.8 0 2,683.8

Columbus, Loup NE 16,907.6 0 16,907.6 River

Council Bluffs, IA 620,407.6 0 620,407.6 Missouri R.

Deadman Gulch @ SD 5,792.1 0 5,792.1 Sturgis

Emerson, Indian IA 6,983.4 0 6,983.4 Creek

Floyd River @ Sioux IA 30,399.2 0 30,399.2 City

Forsyth, MT 4,211.5 0 4,211.5 Yellowstone R.

Gering Valley NE 1,783.8 0 1,783.8

Glasgow, Milk R. MT 1,345.2 0 1,345.2

Grand Island, Wood NE 0.0 23,678.4 23,678.4 23,678.4 R.

Great Falls, Sun R. MT 10.0 0 10.0

Greybull, Bighorn R. WY 9,995.9 743.4 23.0 766.4 10,762.3

4-2 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TABLE 4-1 OMAHA DISTRICT PROJECTS FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED FY 2005 LOCAL AND MAIN STEM REDUCTIONS

Cumulative Total FY Cumulative Omaha District Locatio Thru FY04 MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST 2005 Thru FY05 Projects n ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) Hamburg, Ditch 6 IA 398.4 190.5 190.5 588.9

Hamburg, IA 207,439.2 4,193.2 4,193.2 211,632.4 Nishnabotna R.

Havre, Milk R. MT 47,623.1 0 47,623.1

Hawarden, Dry IA 552.0 0 552.0 Creek

Herreid, Spring SD 33.0 0 33.0 Creek

Hooper, Elkhorn R. NE 4,191.9 0 4,191.9

Hot Springs, Fall R. SD 0.0 0 0.0

Howells, E. Fork of NE 1,200.0 0 1,200.0 Maple Ck.

Ida Grove, Maple R. IA 2,414.1 0 2,414.1

Kenslers Bend SD/NE 45,465.7 914.0 914.0 46,379.7

Little Papillion Ck. NE 20,744.1 0 20,744.1 @ Omaha

Little Sioux River IA 187,606.2 198.5 42.0 240.5 187,846.7

Lodgepole Ck. @ NE 31,200.2 0 31,200.2 Sidney

Lost Creek @ NE 4,567.8 0 4,567.8 Columbus

Madison, NE 6,520.3 0 6,520.3 Union/Taylor Cks.

Malta, Milk River MT 0.0 0 0.0

Mandan, Heart R. ND 41,132.3 0 41,132.3

Marmarth, Little ND 1,449.0 0 1,449.0 Missouri R.

Meadow Grove, NE 733.6 0 733.6 Buffalo Ck.

Norfolk, Elkhorn NE 37,104.5 171.9 171.9 37,276.4 River

Omaha, Missouri NE 693,505.0 0 693,505.0 River

Pebble Ck. @ NE 17,928.5 0 17,928.5 Scribner

Pender, Logan Ck. NE 0.0 0 0.0

4-3 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TABLE 4-1 OMAHA DISTRICT PROJECTS FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED FY 2005 LOCAL AND MAIN STEM REDUCTIONS

Cumulative Total FY Cumulative Omaha District Locatio Thru FY04 MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST 2005 Thru FY05 Projects n ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) Pierce, N. F. NE 999.0 0 999.0 Elkhorn R.

Platte R. @ NE 3,245.2 0 3,245.2 Schuyler

Red Dale Gulch SD 250.0 0 250.0

Red Oak, E. IA 30,254.7 1,371.1 22.5 1,393.6 31,648.3 Nishnabotna R.

Saco, Beaver Ck. MT 1,288.9 0 1,288.9

Schuyler, Lost Ck. NE 394.0 0 394.0

Scranton, Buffalo ND 0.0 0 0.0 Ck.

Scribner, Elkhorn R. NE 512.1 0 512.1

Sheridan, Goose WY 1,504.1 0 1,504.1 Ck.

Shields R. @ Clyde MT 156.2 0 156.2 Park

Sioux Falls, Big SD 19,327.2 0 19,327.2 Sioux R.

Vaughn, Sun R. MT 485.0 0 485.0

Waterloo, Elkhorn NE 470.0 0 470.0 R.

W. Glendive, MT 15,072.3 0 15,072.3 Yellowstone R.

West Point, Elkhorn NE 23,552.2 0 23,552.2 R.

Subtotal: 2,158,865.2 0.0 0.0 31,028.9 259.4 0.0 914.0 32,202.3 2,191,067.5

Other Projects

McCook Lake SD 0 0 0

Total Corps N.W.O. 5,399,201.4 0.0 0.0 31,028.9 25,636.7 38,452.5 914.0 96,032.2 5,495,233.6 Projects:

4-4 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TABLE 4-2 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PROJECTS FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED FY05– LOCAL AND MAIN STEM REDUCTIONS

Cum. Cum. Thru Total Thru FY04 MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST FY05 FY05 River Basin District Location ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) Big Horn River Boysen WY 81,284.1 2,415.0 4,553.2 6,968.1 88,252.2

Buffalo Bill WY 10,567.6 422.1 422.1 10,989.7

Bull Lake WY 2,690.7 0.0 2,690.7

Yellowtail MT 101,251.7 4,558.4 5,922.4 10,480.9 111,732.6

Subtotal: 195,794.1 0.0 0.0 422.1 6,973.4 10,475.6 0.0 17,871.1213,665.2

Cheyenne River Angostura SD 21.1 0.0 21.1

Keyhole WY/SD 3,756.2 6.5 6.5 3,762.7

Pactola SD 3,116.5 0.0 3,116.5

Subtotal: 6,893.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 6.5 6,900.3

Grand River Shadehill SD 9,028.2 4.3 4.3 9,032.5

Heart River Heart Butte ND 13,295.8 9.7 9.7 13305.5

James River Jamestown ND 86,801.0 6.3 6.3 86,807.3

Marias River Tiber MT 58,668.0 398.7 1,822.1 2,220.9 60,888.9

Milk River Fresno MT 13,059.6 25.9 25.9 13,085.5

Missouri River Canyon MT 138,132.4 1,990.9 8,695.0 10,685.9148,818.3 Ferry North Platte Pathfinder WY 8,767.2 104.1 104.1 8,871.3 River Alcova WY 398.5 146.5 146.5 545.0

Seminoe WY 28,398.8 1,682.4 1,682.4 30,081.2

Guernsey WY 434.0 0.0 434.0

Glendo WY/NE 70,498.5 4,921.6 4,921.6 75,420.1

Subtotal: 108,497.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6,854.6 0.0 0.0 6,854.6115,351.6

Sun River Gibson MT 3,044.5 0.0 3,044.5

Threeforks Clark MT 12,310.4 55.6 137.5 193.1 12,503.5 Basin Canyon St. Mary River Sherburne MT 0.0 6.4 6.4 6.4

Total Bureau 645,524.8 0.0 0.0 422.1 16,332.5 21,130.2 0.0 37,884.8683,409.6 Projects:

4-5 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TABLE 4-3 FLOOD DAMAGES PREVENTED BY STATE, OMAHA DISTRICT, FY 2005

Corps Main Bureau of Local Main Stem Rec. Bureau Corps Protection Corps Main Stem Non- Dams of Rec. Local Channels Supported Stem Urban Urban (Main Dams Protection and Emergency Dams Levees Levees Stem) (Local) Dams Levees Operations TOTAL State ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) ($1,000) Colorado 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iowa 5,476.6 0 4,827.3 0 0 0 6,017.8 0 16,321.7

Missouri 1,728.4 0 931.7 0 0 0 0 0 2,660.1

Montana 102.1 0 0 23,501.8 111.3 0 0 0 23,715.2

Nebraska 7,205.0 0 764.1 0 3,937.2 0 24,961.0 0 36,867.3

N. Dakota 42,767.9 0 0 9.7 6.3 26.9 0 0 42,810.8

S. Dakota 0 0 0 7.6 0 0 457.0 0 464.6

Wyoming 0 0 0 6,971.4 3,339.4 0 766.4 0 11,077.2

TOTAL 57,280.0 0.0 6,523.1 30,490.5 7,394.2 26.9 32,202.2 0.0 133,916.9

b. Recreation Usage. Visitation hours for each Corps of Engineers project for FY98, FY99, FY00, FY01, FY02, FY03, FY04, and FY05 are tabulated in Table 4-4.

TABLE 4-4 RECREATION VISITATION HOURS Project Name FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05

Bowman-Haley 269,900 418,100 567,600 551,200 464,300 412,100 421,700 434,700

Cottonwood Springs 135,600 144,800 147,900 121,600 98,000 96,300 150,000 135,800

Cold Brook 63,500 59,500 89,600 38,900 36,800 26,000 68,300 46,900

Pipestem 155,200 200,000 207,000 162,100 198,800 184,300 169,700 173,400 Papillion Creek No. 11 Glenn Cunningham 451,100 378,500 42,830 794,500 541,600 1,013,100 1,127,900 779,000 Dam Papillion Creek No. 16 184,600 183,600 170,500 251,700 265,000 315,200 297,100 260,400 Standing Bear Dam Papillion Creek No. 18 841,000 831,400 866,900 871,500 910,400 426,700 870,600 936,400 Zorinsky Dam Papillion Creek No. 20 634,700 617,700 978,600 892,700 1,035,300 919,800 774,300 737,800 Wehrspann Dam Papillion Creek 2,111,400 2,011,200 2,058,830 2,810,400 2,752,300 2,674,800 3,069,900 2,713,600 Subtotal:

4-6 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TABLE 4-4 RECREATION VISITATION HOURS Project Name FY98 FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05

Chatfield 4,939,600 4,928,600 5,522,600 5,852,700 7,538,200 7,799,700 7,540,000 7,932,000

Cherry Creek 8,029,500 8,151,100 9,029,700 8,196,700 8,697,700 9,154,200 9,005,700 9,584,200

Bear Creek 1,150,200 1,151,100 1,199,800 1,136,400 1,963,000 1,458,100 1,362,700 1,436,800

Tri-Lakes 14,119,300 14,230,800 15,752,100 15,185,800 18,198,900 18,412,000 17,908,400 18,953,000 Subtotal: Salt Creek No. 2 77,500 51,100 41,800 76,400 78,300 76,800 89,600 113,000 Olive Creek Salt Creek No. 4 114,400 81,300 88,700 90,200 85,300 81,900 92,000 80,100 Blue Stem Salt Creek No. 8 83,000 75,000 72,100 100,400 100,800 92,000 120,100 100,400 Wagon Train Salt Creek No. 9 111,300 190,000 82,100 76,100 130,600 119,300 129,500, 114,600 Stagecoach

Salt Creek No. 10 1 1 1 34,900 44,300 39,600 37,700 167,300* 47,500 CLOSED CLOSED Yankee Hill Salt Creek No. 12 165,100 198,900 204,000 204,900 571,400* 398,300 296,800 301,700 Conestoga Salt Creek No. 13 48,300 38,100 34,300 39,300 36,300 46,800 39,200 33,300 Twin Lakes Salt Creek No. 14 679,500 683,300 644,600 765,600 956,500 938,700 766,100 708,900 Pawnee

Salt Creek No. 17 2 2 1,150,500 930,600 1,065,700 1,291,200 918,300 683,300 264,800 449,800 Holmes Lake Salt Creek No. 18 1,103,900 1,123,000 1,173,300 1,305,400 867,700 1,148,700 1,216,200 1,147,200 Branched Oak Lake Salt Creek 3,573,600 3,483,100 3,451,000 3,922,800 3,912,500 3,633,300 3,014,300 3,049,000 Subtotal:

TOTAL: 20,428,500 20,547,500 22,274,030 22,792,800 25,661,600 25,438,800 24,802,300 25,506,400

FY02 * Lower water levels due to drought and localized road construction caused shift in use patterns. FY03 1 NE Game and Parks drawing lake down for habitat improvement. 2 City of Lincoln drawing lake down to remove silt.

4-7 CHAPTER 4 RESERVOIR ACCOMPLISHMENTS

This page left intentionally blank.

4-8 CHAPTER 5 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS

Actual operations for the past year and proposed operations through calendar year 2005 are briefly discussed in the following sections. Individual project operation summaries are contained in Appendices B and D for both Corps of Engineers projects and Bureau of Reclamation projects. Table 5-1 summarizes the tributary reservoir flood control operation for the 2005 water year. A tabulation of the number of cases that the exclusive flood control zones in the 36 Omaha District tributary reservoirs have been filled to 25, 50, 75, and 100 percent is shown in Table 5-2.

TABLE 5-1 TRIBUTARY RESERVOIR FLOOD CONTROL OPERATION (WATER YEAR 2005)

Flood Daily Max. Daily Max. % Control Max. Date of Storage of FC Max. Max. Pool Date in Flood Control Pool Max. (FC Pool Pool Inflow Outflow Name of Dam (Ft-Msl) Operation Pool (Ft-Msl) Pool Acre-Feet1) Occupied (CFS) (CFS) COE Reservoirs Bear Creek 5558.0 Aug04-Sept05 5559.88 11 May 161 .6 254 254 Bowman-Haley 2754.8 None 2752.18 06 Jul 0 0 91 0 *Bull Hook 2517.0 None n/a n/a 0 0 n/a n/a *Cedar Canyon 3526.0 None n/a n/a 0 0 n/a n/a Chatfield 5432.0 May05, Jun05 5432.12 04 May 174 0 873 953 Cherry Creek 5550.0 Aug04-Sep05 5551.43 15 Apr 1239 1.1 201 207 Cold Brook 3585.0 Mar05, Apr05 3585.32 24 Mar 12 .2 9 7 Cottonwood 3875.0 None 3856.78 01 Oct 0 0 1 0 *Kelly Road 5342.0 None n/a n/a 0 0 n/a n/a Papio No. 11 1121.0 Aug04- Aug05 1121.75 13 Apr 292 2.1 55 57 Papio No. 16 1104.0 Aug04-Dec04, Mar05- 209 5.8 116 26 1105.58 13 Feb Jun05, Aug05, Sept05 Papio No. 18 1110.0 Aug04-Oct04, Dec04- 1112.07 13 Feb 569 7.4 277 60 Jun05, Aug05 Papio No. 20 1095.8 None 1095.63 10 Jun 0 0 163 0 Pipestem 1442.5 Aug04-Oct05 1451.74 03 Jul 10374 7.8 436 174 Salt Ck No. 2 1335.0 None 1333.15 01 Oct 0 0 3 0 Salt Ck No. 4 1307.4 None 1305.83 01 Oct 0 0 31 0 Salt Ck No. 8 1287.8 None 1286.69 13 May 0 0 44 0 Salt Ck No. 9 1271.1 Sept04, 115 3.2 29 12 Nov04-Apr05, Jun05, 1271.69 13 Feb Jul05 Salt Ck No. 10 1244.9 None 1232.00 01 Oct 0 0 n/a n/a Salt Ck No. 12 1232.9 None 1231.17 01 Oct 0 0 6 0 Salt Ck No. 13 1341.0 None 1339.89 22 Apr 0 0 19 0 Salt Ck No. 14 1244.3 None 1243.66 21 Apr 0 0 39 0 Salt Ck No. 17 1242.4 None 1240.92 29 Aug 0 0 66 8 Salt Ck No. 18 1284.0 None 1280.49 13 Jun 0 0 293 3 *Westerly Creek 5389.0 None n/a n/a 0 0 n/a n/a USBR Reservoirs Boysen 4725.0 None 4724.92 27 Jun 0 0 9124 5580 Canyon Ferry 3797.0 Jun05-Jul05 3798.51 02 Jul 50618 50.1 12733 6694 Clark Canyon 5546.1 None 5519.98 24 May 0 0 337 813 Glendo 4635.0 None 4633.94 20 Jun 0 0 3034 7542 Heart Butte 2064.5 Mar-Jun 2066.46 03 Jul 6631 4.5 1294 952 Jamestown 1431.0 Aug04,Sept04, 9254 4.9 401 202 1432.30 10 May Dec04-Aug05 Keyhole 4099.3 None 4086.54 20 May 0 0 406 204 Pactola 4580.2 None 4564.72 22 Jun 0 0 91 99 Shadehill 2271.9 None 2267.55 01 Oct 0 0 418 25 Tiber 2993.0 None 2985.52 09 Jul 0 0 3901 515 Yellowtail 3640.0 Jun05-Aug05 3642.82 01 Jul 36957 14.3 13371 7219 *Dry dams with no gauge readings taken.

1 If a project has a joint use pool, storage in the joint use zone is not counted as flood control in this table.

5-1 CHAPTER 5 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS

a. Previous Year Operations (August 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005).

i Corps of Engineers Lakes. All of the Corps' tributary projects, within the Omaha District, were regulated in accordance with normal procedures during the period covered by this report. As shown on Table 5-1, tributary projects TABLE 5-2 including Bear Creek, Chatfield, UTILIZATION OF EXCLUSIVE FLOOD CONTROL Cherry Creek, Cold Brook, ZONE, OMAHA DISTRICT TRIBUTARY PROJECTS Percent of Flood Control Storage Papillion Creek Dams Nos. 11, Total of 16, 18, Pipestem, and Salt Creek Year Tributary 25% or 50% or 75% or 100% Projects More More More or More Dam No. 9 stored water in the 1967 26 3 2 2 0 flood storage zone during the 1968 27 0 0 0 0 1969 27 1 0 0 0 report period. Bowman-Haley, 1970 28 2 2 0 0 Bull Hook, Cedar Canyon, 1971 28 2 1 0 0 Cottonwood, Kelly Road, Papillion 1972 28 1 0 0 0 1973 28 6 2 1 0 Creek Dam No. 20, Salt Creek 1974 31 1 1 0 0 Dams Nos. 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 1975 32 6 2 1 1 1976 32 2 1 0 0 17, and 18, and Westerly Creek 1977 32 0 0 0 0 did not store water in their flood 1978 33 5 1 0 0 control zones during the reporting 1979 33 1 0 0 0 1980 33 2 1 0 0 period. Low inflow and/or 1981 33 2 1 1 0 maintenance were the main 1982 33 2 1 0 0 reasons for this lack of storage 1983 34 5 1 1 0 1984 35 7 2 1 1 usage. There were no major 1985 35 0 0 0 0 floods during the reporting period 1986 35 5 0 0 0 1987 35 3 0 0 0 and most projects had normal to 1988 35 0 0 0 0 below normal inflows over the 1989 35 0 0 0 0 reporting period. Detailed 1990 36 0 0 0 0 1991 36 2 1 0 0 operation reports for each project 1992 36 0 0 0 0 are included in an appendix at the 1993 36 12 0 0 0 1994 36 2 0 0 0 end of this report. 1995 36 6 3 0 0 1996 36 6 1 0 0 ii Bureau of 1997 36 6 3 0 0 1998 36 3 1 1 0 Reclamation Dams. Reservoir 1999 36 5 2 0 0 operations at all 11 Bureau of 2000 36 1 0 0 0 Reclamation projects in the 2001 36 2 0 0 0 2002 36 0 0 0 0 Omaha District were carried out in 2003 36 0 0 0 0 accordance with normal regulation 2004 36 2 0 0 0 2005 36 1 1 0 0 procedures during this reporting TOTAL 104 30 8 2 period. As shown in Table 5-1, four of the eleven Section 7 projects including Heart Butte (North Dakota), Jamestown (North Dakota), Canyon Ferry (Montana), and Yellowtail (Montana) stored water in the flood storage zone during the report period. Detailed operation reports for each project are included in an appendix at the end of this report.

5-2 CHAPTER 5 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS

b. Proposed Operations. With the exception of Bear Creek, Cherry Creek, Chatfield and Pipestem, all Corps of Engineers tributary dams have ungated service outlets and no gate operations are normally required except for occasional opening of low-level outlets for various purposes. Releases to meet downstream water rights can be expected at Bowman Haley, Cold Brook, Chatfield, Cherry Creek, Bear Creek, and Salt Creek No. 18. Evacuation of stored floodwater in these projects is scheduled as soon as practicable after each flood event.

i Corps of Engineers.

(1) Colorado. At Chatfield Reservoir, the pool level normally fluctuates between elevations 5423.0 and 5432.0 feet mean sea level (ft-msl). Water rights issues have delayed the environmental assessment (EA) that began during the drought conditions in Water Year (WY) 2003. Once these issues are resolved, it is expected that the EA will be completed for use in the future if severe drought conditions are experienced at Chatfield Reservoir. During normal runoff years, from 1 May to 31 August, the pool level is not expected to fall below elevation 5426.85 ft-msl (20,000 acre-feet) for recreational purposes. Storage of water above elevation 5426.85 ft-msl to elevation 5432.0 ft-msl will depend on the availability of free water and/or the desire of the City of Denver to store water. During the Colorado irrigation season, the Water Control and Water Quality Section and the State Engineer will calculate inflows to Cherry Creek Reservoir on a daily basis and releases will be balanced on a weekly basis to comply with State water rights. The Colorado Department of Parks and Recreation has been working to obtain water from several sources, including the Denver metro sewer return flows, to exchange with calls made against Cherry Creek. Releases will be made at Cherry Creek Reservoir in May or June to flush sediment from around the gates in the intake structure. Flushes will not be scheduled during the December through March period or if there is downstream flooding. The flushing schedule utilizes approximately 150 to 250 acre-feet of water. A Section 404 permit will need to be obtained starting in 2006 for the flushing operation. At Bear Creek Reservoir, the low-level gate will be opened, if requested and practical, during the June through August period when the lake typically stratifies to assist in the improvement of lake water quality. If the lake falls below elevation 5558.0 feet msl, releases from the low level gates may be needed in order to satisfy downstream water rights requests. All other operations of the Colorado reservoirs will be made in accordance with the individual water control plan.

(2) Nebraska. At Salt Creek Dam 18, releases of inflows up to a total of 11.6 cfs may be made for water rights calls from downstream landowners. Releases up to 3 cfs without proving inflow will be made when required to satisfy downstream water rights. Low-level releases will be made when practicable from the Papillion Creek projects to allow water to be discharged from lower elevations in an attempt to improve lake water quality. Salt Creek Dams 10 and 17 lake rehabilitations by the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission are finished and the reservoirs will be allowed to fill to normal levels. The reservoir at Papio Dam 16 will be drawn down slightly for the walking/bike trail replacement. The City of Omaha and the NGPC would like a 2 foot

5-3 CHAPTER 5 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS

drawdown of Papio 11 for 3½ days to survey the shoreline for a lake rehabilitation project. Later in the year, the City of Omaha would like to have a 10 foot drawdown to begin work on the rehabilitation, but this will be dependent on an EA being completed with a FONSI. Spring inflows will be allowed to refill the remaining reservoirs up to the top of conservation pool. All other operations of the Nebraska reservoirs will be done in accordance with the individual reservoir water control plan.

(3) North Dakota. Flood releases from Pipestem Dam will be coordinated with those from the Bureau's Jamestown Dam. Operation of Jamestown and Pipestem Reservoirs will follow the release plan that was developed in the Water Control Plan Review and Update Study. This study was completed in 2000. The plan is termed a “flexible” plan in that the operation of the two reservoirs and releases could vary from year to year. Each spring a forecast will be prepared, the James River Operations Meeting will be held with other agencies and interested parties, and a plan of operation will be developed based on the forecast and feedback from the other agencies. During low runoff years where combined inflow is less than 90,000 acre-feet a constant release will be made. This type of operation will stretch releases out through the typically dry summer and fall months providing benefits to downstream fish and wildlife resources. During medium runoff years, where combined inflow is in the range of 90,000 acre-feet to 160,000 acre-feet, releases will follow the 1975 Field Working Agreement (FWA) except that even greater priority will be placed on evacuating Jamestown Reservoir before Pipestem. This will result in benefits to Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuge located upstream of Jamestown Reservoir. During high runoff years where combined inflow is greater than 160,000 acre-feet the operation of the two projects will follow the 1975 FWA. Details of the “flexible” operation plan can be found in the study report and will also be incorporated into a new field working agreement. At Bowman-Haley Reservoir, the water quality improvement program calls for releases from the low-level drawdown tube during periods of pronounced lake stratification that typically occur in late winter and again in late summer around mid July. If the local sponsor concurs and winter downstream conditions permit, water will be evacuated from the lower elevations of the reservoir each year starting in early February.

(4) South Dakota. The pool level at Cold Brook Dam will be lowered following ice-out in the spring to elevation 3582 ft-msl. This level is 3 feet below the morning glory service spillway. It will be maintained at this lower level through the summer and fall months by either periodically making a small release through the low level gates or by utilizing the newly installed 8 inch valve in the tailrace of the project. This will provide a small buffer of storage that delays or prevents uncontrolled outlet works flow. In order to comply with Larive Lake Resort’s water rights, the resort may request a release of up to 1.1 cfs.

ii Bureau of Reclamation. As in the past, the Bureau will continue to operate their reservoirs to meet project objectives and to coordinate operations with other interests to achieve optimum use of water resources. Generally, all reservoirs will be operated as close to the top of their conservation pools as possible. Boysen,

5-4 CHAPTER 5 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS

Canyon Ferry, Clark Canyon, Tiber and Yellowtail Reservoirs require evacuation and refill of joint-use storage for flood control based on mountain runoff inflow forecasts.

(1) Canyon Ferry. The Canyon Ferry Reservoir Operating Plan requires that releases are adjusted as soon as the storage has peaked, usually in June or July, so the pool will be drawn to near elevation 3780.0 ft-msl by the following 1 March. In addition, the Montana Power Company will try to limit releases from Hebgen Reservoir to keep Canyon Ferry’s pool below elevation 3794.0 ft-msl after 1 December. A pool level below elevation 3794.0 ft-msl prior to winter freeze up is desired to prevent ice jam problems at the upper end of the lake. Beginning near the first of January, releases will be set based on the most probable spring-inflow forecast to allow the reservoir to fill to elevation 3797.0 ft-msl near the end of June.

(2) Tiber (Lake Elwell). In accordance with the Water Control Agreement, the joint-use zone at Tiber Reservoir should be vacated to elevation 2976.0 ft-msl by March 1st. March-June releases are based on forecasted inflows with the objective of filling Lake Elwell to elevation 2993.0 ft-msl by the end of June. However, if necessary, the Bureau may decide to fill the reservoir to elevation 3008.0 ft-msl to provide replacement storage. This storage will be used by the Corps of Engineers to assist in the operation of the Missouri River mainstem reservoir system.

(3) Yellowtail. Yellowtail Reservoir will be regulated to be no higher than elevation 3630.0 ft-msl by 30 November to reduce chances of headwater ice problems. The drawdown will continue through the winter months so that the pool elevation will be no higher than 3605.0 ft-msl before the beginning of spring runoff based on a normal runoff forecast. March through July releases will be based on forecasted inflows with the objective of filling Yellowtail Reservoir to elevation 3640.0 ft-msl by the end of July.

(4) Others. Replacement storage up to a combined total of 1,075,500 acre- feet can be made available in Clark Canyon, Tiber and Canyon Ferry Reservoirs on a forecast basis. Fresno Reservoir in Montana is lowered each year and regulated to provide flood control in accordance with a 4 July 1957 Letter of Understanding. In addition to the reservoirs covered in this report, other Bureau reservoirs, without allocated flood control storage space, will provide flood control in their normal operation of storing seasonal runoff. Some of these projects are Gibson Dam in Montana and Bull Lake, Pathfinder, Seminoe, and Buffalo Bill Dams in Wyoming.

5-5 CHAPTER 5 RESERVOIR OPERATIONS

This page left intentionally blank

5-6 CHAPTER 6 MAJOR REGULATION ISSUES

There were several areas where major regulation issues may arise. This chapter will detail the regulation issues dealing with water quality, downstream channel capacity, potential hazardous conditions and dam safety.

a. Water Quality. The Omaha District has identified the following four general water quality priorities that have relevance to the tributary projects:

• Evaluate water quality conditions and trends at Corps projects.

• Identify existing and potential water quality problems at Corps projects, and develop and implement appropriate solutions.

• Provide water quality information to support Corps reservoir regulation elements for effective water quality and aquatic habitat management.

• Provide water quality information and technical support to the States in the development of their Section 303(d) lists and development and implementation of TMDLs at Corps projects.

Water quality data was collected at the tributary projects identified in Table 8-2. Water quality data are assessed by the District's Water Quality Unit to identify any water quality concerns, including compliance with State water quality standards, at the tributary projects. Other water quality information, including State 303(d) and 305(b) Reports, is also reviewed for indications of water quality concerns at the projects. Table 6-1 provides a summary of water quality issues and concerns at each of the tributary projects based on Omaha District monitoring and a review of current State water quality reports.

b. Downstream Channel Capacity. Inadequate or reduced channel capacity is a problem below many of the tributary reservoirs. This was caused by several factors, including natural plant growth during extended low flow periods, flood deposits, human construction, and agriculture practices. In some cases, downstream channel capacity is significantly less than is needed for flood control releases. For example, the channel downstream of Cold Brook Dam has been filled due to residential construction. The channel capacity of the South Platte River below the Tri-Lakes projects hinders or prevents releases in accordance with the three-reservoir (Chatfield, Bear Creek, and Cherry Creek) plan of regulation to evacuate flood storage. Compounding this situation is the fact that the reservoir design routings for Chatfield, Bear Creek and Cherry Creek Reservoirs were made independently of each other and that the individual routings neglected (1) the effect of the releases from the other two dams in the three-reservoir system, (2) the effect of the incremental runoff below the dams, and (3) the actual channel capacity below the three dams.

c. Releases for Purposes other than Authorized Project Functions. No releases were made for purposes other than authorized project functions.

6-1 CHAPTER 6 MAJOR REGULATION ISSUES

TABLE 6-1 WATER QUALITY ISSUES AND CONCERNS

Other Potential Fish Consumption Water TMDL Considerations* Advisories Project Quality Concerns On 303(d) Impaired Pollutant/Stressor TMDL Advisory Identified List Uses Status*** in Effect Contaminate Colorado: Bear Creek Lake No No Nutrients Urbanization Chatfield Lake No No Nutrients Urbanization Cherry Creek Lake Yes Aquatic Life Chlorophyll a Under No Nutrients Recreation Revision Urbanization Nebraska: Bluestem Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Aquatic Life Branched Oak Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Aquatic Life Conestoga Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Aquatic Life Sedimentation East Twin lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Aquatic Life Ed Zorinsky Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients Completed Yes Mercury Urbanization Aquatic Life Sedimentation Glen Cunningham Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Urbanization Lake Aquatic Life Sedimentation Holmes Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients Completed No Urbanization Aquatic Life Sedimentation Olive Creek Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Aquatic Life Sedimentation Low Dissolved Oxygen Pawnee Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients Completed No Aquatic Life Stagecoach Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD No Aquatic Life Sedimentation Standing Bear Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients Completed No Urbanization Aquatic Life Sedimentation Wagon Train Lake Yes Aesthetics Low Dissolved Oxygen Completed No Aquatic Life Nutrients Wehrspann Lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients TBD Yes Mercury Urbanization Aquatic Life West Twin Lake Yes Aesthetics Low Dissolved Oxygen TBD No Aquatic Life Nutrients Yankee Hill lake Yes Aesthetics Nutrients Completed No Aquatic Life Sedimentation North Dakota: Bowman-Haley Lake No Yes Mercury Pipestem Lake No Yes Mercury South Dakota: Cold Brook Lake No No Cottonwood Springs No No Lake * Information taken from published state Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) 303(d) reports and listings. *** TBD = To Be Developed.

d. Potential Hazardous Conditions. A potential problem exists if water is released through project spillways where the land downstream of the project has been developed into urban areas. A hazard-to-life condition exists if a significant flow of water is discharged through the spillways at these projects.

6-2 CHAPTER 6 MAJOR REGULATION ISSUES

e. Dam Safety Issues. There is also a hazard-to-life condition if a flood event occurs that causes overtopping of the dam embankment. Dams located above populated areas are normally designed to safely pass a Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) without overtopping the embankment. The PMF is estimated using probable maximum precipitation (PMP) estimates developed by the National Weather Service. Recent studies indicate that nine Corps of Engineers and nine Bureau of Reclamation tributary reservoirs cannot safely pass the PMF without being overtopped. Following is information on each of these projects along with the status of potential corrective actions:

i Corps of Engineers Dams.

(1) Cherry Creek Dam. Corps of Engineers design guidance for dams located above populated areas states they should store and pass a PMF without overtopping the embankment. The most recent precipitation estimates prepared by the National Weather Service for this area indicate that the reservoir could safely pass no more than 75% of the PMF under existing development with adequate freeboard. A dam safety evaluation study to determine optimal solutions to the hydrologic inadequacy of Cherry Creek Reservoir is underway, with current studies focused on development of the PMP.

(2) Cold Brook Dam. On August 11, 1993, the revised draft reconnaissance report for the Cold Brook Dam hydrologic improvement assessment was completed. The report concluded that the Cold Brook project was hydrologically deficient as it could safely pass only 48 percent of the PMF with adequate freeboard. A dam safety evaluation study was initiated in FY 2000 to determine optimal solutions to the hydrologic inadequacy of Cold Brook Dam. The study received funding for FY 2006, and a draft report is scheduled for completion in September 2006.

(3) Salt Creek Dams. Recent studies indicate that Salt Creek Dams 4,8, 9,13,14,17, and 18 will be overtopped by the PMF and all of the projects would have less freeboard than originally designed. This is a result of spillway crests that are higher than the original design and dam crests that are lower than the original design. In addition, new criteria for the antecedent flood prior to the PMF results in a higher maximum pool during the PMF routing. Funds have been requested to restore the spillway crests and dam crests to the original design elevations. Funds will also be requested in the FY07 O&M budget to conduct an antecedent storm analysis to determine updated maximum pool levels for the PMF routing for each Salt Creek Dam.

ii Bureau of Reclamation Dams.

(1) Clark Canyon Dam. The PMF for Clark Canyon Dam is characterized by a peak inflow of 166,800 cfs and a 30-day volume of about 506,000 acre-feet. Clark Canyon Dam would be overtopped at around 58 percent of the volume of the PMF.

(2) Canyon Ferry Dam. A peak inflow of 506,000 cfs and a 15-day volume of about 2,035,000 acre-feet characterize the PMF for Canyon Ferry Dam. Floods

6-3 CHAPTER 6 MAJOR REGULATION ISSUES

exceeding approximately 94 percent of the PMF would overtop canyon Ferry Dam. The increased loading associated with unusually high reservoir water surfaces could also cause the failure of one or more spillway gates.

(3) Tiber Dam. The PMF is characterized by a peak inflow of 695,926 cfs and a 15-day volume of 1,433,000 acre-feet. Tiber Dam would be overtopped by floods exceeding 59 percent of the PMF.

(4) Boysen Dam. A peak inflow of 844,500 cfs and a 15-day volume of 2,820,000 acre-feet characterize the PMF. Floods exceeding approximately 48 percent of the PMF would overtop Boysen Dam.

(5) Yellowtail Dam. The PMF is characterized by a peak inflow of 887,000 cfs and a 15-day volume of 4,700,000 acre-feet. Yellowtail Dam would be overtopped by floods exceeding 31 percent of the PMF.

(6) Heart Butte Dam. A peak inflow of 161,400 cfs and a 5-day volume of 558,600 acre-feet characterize the PMF. Heart Butte Dam was modified in 1987 to safely pass the PMF.

(7) Jamestown Dam. The PMF is characterized by a peak inflow of 243,900 cfs and a 15-day volume of 574,000 acre-feet. Floods exceeding approximately 91 percent of the PMF would overtop Jamestown Dam.

(8) Keyhole Dam. The PMF is characterized by a peak inflow of 513,600 cfs and a 5-day volume of 785,800 acre-feet. Keyhole Dam would be overtopped by floods exceeding approximately 75 percent of the PMF.

(9) Pactola Dam. A peak inflow of 276,000 cfs and a volume of 159,800 acre- feet characterize the PMF. The PMF has not been revised since 1981. Pactola Dam was modified in 1985-87 to safely pass the PMF.

(10) Shadehill Dam. The PMF is characterized by a peak inflow of 423,200 cfs and a volume of 1,324,900 acre-feet. Shadehill Dam would be overtopped by floods exceeding approximately 77 percent of the PMF.

(11) Glendo Dam. The current PMF into Glendo Reservoir has a peak inflow of 534,067 cfs, and a 15-day volume of approximately 2,800,000 acre-feet. It is based on a 72-hour, June PMP general rainstorm centered over the North Platte River Basin between Seminoe and Pathfinder Dams, with concurrent floods occurring in the Seminoe Reservoir basin and the intervening drainage basin between Pathfinder and Glendo Dams. Floods exceeding approximately 40 percent of the PMF would overtop Glendo Dam. Overtopping failure of Glendo Dam could lead to the failure of dams downstream (Guernsey Dam and Kingsley Dam). The dam failure floods would have catastrophic consequences along the North Platte and Platte Rivers in Wyoming and Nebraska.

6-4 CHAPTER 7 WATER CONTROL MANUALS

A responsibility of the Water Control and Water Quality Section is to update the water control manuals for each project on a periodic basis. During the reporting period, work progressed on several Water Control Manual updates. This chapter details the current status of updates as well as the schedule for updating the balance of the project manuals.

a. Current Manual Status. The draft water control manual updates for the Chatfield, Cherry Creek, and Bear Creek projects are complete and under review. During the public involvement process, most of the public comment involved issues of reallocation of a portion of the flood control storage to multipurpose storage, including water supply storage. Since this type of reallocation of storage was beyond the scope of a water control manual update, scoping for a General Investigation (GI) funded reallocation study was initiated in conjunction with the state of Colorado. The draft water control manual updates do not contain an evaluation of alternative water control plans. These water control updates will be completed in FY 06. The Chatfield Reallocation Study is expected to be completed in FY 07. The Pipestem water control manual update was completed and submitted for review to Northwestern Division in September, 2005. The Jamestown water control manual update will be completed and submitted for review to Northwestern Division in February, 2006.

b. Work Priorities. TABLE 7-1 Water control manuals will WORK PRIORITIES FOR UPDATING WATER CONTROL MANUALS typically be updated on an approximate 10-year Priority Project Remarks cycle. If funds are not 1 Pipestem/Jamestown Scheduled completion FY-06 available for a comprehensive review 2 Lake Audubon Scheduled completion FY-06 and update of a water control manual, at a 3 Canyon Ferry Scheduled completion FY-06 minimum "baseline" O&M 4 Chatfield Scheduled completion FY-06 funds will be used to update area-capacity 5 Bear Creek Scheduled completion FY-06 curves, rating curves, 6 Cherry Creek Scheduled completion FY-06 stage-damage curves, historical records, and 7 Cold Brook Scheduled start FY-06 documentation of large runoff events. Table 7-1 8 Cottonwood Springs Scheduled start FY-06 indicates work priorities while Table 7-2 lists the current status of all water control manuals.

7-1 CHAPTER 7 WATER CONTROL MANUALS

TABLE 7-2 SCHEDULE FOR REVISION OF WATER CONTROL MANAULS FY 2006 – FY 2015

Date of Scheduled Type of Manual Completion Revision - Estimated or Last Date of Next Manual (M) Total Cost Dam/Reservoir Name Stream Owner District Revision Revision or Plan (P) $1000

Kelly Rd/Westerly Creek Westerly Creek CE NWO Dec 92 FY 2012 M 30

Papillion Creek Dams (4) Papillion Creek/Tribs CE NWO Oct 98 FY 2012 M 30

Chatfield South Platte River CE NWO Apr 73 FY 2006 M/P 110

Cherry Creek Cherry Creek CE NWO Oct 71 FY 2006 M/P 120

Bear Creek Bear Creek CE NWO Mar 77 FY 2006 M/P 90

Pipestem Pipestem Creek CE NWO Aug 86 FY 2006 M/P 60

Cold Brook Cold Brook CE NWO Aug 54 FY 2007 M 30

Cottonwood Springs Cottonwood Springs CE NWO Sep 73 FY 2007 M 20

Cedar Canyon Deadman's Gulch CE NWO Jan 71 FY 2007 M 20

Salt Creek Dams (10) Salt Creek/Tribs CE NWO Dec 78 FY 2008 M 40

Bowman-Haley N. Fork Grand River CE NWO Mar 87 FY 2008 M 30

Lake Pocasse Spring Creek CE NWO Jun 89 FY 2010 M 20

Lake Audubon Snake Creek CE NWO Dec 92 FY 2006 M 30

Bull Hook/Scott Coulee Bull Hook Creek CE NWO Mar 91 FY 2011 M 20

Canyon Ferry Missouri River BR NWO Apr 95 FY 2006 M 40

Jamestown James River BR NWO Nov 57 FY 2006 M/P 60

Pactola Rapid Creek BR NWO Feb 77 FY 2007 M 50

Boysen Wind River BR NWO Dec 66 FY 2008 M 50

Yellowtail Bighorn River BR NWO Jan 74 FY 2009 M 40

Clark Canyon Beaverhead River BR NWO Jun 76 FY 2010 M 40

Tiber Marias River BR NWO Dec 59 FY 2011 M/P 60

Heart Butte Heart River BR NWO Feb 51 FY 2012 M 30

Shadehill Grand River BR NWO Nov 51 FY 2013 M 30

Keyhole Belle Fourche River BR NWO Jun 69 FY 2014 M 30

Glendo North Platte River BR NWO Apr 70 FY 2015 M 40

7-2 CHAPTER 8 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES

The Omaha District data collection program is responsible for collecting tributary and reservoir data within the district boundaries. This chapter describes the manner in which the data is collected and who collects the data. In addition, a brief summary of other data that is being collected, including water quality and sedimentation, is included.

a. Water Control Data Collection.

i. Sources. Data from hydrologic gages for water management are obtained from various sources including contract observers, project offices, National Weather Service, U.S. Geological Survey, Bureau of Reclamation, state offices and data collection platforms (DCPs) operated by the Omaha District. The National Weather Service (NWS) provides current weather conditions, one to five day forecasts, precipitation reports, river level data and special hydrologic forecasts including flood warnings. The Water Control and Water Quality section also obtains weather information from several commercial vendors. They include the National Weather Service, Meterologix – Storm Sentry Network, and various Internet web pages. Regional weather data and forecasts are provided via satellite receiver to Storm Sentry and DTN workstations. Regional and National radar data can be looped to track heavy rainfall in the district on this device. The final source of weather information is from the Internet. There are many sites scattered throughout the United States and the world, which provide a variety of weather products at no cost. More detailed products require a subscription or payment. Internet sites include universities, the NWS and the commercial vendors of weather products. Products available range from raw data (i.e., precipitation, temperature) to upper air maps and forecast products containing "value- added" graphics. In addition to DCP data, other data streams have been added to our database for both redundancy and improved information. These additions include the Denver alert system and SNOTEL sites maintained by the National Resource Conservation Service (NRCS).

ii. Data Storage. The Corps Water Management Software (CWMS) is the Omaha District’s primary data management system. CWMS was developed by the Hydrologic Engineering Center (HEC) and utilizes an Oracle database to store river, reservoir, and weather data. Another feature of CWMS utilized by this office is the ability to collect data from the Kansas City District and Missouri River Region offices. This provides redundancy/backup for the Omaha District and also the other offices from which data is collected.

iii. Data Collection Equipment. Remote site, satellite data transmissions are utilized for water management. Satellite collection equipment being used by the district was purchased from Sutron Corporation and Design Analysis. The equipment is installed and maintained by Water Control and Water Quality section personnel and/or by the USGS. Currently there are 23 DCPs in Montana, 5 in Wyoming, 23 in Colorado, 19 in North Dakota, 36 in South Dakota, 46 in Nebraska, and 22 in Iowa for a total of 174 sites funded by the Omaha District. The DCPs in the district LAN transmit real-time river and reservoir levels, precipitation, wind, and water and air temperature data. This hourly data collected by these remote sensors is transmitted to two ground receiving

8-1 CHAPTER 8 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES

sites called Local Readout Ground Stations (LRGS) located in Omaha, Nebraska (Corps of Engineers) and Boise, Idaho (Bureau of Reclamation). This information is currently transmitted via GOES-west and GOES-central satellites located at 135 degrees west longitude and 112 degrees west longitude, respectively. New DCPs are being purchased from Sutron and Design Analysis in preparation for the conversion to high data rate transmissions. The deadline for this conversion is December of 2013. At the current rate of purchase, this deadline will be met.

b. Cooperative Hydrologic Programs. Omaha District personnel complete the district’s stream gaging program with assistance from the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS’ activities are funded through the Cooperative Stream Gaging Program (FC-33) executed by the Water Control and Water Quality section. The Cooperative Stream Gaging Program provides financial support to seven USGS Districts for operation and maintenance of multiple stream gaging stations. The USGS districts are Colorado, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming. Collection and publication of data such as stage, discharge, sediment, water quality and groundwater records TABLE 8-1 COST OF FY2005 NWS AND USGS COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS are the primary NWS Coop USGS Coop functions of this District Report Network Domsat & AFOS Stream Gaging Total program. Table 8-1 Omaha discontinued $1,300 $1,264,235 $1,284,832 shows the cost for these programs.

c. Water Quality. The Omaha District’s Water Quality Unit operates a water-quality monitoring program for Corps projects in the District. Water quality monitoring goals, objectives, and data collection approaches are defined in the document, “Program Management Plan for Implementing the Omaha District’s Water Quality Management Program” (USACE, 2005). In general, water quality data collection consists of long-term fixed station ambient monitoring, intensive surveys, special studies, watershed assessments, and investigative monitoring.

Long-term fixed station ambient monitoring is intended to provide information that will allow the Omaha District to determine the status and trends of surface water quality at Corps projects. This type of sampling consists of systematically collecting samples at the same location over a long period of time (e.g., collecting monthly water samples at the same site for several years).

Intensive surveys are intended to provide more detailed information regarding the water quality conditions at Corps projects. They typically will include more sites and parameters sampled over a shorter timeframe than long-term fixed station ambient monitoring. Intensive surveys will provide the detailed water quality information needed to thoroughly understand water quality conditions at a project.

Special studies are conducted to address specific water quality information needs at Corps projects. Among other things, special water quality studies may be

8-2 CHAPTER 8 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES

undertaken to collect the information needed to “scope-out” a specific water quality problem; calibrate and validate water quality models; design and engineer modifications at projects; or evaluate the effectiveness of specific implemented water quality enhancement measures.

The purpose of watershed assessments is to collect the information needed to identify and quantify sources and loadings of pollution being transported to targeted receiving waters from their watersheds. The Omaha District may conduct watershed assessments at a “scoping-level” to better understand possible pollution concerns impacting Corps projects. Information at this level will allow the Omaha District to interface with state and local entities regarding the identification of pollution concerns at Corps projects. Additionally, detailed watershed assessments may be conducted to definitively identify and quantify pollution sources, loadings, necessary loading reductions, contributing critical areas, and possible pollution control measures for implementation. The compilation and assessment of this information is typically facilitated through the utilization of watershed water quality models. The Omaha District’s involvement in detailed watershed assessments would normally be in a supporting role to state and local agencies that have the lead in developing a watershed management plan or total maximum daily load (TMDL) for a water body that involves a Corps project.

Investigative monitoring is typically initiated in response to an immediate need for water quality information. This may be in response to an operational situation at a Corps project, the occurrence of a significant pollution event, public complaint, or a report of a fish kill. Any Omaha District response to a pollution event or fish kill would need to be coordinated with the appropriate state and local agencies. The type of sampling that is done for investigative purposes is highly specific to the situation under investigation.

Water quality data collection conducted in the reporting period at Omaha District projects is summarized in Table 8-2.

TABLE 8-2 PROJECTS SAMPLED AND TYPES OF SAMPLING Type of Project Sampling* Samples Collected By** Mainstem Projects: • Gavins Point - Lewis and Clark Lake LTFS WQU - Lake Yankton LTFS WQU - Powerhouse LTFS Data-logger • Fort Randall - Lake Francis Case LTFS WQU - Powerhouse LTFS Data-logger • Big Bend - Lake Sharpe LTFS WQU - Powerhouse LTFS Data-logger

8-3 CHAPTER 8 DATA COLLECTION PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES

Type of Project Sampling* Samples Collected By** • Oahe - Lake Oahe LTFS, IS WQU - Powerhouse LTFS Data-logger - Inflow IS WQU • Garrison - Lake Sakakawea LTFS, IS, SS WQU - Powerhouse LTFS Data-logger - Inflow IS WQU • Fort Peck - Fort Peck Lake LTFS, IS WQU - Powerhouse LTFS Data-logger - Inflow IS WQU Missouri River: • Fort Randall Dam to Lewis and Clark Lake LTFS WQU • Gavins Point Dam to Rulo, NE LTFS WQU Tributary Projects: • Tri-Lakes (CO) LTFS, SS Watershed Authority • Papillion Creek Lakes (NE) LTFS WQU • Salt Valley Lakes (NE) LTFS WQU * LTFS = Long-Term Fixed Station. IS = Intensive Survey. SS = Special Study.

** WQU = Omaha District Water Quality Unit. Data-logger = Automatic in-place data logger serviced by the WQU. Watershed Authority = Local Watershed Authorities established for Cherry Creek, Chatfield, and Bear Lakes.

d. Sediment.

i. Bed and Suspended Sediment Sampling. The Omaha District, under the Cooperative Stream Gaging Agreement with the United States Geological Survey (USGS), operates four suspended sediment-sampling stations and three multipurpose stations. The Musselshell River at Mosby has been discontinued. These stations are located on the Missouri River and tributaries and are listed below.

TABLE 8-3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS River City State Station Type Missouri Landusky Montana Suspended Yellowstone Sidney Montana Suspended Bad Fort Pierre South Dakota Suspended White Oacoma South Dakota Suspended Missouri Sioux City Iowa Multipurpose Missouri Omaha Nebraska Multipurpose Missouri Nebraska City Nebraska Multipurpose

ii. Sedimentation Surveys. No sedimentation surveys were conducted during the report period.

8-4 CHAPTER 9 OTHER WATER CONTROL ACTIVITIES

In addition to the information previously discussed, Omaha District Water Control routinely reports on other activities. These include Federal Energy Regulatory Commission application reviews and personnel issues. The following is a brief synopsis of these activities.

a. Water Control Initiatives.

i. Missouri River Region Water Control Data System Master Plan. The Water Control and Water Quality Section has been using the Corps Water Management System (CWMS) since February 2001. Work is continuing on efforts to enhance the efficiency of the processing of data. The Water Control unit is working towards having data work through the system in a real-time manner. To accomplish this, work is being done to convert all of the necessary computations over to Oracle and abolish the necessity of exporting data to the Corps’ DSS database.

Included in this effort is data dissemination. Work on a new web-based plotting routine is nearly complete.

ii. Model Development. One advantage to using CWMS, is the ability to perform real-time forecasting. There are several different models that are being developed for this effort. These modeling programs were all developed by the Corps’ Hydraulic Engineering Center (HEC).

(1) HEC-HMS. Hydrologic Modeling System (HMS) is designed to simulate the precipitation-runoff processes of dendritic watershed systems. It is designed to be applicable for the wide range of geographic area our district covers. This includes large river basin water supply and flood hydrology, and small urban or natural watershed runoff. Hydrographs produced by the program are used directly in flow forecasting and systems operation.

(2) HEC-RAS. The River Analysis System (RAS) is used for calculating water surface profiles for steady gradually varied flow. The model can handle a full network of channels, a dendritic system, or a single river reach. Currently there are steady and unsteady flow components of HEC-RAS. The steady flow component is capable of modeling water surface profiles for subcritical, supercritical, and mixed flow regimes.

(3) HEC-ResSim. Reservoir Simulation (ResSim) was created for performing reservoir operation modeling at one or more reservoirs for a variety of operational goals and constraints. Using the inflow from HEC- HMS, ResSim will provide the user with a forecast of pool elevations and releases from the reservoir.

(4) HEC-FIA. Flood Impact Analysis (FIA) computes flood damage for regulated flow. It also computes damage for unregulated flow. Then computes flood damage reduction and allocates regulation benefits. The

9-1 CHAPTER 9 OTHER WATER CONTROL ACTIVITIES

benefits can be based on routed reservoir holdouts, or on an input allocation table.

b. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Applications. The Omaha District is responsible for review and comment on FERC applications submitted for projects within our geographic boundaries. Table 9-1 lists the requests received from October 2004 through March 2005.

TABLE 9-1 FERC PERMIT APPLICATIONS

Date Title Order Name 8-Oct-04 Several projects, misc. Order on rehearing consolidating administrative annual charges bill appeals and modifying annual charges billing procedures 8-Nov-04 Hebgen Dam Hydroelectric Project - Letter referencing comments for the Land FERC #11882, Corps file no. Management Report (Northwest Power 200490132 Services) 15-Dec-04 Entergy Arkansas Inc., project no. Notice of application for non-project use of 271-079 project lands and soliciting comments, motions to intervene, and protests 15-Dec-04 Pilot Butte Dam Hydroelectric Project, Order issuing preliminary permit project no. 12458-000 15-Dec-04 Wind River Hydro, LLC, Eastern Order issuing preliminary permit and denying Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River competing application Reservation, project nos. 12457-000, 12480-000 17-Dec-04 Woodruff Narrows, LLC, project no. Notice of application accepted for filing and 12510-000 soliciting motions to intervene, protests and comments 17-Dec-04 Corbett Diversion Project, project no. Notice of application accepted for filing and 12515-000 soliciting motions to intervene, protests and comments 18-Jan-05 Entergy Arkansas Inc., project no. Order Approving Non-Project Use of Project 271-079 Lands and Waters 7-Feb-05 Entergy Arkansas Inc., project no. Notice of application for non-project use of 271-079 project lands and soliciting comments, motions to intervene, and protests 3-Feb-05 Hebgen Dam Hydroelectric Project - Submission of Addendum 2 to correct FERC #11882, Corps file no. deficiencies in license application and 200490132 provide additional information. 22-Mar-05 Entergy Arkansas Inc., project no. Order Approving Non-Project Use of Project 271-079 Lands and Waters 25-Mar-05 Corbett Diversion Project, project no. Order issuing preliminary permit 12515-000 25-Mar-05 Woodruff Narrows, LLC, project no. Order issuing preliminary permit 12510-000

c. Personnel. The Water Control and Water Quality Section consists of Hydraulic Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Technicians, a Water Quality Specialist, Biologists, and student trainees. Table 9-2 shows a complete listing of the personnel (name, 9-2 CHAPTER 9 OTHER WATER CONTROL ACTIVITIES

This page left intentionally blank.

9-4 APPENDIX A - COE PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT BEAR CREEK BOWMAN-HALEY BULL HOOK- CEDAR CANYON CHATFIELD NO SCOTT COULEE GENERAL 1 Location of dam 3 mi. S W of Denver, CO 6 mi. W of Haley, ND 1 mi. S of Havre, MT 3.5 mi. W of Rapid City, SD 2 mi. S of Denver, CO 2 River and river mile Bear Creek R M 8 N. Fk. Grand R M 100 Bull Hook Cr.-Scott Coulee Deadman's Gulch South Platte River R M 321 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 236 446 54 0.4 3,018 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 0.5 mi. at el. 5558 2.5 mi. at el. 2755 Normally dry Normally dry 2.0 mi. at el. 5430 5 Location of Damtender At Chatfield Dam Garrison Dam Ft. Peck Dam Oahe Dam On site 6 Travel time to Missouri River 2 weeks 1 day to Shadehill Dam - - 2 weeks 7 Max. discharge of record 8,600 cfs July 1896 14,100 cfs April 1952 - 440 cfs August 1949 110,000 cfs June 1965 8 Project cost (1) $61,700,000 $4,372,200 $1,837,200 $122,600 (3) $101,130,000 DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9Top of dam – ft-msl 5689.5 2794 2613.3 (BH) 2613.3 (SC) 3554 5527 10 Length of dam – ft. 5,300-main 2,100-south 5,730 1900 (BH) 1500 (SC) 1,320 13,136 11 Height of dam – ft. 179.5-main 65-south 79 73 (BH) 53 (SC) 42 147 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 5510 2715 2540 (BH) 2560 (SC) 3512 5380 13 Abutment formation Clay,shale,siltstone,sandstone Ludlow, sandy clay, silty sand Glacial till, lean clay Minnekahta limestone Sandy overburden-Dawson F. 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 11,346,000-main 770,000-so. 1,750,000 1,300,000 150,000 14,650,000 16 Date of closure Jul-77 Aug-66 Oct-55 Sep-59 Aug-73 17 Date of initial fill (base F.C.) May-79 Mar-69 - - Jun-79 SPILLWAY *Notch in BH to 2583 18 Discharge capacity – cfs 153,500 cfs at el. 5684.5 62,970 cfs at el. 2789 25,200 cfs at el. 2605 1,400 cfs at el. 3550.6 188,000 cfs at el. 5521.6 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 5667 2,777 2593.0 (BH)* 2586.0 (SC) 3545 5500 20 Width – ft. 800 650 - 60 500 21 Gates, number, size, type Ungated earth channel Ungated earth notch (2) Ungated earth channels Ungated rock channel Ungated converging chute RESERVOIR ELEV. AND AREA (1987 data) (1998 data) 22 Maximum pool 5684.5 1220a 2789.0 7916a 2605.0 (BH & SC) 384a 3550.6 15a 5521.6 5991a 23 Top of flood control pool 5635.5 715a 2777.0 5131a 2593.0 (BH & SC) 283a 3545.0 11a 5500.0 4779a 24 Top of multipurpose pool 5558.0 107a 2754.8 1732a none none 5432.0 1429a 25 Top of inactive pool 5528.0 16a 2740.0 565a none 3526.0 2a none STORAGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) (1987 data) Total - (BH & SC) (1998 data) A-1 26 Surcharge 5635.5 – 5684.5 47,352AF 2777.0 - 2789.0 77,085AF 2593.0 - 2605.0 4,000AF 3545.0 - 3550.6 74AF 5500 – 5521.6 116,469AF 27 Flood Control 5558.0 – 5635.5 28,715AF 2754.8 - 2777.0 72,717AF 2540.0 - 2593.0 6,500AF 3526.0 - 3545.0 123AF 5432 – 5500.0 206,779AF 28 Multipurpose 5528.0 – 5558.0 1,909AF 2740.0 - 2754.8 15,456AF none none 5385 – 5432 27,405AF 29 Inactive 5510.0 – 5528.0 65AF 2715.0 - 2740.0 3,309AF none 3512.0 - 3526.0 13AF 5377 – 5385 23AF 30 Gross (top of flood control pool) 30,689AF 91,482AF 6,500AF 136AF 234,207AF OUTLET WORKS 31 Number and size – conduits 1 – 7 ft. circular – upstream 1 - 10 ft. circular conduit 1 - 30 in. RCP - (BH) 1 - 24 in. C. M. P. 2 – 11 x 16 ft. oval conduit 1 – 7 x 10.5 ft. – downstream 1 - 30 in. RCP - (SC) 32 Conduit length – ft. 1690 ft. 341 ft. 393 ft. - (BH) 230 ft. 1280 ft. 286 ft. - (SC) 33 Disch Cap of Conduit - cfs 49 cfs at el. 3545 34 Gated outlets (No - size - invert elev) 2 – 3 x 6 ft. hydraulic slide 2 - 30 in. valves - el. 2740.0 1 - 24 in. valve, (BH) 2 – 6 x 13.5 ft. hydraulic slide 2 – 36” K-flo Butterfly 1 - 30 in. interior gate valve 1 - 24 in. valve, (SC) 2 – 2 x 2 ft. slide-gate on gate 1 - 30 in. interior slide gate 1 – 72 in. butterfly 35 Disch Cap of gated outlets - cfs 2,169 cfs at el. 5667 Glory Hole-3206cfs at el 2789 123 cfs at 2593- (BH) 8400 cfs at el. 5500.0 30 in. valve-140cfs at el 2755 103 cfs at 2593- (SC) 36 Ungated Outlets (No - size - invert elev) Ungated drop inlet – el. 5558 Ungated Glory Hole-el 2754.8 Ungated inlet - el. 3526

(1) Costs are as of 9-30-80. (2) Bowman-Haley sillway equipped with fuse plug (crest elevation 2780.7 ft-msl (3) Costs are as of 5-3-88 APPENDIX A - COE PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT CHERRY CREEK COLD BROOK COTTONWOOD KELLY ROAD NO SPRINGS GENERAL 1 Location of dam 10 mi. S E of Denver, CO 1 mi. N of Hot Springs, SD 4.5 mi. W of Hot Springs, SD Lowry A.F.B., Denver, CO 2 River and river mile Cherry Creek R M 11.4 Cold Brook R M 1 Cottonwood Springs Creek Westerly Creek 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 386 70.5 26 10.84 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 1.5 mi.at el. 5550 1.2 at el. 3646.5 0.6 mi. at el. 3875 Normally dry 5 Location of Damtender At Chatfield Dam On site At Cold Brook Dam Rocky Mt. Area 6 Travel time to Missouri River 2 weeks - - 2 weeks 7 Max. discharge of record 58,000 cfs June 1965 8,400 cfs September 1938 - Not available 8 Project cost (1) $14,670,000 $1,571,000 (4) $2,885,000 (4) $232,000 (Original Cost) DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9Top of dam – ft-msl 5644.5 3675 3955 5372 5363 West Emb. 10 Length of dam – ft. 14,300 925 1,190 4,700 11 Height of dam – ft. 141 127 123 32 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 5504 3545 3832 5340 13 Abutment formation Sandstone, clay, silt Sandstone, shale, limestone Minnekahta limestone Overburden-sandy clay 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 13,000,000 1,072,000 950,000 200,000 16 Date of closure Oct-48 Sep-52 May-69 November 1953 Rehab 1978 17 Date of initial fill (base F.C.) Mar-60 Jun-63 (3584.7) -Dry Pool SPILLWAY 18 Discharge capacity – cfs 38,350 cfs at el. 5636.2 80,600 cfs at el. 3667.2 39,600 cfs at el. 3950.3 3,600 cfs at el. 5366.8 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 5608.7 (3) 3,647 3936 5362 20 Width – ft. 67 200 275 120 21 Gates, number, size, type Ungated earth channel Ungated sharp crested weir Ungated broad weir Uncontrolled concrete U wall and chute RESERVOIR ELEV. AND AREA (1988 data) 22 Maximum pool 5645.0 (2) 4820a 3667.2 279a 3950.0 257a 5366.8 43a 23 Top of flood control pool 5608.7 3103a 3651.4 198a 3936.0 214a 5362.0 38a 24 Top of multipurpose pool 5550.0 847a 3585.0 36a 3875.0 41a none 25 Top of inactive pool none none 3868.0 30a none STORAGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) (1988 data) A-2 26 Surcharge 5608.7 - 5645.0 142,069AF(3) 3651.4 - 3667.2 3,600AF 3936.0 - 3950.0 3,250AF 5362.0 - 5366.8 200AF 27 Flood Control 5550.0 – 5608.7 110,034AF(3) 3585.0 - 3651.4 6,680AF 3875.0 - 3936.0 7,730AF 5342.0 - 5362.0 360AF 28 Multipurpose 5504.0 – 5550.0 12,805AF 3548.0 - 3585.0 520AF 3868.0 - 3875.0 249AF none 29 Inactive none none 3832.0 - 3668.0 406AF none 30 Gross (top of flood control pool) 122,839AF(3) 7,200AF 8,385AF 360AF OUTLET WORKS 31 Number and size – conduits 2 – 8 x 12 ft. oval conduit 1 - 6.67 ft. conduit 1 - 48 in. concrete 1 - 5.5 ft. circular conduit 1 – 12 ft. circular conduit 1 - 8 in. supply line 1 - 30 in. CMP 32 Conduit length – ft. 679.5 ft. 907 ft. 580 ft. 260 ft.

33 Disch Cap of Conduit - cfs 1540 cfs at el. 3651.4 560 cfs at el. 3936.0 34 Gated outlets (No - size - invert elev) 5 – 6 x 9 ft. – hydraulic slide 3 - 12 in. gate valves el. 3548 1 - 3 x 3 ft. gate - el. 3868 Gated inlet - el. 5342.0 2 – 18 in. bypass gates 1 - 8 in. valve

35 Disch Cap of gated outlets - cfs 8100 cfs at el. 5598.0 570 cfs at el. 5362.0

36 Ungated Outlets (No - size - invert elev) Ungated drop inlet - el. 3585 Ungated drop inlet - el. 3875 Ungated drop inlet-el. 5358.4 (1) Costs are as of 9-30-80. (2) Due to updated Hydrological Improvement Assessment for Cherry Creek Reservoir, with the maximum pool the dam would be overtopped. (3) Top of Flood Control Pool is elevation 5598.0 which was original spillway crest elevation. Due to sloughing of spillway side slopes, spillway crest elevation is 5609.7 ft-msl. (4) Costs are as of 5-3-88. APPENDIX A - COE PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT PAPIO DAM NO. 11 PAPIO DAM NO. 16 PAPIO DAM NO. 18 PAPIO DAM NO. 20 NO (Glenn Cunningham Lake) (Standing Bear Lake) (Zorinsky Lake) (Wehrspann Lake) GENERAL 1 Location of dam 93rd State Street 132nd and Fort Street 156th and "F" Street 156th and Giles Road 2 River and river mile Knight Creek - Tributary Big Papio - Boxelder Creek - Trib. South Branch Papio- 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 17.8 6 16.4 13.1 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 2.5 1 1.5 1.5 5 Location of Damtender Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office 6 Travel time to Missouri River 5 - 10 Hours 5 - 10 Hours 5 - 10 Hours 5 - 10 Hours 7 Max. discharge of record ---- 8 Project cost (1) $11,800,000 $4,500,000 $20,656,000 $14,934,000 DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9Top of dam – ft-msl 1152 1130 1143.5 1131 10 Length of dam – ft. 1,940 1,460 1,400 1,810 11 Height of dam – ft. 67 70 64 59 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 1085 1060 1079.5 1069 13 Abutment formation Lean clay loess Lean clay loess Lean clay loess Lean clay loess 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 656,000 481,000 1,263,000 767,450 16 Date of closure Aug-74 Oct-72 Jul-84 Sep-82 17 Date of initial fill (base F.C.) Sep-77 Oct-77 Apr-92 May-87 SPILLWAY 18 Discharge capacity – cfs 18,700 9,500 30,000 12,000 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 1142 1121 1128.2 1120 20 Width – ft. 700 250 400 600 21 Gates, number, size, type Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel RESERVOIR ELEV. AND AREA (1987 data) (1989 data) (1985 data) (1984 data) 22 Maximum pool 1147 1170a 1127 390a 1138.2 861a 1125.8 806a 23 Top of flood control pool 1142 991a 1121 313a 1128.2 599a 1113.1 489a 24 Top of multipurpose pool 1121 377a 1104 125a 1110.0 259a 1095.83 (2) 239a A-3 25 Top of inactive pool STORAGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) (1987 data) (1989 data) (1985 data) (1984 data) 26 Surcharge 1142 - 1147 5,405AF 1121 - 1127 2,110AF 1128.2 - 1138.2 7,290AF 1113.1 - 1125.8 8,128AF 27 Flood Control 1121 - 1142 13,899AF 1104 - 1121 3,591AF 1110.0 - 1128.2 7,649AF 1095.83 - 1113.1 6,119AF 28 Multipurpose 1085 - 1121 3,262AF 1060 - 1104 1,285AF 1060.5 - 1110.0 3,037AF 1069 - 1095.83 2,682AF 29 Inactive 30 Gross (top of flood control pool) 17,161AF 4,876AF 10,686AF 8,801AF OUTLET WORKS 31 Number and size – conduits 1 - RCP - 54" Dia. 1 - RCP - 36" Dia. 1 - RCP - 48" Dia. 1 - RCP - 48" Dia. 32 Conduit length – ft. 680 736 782 656 33 Disch Cap of Conduit - cfs 570 160 460 490 34 Gated outlets (No - size - invert elev) 1 - 30" x 30" 1100 1 - 24" x 36" 1080 1 - 30" x 30" 1090 1 - 30" x 30" Dia. 1077 1 - 6" diameter 1104.25 1 - 6" diameter 1090 35 Disch Cap of gated outlets - cfs 90 90 140 140 36 Ungated Outlets (No - size - invert elev) 2 - 2.0' x 4.0' 1121 2 - 1.0' x 2.5' 1104 2 - 1.5' x 3.5' 1110 2 - 1.25' x 3.5' 1095.83 2 - 2.5' x 9.0' 1127.5 2 - 2.0' x 6.0' 1109 2 - 3.15' x 8.0' 1117.6 2 - 3.67' x 8.0' 1103.4

(1) Costs as of 5-3-88 (2) Based on a survey of July 1987 the elevation of the overflow lip was changed from 1096 ft-msl to 1095.83 ft-msl. APPENDIX A - COE PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT SALT CR. DAM NO. 2 SALT CR. DAM NO. 4 SALT CR. DAM NO. 8 SALT CR. DAM NO. 9 SALT CR. DAM NO. 10 NO (Olive Creek Lake) (Blue Stem Lake) (Wagon Train Lake) (Stagecoach Lake) (Yankee Hill Lake) GENERAL 1 Location of dam 1.5 mi. W of Sprague 2.5 mi. W of Sprague 1.5 mi. N of Holland 1 mi. S of Hickman 3.5 mi. N of Denton 2 River and river mile S Trib. of Olive Br. RM 12 N. Trib. of Olive Br. RM 9.5 N. Trib. of Hickman Br. RM .8 S. Trib. of Hickman Br. RM 1 Cardwell Br. RM 4 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 8.2 16.6 15.6 9.7 8 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 1.2 1.6 1.8 1.4 0.7 5 Location of Damtender Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office 6 Travel time to Missouri River 23 hrs. 13 hrs. 14 hrs. 8 hrs. 3 hrs. 7 Max. discharge of record 179 cfs July 1993 342 cfs October 1973 334 cfs July 1993 190 cfs October 1973 145 cfs October 1973 8 Max. pool of record 1342.62 July 1993 1316.5 October 1973 1295.4 October 1973 1279.0 October 1973 1252.3 October 1973 9 Project cost (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) DAM AND EMBANKMENT 10 Top of dam – ft-msl (2) 1359 1332.7 1311.2 1294.2 1270.2 11 Length of dam – ft. 3,020 2,460 1,650 2,250 3,100 12 Height of dam – ft. 45 57 52 48 52 13 Stream bed – ft-msl 1314 1277 1260 1246 1218 14 Abutment formation Clay - sand - silt Clay - sand Clay Clay - sand Clay - sand 15 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth 16 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 312,000 471,000 376,000 374,000 502,000 17 Date of closure 20 Sept. 1963 12 Sept. 1962 24 Sept. 1962 27 Aug. 1963 5 Oct. 1965 18 Date of initial fill (base F.C.) 30 Jun. 1965 6 Jul. 1963 24 Jun. 1963 May-65 10 Jun. 1967 SPILLWAY 19 Discharge capacity – cfs 15,875 at el. 1357.1 22,925 at el. 1331.7 23,210 at el. 1309.8 17,565 at el. 1291.6 12,100 at el. 1267.8 20 Crest elevation – ft-msl 1350 1,323 1301.2 1284.9 1262.5 21 Width – ft. 340 340 430 430 400 22 Gates, number, size, type Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel RESERVOIR ELEV. AND AREA (1993 data) (1993 data) (1987 data) (1990 data) (1994 data) 23 Maximum pool 1357.1 459a 1331.7 938a 1309.8 908a 1291.6 621a 1267.8 627a 24 Top of flood control pool 1350.0 359a 1322.5 646a 1302.0 648a 1285.0 464a 1262.0 495a

A-4 25 Top of joint use pool none none none none none 26 Top of conservation pool 1335.0 162a 1307.4 309a 1287.8 277a 1271.1 195a 1244.9 211a 27 Top of sediment Pool 1335.0 162a 1306.1 282a 1284.6 200a 1271.1 195a 1241.9 170a STORaGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) (1993 data) (1993 data) (1987 data) (1990 data) (1994 data) 28 Surcharge 1350.0 - 1357.1 2,911AF 1322.5 - 1331.7 7,229AF 1302.0 - 1309.8 5,972AF 1285.0 - 1291.6 3,578AF 1262.0 - 1267.8 3,225AF 29 Flood Control 1335.0 - 1350.0 3,857AF 1307.4 - 1322.5 7,129AF 1287.8 - 1302.0 6,676AF 1271.1 - 1285.0 4,413AF 1244.9 - 1262.0 5,841AF 30 Conservation none 1306.1 - 1307.4 385AF 1284.6 - 1287.8 755AF none 1241.9 - 1244.9 570AF 31 Sediment 1314.0 -1335.0 1,100AF 1277.0 - 1305.1 2,146AF 1260.0 - 1284.6 1,298AF 1246.0 - 1271.1 1,451AF 1218.0 - 1241.9 1,057AF 32 Gross (top of flood control pool) 4,957AF 9,660AF 8,929AF 5,864AF 7,468AF OUTLET WORKS 33 Number and size – conduits 1 - CMP - 48" Dia. 1 - CMP - 60" Dia. 1 - CMP - 60" Dia. 1 - CMP - 48" Dia. 1 - CMP - 42" Dia. With 30" RCP lining With 42" RCP lining With 42" RCP lining With 30" RCP lining With 30" RCP lining 34 Conduit length – ft. 280 313 299 280 300 35 Gated outlets (No - size - invert elev) 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1330.0 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1303.0 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1283.5 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1261.0 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1237.0 36 Ungated outlets (openings - size - elev.) 2 - 24" x 72" - 1340.9 2 - 30" x 96" - 1313.5 2 - 30" x 96" - 1292.4 2 - 24" x 72" - 1277.1 2 - 18" x 63" - 1250.0 2 - 12" x 30" - 1335.0 2 - 12" x 54" - 1307.4 2 - 12" x 54" - 1287.8 2 - 12" x 30" - 1271.1 2 - 12" x 30" - 1244.9 37 Disch cap - cfs at base of FC 85 @ 1335.0 85 @ 1307.4 85 @ 1287.8 85 @ 1271.1 110 @ 1244.9

(1) Total project financial cost including all dams = $12,075,000 (Costs are as of 9-30-80). (2) Top of dam and spillway crest elevation changed per 1997 freeboard analysis surveys APPENDIX A - COE PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT SALT CR. DAM NO. 12 SALT CR. DAM NO. 13 SALT CR. DAM NO. 14 SALT CR. DAM NO. 17 SALT CR. DAM NO. 18 NO (Conestoga Lake) (Twin Lakes) (Pawnee Lake) (Holmes Lake) (Branched Oak Lake) GENERAL 1 Location of dam 1.5 mi. N of Denton 2 mi. NW of Pleasantdale 2 mi. NW of Emerald SE edge of Lincoln 4 mi. W of Raymond 2 River and river mile Holmes Cr. RM 1 Middle Cr. RM 12.8 N Middle Cr. RM 1 Antelope Cr. RM 6.1 Oak Cr. RM 17.3 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 15.1 11 35.9 5.4 89 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 1.4 1.5 3 0.7 3.7 5 Location of Damtender Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office Missouri River Project Office 6 Travel time to Missouri River 8 hrs. 13 hours 7 hrs. 3 hrs. 6 hrs. 7 Max. discharge of record 185 cfs March 1987 168 cfs June 1983 420 cfs July 1993 187 cfs June 1983 774 cfs July 1993 8 Max. pool of record 1241.1 March 1987 1346.9 June 1983 1249.1 July 1993 1249.97 July 1993 1287.9 August 1987 9 Project cost (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) DAM AND EMBANKMENT 10 Top of dam – ft-msl (2) 1260.2 1363.6 1270.6 1271.3 1318.2 11 Length of dam – ft. 3,000 2,075 5,000 7,700 5,200 12 Height of dam – ft. 63 58 65 55 70 13 Stream bed – ft-msl 1197 1306 1206 1218 1250 14 Abutment formation Clay - sand Clay - sand - silt Clay - sand Clay - sand Clay - sand - silt 15 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth 16 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 658,000 610,000 870,000 900,000 246,000 17 Date of closure 24 Sept. 1963 26 Sept. 1965 16 Jul. 1964 17 Sept. 1962 21 Aug. 1967 18 Date of initial fill (base F.C.) May-65 18 Mar. 1969 21 Jun. 1967 2 Jun. 1965 18 Jan. 1973 SPILLWAY 19 Discharge capacity – cfs 27,220 at el. 1258.2 25,200 at el. 1361.6 19,875 at el. 1269.1 800 at el. 1269.7 7,825 at el. 1317.5 20 Crest elevation – ft-msl 1251.9 1354.9 1263.4 1267.2 1311.6 21 Width – ft. 750 400 700 50 200 22 Gates, number, size, type Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel Ungated earth channel RESERVOIR ELEV. AND AREA (1988 data) (1994 data) (1981 data) (1993 data) (1991 data) 23 Maximum pool 1258.2 733a 1361.6 636a 1269.1 1679a 1269.7 423a 1317.3 4224a 24 Top of flood control pool 1252.0 601a 1355.0 497a 1263.5 1403a 1266.0 381a 1311.0 3673a

A-5 25 Top of joint use pool none none none none none 26 Top of conservation pool 1232.9 217a 1341.0 236a 1244.3 739a 1242.4 123a 1284.0 1847a 27 Top of sediment Pool 1232.9 217a 1337.4 177a 1244.3 739a 1240.0 99a 1275.7 1225a STORaGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) (1988 data) (1994 data) (1981 data) (1993 data) (1991 data) 28 Surcharge 1252.0 - 1258.2 4,141AF 1355.0 - 1361.6 3,728AF 1263.5 - 1269.1 8,575AF 1266.0 - 1269.7 1,490AF 1311.0 - 1317.3 4,886AF 29 Flood Control 1232.9 - 1252.0 7,655AF 1341.0 - 1355.0 5,021AF 1244.3 - 1263.5 20,299AF 1242.4 - 1266.0 5,845AF 1284.0 - 1311.0 1,686AF 30 Conservation none 1337.4 - 1341.0 747AF none 1240.0 - 1242.4 245AF 1275.7 - 1284.0 2,724AF 31 Sediment 1197.0 - 1232.9 1,912AF 1306.0 - 1337.4 1,414AF 1206.0 - 1244.3 7,813AF 1218.0 - 1240.0 538AF 1250.0 - 1275.7 2,364AF 32 Gross (top of flood control pool) 9,567AF 7,182AF 28,112AF 6,628AF 96,774AF OUTLET WORKS 33 Number and size – conduits 1 - CMP - 60" Dia. 1 - CMP - 42" Dia. 1 - CMP - 60" Dia. 1 - CMP - 60" Dia. 1 - CMP - concrete With 42" RCP lining With 30" RCP lining With 42" RCP lining With 42" RCP lining Lined - 72" Dia. 34 Conduit length – ft. 318 335 382 320 370 35 Gated outlets (No - size - invert elev) 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1228.0 1 - 42" x 54" Lift gate- 1333.0 1 - 42" x 60" Lift gate- 1236.0 1 - 36" x 36" Lift gate- 1239.0 1 - 48" x 72" Lift gate - 1274.0 36 Ungated outlets (openings - size - elev.) 2 - 30" x 96" - 1242.3 2 - 24" x 63" - 1341.0 2 - 34" x 120" - 1244.3 2 - 30" x 96" - 1249.0 1 - 10" Dia. slide gate- 1276.3 2 - 12" x 54" - 1232.9 - - 2 - 12" x 36" - 1242.5 2 - 42" x 144" - 1283.95 37 Disch cap - cfs at base of FC 85 @ 1232.9 190 @ 1341.0 210 @ 1244.3 85 @ 1242.4 300 @ 1284.0

(1) Total project financial cost including all dams = $12,075,000 (Costs are as of 9-30-80). (2) Top of dam and spillway crest elevation changed per 1997 freeboard analysis surveys. APPENDIX A - COE PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT PIPESTEM SNAKE CREEK (2) SPRING CREEK (3) WESTERLY CREEK NO LAKE AUDUBON LAKE POCASSE GENERAL 1 Location of dam 3 mi. N W Jamestown, ND 12 mi. NE of Garrison Dam Pollock, SD Lowry A.F.B., Denver, CO 2 River and river mile Pipestem Creek R M 3 Snake Creek Spring Creek Westerly Creek 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 594 250 660 9.29 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 5.5 at elevation 1442.4 Normally dry 5 Location of Damtender On site Garrison Dam Oahe Dam Rocky Mt. Area 6 Travel time to Missouri River 8 weeks - - 2 weeks 7 Max. discharge of record 6,080 cfs April 1969 - Not available 8 Project cost (1) $9,277,500 Not available DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9Top of dam – ft-msl 1507.5 1865 1625 5434.5 10 Length of dam – ft. 4,000 12,900 3200 9,100 11 Height of dam – ft. 107.5 85 40 45.5 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 1400 1780 1585 5389 13 Abutment formation Sandy overburden-P. shale Not available 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled Earth Rolled earth Rolled earth 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 1,990,000 Not available 16 Date of closure Jul-73 1952 1961 Jul-91 17 Date of initial fill (base F.C.) May-74 Sep-75 Between 1961 and 1964 Dry Pool SPILLWAY 18 Discharge capacity – cfs 56,200 cfs at el. 1502.8 none 46,900 cfs at el. 5431.4 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 1496.3 1617 5419 20 Width – ft. 1500 72 400 21 Gates, number, size, type Ungated earth channel Ungated box culverts Uncontrolled grass lined, earth cut RESERVOIR ELEV. AND AREA 22 Maximum pool 1502.8 6000a 1850 20,620a 1625.0 2,560a 5431.4 375a 23 Top of flood control pool 1496.3 4728a none none 5419.0 275a 24 Top of multipurpose pool 1442.5 840a 1847 18,780a 1617.0 1,520a none 25 Top of inactive pool 1415.0 5a 1810 1,450a 1602.0 60a none A-6 STORAGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) 26 Surcharge 1496.3 - 1502.8 34,681AF 1847 - 1850 59,130AF 1617 - 1625 15,000AF 5419.0 - 5431.4 3950AF 27 Flood Control 1442.5 - 1496.3 133,163AF none 5389.0 - 5419.0 4150AF 28 Multipurpose 1415.0 - 1442.5 8,944AF 1810 - 1847 323,690AF 1585 - 1617 11,000AF none 29 Inactive 1400.0 - 1415.0 0AF 1780 - 1810 13,180AF none 30 Gross (top of flood control pool) 142,107AF 396,000AF 11,000AF 4150AF OUTLET WORKS 31 Number and size – conduits 1 - 8 ft. circular conduit 1 - 7 x 10 ft. reinforced 1 - 5 ft. CMP 1 - 4 ft. prestressed concrete concrete conduit cylinder pipe 32 Conduit length – ft. 675 ft. 907 ft. 34 Gated outlets (No - size - invert elev) 2 - 4 x 7 ft. hydraulic slide 1 - 7 x 10 ft. sluice gate 5 x 5 ft sluice gate el. 1602 1 - 48 x 24 inches hand 1 - 36 in valve, 1-3 x 3 ft slide 5 x 12 ft overflow roller operated sluice gate el. 1609 35 Disch Cap of gated outlets - cfs 2,300 cfs at el. 1496.3 2,300 cfs at 15 ft. head 98 cfs at el. 5431.4 36 Ungated Outlets (No - size - invert elev) Ungated drop inlet-el. 1442.5 differential

(1) Costs are as of 9-30-80. (2) Subimpoundment of Garrison Reservoir – no authorized flood control (3) Subimpoundment of Oahe Reservoir – no authorized flood control APPENDIX B1-BEAR CREEK DAM

BEAR CREEK DAM SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operation. In response to the contracts for temporary water storage, a revised Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Corps of Engineers and the State of Colorado was signed on 20 June 1988. This memorandum supercedes the previous MOU dated 11 May 1977. Under normal conditions the Bear Creek Dam outlet works are set to automatically pass streamflow up to 500 cfs when pool elevations are above the drop inlet-outlet weir crest of 5558.0 ft-msl. When conditions warrant, higher releases are made by opening two slide service gates in the dome-type gated control structure buried under the embankment. Under the revised MOU, the State Engineer or his representative will determine the storage and releases necessary to satisfy downstream water right requirements when the pool level is below elevation 5559.0 ft-msl. Elevation 5559.0 ft-msl is one foot into the flood storage zone and was selected to allow flexibility in targeting authorized pool levels. No contract water was stored during the report period. The State of Colorado, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Game, Fish and Parks, in a letter dated 1 October 1970, agreed to provide water for the initial filling and replenishment of evaporation losses from the recreation pool, by purchase or other means, consistent with Federal and State laws to assure effective operation of the project for recreation.

2. Operation Details. Bear Creek Reservoir started the year in “fill and spill” mode. Starting on July 26, gated releases were made at Bear Creek Reservoir until the end of the report period at the request of the State Engineer. Inflow for the period was up from the previous year at 111% of normal. No flood control releases were made during the reporting period. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for Bear Creek.

a. Maximums of Records: Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 910 cfs May 01 80 800 cfs Jun 12 79 5587.09 Jun 18 95 2nd 796 cfs Jun 09 95 800 cfs May 05 80 5580.96 Jun 23 83 3rd 690 cfs Jun 10 79 612 cfs Jun 24 95 5576.3 May 19 80

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill): Pool-Date Lowest 5549.17 Oct 18 99 2nd 5554.65 Sep 09 02 3rd 5555.89 Jul 31 02

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005): Total Inflow Total Outflow Peak Daily Inflow 40,001 AF, 111% of normal 39,813 AF, 112% of normal 254 cfs on May 12 Peak Daily Outflow Peak Pool Elev. (FT-MSL) Min. Pool Elev. (FT-MSL) 254 cfs on May 12 5559.88, May 11 5556.76, Sep 27

APPENDIX B1- BEAR CREEK DAM-1 APPENDIX B1-BEAR CREEK DAM

FIGURE 1 –BEAR CREEK DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B1-BEAR CREEK DAM-2 APPENDIX B1-BEAR CREEK DAM

FIGURE 2 – BEAR CREEK DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B1- BEAR CREEK DAM-3

APPENDIX B2-BOWMAN-HALEY DAM

BOWMAN-HALEY DAM AND LAKE GRAND RIVER BASIN, NORTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operations. The pool level of Bowman-Haley Lake will be maintained from 1.0 to 2.0 feet below the top of conservation pool (2754.8 ft-msl) as a result of an informal agreement in 1994 between the Corps, the Natural Resource Conservation Service, the North Dakota Game and Fish Department, and the Bowman County Water Management District. This will be done by making releases through the Olzanski Tube or low-level gate. Maintaining the pool at this level is being done in an attempt to reduce shoreline erosion, help establish riparian vegetation, and improve water quality by reducing turbidity from wave wash. In addition by making the releases from the lower strata of the reservoir, it is hoped that the overall quality of the water in the reservoir will be improved. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operational Details. Dry conditions continued in the Bowman-Haley Basin. Inflow was 13% of normal and one of the lowest since the dam was closed in 1967. While no low level releases were made the pool level continued to drop and at the end of September, 2005 was 4.0 feet below the top of the conservation pool. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for Bowman-Haley.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 5,310 cfs Mar 27 78 2,390 cfs Mar 28 78 2762.66 Mar 28 78 2nd 2,135 cfs Jun 14 92 1,256 cfs May 15 95 2758.77 May 14 95 3rd 2,081 cfs May 09 95 1,125 cfs Mar 14 72 2758.50 Mar 13 72

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 2747.57 Jun 12 92 2nd 2749.07 Apr 27 91 3rd 2749.44 Oct 27 03

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through Sep 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 2,747 AF, 13% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 91 cfs on Jun 28 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 2752.18, Jul 06 2750.93, Sept 29

APPENDIX B2- BOWMAN-HALEY DAM-1 APPENDIX B2-BOWMAN-HALEY DAM

FIGURE 1 - BOWMAN-HALEY DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B2- BOWMAN-HALEY DAM-2 APPENDIX B2-BOWMAN-HALEY DAM

FIGURE 2 – BOWMAN-HALEY DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B2- BOWMAN-HALEY DAM-3

APPENDIX B3-BULL HOOK-SCOTT COULEE-CEDAR CANYON DAMS

BULL HOOK-SCOTT COULEE DAMS MILK RIVER BASIN, MONTANA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operations. Bull Hook and Scott Coulee Dams are both part of the Bull Hook Unit providing flood control for the city of Havre, Montana. Bull Hook and Scott Coulee Dams are both located south of Havre on Bull Hook and Scott Coulee Creeks, respectively.

Under normal circumstances, the conduit valves of both dams will be kept partially open to evacuate accumulated storage as expeditiously as possible to allow the dams to function as flood protection facilities if excess runoff occurs upstream. Valve openings are to be maintained that will allow only the minimal damages to occur in the City of Havre.

At times of high flows on the Milk River, it may be necessary to shut off releases in both dams to prevent flooding behind the Milk River levees. No reports of heavy inflow into Bull Hook-Scott Coulee Dams were made during the report period.

CEDAR CANYON DAM (RED DALE GULCH) RAPID CREEK BASIN, SOUTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Cedar Canyon Dam is located on the western outskirts of Rapid City, South Dakota. The dam is designed as a detention structure with no permanent storage. However, a small pool may sometimes exist in the dead storage below the invert of the outlet pipe. The dam collects runoff from approximately 261 acres. The outlet and spillway are uncontrolled. No water accumulated during the report period. Inflow was negligible and outflow was zero for the period. No flood control was achieved. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

APPENDIX B3- BULL HOOK-SCOTT COULEE-CEDAR CANYON DAMS-1

APPENDIX B4-CHATFIELD DAM

CHATFIELD DAM AND LAKE SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operation. Before Chatfield Dam became operational, the Corps Water Control Section requested that the Colorado State Engineers Office, acting through the District 8 Water Commissioner, assume responsibility for determining releases from the multipurpose pool in an effort to keep the Corps free of water rights conflicts. This relationship was put into a formal document dated 30 March 1973, when the multipurpose pool was increased from elevation 5430.0 to 5432.0 ft-msl and contained water storage commitments by the State. By contract, the State is committed to keeping the pool above elevation 5423.0 ft-msl for recreation and fish and wildlife purposes. Since 1979, the City of Denver through the State of Colorado has been permitted to regulate storage in the conservation pool in return for the city's commitment to provide sufficient water in the pool for recreation. The city is committed to keeping 20,000 acre- feet (Elevation 5426.94 ft-msl) of water in the pool from 1 May through 31 August, and permitted to use 10,000 acre-feet of storage space in the reservoir between elevations 5423.8 and 5432.0 ft-msl. The original top of multipurpose pool level was at elevation 5426.0 ft-msl.

2. Operation Details. Chatfield Reservoir was in the conservation pool for nearly the entire report period. Twice the pool level entered the flood control zone slightly, but regulation was maintained by the State of Colorado. Inflows continued to be below normal but were up significantly from last year. The State of Colorado is responsible for releases from Chatfield Reservoir below elevation 5432.0 ft-msl. The releases are necessary to satisfy downstream water rights. The City of Denver continued planning on the construction of a pumping station below the Chatfield outlet works and the possibility of drawing the pool down below elevation 5423.0 ft, msl in the event of another drought. To accomplish this work, a draft Environmental Assessment (EA) was started in WY2003. This EA for Chatfield has been delayed due to water use issues regarding the water below elevation 5432.0. As of January 16, 2006, these issues were being worked out between Denver Water, the State of Colorado, and the National Parks Service. Following agreement between these agencies, the Omaha District will continue the draft EA. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for Chatfield.

a. Maximums of Records: Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 3,394 cfs Jul 03 95 3,350 cfs Jul 07 95 5447.58 May 26 80 2nd 3,370 cfs May 30 83 3,034 cfs May 15 84 5447.08 Jun 30 83 3rd 3,155 cfs May 09 80 3,027 cfs May 27 87 5446.40 Jul 04 95

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill): Pool-Date Lowest 5423.03 Aug 30 03 2nd 5423.14 Aug 04 04 3rd 5423.59 Oct 14 98

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005): Total Inflow Total Outflow Peak Daily Inflow 109,045 AF, 72% of normal 99,050 AF, 68% of normal 873 cfs on Jun 01

APPENDIX B4-CHATFIELD DAM-1 APPENDIX B4- CHATFIELD DAM

Peak Daily Outflow Peak Pool Elev. (FT-MSL) Min. Pool Elev. (FT-MSL) 953 cfs on Jun 01 5432.12, May 04 5423.16, Nov 18

APPENDIX B4- CHATFIELD DAM-2 APPENDIX B4-CHATFIELD DAM

FIGURE 1 – CHATFIELD DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B4-CHATFIELD DAM-3 APPENDIX B4- CHATFIELD DAM

FIGURE 2 – CHATFIELD DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B4- CHATFIELD DAM-4 APPENDIX B5-CHERRY CREEK DAM

CHERRY CREEK DAM AND LAKE CHERRY CREEK SOUTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, COLORADO 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. On 1 April 1988, the State of Colorado, through the State Engineer, implemented strict administration of water rights within the Cherry Creek basin. When a senior river call is in effect, the Cherry Creek Reservoir is required to pass inflow through the project. The Water Control and Water Quality Section coordinated releases from the project to comply with downstream river calls as determined by the Colorado State Engineer’s office.

2. Operation Details. Cherry Creek Dam and Reservoir is operated within a transition zone of 5550.0 to 5551.0 feet above msl. The transition zone was established to minimize the number of gate changes needed to keep the reservoir at or near the full conservation pool level of 5550.0 feet above msl.

On May 27, 2005 the five main service gates were individually opened to flush sediment that has accumulated in front of the gates. Gates 1, 2, 4 and 5 were opened 1 foot (250 cfs) for 15 minutes each. Gate 3 was opened to 6 feet (1300 cfs) for 5 minutes. This was considered a “low flush” for gates 1, 2, 4 and 5 and a “high flush” for gate 3. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for Cherry Creek.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 6,150 cfs Jun 16 65 560 cfs Aug 7-8 65 5565.82 Jun 03 73 2nd 3,195 cfs May 06 73 450 cfs Mar 27 60 5562.52 Aug 01 65 3rd 1,440 cfs Jul 24 83 375 cfs Jun 08 73 5562.50 Jul 31 65

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 5543.51 Jan 29 65 2nd 5544.97 Jul 31 64 3rd 5545.90 Nov 23 78

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 20,404 AF, 200% of normal 18,667 AF, 258% of normal Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 201 cfs on Apr 13 207 cfs on Apr 16 Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 5551.43, Apr 15 5549.22, Sep 17

APPENDIX B5-CHERRY CREEK DAM-1 APPENDIX B5- CHERRY CREEK DAM

FIGURE 1 – CHERRY CREEK DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD

APPENDIX B5- CHERRY CREEK DAM-2 APPENDIX B5-CHERRY CREEK DAM

FIGURE 2 – CHERRY CREEK DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B5-CHERRY CREEK DAM-3

APPENDIX B6-COLD BROOK DAM

COLD BROOK DAM AND LAKE FALL RIVER BASIN, SOUTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Releases from Cold Brook Reservoir are regulated to comply with state water law. Larive Lake Resort, located below the dam, holds a senior water right entitling it to the Cold Brook Reservoir inflow up to 1.1 cfs. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

An outlet works with port openings at elevation 3585.0 ft-msl and a main crest at elevation 3600.0 ft-msl regulate the pool level and outflows from Cold Brook Reservoir. The outlet works is uncontrolled, which means that there are no gates on the port openings or main crest to regulate flows once the pool level rises above the crest of the port openings. There are three low level gates in the outlet works, each having a capacity of 20 cubic feet per second (cfs). These gates are normally closed, but can be opened to provide for lowering of the reservoir pool below elevation 3585.0 ft-msl. In spring of 2001 the downstream gage house was removed and 2 new 8-inch valves were installed on the 8-inch supply line to Larive Lake. One valve is used for controlling flows to Larive Lake and the other valve is used to divert flows into the stilling basin below the outlet works.

2. Operation Details. From the initial construction of Cold Brook Dam in the early 1950’s until 1994, the reservoir rarely filled to the top of the multipurpose pool, and outflows were at or near zero. Since 1994 groundwater conditions in the Black Hills have changed and there has been an increase in flow from springs in the area. This has resulted in pool levels at or slightly above the top of multipurpose pool and minor discharges below the project. For the last 11 years (1994-2005) the pool level has fluctuated in the range of 3580 ft-msl to 3585.4 ft- msl, and outflows of up to 4 cfs have spilled through the lower port openings of the intake structure except for periods of artificial drawdown. New 8-inch valves were installed in 2001 and since then the goal has been to maintain the pool level below the crest of the intake structure in the range of 3582 to 3584 ft-msl.

Traditionally the releases from Cold Brook Dam had been absorbed into the bed of the outflow channel and did not pose a problem to downstream residents. Beginning in December 1998, the outflow began to extend farther downstream on project property but still within the channel. After flow left the boundary of the Cold Brook Project, it extended into private land and a residential area in the northern part of Hot Springs, South Dakota. In about a one-quarter mile reach of private land below Cold Brook Dam, the channel has been completely filled in. Presently homes, trailers, and outbuildings are located in the historic channel area and flood plain of Cold Brook. Because of the lack of a channel to convey flood flows, a significant area is flooded with only a small release from the project. In addition to potential for property damage, the warning time for high releases is very low, resulting in the potential for loss of life in the residential area.

APPENDIX B6-COLD BROOK DAM-1 APPENDIX B6- COLD BROOK DAM

This was the first year since the wet years of 1994 - 1999 where total inflow and outflow were below normal for the report period. This was a change for Cold Brook as conditions over the Black Hills in general have been very wet since 1994. Releases from Cold Brook Dam flow into Cold Brook. Cold Brook flows into the Fall River approximately one half mile downstream of Cold Brook Dam.

The temporary drawdown plan initiated on 28 June 1999 was continued in the water year 2005 with a slight modification. When it was first initiated the plan called for maintaining the Cold Brook Reservoir pool at a level five feet (elevation 3580 ft-msl) below the intake of the outlet works. The drawdown provided an additional 165 acre-feet of storage space in the reservoir to contain rainfall runoff. Because of impacts to recreation at the project, since year 2000 the lake has been drawn down to a level only 3 feet (elevation 3582 ft-msl) below the intake of the outlet works. This drawdown plan will be continued as long as local authorities continue with initiatives to restore the downstream channel capacity. The City of Hot Springs has received preliminary approval from Federal Emergency Management Agency to restore the channel as part of the Pre- Disaster Mitigation Program. Fall River County is in the process of applying for assistance through this same program. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for Cold Brook.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 74 cfs Jul 14 62 19 cfs Jul 04 99 3585.63 Jun 20 99 2nd 65 cfs Jul 08 61 13 cfs Apr 08 00 3585.43 Jun 13 98 3rd 40 cfs May 19 82 12 cfs Jun 07 01 3585.41 Jul 16 95

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 3576.60 Oct 22 77 2nd 3576.80 Sep 14 81 3rd 3576.86 Oct 01 80

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 561 AF, 82% of normal 463 AF, 79% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 9 cfs on Aug 13 7 cfs on Apr 07

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 3585.32, Mar 24 3581.71, Apr 20

APPENDIX B6- COLD BROOK DAM-2 APPENDIX B6-COLD BROOK DAM

FIGURE 1 – COLD BROOK DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B6-COLD BROOK DAM-3 APPENDIX B6- COLD BROOK DAM

FIGURE 2 – COLD BROOK DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B6- COLD BROOK DAM-4 APPENDIX B7-COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM

COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM AND LAKE FALL RIVER BASIN, SOUTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operations. Cottonwood Springs Dam is located on Cottonwood Springs approximately 1/2 mile above its confluence with Hot Brook, a tributary of Fall River. The site is located 4.5 miles west of Hot Springs, Fall River County, South Dakota. The purpose for the project is to provide flood protection for Hot Springs, South Dakota and along the Fall River. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for Cottonwood Reservoir. As shown in Figures 1 and 2, the reservoir continued a slow drop of 18 feet from a maximum pool elevation of 3872.70 ft-msl that was achieved on 23 March 2000.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 52 cfs Aug 20 93 0 cfs Aug 01 73 2nd 10 cfs Jun 21 95 0 cfs Aug 01 73 3rd 8 cfs Feb 01 97 0 cfs Aug 01 73

Pool Date Highest 3872.70 Mar 23 00 2nd 3871.61 Jul 31 99 3rd 3871.36 Aug 02 00

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 3832.40 Sep 30 89 2nd 3832.59 Aug 01 90 3rd 3832.90 Aug 14 93

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 18 AF, 50% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 1 cfs on May 17 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 3856.78, Oct 01 3854.60, Sep 30

APPENDIX B7-COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM-1 APPENDIX B7- COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM

FIGURE 1 – COTTONWOOD DAM POOL ELEVATIONS FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B7- COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM-2 APPENDIX B7-COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM

FIGURE 2 – COTTONWOOD DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS.

APPENDIX B7-COTTONWOOD SPRINGS DAM-3

APPENDIX B8-KELLY ROAD DAM

KELLY ROAD DAM SAND CREEK BASIN, COLORADO 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operations. Kelly Road Detention Dam is located on Westerly Creek, a tributary of Sand Creek and the South Platte River and provides flood control for the City of Aurora, Colorado. It is located entirely within the boundaries of the former Lowry Air Force Base. The project's sole purpose is flood control and was not designed to permanently store water. Water is automatically impounded by the project and released through a ground level 24- inch CMP conduit or high overflow inlet. A gate on the 24-inch conduit is kept in the open position. The intended closure of the gate is to contain oil or other spills within the air base. The City of Aurora is responsible for obtaining pool gage readings during flood periods and general observation of project operation. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Previous Years Operations. No reports of heavy inflow into Kelly Road Dam were made during the reporting period.

APPENDIX B8-KELLY ROAD DAM-1

APPENDIX B9-WESTERLY CREEK DAM

WESTERLY CREEK DAM SAND CREEK BASIN, COLORADO 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General Operations. The Westerly Creek Dam is located approximately 0.8 miles upstream from the Kelly Road Dam on the southern edge of the former Lowry Air Force Base. Construction of Westerly Creek Dam was completed in July of 1991. Both the dam and the detention area are located within the confines of the former Lowry Air Force Base and were constructed for the purpose of flood control. The reservoir is generally dry and no permanent storage is provided. The reservoir is discharged by an orifice-controlled outlet structure and overflow spillway. The capacity of the outlet works is 98 cfs at a pool capacity elevation of 5,431.4 ft-msl. Discharge from the outlet works is governed by the capacity of the existing 48-inch RCP storm sewer running into the Kelly Road pool. The sluice gate is intended to remain open unless overtopping of the Kelly Road Dam is imminent or the downstream storm sewer capacity is exceeded due to inflows from the downstream drainage area at this time the gate would be closed until downstream conditions permit releases from the Westerly Creek pool. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Land Transfer. As part of the closure of Lowry Air Force Base, lands on the base that are necessary for the continued function of the Westerly Creek Dam Project are being transferred to both public and private interests. The land transfer is being coordinated by the Lowry Redevelopment Authority (LRA). Westerly Creek Dam was constructed by the Corps of Engineers, as per a Local Cooperation Agreement (LCA) with the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. The Westerly Creek Dam embankment and spillway footprint are being transferred fee title to the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District. Other areas necessary for the operation of the project such as areas along the downstream toe of the embankment and the pool area above elevation 5429 ft- msl are being sold to private developers with a flowage easement and restrictions on the types of development that can occur.

3. Previous Years Operations. No reports of heavy inflow into Westerly Creek Dam were made during the reporting period.

APPENDIX B9- WESTERLY CREEK DAM-1

APPENDIX B10-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 11

GLENN CUNNINGHAM DAM AND LAKE PAPILLION CREEK BASIN - NO. 11, NEBRASKA 2004 - 2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. In late August, the Geotechnical Branch’s Soils Section B requested the pool be brought down to six inches below the top of conservation zone. This was to allow the periodic survey of the outlet works. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the remainder of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation began the reporting period in the flood control zone and remained there until August, 2005. These pool levels can be attributed to relatively constant rainfall throughout the spring and summer. During this time the pool peaked at 1121.7 ft-msl with an average outflow of approximately 10 cfs. There was a 58 cfs release for 2 days beginning August 22, 2005. This was, again, to meet the Geotechnical Branch’s Soils Section B request mentioned above. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 931 cfs Aug 07 99 157 cfs Aug 08 99 1125.28 Aug 07 99 2nd 391 cfs Jul 05 98 152 cfs Jun 18 84 1124.40 Jun 17 84 3rd 362 cfs Jun 22 94 116 cfs Jun 16 80 1123.87 Jun 15 98

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1118.81 Aug 10 97* 2nd 1119.01 Jul 19 97 3rd 1119.49 Nov 15 89 *Due to two foot pool draw down for fish habitat work.

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 4,877 AF, 67% of normal 4,231 AF, 71% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 55 cfs on Feb 13 57 cfs on Aug 23

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1121.75, Apr 13 1120.25, Sep 30

APPENDIX B10- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 11-1 APPENDIX B10-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 11

FIGURE 1 – PAPIO DAM 11 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B10- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 11-2 APPENDIX B10-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 11

FIGURE 2 – PAPIO DAM 11 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATOIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B10- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 11-3

APPENDIX B11-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 16

STANDING BEAR DAM AND LAKE PAPILLION CREEK BASIN - NO. 16, NEBRASKA 2004 - 2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. In late March the Geotechnical Branch requested the pool be brought down to six inches below the top of conservation zone. This was to allow the periodic survey of the outlet works. Unfortunately, the wet spring would not allow the pool to reach a safe level for crews to work, so the survey was postponed until mid June. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the remainder of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation started the report period in the flood control zone and moved in and out of the conservation zone until mid March. Beginning March 24th a 21 cfs release was made to accommodate the Dam Safety Office’s request but snowmelt and spring rains drove the pool to its report period peak of 1105.6 ft-msl. The attempted six inch drawdown was abandoned until June 2nd when another 21 cfs release was made. June 13th the gate was closed and the survey was conducted. After June, the pool, again, was in and out of the conservation zone averaging a 6 cfs release. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records: Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 266 cfs Jun 14 84 65 cfs Jun 16 84 1107.80 Jan 16 84 2nd 235 cfs Aug 09 87 57 cfs Aug 09 87 1107.68 Jul 06 98 3rd 211 cfs Jun 22 94 52 cfs May 22 82 1107.48 Jun 23 94

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill): Pool-Date Lowest 1095.95 Feb 28 91 2nd 1097.58 Jun 06 90 3rd 1098.30 Feb 09 82

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through Sep 30, 2005): Total Inflow Total Outflow 1,412 AF, 115% of normal 1,111 AF, 148% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 116 cfs on Feb 13 26 cfs on Feb 14

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1105.58, Feb 13 1103.26, Jul 17

APPENDIX B11- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 16-1 APPENDIX B11-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 16

FIGURE 1 PAPIO DAM 16 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B11- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 16-2 APPENDIX B11-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 16

FIGURE 2 – PAPIO DAM 16 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B11- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 16-3

APPENDIX B12-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 18

ZORINSKY DAM AND LAKE PAPILLION CREEK BASIN - NO. 18, NEBRASKA 2004 - 2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. In March the City of Omaha asked to meet with the Missouri River Project Office and Water Control. The meeting was to plan a small drawdown to facilitate repair of the bike trail running underneath the 168th Street bridge. The City of Omaha requested the pool be lowered to one foot below the conservation pool. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the remainder of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation started the reporting period in the flood control zone but was in and out of the conservation zone. On May 27th a release of 19 cfs was started to meet the City of Omaha’s request. The gate was closed on June 14th but was reopened on August 12th until August 17th. The second release was due to a late start on the bike trail repair and local rain raising the pool. Releases for the rest of the report period averaged about 8 cfs. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 561 cfs Jun 14 91 142 cfs Jul 25 93 1116.79 Jul 24 93 2nd 530 cfs Jul 24 93 113 cfs Aug 31 93 1114.75 Aug 30 93 3rd 423 cfs Aug 30 93 92 cfs Jun 26 00 1113.52 Jun 25 00

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1106.54 Aug 13 96 2nd 1107.08 Jul 27 98 3rd 1107.20 Jul 09 96

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through Sep 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 2,914 AF, 69% of normal 2,424 AF, 71% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 277 cfs on Feb 13 60 cfs on Feb 14

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1112.07, Feb 13 1108.03, Jul 24

APPENDIX B12- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 18-1 APPENDIX B12-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 18

FIGURE 1 – PAPIO DAM 18 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B12- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 18-2 APPENDIX B12-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 18

FIGURE 2 – PAPIO DAM 18 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B12- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 18-3

APPENDIX B13-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 20

WEHRSPAN DAM AND LAKE PAPILLION CREEK BASIN - NO. 20, NEBRASKA 2004 - 2005 REGULATION

1. Previous Years Operation. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation for the reporting period was in the conservation zone. The drought conditions kept the pool lowering until snowmelt and spring rains raised it five feet by the end of the reporting period. Releases were at zero for the reporting period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 678 cfs Jun 28 93 124 cfs Jul 25 93 1103.20 Jul 24 93 2nd 515 cfs Aug 25 87 101 cfs Aug 31 93 1101.14 Aug 30 93 3rd 458 cfs Aug 29 93 77 cfs Aug 26 87 1099.50 Aug 25 87

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1085.42 May 02 90 2nd 1085.88 Feb 02 91 3rd 1086.94 Jun 01 89

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through Sep 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 2,396 AF, 114% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 163 cfs on Oct 18 0 cfs on Oct 1

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1095.63, Jun 10 1090.57, Feb 02

APPENDIX B13- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 20-1 APPENDIX B13-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 20

FIGURE 1 – PAPIO DAM 20 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B13- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 20-2 APPENDIX B13-PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 20

FIGURE 2 – PAPIO DAM 20 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES

APPENDIX B13- PAPILLION CREEK DAM NO. 20-3

APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

PIPESTEM DAM AND LAKE PIPESTEM CREEK, JAMES RIVER BASIN, NORTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir. Pipestem Reservoir is regulated as a system with Jamestown Reservoir, which is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation. A new water control plan was finalized at the end of 2002. This plan was the product of a study initiated in 1996. This new plan has been followed for the last several years. Details of this plan are contained in the report “Jamestown and Pipestem Reservoirs Water Control Plan Review and Update, July, 2000”.

2. Operation Details. In summary, 2005 was a “low flow year” (see Figure 1). Early forecasts indicated a runoff year at the upper end of a low runoff year with anticipated runoff of less than 90,000 acre-feet. During this type of year the new plan calls for a “higher, early release” from Jamestown Reservoir while holding water at Pipestem Reservoir in order to (1) reduce flooding at Arrowwood NWR and (2) minimize the potential for flooding to downstream farming interests. This operation is reflected in Figures 2 through 4.

There was agreement among agencies at the spring “James River Operations Meeting” held in Jamestown on April 7th, 2005 that the best plan of operation would be to follow the “higher, early release” criteria in order to meet the June 1 target elevation at Jamestown Reservoir of 1431 ft, msl. (Figures 2 and 3). The forecasted runoff at the time of the meeting was 75,400 acre-feet. This was based in large part on the dry fall and winter and the absence of existing snow cover. The actual runoff turned out to be 61,900 acre-feet.

The actual operation in 2005 followed the new plan fairly closely. The following paragraphs were taken from the new water control plan and provide guidance for operating both projects during a “low flow year”.

Forecasted Typical Peak Annual Normal Maximum Release Normal Type Calendar Reservoir Levels Maximum of Year Inflow Jamestown Pipestem Jamestown Pipestem Combined Flow Volume Pool Level Pool Level Reservoir Reservoir Release

Footnote Year (af) (ft, msl) (ft, msl) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs)

5. Low 0 – 90,000 Below Below 200 120 200 1433.0 1460.0

5. Use constant release option. Evacuate Jamestown first to 1431 ft, msl by June 1, and then evacuate Pipestem to 1442.5 ft, msl by September 1, then Jamestown to 1429.8 ft, msl by November 1.

Reservoir Operations in Low Flow Years. The overall objectives for low flow years are to meet target elevations at Jamestown Reservoir, store spring inflow at Pipestem for release during the months of June, July, and

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-1 APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

August, and to maintain as constant a low flow combined release as possible from the two reservoirs. By meeting target pool levels at Jamestown Reservoir, water management at Arrowwood can be accomplished. Maintaining a constant low flow provides the lowest damage potential to downstream areas and also benefits downstream water users and environmental concerns.

As mentioned above, the actual operation followed the guidance fairly closely. By making a peak release of 200 cfs from Jamestown in May, the target pool of 1431 was reached by June 1. This is indicated in Figure 3. Following this accomplishment, a constant release is prescribed in the new plan for maintaining Jamestown at elevation 1431 ft-msl and for evacuating the approximate nine (9) feet of storage at Pipestem Reservoir. However as shown in Figure 4 a constant release was difficult to maintain with several rainfall events causing fluctuations in pool levels at Jamestown Reservoir. Actual combined releases fluctuated between 100 cfs and 250 cfs. Despite these fluctuations the goal of evacuating Pipestem Reservoir by September 1 was achieved. Following this accomplishment the flood control pool portion of the joint use pool at Jamestown Reservoir was evacuated by the end of September.

This operation could have been improved by closer coordination of releases between Pipestem and Jamestown Reservoirs. Some of the fluctuation in releases could have been prevented if there was a slight buffer zone at Arrowwood NWR where the pool could be allowed to creep above elevation 1431 ft-msl by a few feet. If this buffer zone were available releases could have been dampened. This could probably be achieved by closer coordination with the manager of Arrowwood NWR.

Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 5 and 6.

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-2 APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

450000 Historical Annual Flow at James River Gage at Jamestown, ND 400000 (Through end of 2005)

350000

300000 Calendar Year 2005 Flow at Jamestown Gage = 61,900 acre-feet

250000

200000 High Flow Years > 160,000 AF Average 80,800 Acre-Feet Discharge (Acre-Ft) Discharge

150000 Medium Flow Years 90,000 - 160,000 AF 100000

Low Flow Years 50000 < 90,000 AF Missing Missing Data Data 0 1928 1931 1934 1937 1940 1943 1946 1949 1952 1955 1958 1961 1964 1967 1970 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003 Calendar Year

FIGURE 1 – HISTORICAL ANNUAL FLOW VOLUME, JAMES RIVER GAGE AT JAMESTOWN, ND.

FIGURE 2 – PIPESTEM DAM, POOL ELEVATION AND DISCHARGE.

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-3 APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

FIGURE 3 – JAMESTOWN DAM, POOL ELEVATION AND DISCHARGE.

FIGURE 4 – RELEASES FROM JAMESTOWN AND PIPESTEM DAMS.

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-4 APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 4,374 cfs Jul 16 93 797 cfs Jun 16 01 2nd 3,380 cfs Apr 20 75 769 cfs May 23 97 3rd 3,231 cfs Apr 11 96 659 cfs Aug 05 99

Pool-Date Highest 1487.01 May 10 97 2nd 1479.54 May 22 95 3rd 1479.30 Jun 08 99

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1439.65 Feb 18 93 2nd 1439.97 Jan 01 77 3rd 1440.11 Jul 31 92

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through Sep 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 23,050 AF, 51% of normal 19,105 AF, 46% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 436 cfs on Jun 14 174 cfs on Aug 28

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1451.74, Jul 03 1442.62, Feb 02

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-5 APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

FIGURE 5 – PIPESTEM DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-6 APPENDIX B14-PIPESTEM DAM

FIGURE 6 – PIPESTEM DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B14- PIPESTEM DAM-7

APPENDIX B15-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 2

OLIVE CREEK DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 2, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation began the report period in the conservation zone and remained there. There were no releases for the report period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 920 cfs May 23 04 188 cfs May 24 04 1342.62 Jul 24 93 2nd 764 cfs Jun 12 84 179 cfs Jul 25 93 1342.60 Oct 11 73 3rd 749 cfs Oct 10 73 176 cfs Oct 12 73 1342.10 Jun 12 84

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1324.32 Dec 01 99* 2nd 1324.32 Aug 01 00* 3rd 1325.32 Jul 29 99 *Due to lake renovation and habitat enhancement.

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 71 AF, 3% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 3 cfs on Dec 12 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1333.15, Oct 01 1329.81, Sep 30

APPENDIX B15- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 2-1 APPENDIX B15-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 2

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 2 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B15- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 2-2 APPENDIX B15-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 2

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 2 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B15- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 2-3

APPENDIX B16-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 4

BLUESTEM DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 4, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation entered the report period in the conservation zone and remained there. There were no releases during the report period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 1,447 cfs Oct 10 73 342 cfs Oct 12 73 1316.5 Oct 11 73 2nd 996 cfs May 09 96 198 cfs Jun 14 84 1314.5 Jun 13 84 3rd 932 cfs Jul 24 93 195 cfs Jul 26 93 1314.23 Jul 25 93

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1299.11 Oct 28 91 2nd 1299.90 Sep 01 77 3rd 1300.10 Jul 26 77

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 309 AF, 7% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 31 cfs on Feb 13 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1305.83, Oct 01 1303.16, Sept 30

APPENDIX B16- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 4-1 APPENDIX B16-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 4

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 4 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B16- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 4-2 APPENDIX B16-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 4

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 4 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B16- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 4-3

APPENDIX B17-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 8

WAGON TRAIN DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 8, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation entered the report period in the conservation zone and remained there. There were no releases during the report period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 1,199 cfs Oct 10 73 334 cfs Jul 25 93 1295.4 Oct 11 73 2nd 1,037 cfs Jul 24 93 329 cfs Oct 12 73 1294.61 Jul 25 93 3rd 1,027 cfs Oct 11 86 176 cfs May 24 04 1293.2 Jun 13 84

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1273.10 Apr 05 00* 2nd 1275.00 Feb 20 01* 3rd 1275.48 Apr 04 99* *Due to lake renovation and habitat enhancement.

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005): Total Inflow Total Outflow 500 AF, 10% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 44 cfs on Feb 13 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1286.69, May 13 1284.85, Sept 30

APPENDIX B17- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 8-1 APPENDIX B17-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 8

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 8 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B17- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 8-2 APPENDIX B17-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 8

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 8 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B17- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 8-3

APPENDIX B18-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 9

STAGECOACH DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 9, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation started the reporting period in the conservation zone but entered the flood control zone periodically due to local rains until December. At this time, snowfall followed warmer temperatures and spring rains kept the pool in the flood control zone with a peak of 1271.6 ft-msl until mid April. In June, the pool rose into the flood control zone but with no effect on outflows. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 1,030 cfs May 23 04 190 cfs Oct 12 73 1279.00 Oct 11 73 2nd 958 cfs Oct 10 73 180 cfs May 24 04 1278.66 May 23 04 3rd 829 cfs Oct 11 86 155 cfs Jul 25 93 1278.15 Jul 24 93

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1259.60 Oct 31 91 2nd 1260.50 Aug 09 76 3rd 1260.86 Oct 19 90

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 1,351 AF, 42% of normal 988 AF, 38% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 29 cfs on Feb 13 12 cfs on Feb 14

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1271.69, Feb 13 1270.25, Sep 30

APPENDIX B18- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 9-1 APPENDIX B18-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 9

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 9 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B18- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 9-2 APPENDIX B18-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 9

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 9 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B18- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 9-3

APPENDIX B19-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 10

YANKEE HILL DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 10, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. The pool was drawn down beginning in April 2002 until August 2005 when Nebraska Game and Parks Commission finished the lake rehabilitation. The lake is being allowed to fill but still has not developed a measurable pool. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation began and ended the reporting period in the conservation zone. Recording of elevation data was suspended due to the drawn down pool. The new record low of 1232.00 set this year is an estimation based on surveys done the previous year. There were no releases during the report period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 690 cfs Oct 10 73 145 cfs Oct 12 73 1252.30 Oct 11 73 2nd 609 cfs Jul 24 93 133 cfs Jul 25 93 1251.21 Jul 24 93 3rd 575 cfs Sep 08 89 114 cfs Jun 14 84 1250.70 Jun 13 84

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1232.00 Nov 01, 03* 2nd 1232.00 Aug 01 04* 3rd 1233.32 Jul 31 03* *Due to lake renovation and habitat enhancement.

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 0 AF, 0% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 0 0

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1232.00, Oct 01 1232.00, Oct 01

APPENDIX B19- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 10-1 APPENDIX B19-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 10

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 10 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B19- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 10-2 APPENDIX B19-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 10

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 10 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B19- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 10-3

APPENDIX B20-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 12

CONESTOGA DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 12, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation entered the report period in the conservation zone and remained there. Due to the persisting dry conditions, a record low pool level was reached. There was no outflow for the report period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 907 cfs Mar 23 87 185 cfs Mar 25 87 1241.10 Mar 24 87 2nd 899 cfs Jul 24 93 180 cfs Jul 25 93 1240.64 Jul 24 93 3rd 693 cfs May 18 74 152 cfs Jun 16 82 1239.60 Oct 11 73

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1228.36, Sept 30 05 2nd 1228.40 Aug 28 77 3rd 1228.60 Jul 31 77

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 113 AF, 2% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 6 cfs on Feb 06 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1231.17, Oct 01 1228.36, Sept 30

APPENDIX B20- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 12-1 APPENDIX B20-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 12

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 12 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B20- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 12-2 APPENDIX B20-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 12

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 12 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATION AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B20- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 12-3

APPENDIX B21-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 13

TWIN LAKES DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 13, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation entered the report period in the conservation zone and remained there. There was no outflow for the report period. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 632 cfs Jul 13 93 168 cfs Jun 30 83 1346.90 Jun 29 83 2nd 539 cfs Mar 23 87 167 cfs Mar 24 87 1346.00 Mar 23 87 3rd 539 cfs Jun 14 98 165 cfs Jul 27 93 1345.55 Jul 26 93

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1332.13 Oct 31 91 2nd 1332.15 Aug 18 89 3rd 1332.51 Jul 29 89

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 296 AF, 8% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 19 cfs on Jul 26 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1339.89, Apr 22 1338.16, Sept 27

APPENDIX B21- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 13-1 APPENDIX B21-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 13

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 13 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B21- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 13-2 APPENDIX B21-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 13

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 13 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B21- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 13-3

APPENDIX B22-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 14

PAWNEE DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 14, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool level was in the conservation zone for the entire reporting period. There were no releases. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 1,381 cfs Mar 24 87 420 cfs Jul 25 93 1249.09 Jul 25 93 2nd 1,347 cfs Jul 13 93 419 cfs Mar 25 87 1248.40 Mar 24 87 3rd 1,074 cfs Jul 19 85 311 cfs Jun 13 84 1247.10 Jun 12 84

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1240.20 Oct 14 79 2nd 1241.20 Dec 27 76 3rd 1241.40 Aug 03 77

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 1,339 AF, 18% of normal 0 AF, 0% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 39 cfs on Feb 13 0 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1243.66, Apr 21 1242.09, Sept 30

APPENDIX B22- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 14-1 APPENDIX B22-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 14

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 14 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B22- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 14-2 APPENDIX B22-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 14

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 14 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B22- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 14-3

APPENDIX B23-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 17

ANTELOPE CREEK DAM AND HOLMES PARK LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 17, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. There was no reservoir regulation activity during the reporting period. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool continued to be drawn down for the lake rehabilitation until November 2004 when work was completed. Recording of elevation data was reactivated once the pool reached the minimum measuring level. The new record low of 1231.00 set this year is an estimation based on surveys done the previous year. The pool has finally reached normal levels considering the drier conditions in the region. Releases peaked at 8 cfs in September. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 604 cfs Jul 24 93 187 cfs Jun 29 83 1249.97 Jul 24 93 2nd 567 cfs Sep 08 89 174 cfs Jul 25 93 1249.09 Sep 08 89 3rd 451 cfs Jul 20 96 140 cfs Sep 09 89 1248.10 Jun 27 83

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1231.00 Sep 30 03* 2nd 1231.00 Aug 01 04* 3rd 1232.80 Jul 07 77 *Due to lake renovation and habitat enhancement.

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 409 AF, 12%of normal 117 AF, 4% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 66 cfs on Jul 26 8 cfs on Aug 30

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1240.92, Aug 29 1231.00, Oct 01

APPENDIX B23- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 17-1 APPENDIX B23-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 17

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 17 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B23- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 17-2 APPENDIX B23-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 17

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 17 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B23- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 17-3

APPENDIX B24-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 18

BRANCHED OAK DAM AND LAKE SALT CREEK BASIN - NO. 18, NEBRASKA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. The project was operated according to the water control manual for the duration of the reporting period. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this reservoir.

2. Operation Details. The pool elevation was in the conservation zone for the entire reporting period. The lowest pool of record was achieved in October with 1278.21 ft. In July a release was made at the request of the Department of Natural Resources to satisfy water rights holders. Releases ranged from 0 to 3 cfs. Historical as well as reporting period details are contained in paragraphs 2a through 2c and Figures 1 and 2.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 3,700 cfs Aug 25 87 774 cfs Jul 25 93 1287.90 Aug 26 87 2nd 2,435 cfs Mar 23 87 730 cfs Aug 26 87 1287.79 Jul 24 93 3rd 1,945 cfs May 22 98 670 cfs Jun 19 83 1287.70 Jun 18 83

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1278.21 Oct 30 04 2nd 1278.31 Dec 24 03 3rd 1278.39 Jan 12 02

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 5,060 AF, 19% of normal 296 AF, 1% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 293 cfs on May 12 3 cfs on Jun 28

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1280.49, Jun 13 1278.21, Oct 30

APPENDIX B24- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 18-1 APPENDIX B24-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 18

FIGURE 1 – SALT CREEK DAM 18 POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B24- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 18-2 APPENDIX B24-SALT CREEK DAM NO. 18

FIGURE 2 – SALT CREEK DAM 18 HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B24- SALT CREEK DAM NO. 18-3

APPENDIX B25-SNAKE CREEK DAM (LAKE AUDUBON)

SNAKE CREEK DAM AND LAKE AUDUBON LAKE SAKAKAWEA SUBIMPOUNDMENT MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, NORTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Lake Audubon, a subimpoundment of Garrison Reservoir, is located 8 miles northeast of Riverdale, North Dakota. The embankment, known as "Snake Creek", has a crest elevation of 1865.0 ft-msl. With the original planned operating level of 1850.0 ft-msl, Lake Audubon would cover 20,600 acres and contain 396,000 acre-feet of water. The latest agreement specifying an operating level of 1847.2 ft-msl would cover 19,095 acres and contain 346,419 AF of water. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this subimpoundment.

2. Operation Details. The embankment was constructed with the primary purpose of relocating U.S. Highway 83 and the Soo Line Railroad across the Snake Creek Arm of the Garrison Diversion. In addition, during the planning stage it was decided to create a gated subimpoundment for the dual purpose of fish and wildlife enhancement, and the future diversion of water for anticipated irrigation. The pool level has been kept below elevation 1850.0 ft-msl because (1) all land surrounding the lake has not been acquired to maintain the 1850.0 ft-msl level and (2) that level (head) is not needed to supply water to the revised lower irrigation acreage. Garrison pool levels are limited to less than 15 feet above the Audubon pool for dam safety consideration. Most of the time, however, the Lake Audubon level is higher than the Garrison pool. If the latter condition exists, the Snake Creek pumping plant, operated by the Bureau, is used to transfer water from the Garrison Reservoir to Lake Audubon. Gravity flow discharge to or from Lake Audubon is conveyed by a gated conduit, which is 7 feet wide by 10 feet high with invert elevation at 1810.0 ft-msl. This gated conduit is normally closed.

Lake Audubon was operated in accordance with the 1996 Letter of Understanding between the Corps, the Bureau of Reclamation, Fish and Wildlife Service, and the North Dakota Game and Fish Department. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations for the Lake Sakakawea subimpoundments.

a. Maximums of Record:

Pool Date Highest 1848.61 Apr 26 76 2nd 1848.57 May 21 79

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool Date Lowest 1843.39 Mar 13 85 2nd 1843.50 Jan 27 92

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Min. Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1847.3, June 30 – July 05 1844.8, December 21 – January 03

APPENDIX B25- SNAKE CREEK DAM (LAKE AUDUBON)-1 APPENDIX B25-SNAKE CREEK DAM (LAKE AUDUBON)

FIGURE 1 – LAKE AUDUBON DAM POOL ELEVATIONS FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B25- SNAKE CREEK DAM (LAKE AUDUBON)-2 APPENDIX B25-SNAKE CREEK DAM (LAKE AUDUBON)

FIGURE 2 – LAKE AUDUBON DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS.

APPENDIX B25- SNAKE CREEK DAM (LAKE AUDUBON)-3

APPENDIX B26-SPRING CREEK DAM (LAKE POCASSE)

SPRING CREEK DAM AND LAKE POCASSE (LAKE OAHE SUBIMPOUNDMENT) MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, SOUTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Lake Pocasse is operated and administered as the Pocasse National Wildlife Refuge by the Department of the Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service under an agreement with the Corps of Engineers. The pool levels of Oahe Reservoir and Lake Pocasse are contiguous at or above elevation 1617.0 ft-msl, the top of the annual flood control and multiple use zones in Lake Oahe. The long-term plan of regulation is to maintain the Lake Pocasse level as high as possible. Every 4 to 5 years, an early summer drawdown to elevation 1614.0 ft- msl will assist in the re-establishment of shoreline vegetation and improved water quality. In addition, upon evaluation of hydrologic conditions prior to the spring runoff each year above Pocasse, decisions may be made to lower the pool to accommodate the appropriate runoff volumes. Appendix A gives pertinent data for this subimpoundment.

2. Operation Details. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period pool elevations for the Lake Oahe subimpoundment.

a. Maximums of Record:

Pool-Date Highest 1625.00 Mar 23 87 2nd 1624.90 Mar 31 97 3rd 1622.98 Mar 18 95

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1602.69 Sep 22 90 2nd 1605.02 Oct 24 92 3rd 1606.55 Oct 29 91

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1613.5, June 14 1612.3, October 15

APPENDIX B26- SPRING CREEK DAM (LAKE POCASSE)-1 APPENDIX B26-SPRING CREEK DAM (LAKE POCASSE)

FIGURE 1 – LAKE POCASSE DAM POOL ELEVATIONS FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX B26- SPRING CREEK DAM (LAKE POCASSE)-2 APPENDIX B26-SPRING CREEK DAM (LAKE POCASSE)

FIGURE 2 – LAKE POCASSE DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX B26- SPRING CREEK DAM (LAKE POCASSE)-3 APPENDIX C - BUREAU PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT BOYSEN CANYON FERRY CLARK CANYON GLENDO NO GENERAL 1 Location of dam 20 mi S of Thermopolis,Wy 17 mi NE of Helena, MT 18 mi SW of Dillon, MT 4.5 mi SE of Glendo, WY 2 River and river mile Wind RM 295 Missouri RM 2253 Beaverhead North Platte RM 280 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 7710 15900 2320 14330 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 17.5 at el. 4725 25 at el. 3800 5 at el. 5560.4 15 at el. 4635 5 Location of Damtender On site On site Dillon, MT On site 6 Travel time to Missouri River 6 days 4.5 days to Ft. Peck 2.5 days to Three Forks About 3 weeks 7 Max. discharge of record 29,800 cfs Jul 1923 47,000 cfs Jun 1908 3720 cfs Jun 1908 30,000 cfs Jun 1908 8 Project cost (1) $33,468,000 $42,546,000 $12,108,000 $44,371,000 DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9 Top of dam – ft-msl 4758 3808.5 5578 4675 10 Length of dam - ft. 1,143 1,000 2,950 2,096 11 Height of dam - ft. 150 225 147.5 167 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 4608 3635.5 5446.5 4508 13 Abutment formation Sandstone-shale-limestone Shale - slate Sand - bentonitic tuff Sandstone - shale 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Concrete gravity Rolled earth Rolled earth 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 1,527,000 407,100 1,884,000 2,676,000 16 Date of closure Oct-51 Mar-53 Aug-64 Jun-56 17 Date of initial fill (top of cons. pool) Jun-52 Jul-55 Jun-65 May-59 SPILLWAY 18 Discharge capacity - cfs (Max. pool) 20,000 at el. 4725 150,000 9,530 10,300 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 4700 3766 5560.4 4653 20 Width - ft. 60 (net) 68 (total) 204 (net) 222 (gross) 100 45 21 Gates, number, size, type 2 (30 x 25 ft) radial 4 (51 x 34.5 ft) radial Ungated chute Ungated ogee weir RESERVOIR ELEV AND AREA 22 Maximum pool 4752.0 30,860a 3800.0 33,535a 5571.9 6600a 4669.0 23,300a 23 Top of flood control pool 4732.2 22,170a 3800.0 33,535a 5560.4 5900a 4653.0 17,990a 24 Top of joint use pool 4725.0 19,560a 3797.0 32,800a 5546.1 5160a - 25 Top of conservation pool 4717.0 16,960a 3770.0 24,125a 5535.7 4495a 4635.0 12,370a 26 Top of inactive pool 4685.0 9,280a 3728.0 11,480a 5470.6 220a 4570.0 3,130a STORAGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) 27 Surcharge zone 4732.2-4752.0 520,679AF none 5560.4-5571.9 71,830AF 4653.0-4669.0 329,300AF

C-1 28 Exclusive flood control zone 4725.0-4732.2 150,632AF 3797.0-3800.0 101,089AF 5546.1-5560.4 79,090AF 4635.0-4653.0 271,900AF 29 Joint use zone 4717.0-4725.0 144,229AF 3770.0-3797.0 794,289AF 5535.7-5546.1 50,440AF none 30 Conservation zone 4685.0-4717.0 378,184AF 3728.0-3770.0 701,568AF 5470.6-5535.7 126,120AF 4570.0-4635.0 454,300AF 31 Inactive zone 4608.0-4685.0 219,181AF 3636.5-3728.0 396,031AF 2446.5-5470.6 1,510AF 4508.0-4570.0 63,200AF 32 Gross Storage (Excl. of surcharge) 892,226AF 1,992,977AF 257,150AF 789,400AF OUTLET WORKS 33 Number and size - conduits 1 - 66 in. I.D., 1 - 57 in. I.D. 4 - 84 in. ID, 1-13 ft. ID pump intake 1 - 9 ft. I.D. 1 - 21 ft. I.D. 34 Conduit length - ft. 300 84 in. - 115 741 2300 35 Number - size - type gates 2 - 48 in. Jet valves 4 - 77 in. Slide 9500 cfs 2 - 3 x 6.5 ft. Slide 3 - 7.25 x 7.75 ft. Slide 36 Disch cap - cfs (At base of EFC zone) 66 in. - 640 cfs 1 - 13 ft. dia. 600 cfs 2200 cfs 11300 cfs 57 in. – 670 cfs 3 - 13.5 ft. dia. 5970 cfs POWER INSTALLATION 37 No. and size of turbines 2 - 10,500 HP 3 - 23,500 HP 2 - 16,750 HP 38 No. and rating of generators 2 - 7,500 KW 3 - 16,667 KW none 2 - 12,000 KW 39 Plant capacity 15,000 KW 50,000 KW 24,000 KW 40 Power plant disch cap (at base of EFC) 5,200 cfs 5,200 cfs 3,300 cfs (1) These costs to complete the dam and reservoir, the associated recreation and fish and wildlife facilities and the power plant are applicable. Costs do not include irrigation facilities except those located at the dam. Costs are as of 6-30-76 APPENDIX C - BUREAU PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT HEART BUTTE JAMESTOWN KEYHOLE PACTOLA NO GENERAL 1 Location of dam 15 mi S of Glen Ullin, ND 1 mi N of Jamestown, ND 12 mi NE of Moorcroft, WY 15 mi W of Rapid City, SD 2 River and river mile Heart RM 103.5 James RM 580 Belle Fourche RM 289 Rapid Cr. RM 110 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 1710 1300 1950 319 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 12 at el. 2094.5 40 at el. 1454 10 at el. 4111.4 4.5 at el. 4621.5 5 Location of Damtender On site none Pactola Dam On site 6 Travel time to Missouri River 2 days About 7 weeks 5 days 3 days 7 Max. discharge of record 30,500 cfs May 1970 + 8000 cfs Apr 1969 12,000 cfs Apr 1924 2200 cfs May 1952 8 Project cost (1) $3,576,000 $3,717,000 $4,722,000 $7,861,000 DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9 Top of dam – ft-msl 2124.0 1471.0 4134.0 4655.0 (2) 10 Length of dam - ft. 1850 1418 3420 5290 11 Height of dam - ft. 124 85 118 245 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 2000 1386 4016 4422 13 Abutment formation Sandstone Pierre shale Sandstone and shale Slate and schist 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Rolled earth and rock Rolled earth and rock 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 1,140,000 963,000 1,329,000 4,532,000 16 Date of closure Aug 1949 May 1953 Mar 1952 Aug 1956 17 Date of initial fill (top of cons. pool) Apr 1950 Apr 1965 May 1978 Jun 1963 SPILLWAY 18 Discharge capacity - cfs (Max. pool) 5650 2930 11000 255,000 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 2064.5 1454 4099.3 4621.5 20 Width - ft. 27 9.5 19.25 425 21 Gates, number, size, type Ungated glory hole Ungated glory hole Ungated ogee weir Ungated ogee weir RESERVOIR ELEV AND AREA 22 Maximum pool 2119.5 10,950a 1464.4 17,430a 4128.7 10,730a 4651.7 1,560a 23 Top of flood control pool 2094.5 6,580a 1454.0 13,210a 4111.5 13,730a 4621.5 1,230a 24 Top of joint use pool - 1431.0 2,560a - - 25 Top of conservation pool 2064.5 3,400a 1428.0 2,090a 4099.3 9,410a 4580.2 860a 26 Top of inactive pool 2030.0 800a 1400.0 160a 4051.0 820a 4456.1 100a STORAGE ZONES (Elev - Cap) 27 Surcharge zone 2094.5-2119.5 221,801AF 1454.0-1464.4 158,860AF 4111.5-4128.7 294,800AF 4621.5-4651.7 41,892AF 28 Exclusive flood control zone 2064.5-2094.5 147,027AF 1431.0-1454.0 189,468AF 4099.3-4111.5 140,500AF 4580.2-4621.5 43,057AF

C-2 29 Joint use zone none 1428.0-1431.0 6,153AF none none 30 Conservation zone 2030.0-2064.5 61,915AF 1400.0-1428.0 24,535AF 4051.0-4099.3 185,500AF 4456.1-4580.2 54,955AF 31 Inactive zone 2000.0-2030.0 5,227AF 1390.0-1400.0 822AF 4016.0-4051.0 8,000AF 4422.0-4456.1 1,017AF 32 Gross Storage (Excl. of surcharge) 214,169AF 220,978AF 334,200AF 99,029AF OUTLET WORKS 33 Number and size - conduits 1 - 63 in. I.D. 1 - 9.5 ft. - 13.5 ft. 1 - 9.5 x 8.25 1 - 6 ft.

34 Conduit length - ft. 597 443.75 653.4 740 35 Number - size - type gates 1 - 4 x 5 ft. Slide 2 - 5 x 6 ft. Slide 2 - 3.5 x 3.5 ft. Slide 2 - 2.75 x 2.75 ft. Slide 36 Disch cap - cfs (at base of EFC zone) 690 2175 at el. 1429.8 1250 1020 POWER INSTALLATION 37 No. and size of turbines 38 No. and rating of generators none none none none 39 Plant capacity 40 Power plant disch cap (at base of EFC)

(1) These costs to complete the dam and reservoir, the associated recreation and fish and wildlife facilities and the power plant are applicable. Costs do not include irrigation facilities except those located at the dam. Costs are as of 6-30-76 (2) Pactola Dam was raised 15 feet in 1987 APPENDIX C - BUREAU PROJECTS PERTINENT DATA

SUMMARY OF ENGINEERING DATA ITEM SUBJECT SHADEHILL TIBER YELLOWTAIL NO GENERAL 1 Location of dam 1 mi W of Shadehill, SD 15 mi SW of Chester, MT 45 mi SW of Hardin, MT 2 River and river mile Grand RM 90 Marias RM 71 Bighorn 3 Drainage area (sq. mi.) 3120 4850 19626 4 Reservoir length (mi.) 10 at el. 2302 25 at el. 3012.5 71 at el. 3657 5 Location of Damtender none On site On site 6 Travel time to Missouri River 2 days 1.25 days 4 days 7 Max. discharge of record 58,000 cfs Apr 1950 40,000 cfs Jun 1948 37,400 cfs Jun 1935 8 Project cost (1) $7,269,000 $44,909,000 (1983) $95,900,000 DAM AND EMBANKMENT 9 Top of dam – ft-msl 2318 3026 3660 10 Length of dam - ft. 12,840 4,300 1,450 11 Height of dam - ft. 122 201 524 12 Stream bed – ft-msl 2196 2823.5 3166 13 Abutment formation Sand, silt and clay Shale and sandstone Limestone 14 Type of fill Rolled earth Rolled earth Concrete thin-arch 15 Fill quantity in cu. yds. 3,391,000 12,049,000 1,546,000 16 Date of closure Jul-50 Oct-50 Dec-66 17 Date of initial fill (top of conser. pool) Apr-52 Aug-56 Jun-67 SPILLWAY (Service) 18 Discharge capacity - cfs (Max. pool) 5700 127,000 cfs 68,470 92,000 19 Crest elevation – ft-msl 2271.9 2302.0 2975 3593 20 Width - ft. - 1500 66 50 (net) 21 Gates, number, size, type Ungated glory hole/earth channel 3 - 22 x 38 ft. radial 2 - 25 x 64.4 ft. radial RESERVOIR ELEVATION AND AREA 22 Maximum pool 2312.0 12,150a 3020.2 25,410a 3660.0 17,940a 23 Top of flood control pool 2302.0 9,900a 3012.5 23,150a 3657.0 17,280a 24 Top of joint use pool - 2993.0 17,890a 3640.0 12,600a 25 Top of conservation pool 2272.0 4,800a 2976.0 13,790a 3614.0 6,915a 26 Top of inactive pool 2250.8 2,800a 2966.4 11,710a 3547.0 4,150a STORAGE ZONES (Elev. - Capacity) 27 Surcharge zone 2302.0-2312.0 119,560AF 3012.5-3020.2 187,740AF 3657.0-3660.0 52,830AF 28 Exclusive flood control zone 2272.0-2302.0 230,004AF 2993.0-3012.5 400,900AF 3640.0-3657.0 258,330AF 29 Joint use zone none 2976.0-2993.0 268,000AF 3614.0-3640.0 240,340AF 30 Conservation zone 2250.8-2272.0 76,303AF 2966.4-2976.0 121,700AF 3547.0-3614.0 336,100AF

C-3 31 Inactive zone 2198.0-2250.8 43,869AF 2823.5-2966.4 577,620AF 3166.0-3547.0 493,580AF 32 Gross Storage (Excl. of surcharge) 350,176AF 1,368,220AF 1,328,360AF OUTLET WORKS 33 Number and size - conduits 1 - 7 ft. I.D. 1 conduit containing 2 - 84 in. 1 - 72", 1 - 22" pipes 1 - 9.5 ft. 34 Conduit length - ft. 355 72" - 1110 22"-1090 289 - 216 - 305 35 Number - size - type gates 1 - 6 x 6 ft. radial 1-5x5' Slide, 1-18" butterfly (2) 3 - bulkhead gates 36 Disch. capac. - cfs (At base of EFC zone) 600 at el. 2260 1425 at el. 2993 84 in. - 2500 each/9.5 ft. - 862 POWER INSTALLATION 37 No. and size of turbines 4 - 87,500 HP 38 No. and rating of generators none none 4 - 62,500 KW 39 Plant capacity 250,000 KW 40 Power Plant disch. capac.(At base of EFC) 7800 cfs (1) These costs to complete the dam and reservoir, the associated recreation and fish and wildlife facilities and the power plant are applicable. Costs do not include irrigation facilities except those located at the dam. Costs are as of 6-30-76 (2) Tiber Auxiliary Outlet - No. and size of conduits 1 - 10.75 ft. I.D. Conduit length - ft. 1535 No. - Size - Type gates 1 - 7.25 x 9.25 ft. slide 2 - 7.0 x 12.0 ft. slide Discharge capacity – cfs 4250 at el. 3020.2 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM AND RESERVOIRS WIND/BIGHORN RIVER BASINS, WYOMING 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. Description. The Bureau of Reclamation constructed Boysen Dam and powerplant during the period 1945-1952. Boysen Dam provides flood control, irrigation, power, silt control, recreation, and fish and wildlife.

Bighorn Reservoir/Yellowtail Dam was constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation, completed in December 1966, for the purposes of power production, irrigation, industrial water, flood control, fish and wildlife, sediment and recreation.

Table D1-1 presents the 1994 survey of Boysen Reservoir storage allocations. Table D1-2 presents the 1982 survey of Bighorn Lake storage allocations.

TABLE D1-1 BOYSEN RESERVOIR STORAGE ALLOCATIONS Storage Zones Pool Elevation Zone Capacity Cum Capacity (ft-msl) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Dead 4608-4657 40,084 40,084 Inactive 4657-4685 179,097 219,181 Conservation 4685-4717 378,184 597,365 Joint Use1 4717-4725 144,229 741,594 Flood Control1 4725-4732.2 150,632 892,226 Surcharge 4732.2-4752 520,679 1,412,905

TABLE D1-2 BIGHORN LAKE STORAGE ALLOCATIONS Storage Zones Pool Elevation Zone Capacity Cum Capacity (ft-msl) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Dead 3166-3296.5 16,008 16,008 Inactive 3296.5-3547 477,576 493,594 Conservation 3547-3614 336,103 829,687 Joint Use2 3614-3640 240,342 1,070,029 Flood Control2 3640-3657 258,331 1,328,360 Surcharge 3657-3660 52,829 1,381,189

2. Water Control Plans. The primary regulation of Boysen Reservoir will be for the local reduction of flow in the reaches between Boysen Dam and Yellowtail Dam. The pool at Boysen Reservoir did not quite enter the exclusive flood control zone so no flood

1 Water stored in the flood control zone of Boysen Reservoir is released under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army under authority of the Flood Control Act of 1944. The exclusive flood control storage capacity of the reservoir (which initially amounts to 145,972 acre-feet, between elevations 4725 and 4732) and during the flood season, February 1 to July 31, that portion of the joint use storage capacity (which initially amounts in whole to 146,099 acre-feet between elevation 4717 and 4725) is determined as described in paragraph VI of this report. 2 Waters stored in the flood control zone of Bighorn Reservoir are released under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army under authority of the Flood Control Act of 1944. The exclusive flood control storage capacity of the reservoir (which initially amounts to 258,331 acre-feet, between elevation 3640 and 3657) and during the flood season, February 1 to July 31, that portion of the joint use storage capacity (which initially amounts in whole to 240,342 acre-feet between elevations 3614 and 3640) is determined as described in paragraph VII of this report.

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM - 1 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

control releases were necessary at this project. However coordinated regulation with Yellowtail to affect maximum reductions in downstream areas was still a factor.

Bighorn Reservoir is regulated for flood control primarily for the reduction and prevention of flooding downstream from the project, on both the Bighorn and Yellowstone Rivers. Flood control regulation was done at Bighorn Reservoir during the report period. Flood control regulation criteria is published in the Federal Register, at page 17996, Volume 36, issue of September 9, 1971 and is also contained in the September 21, 1971 Field Working Agreement. The criteria for flood control regulation of the exclusive flood control storage space is as follows.

“…shall be regulated for flood control on the Bighorn and Yellowtail Rivers. Any water temporarily stored in this space shall be released as rapidly as practicable. The objectives of the flood control operation are to limit, insofar as practicable, the flow in the Bighorn River to 20,000 c.f.s. and/or a stage of 14.2 feet at St. Xavier, Mont., and the flow in the Yellowstone River to 65,000 c.f.s. and/or a stage of 13 feet at Miles City, Mont.”

Desired target flows provided in “Chapter IX - Flood Control Regulation” of the “December 1971 Report on Reservoir Regulation for Flood Control (Revised January 1974)” are as follows.

20,000 cfs 14.2 feet at St. Xavier 25,000 cfs 10.5 feet at Bighorn 65,000 cfs 13.0 feet at Miles City 100,000 cfs 19.0 feet at Sidney

3. Inflow Forecasts. Three federal agencies, the Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) are responsible for providing monthly independent April-July inflow forecasts for Boysen and Bighorn Reservoir. The Corps calculates their forecasts based on November and December inflows (antecedent conditions), observed January to June snowpack and actual and anticipated April to June precipitation. Monthly inflow forecasts by the Corps, USBR and NRCS all indicated that it was highly unlikely that either Boysen or Bighorn Reservoirs would enter into their respective flood pools. However, late heavy snowfall in May 2005 that raised the snowpack up to near normal levels followed by a rapid melt resulted in near normal runoff and high pool levels at both projects.

4. Operation. Water Year (WY) 2005 could be considered nearly a drought buster year. Bighorn Reservoir inflow volume, release volume, and minimum pool elevation for the last three years, WY 2002 through WY 2004, were the lowest since the reservoir first filled in 1966. Boysen Reservoir fared only slightly better. The snowmelt runoff in WY 2005, although below normal for the entire year, was concentrated during the months of May and June and surprised water control managers for both the USBR and Corps. Boysen Reservoir nearly entered the flood control pool. The pool did enter the flood pool at Bighorn Reservoir resulting in approximately 2 weeks of flood operations. The following flood control releases from Yellowtail Dam during the 2005 runoff season were coordinated with the Bureau’s Montana Area Office. APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM -2 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

(1). June 26, 2005. The pool level enters the exclusive flood control zone (3640 ft-msl). The average discharge of approximately 6,900 cfs is maintained. Inflows are peaking at around 13,000 cfs.

(2). June 28, 2005. The pool level is approximately 3642 ft-msl and continuing to climb. Releases are increased slightly to approximately 7,300 cfs Inflows have declined to 9,400 cfs.

(3). June 29, 2005. The pool level is approximately 3642.4 ft-msl. and beginning to flatten out. Since inflows are also continuing to decline to 9,200 cfs releases are reduced back down to approximately 6,900 cfs.

(4). July 11, 2005. The pool level drops below the base of the exclusive flood control zone (3640 ft-msl). Releases have been maintained at approximately 6,900 cfs. Inflow has dropped to 2,800 cfs.

Peak flows and stages in 2005 on the Bighorn River at Bighorn were 8,200 cfs and 4.5 feet and on the Yellowstone at Sidney were 42,900 cfs and 12.7 feet. Both peaks occurred on June 29, 2005. As can be seen by these peaks flood control releases of approximately 7,000 cfs did not result in flows exceeding the target flows and left additional downstream channel capacity for unanticipated runoff. At the same time the release of 7,000 cfs evacuated the storage in the exclusive flood control pool in a short 16 days while providing maximum benefits to the authorized purpose of hydropower generation.

5. Boysen Dam and Reservoir Operation Details. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Pool-Date Highest 19,253 cfs Jun 23 67 14,204 cfs Jul 07 67 4730.83 Jul 06 67 2nd 17,976 cfs Jun 17 63 10,688 cfs Jun 16 91 4729.85 Jul 05 57 3rd 16,517 cfs Jun 15 91 9,512 cfs Jul 16 95 4729.18 Jun 16 91

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 4684.18 Mar 18 56 2nd 4686.42 Sep 21 60 3rd 4686.87 Sep 24 02

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 945,192 AF, 94% of normal 828,470 AF, 83% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 9,124 cfs on Jun 24 5,580 cfs on Jun 26

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 4724.92, Jun 27 4711.76, Oct 01

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM - 3 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

FIGURE 1 – BOYSEN DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM -4 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

FIGURE 2 – BOYSEN DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM - 5 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

6. Yellowtail Dam and Reservoir Operation Details. Figures 3 and 4 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

d. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 29,776 cfs Jul 01 67 24,721 cfs Jul 08 67 2nd 23,215 cfs May 19 78 14,947 cfs Jul 03 70 3rd 21,006 cfs Jun 11 97 14,415 cfs Jul 19 95

Pool-Date Highest 3656.36 Jul 06 67 2nd 3651.71 Jul 14 97 3rd 3649.26 Jul 14 99

e. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 3572.81 Mar 11 03 2nd 3581.76 May 08 04 3rd 3582.25 May 21 02

f. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 1,848,011 AF, 78% of normal 1,557,842 AF, 66% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 13,371 cfs on May 12 7,219 cfs on Jul 03

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 3642.82, Jul 01 3583.29, Apr 08

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM -6 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

FIGURE 3 – YELLOWTAIL DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM - 7 APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM

FIGURE 4 – YELLOWTAIL DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D1-BOYSEN DAM/YELLOWTAIL DAM -8 APPENDIX D2-CANYON FERRY DAM

CANYON FERRY DAM AND RESERVOIR MISSOURI RIVER BASIN, MONTANA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Canyon Ferry Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation, except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone, or that portion of the joint use (conservation-flood control) zone required for flood control, as per the Field Working Agreement dated 23 May 1977. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers.

2. Operation Details. Overall it was dry in the upper Missouri River basin this year, however, the reservoir did enter the exclusive flood control zone (3797-3800 ft-msl) during June and July reaching a peak pool elevation of 3798.5 on July 2. During this period, the reservoir was operated with maximum releases through the powerhouse turbines. This was done to maximize power generation by releasing all water through the turbines and not spilling water unnecessarily. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 35,330 cfs Jun 12 97 25,720 cfs Jun 13 81 2nd 29,055 cfs May 24 81 25,429 cfs Jun 22 97 3rd 28,752 cfs Jun 14 96 24,370 cfs Jun 19 64

Pool-Date Highest 3800.00 Jul 16 62 2nd 3800.00 Jun 23 64 3rd 3800.00 Jul 02 56

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 3764.70 Apr 11 67 2nd 3769.15 Apr 17 97 3rd 3772.75 Mar 25 62

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 2,701,426 AF, 72% of normal 2,549,796 AF, 68% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 12,733 cfs on Jun 19 6,694 cfs on Jul 10

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 3798.51, Jul 02 3779.85, Jan 18

APPENDIX D2- CANYON FERRY DAM - 1 APPENDIX D2-CANYON FERRY DAM

FIGURE 1 – CANYON FERRY DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D2- CANYON FERRY DAM -2 APPENDIX D2-CANYON FERRY DAM

FIGURE 2 – CANYON FERRY DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D2- CANYON FERRY DAM - 3

APPENDIX D3-CLARK CANYON DAM

CLARK CANYON DAM AND RESERVOIR BEAVERHEAD RIVER BASIN, MONTANA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Clark Canyon Reservoir (Hap Hawkins Lake) is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation, except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone, or that portion of the joint use (conservation-flood control) zone required for flood control, as per the Field Working Agreement dated November 19, 1971. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers.

2. Operation Details. Clark Canyon Reservoir did not enter the exclusive flood control zone (5546.1 ft-msl) during the report period. Since WY 2000 Clark Canyon has been in severe drought. The last three years have seen the lowest volume inflow and volume release since records started in 1964. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 3,474 cfs Jun 22 84 2,586 cfs, Jun 25 84 2nd 2,800 cfs Jun 20 75 1,900 cfs, Aug 01 84 3rd 2,563 cfs Jun 06 95 1,538 cfs, Jul 26 95

Pool-Date Highest 5564.70 Jun 25 84 2nd 5556.88 Jul 22 75 3rd 5556.60 Aug 01 84

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 5490.01 Aug 18 03 2nd 5491.33 Aug 29 02 3rd 5498.57 Aug 20 04

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 106,843 AF, 40% of normal 87,581 AF, 33% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 337 cfs on Jun 30 813 cfs on Jul 23

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 5519.98, May 24 5501.32, Oct 01

APPENDIX D3- CLARK CANYON DAM - 1 APPENDIX D3-CLARK CANYON DAM

FIGURE 1 – CLARK CANYON DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D3- CLARK CANYON DAM -2 APPENDIX D3-CLARK CANYON DAM

FIGURE 2 – CLARK CANYON DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATION AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D3- CLARK CANYON DAM - 3

APPENDIX D4-GLENDO DAM

GLENDO DAM AND RESERVOIR NORTH PLATTE RIVER BASIN, WYOMING 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. Description. The Bureau of Reclamation constructed Glendo Dam and Powerplant in October 1957 as part of the Missouri River Basin Project, Glendo Unit. The Glendo Unit provides irrigation, power generation, flood control, fish and wildlife enhancement, recreation, sediment retention, pollution abatement, and improvement of the quality of municipal and industrial water supply in the North Platte River valley between Gray Reef Dam and Glendo Reservoir.

Table D-4 shows Glendo Reservoir storage allocations from the 1975 resurvey.

TABLE D-4 GLENDO RESERVOIR STORAGE ALLOCATIONS Pool Elevation Zone Capacity Cum Capacity Storage Zones (ft-msl) (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Dead 4508-4545 11,033 11,033 Irrigation 4545-4570 53,115 63,148 Conservation 4570-4635 454,337 517,485 Flood Control3 4635-4653 271,917 789,402 Surcharge 4653-4669 329,251 1,118,653

2. Water Control Plan. The general objectives of the water control plan as described in paragraph 7-01 of the Glendo Dam and Reservoir water control manual calls for the District Engineer (Corps) to make discharges from Glendo Dam “considered necessary based on known hydrologic conditions at the time with the objective of prevention of reduction of flood damages along the North Platte River in Wyoming and Nebraska from Glendo Dam to Lake McConaughy (Kingsley Dam).”

3. Inflow Forecasts. Inflow forecasts are based on historical antecedent conditions, snowpack and precipitation versus actual inflow. Both the USBR and the Corps independently calculate monthly forecasts. There were no flood control activities at Glendo Reservoir during the report period. Drought conditions persisted in the basin in WY 2005 following a record low volume of runoff for WY 2004 The only way of sustaining storage at a near normal level in Glendo was by implementing conservation measures and cutting back on irrigation deliveries.

4. Reservoir Regulation. Several considerations are given in determining releases from Glendo Dam: 1) incremental inflows downstream of Glendo Dam and upstream of the re-regulating Guernsey Dam, which has a total storage capacity of only 30,000 acre- feet; 2) downstream irrigation canal diversions from the North Platte River; 3) releases from Grayrocks Dam on the Laramie River; and 4) incremental inflows between Guernsey Dam and the Nebraska communities along the North Platte River including Mitchell, Scottsbluff, Bridgeport, Lisco and Lewellen.

3 Waters stored in the flood control zone of Glendo Reservoir are released under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Army under authority of the Flood Control Act of 1944. APPENDIX D4- GLENDO DAM - 1 APPENDIX D4-GLENDO DAM

5. Operation Details. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 18,840 cfs May 15 65 10,214 cfs Jun 30 84 2nd 17,560 cfs Jun 13 70 9,952 cfs Jul 20 83 3rd 14,661 cfs May 21 73 9,644 cfs Jun 02 73

Pool-Date Highest 4650.94 May 28 73 2nd 4650.27 Jun 14 83 3rd 4649.08 May 24 71

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 4548.10 Sep 28 66 2nd 4560.42 Sep 26 72 3rd 4560.73 Sep 29 69

c. Report Period (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 796,246 AF, 68% of normal 758,976 AF, 67% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 3,034 cfs on Jul 25 7,542 cfs on Aug 04

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 4633.94, Jun 20 4583.27, Sep 07

APPENDIX D4- GLENDO DAM -2 APPENDIX D4-GLENDO DAM

FIGURE 1 – GLENDO DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D4- GLENDO DAM - 3 APPENDIX D4-GLENDO DAM

FIGURE 2 – GLENDO DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D4- GLENDO DAM -4 APPENDIX D5-HEART BUTTE DAM

HEART BUTTE DAM AND RESERVOIR (LAKE TSCHIDA) HEART RIVER BASIN, NORTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Heart Butte Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers as per the Field Working Agreement dated 15 March 1951.

The capacity of the spillway at the top of the flood control pool is 4,450 cfs. This discharge is well within the downstream channel capacity.

2. Operation Details. Heart Butte Reservoir remained near the top of the conservation pool for most of the year. June through September releases were made from the project. Dry conditions prevailed for the remainder of the reporting period. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 22,092 cfs May 09 70 4,100 cfs Apr 09 52 2nd 21,662 cfs Apr 17 50 3,932 cfs Apr 01 78 3rd 15,114 cfs Mar 21 97 3,864 cfs May 13 70

Pool-Date Highest 2086.23 Apr 09 52 2nd 2083.77 Mar 31 78 3rd 2082.70 May 12 70

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill): Pool-Date Lowest 2049.00 Oct 25 91 2nd 2049.16 Oct 12 92 3rd 2051.44 Nov 07 90

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 35,527 AF, 41% of normal 34,921 AF, 41% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 1,294 cfs on Jul 02 952 cfs on Jul 06

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 2066.46, Jul 03 2061.04, Oct 16

APPENDIX D5- HEART BUTTE DAM - 1 APPENDIX D5-HEART BUTTE DAM

FIGURE 1 – HEART BUTTE DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D5- HEART BUTTE DAM -2 APPENDIX D5-HEART BUTTE DAM

FIGURE 2 – HEART BUTTE DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D5- HEART BUTTE DAM - 3

APPENDIX D6-JAMESTOWN DAM

JAMESTOWN DAM AND RESERVOIR JAMES RIVER BASIN, NORTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Jamestown Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone or that portion of joint use conservation-flood control zone required for flood control. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers. Pipestem Reservoir is operated jointly with Jamestown Reservoir for flood control. A new water control plan was finalized at the end of 2002. This plan was the product of a study initiated in 1996. This new plan has been followed for the last several years. Details of this plan are contained in the study write-up “Jamestown and Pipestem Reservoirs Water Control Plan Review and Update, July, 2000”. For a description of the joint operation of Jamestown and Pipestem Reservoirs, refer to the Pipestem Reservoir narrative located in Appendix B of this report.

2. Operation Details. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 7,689 cfs Apr 17 69 1,702 cfs May 02 97 2nd 5,808 cfs Apr 22 97 1,169 cfs May 13 96 3rd 5,029 cfs Apr 18 96 1,152 cfs May 04 01

Pool-Date Highest 1445.70 May 02 97 2nd 1444.90 Apr 25 96 3rd 1443.80 May 02 69

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 1420.91 Mar 03 93 2nd 1421.85 Jul 31 92 3rd 1423.53 Jul 31 91

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 29,600 AF, 68% of normal 26,628 AF, 62% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 401 cfs on Oct 29 202 cfs on May 22

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 1432.30, May 10 1428.11, Oct 06 APPENDIX D6- JAMESTOWN DAM - 1 APPENDIX D6-JAMESTOWN DAM

FIGURE 1 – JAMESTOWN DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D6- JAMESTOWN DAM -2 APPENDIX D6-JAMESTOWN DAM

FIGURE 2 – JAMESTOWN DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D6- JAMESTOWN DAM - 3

APPENDIX D7-KEYHOLE DAM

KEYHOLE DAM AND RESERVOIR BELLE FOURCHE RIVER BASIN, WYOMING 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Keyhole Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone as per the Field Working Agreement dated 11 February 1970. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers.

2. Operation Details. Drought conditions that began in Water Year (WY) 2000 continued into WY 2005. The pool level did not reach the top of conservation zone (4099.3). Irrigation releases resulted in a further decline of the pool. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 10,664 cfs May 19 78 1,347 cfs May 24 78 2nd 5,198 cfs Mar 13 96 825 cfs May 23-24 62 3rd 4,778 cfs Feb 29 72 800 cfs Mar 11-15 72

Pool-Date Highest 4100.38 May 21 78 2nd 4099.06 Jun 14 99 3rd 4098.78 Mar 07 72

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 4060.32 Nov 01 92 2nd 4063.86 Jul 22-23 92 3rd 4066.94 Dec 12-22 90

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 0 16,267 AF, 109% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 406 cfs on May 14 204 cfs on Jul 20

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 4086.54, May 20 4081.75, Sep 27

APPENDIX D7- KEYHOLE DAM - 1 APPENDIX D7-KEYHOLE DAM

FIGURE 1 – KEYHOLE DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D7- KEYHOLE DAM -2 APPENDIX D7-KEYHOLE DAM

FIGURE 2 – KEYHOLE DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D7- KEYHOLE DAM - 3

APPENDIX D8-PACTOLA DAM

PACTOLA DAM AND RESERVOIR RAPID CREEK BASIN, SOUTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Pactola Dam and Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone as per the Field Working Agreement dated 27 August 1969. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers.

2. Operation Details. Dry conditions that began in WY 2002 worsened in WY 2005. Inflow for WY 2005 was the second lowest since the dam became operational in 1956. Only inflow that occurred in WY 1961 was lower. Pactola Reservoir failed to fill the conservation zone. The low peak inflow and total inflow volume placed the runoff in one of the four driest years of record. Releases were reduced to a minimum to conserve storage at the reservoir.

Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 1,132 cfs May 16 65 500 cfs May 20 65 2nd 1,009 cfs Jun 19 98 438 cfs Jun 02 96 3rd 741 cfs May 31 96 438 cfs Jun 23 98

Pool-Date Highest 4585.87 May 19 65 2nd 4585.44 May 21 78 3rd 4585.35 Jun 04 96

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 4531.53 Jan 24 91 2nd 4533.12 Feb 21 90 3rd 4539.94 Jul 31 89

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 13,871 AF, 39% of normal 20,355 AF, 58% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 91 cfs on May 11 99 cfs on Jul 08

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 4564.72, Jun 22 4553.28, Sep 30

APPENDIX D8- PACTOLA DAM - 1 APPENDIX D8-PACTOLA DAM

FIGURE 1 – PACTOLA DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D8- PACTOLA DAM -2 APPENDIX D8-PACTOLA DAM

FIGURE 2 – PACTOLA DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D8- PACTOLA DAM - 3

APPENDIX D9-SHADEHILL DAM

SHADEHILL DAM AND RESERVOIR GRAND RIVER BASIN, SOUTH DAKOTA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Shadehill Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation except when the pool level rises into the exclusive flood control zone as per the Field Working Agreement dated 15 May 1972. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers.

2. Operation Details. Dry conditions that began in 2002 persisted into 2005 with inflow for WY 2005 the second lowest of record since the dam was closed in 1952. Only inflow that occurred in 1961 was lower. Shadehill Reservoir experienced no flood control activities during the reporting period. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 32,152 cfs Apr 08 52 5,078 cfs Apr 10 52 2nd 11,333 cfs Mar 22 97 4,120 cfs Apr 03 78 3rd 9,690 cfs Mar 30 78 4,038 cfs Mar 24 97

Pool-Date Highest 2297.90 Apr 10 52 2nd 2282.42 Apr 02 78 3rd 2280.01 Mar 24 97

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 2258.62 Nov 17 81 2nd 2258.90 Mar 17 62 3rd 2259.33 Apr 17 64

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 0 16,862 AF, 25% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 418 cfs on May 08 25 cfs on Oct 01

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 2267.55, Oct 01 2263.23, Sep 30

APPENDIX D9- SHADEHILL DAM - 1 APPENDIX D9-SHADEHILL DAM

FIGURE 1 – SHADEHILL DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D9- SHADEHILL DAM -2 APPENDIX D9-SHADEHILL DAM

FIGURE 2 – SHADEHILL DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D9- SHADEHILL DAM - 3

APPENDIX D10-TIBER DAM

TIBER DAM AND RESERVOIR (LAKE ELWELL) MARIAS RIVER BASIN, MONTANA 2004-2005 REGULATION

1. General. Tiber Reservoir is regulated by the Bureau of Reclamation except when the pool level rises into the flood control zone or that portion of the joint use (conservation-flood control) zone required for flood control as per the Water Control Agreement. When this occurs, release determination is the responsibility of the Corps of Engineers. When replacement storage is required for the downstream Fort Peck Reservoir, releases from Tiber Dam will be adjusted beginning 1 March, based on anticipated inflow, to fill the flood control storage zone to elevation 3008.1 ft-msl prior to mid July. Minimum releases to achieve this fill are 300 cfs.

Operation Details. The pool level at Tiber Reservoir did not enter the flood control zone during the report period. Figures 1 and 2 detail historical and reporting period releases and pool elevations.

a. Maximums of Records:

Daily Inflow-Date Daily Outflow-Date Highest 102,888 cfs Jun 10 64 10,300 cfs Jun 13-14 64 2nd 52,981 cfs Jun 21 75 7,989 Aug 12 64 3rd 26,391 cfs Feb 26 86 5,777 cfs Jun 25 75; Jul 11 75

Pool-Date Highest 3005.59 Jul 12 65 2nd 3003.80 Aug 01 65 3rd 3001.91 Jun 13 64

b. Minimums of Record (since initial fill):

Pool-Date Lowest 2953.81 Mar 31 68 2nd 2955.25 Apr 28 67 3rd 2956.31 Mar 14 69

c. Report Period: (October 1, 2004 through September 30 2005):

Total Inflow Total Outflow 339,576 AF, 56% of normal 344,624 AF, 59% of normal

Peak Daily Inflow Peak Daily Outflow 3,901 cfs on Jun 07 515 cfs on Oct 15

Peak Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) Minimum Pool Elevation (FT-MSL) 2985.52, Jul 09 2976.88, Apr 26

APPENDIX D10- TIBER DAM - 1 APPENDIX D10-TIBER DAM

FIGURE 1 – TIBER DAM POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES FOR REPORT PERIOD.

APPENDIX D10- TIBER DAM -2 APPENDIX D10-TIBER DAM

FIGURE 2 - TIBER DAM HISTORICAL POOL ELEVATIONS AND RELEASES.

APPENDIX D10- TIBER DAM - 3