Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
hnperial Irrigation District
Metropolitan Water District ofSoutliern California
Water Conservation Agreenlent
Project 12
Non-Leak Gates
Verification Summary Report
Conservation Verification Consultants
March 1995
Imperial Irrigation District
Metropolitan Water District ofSouthern California
Water Conservation Agreement
Project 12Non-Leak Gates
Verification Summary Report
Conservation Verification Consultants
March 1995
Conservation Verification Consultants
March 17, 1995
Water Conservation Measurement Committee Members
Mr. Gerald DavissonPalo Verde Irrigation District180 West 14th AvenueBlythe, California 92225
Mr. Kirk DimmitMetropolitan Water District107 South 5th Street, Suit 200El Centro, California 92243
Mr. Robert KriegerKrieger and Stewart3602 University Avenue, Suite 201Riverside, California 92501
Mr. Jesse SilvaImperial Irrigation DistrictP.O. Box 937Imperial, California 92251
Mr. Joseph SummersWCMC ChairmanSummers EngineeringP.O. Box 1122Hanford, California 93232
Dear Sirs,
Transmitted herewith is the Conservation Verification Consultants "Project 12 - Non-Leak GatesVerification Report".
Non-Leak Gates verification procedures are set forth in the "Non-Leak Gates VerificationImplementation Plan - Final Document" dated January, 1992 and "Non-Leak Gates VerificationImplementation Plan - Addendum" dated November 14, 1992.
The conservation estimates presented herein are based on field observations and data collected by theImperial Irrigation District Hydrography Unit and data analysis by Imperial Irrigation District WaterResources Staff.
Conservation Verification Consultants
//~k ~eller, PhD, .E -
,C~..,.~t . . ~~4r, PE
I/
CONTENTS
Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................. 1
2.0 CONSERVATION VERIFICATION PROCEDURE ............. 2
3.0 LEAKAGE MEASUREMENT .......................... 2
4.0 PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATES ....................... 4
5.0 WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATES ................... 5
6.0 PROJECTED 1995 CONSERVATION SAVINGS .............. 7
7.0 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS ..... 7
TABLES
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
NON-LEAK GATE PROJECT PLAN PROPOSED NON-LEAK GATE SITES
V-NOTCH WEIR CHARACTERISTICS
V-NOTCH WEIR MONITORING PERIOD AND MEASURED LEAKAGE
ALTERNATIVE LEAKAGE DETERMINATION
PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATES
NON-LEAK GATE SITES AND WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATE
CVC(mbk)
File :CONTENT2.RPT
VSR_P 12
-i- March 16, 1995
FIGURES
1. NON-LEAK GATE SITES(Figure 4.1, "Project 12: Non-leak Gate Project Plan - Final Report")
o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESSOUTH ALAMO SPILL AT HEBER ROADHEMLOCK LATERAL 2B HEADINGASH LATERAL 6 HEADING
o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESBEST CANAL SPILL AT GATE 110SPRUCE MAIN CHECK AT LATERAL 4
o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESCENTRAL MAIN SPILL NO. 4 .SUMAC LATERAL 2 HEADING
o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESELDER LATERAL 13 AT GATE 95WORMWOOD LATERAL 7 HEADING
6. PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESWISTERIA LATERAL 7 HEADING
7. PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESACACIA LATERAL 9 HEADING
o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESTRIFOLIUM LATERAL 14 HEADINGTRIFOLIUM LATERAL 15 HEADINGTRIFOLIUM LATERAL 16 HEADING
9. PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESO’BRIEN LATERAL HEADING
CVC(mbk)File :CONTENT2.RPT -ii-
VSR PI2March 16, 1995
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Project No. 12 of the Water Conservation Agreement between the Imperial Irrigation District
(IID) and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) provides for
replacement of leaking wooden water control gates with non-leak aluminum gates at selected sites
in the IID distribution system. Non-leak gates conserve water by reducing the volume of water
lost as leakage past water distribution control structures.
Out of 127 potential non-leak gate sites, IID Water Resources (WR) staff selected 25 sites to
investigated for inclusion in the Non-leak Gate Program. These sites included 19 lateral
headings, three mid-lateral spills, and three lateral check structures. The 25 sites selected were
identified in "Project 12: Non-leak Gate Project Plan - Final Report" dated October, 1991.
Table 1 lists the 25 proposed non-leak gate sites and Figure 1 depicts the location of the sites as
presented in Figure 4.1 of the Project Plan.
Verification procedures were developed for the Non-leak Gate Program and are set forth in the
"Non-leak Gate Verification Implementation Plan - Final Document" dated January, 1992 and
"Non-leak Gate Verification Implementation Plan - Addendum" dated November 14, 1992.
Conservation estimates are based on field observations and data collected by IID Hydrography
Unit and data analysis by liD WR staff.
Conservation procedures and estimates are presented in the following sections:
2.0 Conservation Verification Procedure
3.0 Leakage Measurement
4.0 Project 12 Non-leak Gates
5.0 Water Conservation Estimates
6.0 Projected 1995 Conservation Savings
7.0 Operation and Maintenance Recommendations
CVC(mbk)
File:NONLKCVC.RPT 1VSR PI2
March 16, 1995
2.0 CONSERVATION VERIFICATION PROCEDURE
As stated in the Non-Leak Gate Verification Implementation Plan, the amount of water conserved
by a non-leak gate was to be determined as the difference between pre-project (wooden gate) and
post-project (aluminum gate) leakage. The selected verification method called for the installation
of a monitoring station that would measure the flow of water for a period of at least 30 days
before and after the installation of a non-leak gate. However, IID WR staff and the CVC, after
inspecting completed non-leak gate installations, determined that with the gates properly installed
and operated there should be no measurable leakage. Therefore the measured leakage for the
time periods after installation of a non-leak gate was, with one exception which will be identified
later, not used for verification. Only the pre-project measured or estimated leakage was used
in establishing the quantity of water that could be conserved with a non-leak gate; the post-
project leakage rate was assumed to be zero.
3.0 LEAKAGE MEASUREMENT
Gate leakage flow rates needed to be determined only during the occurrence of flow rates within
the range of expected gate leakage, which was estimated to range from less than 0.02 cfs up to
0.8 cfs. Measurement hardware had to accurately measure flow across the range of estimated
leakage and not interfere with higher flow rates encountered during normal lateral or canal
operations.
The V-notch weir, an accurate flow measuring device suited to low flows, was selected as the
best method for measuring gate leakage. IID staff fabricated compound V-notch-rectangular weir
plates which could provide measurements across the range of leakage and yet not interfere with
operational flows when installed in a canal or lateral. Since flows greater than the capacity of
the V-notch may result in submergence of the weir plate, the weir plates were not rated for flows
exceeding the capacity of the V-notch. The V-notch weir installed in Acacia Lateral 9 is shown
in the photographs on the following page.
CVC(mbk) VSR P12
File:NONLKCVC.RPT 2 March 16, 1995
It was possible to install V-notch weir plates at 18 of the 25 selected sites to monitor and record
leakage when no deliveries were being made through the gate or check. Each monitoring station
included a V-notch weir plate and a Celesco water level sensor connected to a datalogger to
continuously monitor and record the average hourly flow at the site. The depth and angle of the
V-notch was selected for each site so that the leakage flow would be passed within the capacity
of the notch. Table 2 presents the dimensions and maximum rated flow of the V-notch for each
of the 18 monitored gates.
Pre-project leakage for each of the 18 sites with monitoring stations was determined by averaging
the hourly flows of water through the V-notch weir during periods of time when there were no
deliveries or operational spill. To eliminate the potential for considering flows for other
unscheduled purposes as leakage, flows greater than the maximum measuring capability of the
V-notch weirs were, in almost all cases, assumed to be scheduled deliveries and therefore were
not considered in the determination of leakage.
Table 3 summarizes the monitoring period and measured leakage for each of the 18 sites. This
information includes the number of hourly records obtained and the number of records that
recorded only leakage. Note that post-project gate installation data were utilized in the leakage
determination at Site No 4, Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 95. Post-project leakage estimate for this
site could not be assumed to be zero due to a standing water order of 0.5 cfs for the City of
Seeley water supply which, when rejected, remains in Lateral 13 and is not reflected in the CFS
files. To eliminate and/or minimize the possibility of considering rejected flows by the City of
Seeley as leakage, leakage measurements were collected prior to and after installation of the non-
leak gate. The average leakage measured for the period of time after installation of the non-leak
gate was subtracted from the measured average leakage for the period of time prior to the
installation of the non-leak gate, resulting in a leakage determination of 0.34 cfs (0.55 cfs - 0.21
cfs = 0.34 cfs). The determination of leakage for both periods of time are presented in
Table 3.
Alternative methods were utilized to determine pre-project leakage for four other sites. At Sites
2, 10, and 23, physical and operational characteristics prevented the use of V-notch weirs.
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2
File:NONLKCVC.RPT 3 March 16, 1995
Initial liD leakage estimates were made by field estimation techniques and used for Sites 2 and
10. A sharp crested weir and current meter measurements were used at Site 23. A portable
three-inch Parshall flume was used at Site 22. Table 4 lists these site locations, the alternative
methods used to measure pre-project leakage and the leakage determination.
4.0 PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATF~
For reasons described below, ten of the 25 proposed non-leak gate sites have been excluded or
dropped from Project 12.
Site Reason for Exclusion from Project 12
Site 6 Leakage flows at Elder Lateral 7 Check at Gate 63 were recorded for only two
percent of the monitoring period. After installation of a non-leak gate at this
site, additional downstream demands came on line which resulted in further
reduction in the leakage opportunity time. IID WR staff has concluded that the
monitoring period with the increased downstream demands is typical of normal
annual operations; therefore, Site 6 has been excluded from Project 12.
Site 9 A non-leak gate was installed at the S. Alamo E. Turnout at Lateral 10
Heading, but later removed due to operational problems.
Site 10 Inspection of Wisteria Lateral 1 Heading by liD WR staff and the CVC
confirmed that there is insufficient leakage to justify the cost of installing of
a non-leak gate at this site.
Sites 14 & 18 Because of insufficient leakage opportunity time, measurements were not made
at Redwood Lateral 5 Heading or Elder Lateral 5 Heading.
Site 15 It was recognized in the "Project 12: Non-leak Gate Project Plan" that in order
to take advantage of the potential leakage opportunity time at Redwood Lateral
CVC(mbk) VSR_PI2
File:NONLKCVC.RPT 4 March 16, 1995
8 Heading, the operation of Redwood Canal would have to be modified to
avoid using Lateral 8 for operational spill. As reflected in the limited leakage
opportunity time recorded during the monitoring period at this site, it has not
been practical to limit operational spill to the lateral. IID WR staff has
verified through field inspection and discussion with Division personnel that the
monitoring period is typical of normal annual operations; therefore, because
of limited leakage opportunity time the non-leak gate at Site 15 has been
excluded from Project 12.
Sites 16,17
& 24
During the monitoring periods for Alder Lateral 7 Heading, Elm Lateral 3
Heading and Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 Heading, flows past the existing
wooden gates were greater than flows resulting from just leakage. IID WR
staff concluded through field inspection and discussion with Division operating
personnel that the monitoring periods at these three locations were typical of
normal annual operations. Although non-leak gates were installed at these
sites, the gates are not included in Project 12 because of limited leakage
opportunity time.
Site 19 Realignment of Elder Lateral 7 resulted in reducing the leakage opportunity
time for the non-leak gate at Elder Lateral 7 Heading, from 53 to 1.5 days
annually. Site 19 has been dropped from Project 12 because of inadequate
leakage opportunity time.
The remaining 15 non-leak gates which constitute Project 12 are listed in Table 5.
5.0 WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATES
The estimate of water conserved annually at a non-leak gate was determined by multiplying the
average measured leakage rate in cubic feet per second (cfs) for each site by the conversion
factor 1.983, which converts cfs into acre-feet per day, and then multiplying that number by the
average annual leakage opportunity time in days.
CVC(mbk) VSR P12
File:NONLKCVC.RPT 5 March 16, 1995
Vc= 1.983 Q~. TO
V¢ = Estimated Water Conserved Annually, AF
QL = Leakage, cfs
To = Average Annual Leakage Opportunity Time, days
Average annual leakage opportunity time was determined by subtracting the percentage of time
that water was specifically being delivered through the gate at the proposed non-leak gate site
from the percentage of total time that water was present upstream of, but not necessarily being
delivered through the gate, and then multiplying that percentage by the number of days in a year.
To= 365 (Tu -Td)
To = Average Annual Leakage Opportunity Time, days
T. = Percentage of total time that water was present upstream of the gate, % (or ratio)
= Percentage of time that water was specifically delivered through the gate, % (or ratio)
The determination of average annual leakage opportunity time for canal check gates and lateral
headgates incorporated use of Lateral ProbeI and the CFS files 2. The CFS files were queried
to obtain water delivery data covering the period January 1, 1991 to December 31, 1993 for each
proposed non-leak gate site. Lateral Probe was used to analyze the queried CFS file data to
determine the percentage of total time that water was present at the proposed non-leak gate site
and the percentage of time that water was being delivered through the proposed non-leak gate
site. The estimated leakage opportunity times for mid-lateral spills were based on Division
operational data.
~ Lateral Probe is a computer program developed for estimating the water conveyance lossesin IID lateral canals.
2 CFS files are the IID records of water ordered, delivered and charged for each delivery.
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2
File:NONLKCVC.RPT 6 March 16, 1995
Water conservation estimates for the 15 non-leak gates in Project 12 are summarized in Table
6. Detailed location maps for the 15 sites are presented in Figures 2 through 9.
6.0 PROJECTED 1995 CONSERVATION SAVINGS
The projected 1995 Project 12 conservation savings is estimated to be 630 AF.
7.0 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RECOMMENq)ATIONS
The effectiveness of the non-leak gates depends on proper operation and maintenance practices.
Therefore, it is recommended that:
I. Project 12 non-leak gates be clearly marked and identified in the field.
)Field operating personnel be instructed on Project 12 objectives to ensure that the gates are
operated and maintained to eliminate leakage when there is no water order downstream of
the gate.
Procedures be established that will ensure prompt corrective action is taken if a non-leak
gate requires maintenance.
A log be maintained by each Division of any non-leak gate problems requiring maintenance
and the action taken to correct the problem.
5. Copies of the maintenance logs be retained in the IID conservation verification files.
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2
FiI¢:NONLKCVC.RPT 7 M~,,h 16, 1995
Project 12 non-leak gates be inspected monthly through 1995 to ensure that the non-leak
gates are being operated and maintained to meet the Project objectives. A record of the
monthly inspections be retained in the IID conservation verification files.
QAfter 1995, sufficient inspections be made and documented by liD to ensure the integrity
of the Project 12 program.
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2Filc:NONLKCVC.RPT 8 March 16, 1995
Table 1
NON-LEAK GATE PROJECT PLAN
PROPOSED NON-LEAK GATE SITES
SiteNo. Non-Leak Gate Location
1 South Alamo Spill at Heber Road
2 Best Canal Spill at Gate 110
3 Central Main Spill No. 4
4 Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 955 Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4
6 Elder Lateral 7 Check at Gate 63
7
89
10
1112
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2021
22
23
24
25
Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading
Ash Lateral 6 Heading
S. Alamo E. Turnout at Lateral 10 Heading
Wisteria Lateral 1 Heading
Wisteria Lateral 7 HeadingWormwood Lateral 7 Heading
Acacia Lateral 9 Heading
Redwood Lateral 5 Heading
Redwood Lateral 8 Heading
Alder Lateral 7 Heading
Elm Lateral 3 Heading
Elder Lateral 5 Heading
Elder Lateral 7 Heading
Sumac Lateral 2 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 14 Heading
Trifolium Lateral 15 Heading
Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading
Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 Heading
O’Brien Lateral Heading
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:I1DMEASA.TBL March 16, "~995
Table 2
V-NOTCH WEIR CHARACTERISTICS
SiteNmnber
V-NotchDepth
(inches)
V-NotchAngle
(degrees)Non-Leak Gate Location
1 South Alamo Spill @ Heber Road 8 30 0.24
3 Central Main Spill Number 4 10 22.5 0.31
4 Elder Lateral 13 @ Gate 95 6 120 0.77
5 Spruce Main Check @ Lateral 4 6 45 0.18
6 Elder Lateral 7 Check @ Gate 63 6 30 0.12
7 Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading 8 30 0.24
8 Ash Lateral 6 Heading 6 90 0.44
I 1 Wisteria Lateral 7 Heading 6 120 0.77
12 Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading 8 45 0.40
13 Acacia Lateral 9 Heading 6 45 0.18
15 Redwood Lateral $ Heading 8 90 0.90
16 Alder Lateral 7 Heading 6 60 0.25
17 Elm Lateral 3 Heading 6 45 0.18
19 Elder Lateral 7 Heading 6 90 0.44
20 Sumac Lateral 2 Heading 6 90 0.44
21 Trifolium Lateral 14 Heading 6 30 0.12
24 Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 Heading 6 60 0.25
25 O’Brien Lateral Heading 6 90 0.44
V-NotchMaximum
Flow(crs)
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:VNOTCH3.TBL March 16, "~995
Table 3
V-NOTCH WEIR MONITORING PERIOD AND MEASURED LEAKAGE
SiteNo.
Number of Number ofPre-Project lloudy Records llourty RecordsMonito~tg in With Only Leakage
Description Period Monltorlag Period Leakage (cfs)
South Alamo Spill @ Heber Road 10/01/93 to 01/19/94 2648 1673 0.05
Central Main Spill No. 4 09/07/93 to 11/16/93 1688 1675 0.02
Elder Lateral 13 @ Gate 95(Pre-Installation)(Post-Installation)
01/11/93 to 06/29/9306/30/93 to 09/30/93
40562232
995663
0.550.210.34
5 Spruce Main Check @ Lat. 4 08/22/92 to 11/02/92 1736 283 0.08
6 Elder Lateral 7 Check @ Gate 63 09/12/92 to 12/17/92 2076 49 0.02
7 Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading 12/22/92 to 02/11/93 1232 668 0.06
8 Ash Lateral 6 Heading 12/07/93 to 01/05/94 704 454 0.10
11 Wisteria Lateral 7 Heading 08/26/92 to 10/12/92 1136 588 0.42
12 Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading 07/19/92 to I0/12/92 2048 313 0.17
13 Acacia Lateral 9 Heading 10/15/93 to 02/09/94 2832 740 0.06
15 Redwood Lateral 8 Heading 04/15/93 to 06/18/93 1544 49 0.35
16 Alder Lateral 7 Heading 12/07/92 to 03/02/93 2048 0 -
17 Elm Lateral 3 Heading 10/15/93 to 12/14/93 1448 0 -
19 Elder Lateral 7 Heading 12/06/92 to 01/04/93 704 219 0.09
20 Sumac Lateral 2 Heading 01/11/93 to 02/10/93 704 397 0.38
21 Trifolium Lateral 14 Heading 04/16/93 to 07/01/93 1832 93 0.08
25 O’Brien Lateral Heading 05/03/93 to 07/01/93 1424 206 0.22
24 Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 01/01/94 to 02/08/94 920 0 -Heading
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:MONITPER.TBL March 16, "~995
Table 4
ALTERNATIVE LEAKAGE DETERMINATION
Site Measurement LeakageNumber Site Location Method (cfs)
2 Best Canal Spill at Gate 110 IID Field Estimate 0.01
10 Wisteria Lateral 1 Heading IID Field Estimate 0.01
22 Trifolium Lateral 15 Heading 3-inch Parshall Flume and 0.19Current Meter
23 Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading Sharp Crested Weir and 0.02Current Meter
CVC(mbk) VSR P12File:NLGMEAS.TBL March 16, /995
Table 5
PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATES
SiteNo. Non-Leak Gate Location
12
3
South Alamo Spill at Heber RoadBest Canal Spill at Gate 1 I0Central Main Spill No. 4
4 Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 955 Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4
7
8
11
12
13
20
21
22
23
25
Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading
Ash Lateral 6 Heading
Wisteria Lateral 7 Heading
Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading
Acacia Lateral 9 Heading
Sumac Lateral 2 Heading
Trifolium Lateral 14 Heading
Trifolium Lateral 15 Heading
Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading
O’Brien Lateral Heading
CVC(MBKr) VSR_PI 2File:IIDMEASC.TBL March 16, 1995
Table 6
NON-LEAK GATE SITES AND WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATE
Leakage AnnualSite Location Leakage Opportunity ConservationNo. Location (Figure No.) (cfs) (days/year) (AF/year)
1 South Alamo Spill at Heber Rd. 2 0.05 3372 Best Canal Spill at Gate 110 3 0.01 3483 Central Main Spill No. 4 4 0.02 365
.Can:~iiCheck.Gatesii~:::::: :~": ~": :":~ :.. ’:: ’"::.: i:..~. : i..~ ’ " .... :: ~:.~:... ::~:~~:i: .. .... ~ ’.
4 Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 95 5 0.34 1825 Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4 3 0.08 35
337
14
1236
78
1112132021222325
Hemlock Lateral 2B HeadingAsh Lateral 6 HeadingWisteria Lateral 7 HeadingWormwood Lateral 7 HeadingAcacia Lateral 9 HeadingSumac Lateral 2 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 14 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 15 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 16 HeadingO’Brien Lateral Heading
Total Water Conservation Estimate
0.060.100.420.170.060.380.080.190.020.22
9775
130101103169129126116151
121510834121272148
566
632
CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:IMPID3.TBL March 16, "~995
Project 12 Non-Leak GatesSouth Alamo at Heber RoadHemlock Lateral 2B Heading
Ash Lateral 6 Heading
HEBER
LAT 39
LAT 8
LAT ~
RD
DR
RD
LAT 5A
-.- P-2LAT
P-1RO LAT
LAT 6
RD
8
7
LAT 2
LAT ! ~,
F-
CANAL
YULECANAL
RoadsCanalsRivers
LEGENDGate & Gate Number8outh Alamo at Heber Road
¯ Hemlock Lateral 2B HeadingAsh Lateral 6 Heading
, N1.5 I
FIGURE 2
Project 12 Non-Leak GatesBest Canal Spill at Delivery 110Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4
PICKE]
Roads
RJvm,-s
LEGENDGate & G~te NumberBest Canal Spill at Dellvew 1 10
¯ ~pruce Main Check at Lateral 40 .5 1 1.5
FIGURE 3
Project 12 Non-Leak GatesCentral Main Spill No. 4
Sumac Lateral 2 Heading
RD
LAT3 2
~ :c RDSWARTHOUT RD
CANAL
RD
L1111
WEINERT RD
LARSEN
GRIMES RD
LILAC
RoadsC~malsRivers
~EGENDGate & Gate NumberCentral Maln Spill No. 4Sumac Lateral 2 Heading
1.5 ~
Wc~r Dc3xu~nv~ - GiS ~-
FIGURE 4
Project 12 Non-Leak GatesElder Lateral 13 at Gate 95
Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading
LATt
PARK
STEVENS
LAT2
VAUGHN
4
1
RD
RD
LAT 2:
WIXOMz RD
EVAN
DIEHL
O
11 \
KRAMER
RD
~101
SCHANIEL
RoadsCanalsR/vers
LEGENDGate & Gate NumberElder Lsteral 13 at Gate 95Wormwood Lateral 7 Heeding
Scale gn Miles ,~
0 -5 1 1.5 I
FIGURE 5
ProjectWisteria
12 Non-Leak GatesLateral 7 Heading
~)RTH ,R~P R ,1’2
WAHL
LAT 4
KUBLER
DAHLIA
-- , LAT 1-B
s FAWCETT
JASPER
BIRCH
/
P-1 tAT
RoadsCentsR~em
~.EGEND~ Gate & Gate Number
¯ Wlstede Lateral 7 Heading
FIGURE 6
Project 12 Non-Leak GatesAcacia Lateral 9 Heading
"~ I ~ UL,,,,-I~=- ~.. ~.. L. .~ ,.
DATE
RD
RoadsCanals
LEGEND~’ G~te & Gate Number
¯ Acacia Lateral 9 Headlng
1.5 i.
W,z~r De~r~ - G~
FIGURE 7
ProjectTrifoliumTrifoliumTrifolium
12 Non-Leak GatesLateral 14Lateral 15Lateral 16
HeadingHeadingHeading
LAT 13-A
ORR RD "
STEiNER RD
_L..E_.G. __E._N. _D
X~~ Gate &Gm Number~ Tdfollum Lateral 14 Heading¯ Trifollum Lateral 15 Heading~ Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading
~a/e /n M’i/es~~
0 .5 1 1.5
FIGURE 8