DOCSLIB.ORG

3.2 Lake Stillhouse Hollow

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
3.2 Lake Stillhouse Hollow Appendix D-1 Williamson County Regional Raw Water System Transmission and Operation Models by CDM Appendix D-1 Appendix D-1 Contents PART 1 MODELING REPORT Section 1 Project Objectives ................................................................................1-1 - 1-2 Section 2 The WCRRW System ......................................................................... 2-1 – 2-8 Section 3 Model Overview and Potential Uses............................................... 3-1 – 3-5 Section 4 Modeling Approach.......................................................................... 4-1 – 4-14 Section 5 Mathematical Formulations ............................................................ 5-1 – 5-21 Section 6 Model Validation ................................................................................ 6-1 – 6-6 Section 7 Analysis and Results .......................................................................... 7-1 – 7-7 Appendices ................................................................................................ A - B PART 2 INSTRUCTION GUIDE Section 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1-1 Section 2 Planning Simulation Model ........................................................... 2-1 – 2-24 Section 3 Operations Optimization Model ................................................... 3-1 – 3-27 PART 3 HYDROLOGIC REPORT Section 1 Introduction .................................................................................................. 1-1 Section 2 Hydrologic Methods Used ................................................................ 2-1 – 2-3 Section 3 Specifics on Data Sources and Procedures for Each Lake ......... 3-1 – 3-11 Section 4 Comparison of Flows ......................................................................... 4-1 – 4-5 Section 5 Lake Georgetown ......................................................................................... 5-1 Section 6 Lake Stillhouse Hollow .............................................................................. 6-1 Section 7 Lake Belton .................................................................................................... 7-1 Section 8 Conclusions ................................................................................................... 8-1 Section 9 References...................................................................................................... 9-1 Appendices ................................................................................................. A - F A i Table of Contents Appendix D-1 Appendix D-1 Contents PART 1 MODELING REPORT Section 1 Project Objectives ................................................................................................. 1-1 Section 2 The WCRRW System 2.1 Reservoirs .......................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Stillhouse Pump Station and WCRRW Pipeline .......................................... 2-2 2.3 Customer Water Demands ............................................................................. 2-7 Section 3 Model Overview and Potential Uses 3.1 Planning Simulation Model ............................................................................ 3-1 3.1.1 Brief Description of Planning Simulation Model ........................... 3-1 3.1.2 Potential uses of Planning Simulation Model ................................. 3-2 3.2 Operations Optimization Model .................................................................... 3-3 3.2.1 Brief Description of Operations Optimization Model ................... 3-3 3.2.2 Potential uses of Operations Optimization Model ......................... 3-5 Section 4 Modeling Approach 4.1 Planning Simulation Model ............................................................................ 4.1 4.1.1 Model Approach ................................................................................. 4-1 4.1.2 Model Modes ....................................................................................... 4-2 4.1.3 Scenario Input and Output ................................................................ 4-3 4.1.4 Operating Logic .................................................................................. 4-4 4.2 Operations Optimization Model .................................................................... 4-5 4.2.1 Model Approach ................................................................................. 4-5 4.2.2 Scenario Input and Output ................................................................ 4-7 4.2.2.1 Inputs ................................................................................... 4-7 4.2.2.2 Outputs ................................................................................ 4-8 4.2.3 Model Formulation ............................................................................. 4-9 4.2.4 Assumptions of Linearity ................................................................ 4-12 A i Table of Contents Appendix D-1 Table of Contents – Part 1 BRA WCRRW System Modeling Report Section 5 Mathematical Formulations 5.1 Mass Balance ..................................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Hydrology ......................................................................................................... 5-3 5.3 Pump Station Calculations ............................................................................. 5-5 5.3.1 Physical Components ......................................................................... 5-6 5.3.2 Formulas............................................................................................... 5-6 5.3.3 Summary of Conditions and Restrictions ....................................... 5-8 5.3.3.1 Allowable Pump Configurations ..................................... 5-9 5.3.3.2 Pump Station Operating Strategies ................................ 5-11 5.3.3.3 Pipeline Pressure Rating .................................................. 5-11 5.4 Energy Cost Structure ................................................................................... 5-13 5.4.1 Energy Charges ................................................................................. 5-13 5.4.1.1 The Market Clearing Price for Energy (MCPE) ............ 5-14 5.4.1.2 Fixed Energy Charge ........................................................ 5-16 5.4.1.3 Day/Night Energy Charge ............................................. 5-17 5.4.2 Utility Charges .................................................................................. 5-17 5.4.2.1 Power Demand: Billing kW............................................. 5-18 5.4.2.2 Power Demand: 4 CP kW ................................................ 5-18 5.4.2.3 Power Factor ...................................................................... 5-18 5.5 Pump Operations ........................................................................................... 5-19 Section 6 Model Validation 6.1 Firm Yield Analysis ......................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 Comparison to FNI Model .............................................................................. 6-2 6.3 Comparison of Calculated Costs to Billing Records ................................... 6-4 Section 7 Analysis and Results 7.1 Minimum Trigger Levels ................................................................................ 7-1 7.1.1 Results .................................................................................................. 7-2 7.1.2 Conclusions .......................................................................................... 7-4 7.2 Total Energy Costs ........................................................................................... 7-5 7.2.1 Results .................................................................................................. 7-5 7.2.2 Conclusions .......................................................................................... 7-7 A ii Table of Contents Appendix D-1 Table of Contents – Part 1 BRA WCRRW System Modeling Report Appendices Appendix A Pipe Friction Factor, Pump Analysis for Williamson County, Regional Raw Water Line Appendix B Pump Curves Figures Figure 2-1 Schematic of Reservoir System ................................................................... 2-1 Figure 2-2 Lake Georgetown Elevation-Capacity Curve and Significant Reservoir Elevations ................................................................. 2-3 Figure 2-3 Lake Stillhouse Hollow Elevation-Capacity Curve and Significant Reservoir Elevations ................................................................. 2-4 Figure 2-4 Lake Belton Elevation-Capacity Curve and Significant Reservoir Elevations ................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-5 Lake Granger Elevation-Capacity Curve and Significant Reservoir Elevations ................................................................. 2-6 Figure 5-1 Reservoir Mass Balance ............................................................................... 5-1 Figure 5-2 Cumulative Distribution of Annual Inflows ............................................ 5-4 Figure 5-3 Cumulative Distribution of Annual Net Evaporation............................. 5-4 Figure 5-4 Median Monthly Inflows ............................................................................. 5-5 Figure 5-5 Median Monthly Net Evaporation ............................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Interim Report
    · - Austin Study Area Phase I - Interim Report City of Austin Texas Water Development Board August, 1994 HDR Engineering, Inc_ in association with Paul Price Associates, Inc. ---- ----------------- · TRANS-TEXAS WATER PROGRAM AUSTIN STUDY AREA PHASE I INTERIM REPORT Prepared for City of Austin Texas Water Development Board by HDR Engineering, Inc. in association with Paul Price Associates, Inc. August, 1994 TRANS-TEXAS WATER PROGRAM AUSTIN STUDY AREA TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................... 1-1 1.1 The Study Area .................................... 1-2 1.2 Objectives ....................................... 1-2 2.0 POPULA TION AND WATER DEMAND PROJECTIONS ............. 2-1 2.1 Population Projections -- City of Austin and Travis, Williamson, and Hays Counties ..................................... 2-1 2.2 Water Demand Projections -- City of Austin and Travis, Williamson, and Hays Counties .................................. 2-1 3.0 REVIEW OF CURRENT SUPPLY ............................ 3-1 3.1 Existing Rights .................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Municipal Rights ............................... 3-3 3.1.2 Steam Electric Rights ............................ 3-4 3.2 Water Availability from Existing Rights .................... 3-4 3.2.1 Assumptions and Limitations ........................ 3-5 3.2.2 Modeling Results ............................... 3-8 3.3 Terms and Conditions of Settlement Agreement .. 3-11 4.0 COMPARISON OF PROJECTED WATER DEMAND AND SUPPLY ..... 4-1 4.1 Municipal Water Use ................................ 4-1 4.1.1 Ground Water Supply ......... ................. 4-1 4.1.2 Surface Water Supply ............................ 4-1 4.1.3 Projected Firm Surpluses and Deficits .................. 4-1 4.2 Steam Electric Use .................................. 4-3 4.2.1 Ground Water Supply ............................ 4-3 4.2.2 Surface Water Supply ............................ 4-3 4.2.3 Projected Firm Surpluses and Deficits .................
    [Show full text]
  • Unsuuseuracsbe
    Strawn Gordon PALO 3 STEPHENS Mingus StHwy 19 DISTRICT PARKER PINTO 13 DISTRICT Burleson Oak Grove Lipan Ovilla Ferris 12 Mansfield Red Oak Midlothian Pecan Hill Briaroaks Grand Prairie Oak Trail Shores Oak Leaf StHwy 34 Cottonwood Grays Prairie Joshua Cross Timber Rosser 110th Congress of the WaxahachieUnited States Godley Pearl S St tH wy HOOD Granbury 171 EASTLAND Palmer Keene Alvarado S t H w Venus Trinity River y Main Garrett DISTRICT Tolar 1 4 4 St S ( t G Lake Alvarado 19 H l 287 Bus w e y n 10 R 8 o Pecan Plantation s e 67 6 Cleburne H 1 w y y St w ) on H rs t nde Lake e S e v H Waxahachie Enni s A Squaw Creek Reservoir Ennis Maypearl HENDERSON 4 Bardwell Lake 4 4 Lake Pat 7 1 1 t DISTRICT 5 y Bra Cleburne y zos Riv S w e w Alma r y H H e t t l S s S Grandview o Bardwell M 4 3 y ERATH w Rice Rio Vista t H Glen Rose S S t Stephenville H SOMERVELL w y 8 ELLIS JOHNSON 1 Italy Covington 4 4 StHwy 6 4 7 S 1 1 t y H DISTRICT y Hw NAVARRO t w Emhouse w S y Itasca H t 1 7 S 6 1 USHwy 67 Blum Kerens I - Bus 4 StHwy 31 5 Milford F De Leon Powell Blooming Barry StHwy 6 Grove StHwy 22 Corsicana Richland-Chambers S Carl’s Corner Reservoir t H w Dublin y 8 Lake Halbert 1 22 Frost 4 wy 17 StH Location of Texas’ 31st Congressional District - 32 Districts Total StHwy 220 y S w tHwy 6 H t Mildred Walnut Springs S 106 W 104 W 102 W 100 W98 W96 W94 W Mertens 2 Hillsboro y 2 Hw St 36 N 36 N 6 1 y USHwy 67 HILL Oak Valley Eureka S Morgan w t H Proctor Lake H t 1 w S 3 S t Navarro y Hw y OKLAHOMARetreat 1 y w 4 2 1 tH 4 2 7 ARKANSAS DISTRICT wy 1 S
    [Show full text]
  • Lake Granbury Water Quality Modeling
    Lake Granbury Overview Water Quality Modeling Update • History of studies on Lake Granbury • Watershed Protection Plans in Texas • Data evaluation – Whole lake – Canal by canal David Harkins, Ph.D., P.E. – Findings Tim Osting, P.E. Espey Consultants, Inc. • Modeling approach February 13, 2007 • Recommendations Lake Granbury History Watershed Protection Plan • Dam completed in 1969 • BRA study in 1982 •Why? – Reviewed earlier reports (TDWR, USGS) – Existing bacteria concentrations – Development of areas around the lake – Evaluated treatment of septic systems • What is the result? – Evaluated nutrient loads – Partnership • BRA study 1995 – Ensure good water quality – Identified canal systems with high bacteria – Roadmap for all agencies concentrations – Identify all options • Clean Rivers Program special studies 2001-current – Choose the best options – 50 monitoring locations • Golden Alga study Watershed Protection Plan Examples • Texas • Trinity River Basin WPP – Similarities and Differences – Concho River – Lake Bridgeport – Little Wichita River – Eagle Mountain Lake • Most WPPs address sediment, nutrients – Pecos River –Lake Benbrook – Plum Creek – Cedar Creek Reservoir • Bacteria WPPs usually agricultural or wildlife – Arroyo Colorado – Richland-Chambers Reservoir – Caddo Lake • National sources – Dickinson Bayou – Dungeness River, WA – Hickory Creek – Nooksack River, WA • Some address specific pollutants (eg, atrazine) – Upper San Antonio River – Grand Traverse Bay, MI • Brazos River Basin – Green Valley Lake, IA • All recommend region-wide
    [Show full text]
  • Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(1) Appendix A
    Figure: 30 TAC §307.10(1) Appendix A - Site-specific Uses and Criteria for Classified Segments The following tables identify the water uses and supporting numerical criteria for each of the state's classified segments. The tables are ordered by basin with the segment number and segment name given for each classified segment. Marine segments are those that are specifically titled as "tidal" in the segment name, plus all bays, estuaries and the Gulf of Mexico. The following descriptions denote how each numerical criterion is used subject to the provisions in §307.7 of this title (relating to Site-Specific Uses and Criteria), §307.8 of this title (relating to Application of Standards), and §307.9 of this title (relating to Determination of Standards Attainment). Segments that include reaches that are dominated by springflow are footnoted in this appendix and have critical low-flows calculated according to §307.8(a)(2) of this title. These critical low-flows apply at or downstream of the spring(s) providing the flows. Critical low-flows upstream of these springs may be considerably smaller. Critical low-flows used in conjunction with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regulatory actions (such as discharge permits) may be adjusted based on the relative location of a discharge to a gauging station. -1 -2 The criteria for Cl (chloride), SO4 (sulfate), and TDS (total dissolved solids) are listed in this appendix as maximum annual averages for the segment. Dissolved oxygen criteria are listed as minimum 24-hour means at any site within the segment. Absolute minima and seasonal criteria are listed in §307.7 of this title unless otherwise specified in this appendix.
    [Show full text]
  • LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513
    LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 IMPROVED RANCH | FOR SALE LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER OFFERING SUMMARY Sales Price $998,000 Price/AC $8,790/AC Subject Property Highlights • Less than 3 miles from Interstate 35 just south of Belton Leon River • 4,000’ of frontage on the spectacular Leon River • Diverse mixture of woods and cropland • Several single family residences with lots of potential FM 436 3 Forks Rd LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER PROPERTY INFORMATION Size 113.53 AC North side of FM 436, approximately 3 miles Location east of Interstate 35 just south of Belton 2,490 SF main residence built in 1974, 1,166 SF Improvements home constructed in 2003, numerous older barns 30’ of frontage along FM 436 with long Frontage/Access driveway leading to the property Topography/ Heavily wooded along the south side and the Water Features Leon River with about a 40 acre dry crop field Wildlife Deer, turkey, hogs, ducks and dove Approximately 45% is in the flood Flood Plain plain along the Leon River Owner believes to own 100% of the Minerals mineral estate, minerals are negotiable LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER Subject Virginia Wallace Texas, 120.18 AC +/- Virginia Wallace Texas, 120.18 AC +/- LEON RIVER RANCH 6402 West FM 436 Belton, Texas 76513 SUMMARY • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION • MARKET OVERVIEW • DISCLAIMER Flood Plain Map 100 Year 500 Year Unmapped/ Stream, House Cabin Boundary Floodway Special River/Creek Subject Floodplain Floodplain Not Intermittent Water Body The information contained herein was obtained from sources Aaron Morris deemed to be reliable.
    [Show full text]
  • Stillhouse Hollow Sanctuary
    STILLHOUSE HOLLOW SANCTUARY 65+ Acres Bell County 9177 FM 2410, Harker Heights, TX DESCRIPTION This premier unrestricted property becomes the ultimate for improvements of choice with panoramic Stillhouse Hollow Lake views, prominent residential home sites and ample hardwood trees. The property is located within the ETJ of the city of Harker Heights. In between the property and the Lake lies a protected greenbelt owned by the US Army Corps of Engineers, never to be built upon. IMPROVEMENTS There are 60± feet of FM 2410 frontage for easy access. There is a caliche trail system in place to traverse the property. The western side of the property is not fenced. TERRAIN-VEGETATION Topography ranges from 689-820 feet, with 2 scenic hilltops. There is a 1.5± acre cleared pasture. 65+ Acres Bell County 9177 FM 2410, Harker Heights, TX UTILITIES Available is Oncor Electric, Dog Ridge Water Supply Corp., phone/cable/ internet WATER No well. The top of Elf Trail shows 800± feet to the water table and is 820± feet ASL. There is a 12” water pipe (Dog Ridge) across FM 2410 currently in place. SCHOOLS Belton I.S.D. STILLHOUSE HOLLOW LAKE This is a US Army Corps of Engineers reservoir with a dam on the Lampasas River in the Brazos River basin, 5± miles southwest of Belton. Activities in and near the lake include water sports, boating, fishing, hiking, camping, and playground / sport park. TAXES $7,347.75 (2019) Ag Exempt 11.223± acres were $26. 65+ Acres Bell County 9177 FM 2410, Harker Heights, TX STILLHOUSE HOLLOW SANCTUARY 65± ACRES BELL CO 9177 FM 2410, HARKER HEIGHTS, TX The property is one ± hour north of metro Austin.
    [Show full text]
  • Nationalatlas.Govtm
    nationalatlas.gov TM TEXAS Where We Are Rita Blanca NG FEDERAL LANDS AND Dalhart INDIAN RESERVATIONS Lake Meredith Lake Meredith NRA Alibates Flint Quarries OKLAHOMA Bureau of Reclamation National Monument ARKANSAS Amarillo Department of Defense (includes Army Corps of Engineers lakes) Buffalo Lake NWR Fish and Wildlife Service / Wilderness NEW MEXICO Childress R Plainview ed Forest Service / Wilderness Lake Texoma Sheppard Air Force Base River Muleshoe NWR Pat Mayse Wichita Falls Hagerman NWR Lake National Park Service / Wilderness Lubbock Caddo NG Texarkana Reese AFB Red River Army Depot Lyndon B Johnson NG (Closed) Lake Ray Roberts Wright Patman Lake Some small sites are not shown, especially in Lewisville Lake Lavon Lake urban areas. Lake O' the Pines Grapevine Lake Caddo Lake Fort Wolters Dallas Little Sandy MILES NWR L Snyder Fort Worth Caddo Lake NWR O Benbrook Lake Longview 0 50 100 150 200 Abilene U Albers equal area projection Cleburne Bardwell Lake Tyler Dyess AFB I Whitney Lake S Big Spring I El Paso Midland Proctor Lake Navarro Mills Lake A Abbreviations Fort Bliss Guadalupe Mountains NP Aquilla Lake Sabine NF N Chamizal Odessa Nacogdoches Socorro A AFB Air Force Base National Memorial Waco Lake Waco Pecos O. C. Fisher Lake San Angelo Davy Crockett Angelina NF NAS Naval Air Station Pecos Goodfellow Air Force Base NF Twin Buttes Reservoir Sam Rayburn Reservoir NF National Forest Fort Hood Belton Lake NG National Grassland Van Horn Lampasas Temple Alabama-Coushatta IR Steinhagen Lake NHP National Historical Park Fort Stockton
    [Show full text]
  • Plum Creek Watershed Protection Plan Presented By
    Watershed Protection Plans State Perspective Texas Watershed Planning Short Course June 2, 2008 Bandera, TX State and Federal Perspectives on WPPs (Rush/Wendt) 1. goals and importance of WPPs, 2. how WPPs fit into state and federal objectives and interact with other state and federal programs, and 3. current issues affecting watershed planning efforts. June 2, 2008 2 Water Quality in Texas • Texas State Soil and Water Conservation Board (TSSWCB) – Agricultural and Silvicultural NPS • Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) – Point Source Permitting – All other forms of NPS June 2, 2008 3 June 2, 2008 4 What is a WPP? • Coordinated framework for implementing prioritized and integrated water quality protection and restoration strategies • Addresses complex water quality problems that cross multiple jurisdictions • Developed and implemented through diverse, well integrated partnerships • Specific geographic watershed focus large enough so that its implementation holistically address all of the sources and causes of impairments and threats to water resources • Assures the long-term health of the watershed through strategies for protecting unimpaired waters and restoring impaired waters • Tools to better leverage the resources of local governments, state and federal agencies, and non-governmental organizations • Voluntary, proactive approach • Needed for CWA §319(h) Grant funding June 2, 2008 5 Nine Elements a. Identification of the causes b. Estimate of the load reductions c. Description of management measures d. Estimate of financial
    [Show full text]
  • RIVER AUTHORITIES and SPECIAL LAW DISTRICTS WITHIN the STATE of TEXAS (With Lakes and Bays)
    Dallam Sherman Hansford Ochiltree Lipscomb RIVER AUTHORITIES AND SPECIAL LAW DISTRICTS Hartley Moore Hutchinson Roberts Hemphill WITHIN THE STATE OF TEXAS Lake Meredith (with lakes and bays) Oldham Potter Carson Gray Wheeler NOTE: Map reflects Authority and District statutory boundaries and does not necessarily represent service areas. Greenbelt Reservoir Deaf Smith Randall Armstrong Donley Collingsworth Buffalo Lake Prairie Dog Town Fk Red River Parmer Castro Swisher Briscoe Hall Childress Hardeman Lake Pauline Bailey Lamb Hale Floyd Motley Cottle Wilbarger Wichita Foard Santa Rosa Lake Lake Texoma Pat Mayse Lake Lake Nocona Diversion Reservoir Clay Truscott Lake Hubert H Moss Lake Kemp Lamar Red River Lake Arrowhead Montague Red River Cooke Grayson Cochran Fannin Hockley Lubbock Crosby Dickens King Knox Baylor Archer Bowie White River Lake Lake Amon G. Carter Delta Millers Creek Reservoir Ray Roberts Lake Cooper Lake Wright Patman Lake Elm Fork Trinity River Titus Jack Franklin Wise Denton Collin Hopkins Morris Yoakum Terry Lynn Garza Cass Kent Stonewall Haskell Throckmorton Young Lake Bridgeport Hunt Lewisville Lake Lavon Lake Lake Bob Sandlin Lake Graham Lake Stamford Camp Grapevine Lake Ellison Creek Reservoir Rockwall Eagle Mountain Lake Lake Ray Hubbard Rains Lake Fork Reservoir Marion Possum Kingdom Lake Lake O' the Pines Lake Tawakoni Wood Upshur Caddo Lake Hubbard Creek Reservoir Parker Tarrant Dallas Gaines Palo Pinto Dawson Borden Scurry Fisher Jones Shackelford Stephens Lake Daniel Lake Palo Pinto Benbrook Lake Joe Pool Lake
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Water Resources Institute
    Texas Water Resources Institute Spring 1996 Volume 22 No. 1 Surveying Texas' Reservoirs High Tech Programs by TWDB, Texas Universities Produce better Insights Into Sediment Problems at Texas Lakes By Ric Jensen, Information Specialist, TWRI For reservoir owners and water managers, sediment is a dirty word. Imagine that you planned and built a dam in the 1930s to store enough water to meet regional water needs for many years. For example, you may have estimated that the dam and the reservoir it created should store 50,000 acre-feet of water. Now fast-forward to today's conditions. Unfortunately, many parts of the reservoir have probably been filled in by silt and sediment deposited by runoff caused by heavy rains. As a result, your reservoir may now be able to store just 40,000 acre-feet (AF). Maybe, if you are like many water managers, you don't know exactly how much water your reservoir can store today. Sadly, stories like these are fact - - not fiction -- in many instances in Texas and the U.S. Many experts estimate that sedimentation reduces the storage capacity of reservoirs by an average rate of 0.2% annually. If that's the case, Texas could lose enough water to fill 19 reservoirs within the next 50 TWDB professionals take small boats like this one out on Texas lakes to years. Sedimentation is a gather data on lake volumes, storage capacity, and water elevations. difficult problem to investigate, in part because looking at annual rates or current 1 conditions can be misleading. "Much of the sediment that builds up in Texas lakes is deposited by large storms that occur only once in 50 or 100 years," says Texas A&M University Civil Engineer Ralph Wurbs.
    [Show full text]
  • Ogallala Aquifer Well (#2 on Map) to -4.20 Feet in the La Salle County Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer Well (#10 on Map)
    Texas Water Conditions Report January 2019 RAINFALL Rainfall is the primary source influencing water conditions in Texas. Observations from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – National Weather Service (NOAA‐NWS) for January indicate that total rainfall in January [Figure 1(a)] over the western half of the state was mostly below‐average compared to historical data from 1981–2010. There were isolated patches of above‐average rainfall in the northeastern High Plains, eastern Trans Pecos, and northeastern Lower Rolling Plains climate divisions. Above average rainfall occurred over northern and southern regions of the South Central climate division, southern regions of the North Central climate division, northern and southeastern regions of the East Texas climate division, northern regions of the Upper Coast climate division, and southeastern regions of the Southern climate division [Figure 1(b)]. Figure 1: (a) Monthly accumulated rainfall, and (b) Percent of normal rainfall for January 2019 1700 N. Congress Ave., P.O. Box 13231, Austin, TX 78711‐3231 Telephone (512) 463‐7847 Fax (512) 936‐0816 1‐800‐RELAYTX (for the hearing impaired) www.twdb.texas.gov RESERVOIR STORAGE At the end of January 2019, total conservation storage* in 118 of the state’s major water supply reservoirs plus Elephant Butte Reservoir in New Mexico was 28.20 million acre‐feet or 87 percent of total conservation storage capacity (Figure 2). This is approximately 0.3 million acre‐feet less than a month ago and 2.4 million acre‐feet more than end‐January 2018. Figure 2: Statewide reservoir conservation storage Out of 118 reservoirs in the state, 79 reservoirs held 100 percent of conservation storage capacity (Figure 3).
    [Show full text]
  • STILLHOUSE HOLLOW LAKE September – December 2015 Survey
    Volumetric and Sedimentation Survey of STILLHOUSE HOLLOW LAKE September – December 2015 Survey June 2017 Texas Water Development Board Bech Bruun, Chairman | Kathleen Jackson, Member | Peter Lake, Member Jeff Walker, Executive Administrator Prepared for: Brazos River Authority Authorization for use or reproduction of any original material contained in this publication, i.e. not obtained from other sources, is freely granted. The Texas Water Development Board would appreciate acknowledgement. This report was prepared by staff of the Surface Water Division: Nathan Leber, Manager Holly Holmquist Khan Iqbal Nathan Brock Published and distributed by the P.O. Box 13231, 1700 N. Congress Ave. Austin, TX 78711-3231, www.twdb.texas.gov Phone (512) 463-7847, Fax (512) 475-2053 Executive summary In September 2015, the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) entered into an agreement with the Brazos River Authority, to perform a volumetric and sedimentation survey of Stillhouse Hollow Lake (Bell County, Texas). Surveying was performed using a multi-frequency (208 kHz, 50 kHz, and 24 kHz), sub-bottom profiling depth sounder. In addition, sediment core samples were collected in select locations and correlated with the multi-frequency depth sounder signal returns to estimate sediment accumulation thicknesses and sedimentation rates. Stillhouse Hollow Dam and Stillhouse Hollow Lake are located on the Lampasas River, a tributary of the Little River which is a tributary of the Brazos River, approximately 5 miles southwest of the City of Belton, in Bell County, Texas. The conservation pool elevation of Stillhouse Hollow Lake is 622.0 feet above mean sea level (NGVD29). The TWDB collected bathymetric data for Stillhouse Hollow Lake between September 1 and December 1, 2015, while daily average water surface elevations measured between 621.36 and 626.16 feet above mean sea level (NGVD29).
    [Show full text]