project 15 -- system automation verification summary report

Imperial Irrigation District

Metropolitan Water District ofSouthern California

Water Conservation Agreement

Project 15 -- System AutomationVerification Summary Report

Conservation Verification Consultants

May 1999

_System ..4 utomation_ ’-

TABLE OF: CONTENTS

Intxoduction ...................................................................................................................................................1

Project Description ........................................................................................................................................2Overview of IID Canal System and Operations ........................................................................................ 2

Canal and Reservoir System ................................................................................................................. 2Opcrating Organization and Procedures ................................................................................................ 4

Pre-Project System Automation Facilities ................................................................................................. 6Project 15 Facilities ...................................................................................................................................8

Water Control Sites ...............................................................................................................................8Water Control Center ............................................................................................................................8

Operational Implications .........................................................................................................................12

Review of Related Studies ..........................................................................................................................13Study #1--Correlation of Lateral Spillage With Steadiness and Accuracy of Lateral tleading Flows .. 13Study #2~orrelation of Tailwater with Steadiness and Accuracy of Farm Deliveries ........................ 15Study #3--Correlation of Excess Tailwater with Responsiveness of Farm Deliveries .......................... 16Study #4--Appraisal of Proposed System Automation Plan .................................................................. 16

Targeted Losses and Consequential Effects ................................................................................................ 18Reduction of Lateral Spillage from Steadier Lateral Inflow ................................................................... 18Prevention of Main Canal Spillage from Enhanced Reservoir Operations ............................................. 19Reduction of Excess Tailwater from Increased Delivery Flcxibility ...................................................... 21

Verification Strategies .................................................................................................................................22Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) Due to Enhanced Reservoir Operations ............................. 22

Step l--Identify Farm Delivery Gates and Laterals Associated with Each Reservoir ....................... 22Step 2--1dcntify Fx24-IID Events ...................................................................................................... 23Step 3--Compute Spillage Duration by Event .................................................................................... 23Step 4---Compute Spillage Volume by Event ..................................................................................... 24Step 5--Sum Event Spillage Volume ................................................................................................. 24

Computation of Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) for Water Year 1998 ................................ 25Reduction of Excess Tailwater from Increased Delivery Flexibility ...................................................... 25

Background .........................................................................................................................................25Cost Basis for Portion of Project 15 Needed for 12-ItDs ................................................................... 26Annual Cost of Providing 12-HDs ...................................................................................................... 27Allocating the Associated Conservation Savings ................................................................................ 27

Summary and Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 28

References ...................................................................................................................................................29

Appendix A Descriptions of System Automation Sites (63) ....................................................................... 30

Appendix B System Automation Supporting Study Plans .......................................................................... 94

Appendix C Laterals and Associated Flow Lag Times Used to Compute Prevented Main Canal Spillage(Fx24-HDD) Bevins, Carter, Galleano and Russell Reservoirs ................................................................ 110

CVC(DEI i FINAL - MAY 1999ggd>c \1002,pl 5_ auto’,FINA L_P [ 5..VSR [X)C

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.Figure 2.

IID Main Canal and Lateral Layout .................................................................................................... 3Locations of lID Water Control Sites with System Automation Modernized or Added UnderProject 15 ...........................................................................................................................................11

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Characteristics of IID Main Canal and Lateral Interceptor Canal Regulating Reservoirs ................... 4Table 2. Communication Reliability of Major Water Control Sites with Hardwire Telemetry in 1990 ............ 7Table 3. IID Water Control Sites with System Automation Modernized or Added Under Project 15 ............... 9Table 4. Summary of Studies Conducted in Support of Project 15 - System Automation ............................... 14Table 5. Laterals With Overlapping Heading and Spillage Discharge Records as of the End of Water Year

1998 ...................................................................................................................................................15Table 6. Main Canal Regulating Reservoirs Sponsored Under the IID/MWD Water Conservation Program. 19Table 7. Computation of Spillage Duration for Three Hypothetical Fx24-HDs ............................................... 24Table 8. Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) Events and Volumes for Water Year 1998 .................... 25Table C-1. Laterals and Flow Lag Times Used to Compute Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) for

Bevins, Carter, Galleano and Russell Reservoirs ............................................................................ 111

CVC(~,E) ii FINAL - MAY 1999ggd>c ",1002~p 15_ autokFINA L_P 15_VSR DOC

INTRODUCTION

The Water Conservation Agreement between the Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and the MetropolitanWater District of Southern California (MWD) includes Project 15--System Automation. In theAgreement, it is stated that the project provides for the "Automation of key flow control structures toprovide for better overall system control, more water user flexibility, and less variability in waterdeliveries due to substantial elimination of flow fluctuation in laterals, thereby reducing the amount ofwater that would have otherwise been discharged into the drain system."

hnplementation of Project 15 was initiated in 1990 based on the general definition provided in theAgreement. However, in early 1992, concern arose within the Water Conservation MeasurementCommittee (WCMC) regarding uncertainty in the Project’s potential water savings. Therefore, theWCMC commissioned a series of studies to examine and substantiate the concepts stated in the projectdefinition from the Agreement, provide a basis for specific formulation of the System Automation Projectand provide a basis for verifying Project water savings.

This report describes the facilities that were constructed for Project 15; summarizes the studies that werecompleted to support Project development; and documents the strategies, data and computations used toestimate Project water savings.

eve(DE) 1 FINAl, - MAY 1999ggd>c"~ 1002~p 15_auto".,FIN A L..P 15_ VSR. DOC

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Overview of liD Canal System and Operations

In order to understand the application of system automation in liD, it is first necessary to understand thecanal and reservoir system and its operation.

Canal and Reservoir SystemllI)’s canal system consists ot"1,675 miles of main canals and laterals (Figure 1). Colorado River water diverted at hnperial Dam near Yuma, Arizona and is conveyed westward approximately 50 miles in theAll-American Canal (AAC) into the hnpcrial Valley. Once in the Valley, the AAC runs across thesouthern boundary of the District, more or less coincident with the United States-Mexico boundary.

The East I Iighlinc (EI[I~) Canal branches from the AAC and runs north along the eastern flank of theValley. Laterals, generally spaced at W-mile intervals, stem from the EItL Canal and convey waterwestward to irrigated lands lying generally between the EHL Canal and the Alamo River. These lateralsare mostly straight, non-branching canals.

The EItI, Canal also supplies two submain or "supply" canals. The Rositas Supply Canal branches fiomthe EHL at EHI. Canal Mile 9.9 and serves the Rose, Rubber and Red~vood Laterals. The Vail SupplyCanal branches from the EHL at Mile 35.9 and provides water to the entire Vail Main Canal service area.These canals are operated by Water Control as part of the main canal system.

The Central Main (CM) Canal branches from the AAC near the town of Calexico and runs northwardthrough the central portion of the District, lying generally between the Alamo and New Rivers. Lateralsbranching from the CM Canal run mostly northward. They arc ~’pically branching laterals and tend to belonger than the EItL Laterals.

The Wcstside Main (WSM) Canal is essentially an extension of the AAC. It begins at the southwestcorner of the district and runs northward along the western flank of the Valley. Between the WSM CanalHeading and the No. 8 Heading at Sheldon Reservoir, laterals branching from the WSM Canal are mostlybranching laterals. Downstream of the No. 8 tleading, the WSM laterals are mostly non-branching. Landsserved by the these laterals generally lic between the WSM Canal and the New River.

The canal system includes 10 regulating reservoirs with a combined capacity of 3,372 AF (Table 1). Sixof the reservoirs were constructed under or assigned to the IID/MWD Program; the remaining four werepreviously constructed by IID. However, improvements were also made under the Program to SinghReservoir, one of the previously constructed reservoirs, to enhance its regulating capabilities.

Five reservoirs regulate main canal flows and four regulate intercepted lateral spillage. One reservoir, theRussell, regulates both main canal and lateral interceptor canal flows. Main canal regulating reservoirs areoperated to maintain a median storage volume so that positive or negative flow mismatches in the canalsystem can be accommodated by putting water into or drawing from reservoir storage. In contrast, lateralinterceptor regulating reservoirs arc operated so the full volume of water intercepted each day iswithdrawn the following day; in this manner the reservoirs are maintained at minimum levels tomaximize the storage available for intercepted water.

CV(7(DE) 2 FINAl.- MAY 199’~ggd:>c \100?plS. auli#FIN’AI. PI5 VY, R IX)("

Figure 1. liD Main Canal and Lateral Layout07/21/99.14:47:24, Wed GRNTFIG1.AMZ

Verification Summary Report ’; ~. .

Table 1. Characteristics of liD Main Canal andLateral Interceptor Canal Regulating Reservoirs

Program-s

Carl C.Bcvins

Robert F.Carter

BernardGalleano

MilasRussell,Sr.

Louise K.Willey

)onsored Reservoirs

1992 253

1988

1991

1996

1998

Young 1996

lid Reservoirs

35O

425

200

3OO

275

Regulates flows from the Plum-Oasis Interceptor for supply intothe Redwood Canal systemRegulates flows in the WestsideMain Canal; reduces main canaloperational discharge into theTrifol!u[_~ St_o.[m__.D ra~i.n._~ ....Regulates flows in the EastHighlino Canal; reducesoperational discharge into the "Z"

Regulates flows in the Vail SupplyCanal at the head of the Vail MainCanal, including flows from theMulberry-D North Interceptor.

Regulates flows from the TrifoliumInterceptor for supply into the VailMain Canal system

Regulates flows from the_~.!_u_!...b_o[~-D South Interceptor.

Reservoir discharge is automatedto maintain constant discharge inthe Redwood Canal at Lateral 5.

Completed prior to implementationof the IID/MWD Program butincorporated as an augmentationproject.

Works in conjunction with YoungReservoir. Also regulatesoperational discharges from theRockwood Canal into the VailSupply Canal and Vail MainHeading.

Reservoir discharge (via a 3.5-milepipeline) is automated to maintain constant water level upstream ofthe Vail Main Lateral 3 Check.

Works in conjunction with RussellReservoir.

OscarFudge

Sheldon

KakooSingh

H."Red"Sperber

1982

1977

1976

1983

300

476

323

470

Regulates flows in the CentralMain Canal; reduces main canaloperational discharges from theNo. 4 Spill.Regulates flows in the WestsideMain Canal; reduces main canaloperational discharge.

Regulates flows in the East Reservoir inlet and outlet worksHighline Canal; reduces main were rehabilitated and upgradedcanal op_e.._r.ational discharge~_ I under the IID/MWD Agreement.Regulates flows in the RositasSupply Canal; reduces main canaloperational discharge. _[

Operating Organization and Procedures

liD’s main canals are operated from IlI)’s Hcadquartcrs by the Water Control Centcr. l.aterals areoperated by three decentralized divisions. The Water Control Center prepares a master water order each

Wednesday for the upcoming Monday through Sunday period and submits the order to the Bureau of

Reclamation. The master order is based on judgment and serves as a default basis for operations. Themaster order can be and typically is modificd in accordance with trends in watcr orders, weather

CV(’fl)Ii) 4[:IN..\I. -- MAY Iqgq

ggd ’c H002’.p15 auleXFlNA[. PI 5..VSR IX)(.

~.\-~.Project 15., SYstem Automati~~i:i!~eHficati~n S_.ummary Report_:

conditions and other t;actors; however, 4 days advance notice is required for master schedulemodifications.

The Divisions receive water orders from g-rowers, consolidate the orders and submit them to WaterControl every day at noon for development of the operating plan for the next day. Because the totalavailable flow for the upcoming operational day is fixed according to the master schedule (as modified),the demand for water typically does not match the available supply for the upcoming day. If demand islarger than supply, orders are carried over into a future operating day, usually no more than 2 days beyondwhen the water was desired. On the other hand, when supply exceeds demand, orders carried over frompreceding days can be added to demand. By shifting water orders forward and backward in time in thismanner, the daily demand for water can bc matched to the daily available supply from the ColoradoRiver. Target storage levels in the main canal regulating resc~’oirs can also be adjusted to help balancesupply and demand discrepancies.

After Water Control balances supply and demand, the Divisions are called to confirm the amount of waterthat will be available to them the next day. Division personnel then make decisions regarding whichorders will be filled and which ones carried over. This process results in a schedule of delivery demandsat the head of each lateral in each Division. These demands are called back to Water Control where amain canal operations plan is prepared to satist~, the lateral demands. The main canal operating plan seeksto distribute water through the main canal system so the required lateral flows can be initiated betweenabout 6:00 A.M. and 9:00 A.M. throughout the District. Water deliveries are initiated to individualgrowers between about 6:00 A.M. and Noon, depending on the flow lag time along laterals. The averagefarm delivery start (or stop) time is about 8:00 A.M.

The process described above is performed daily, corresponding to the convention that farmers arerequired to take deliver)’ of water in 24-hour increments. The exceptions to this are:

The 12-ttour Deliver?, Program (sponsored under the IlD/MWD Program), which allows growers take ~vater deliveries in 12-hour increments (during either daytime or nighttime) provided theyindicate at the time of order that they intend to take delivery for 12-hours and the delivery rate doesnot exceed 7 cfs.

An liD operating rule that allows growers to arrange for a flow reduction in the last 12 hours of a 24-hour delivery, not to exceed 5 cfs or V2 the delivery rate.

Although each day’s operating plan is designed to balance supply with demand, there are variable anduncertain operational factors that result in differences between the actual supply and demand from placeto place within the system. Among these factors are variances between water orders and actual waterdemands, due to farmers being allowed to reduce or shut off delivery early under certain conditions (seeabove) and unpredictable changes in canal losses from day to day, such as evaporation; measurement andoperator error in distributing flows. The mismatches between actual water demand and supply areaccommodated by drawing water from or putting water into the main canal regulating reservoirs. Theextent to which water deliveries can be made both reliably and flexibly while avoiding excessiveoperational spillage depends primarily on the volume of regulating storage available in the system and theability to move flow changes smoothly through the canals to the reservoirs.

For operational purposes, the main canal is segnnented into six reaches defined by the locations of theregulating reservoirs. The reservoirs absorb flow mismatches from the main canal reach upstream andallow delivery of scheduled flows into the next reach downstream. The six reaches are listed below along

CVCIDE)5

FINAL - MAY 1999ggd,>c ~d0O2.pl5 auto’..FINAL_PIS_VSR IX)(7

-_~i::.-.p_ ~oject.l.5_. ~ Systeml Automation?:!-~.ii~.v_ ..e~ifi..qqti.qn .S.um.n.t.a.rT..Repot~t i..i

with their associated regulating reservoirs. Note that the pool upstream of the Central Main Canal Checkserves as the reservoir for the AAC Reach.

1. All-American Canal Reach, from Drop No. 1 to Central Main Canal Check (the Central Main Canalcheck pool is operated as a small regulating rcservoir)

2. East Highline Canal Reach 1, from EHL Canal Heading on the AAC to Nectarine Check (SinghReservoir)

3. East Highlinc Canal Rcach 2, from Nectarine Check to the Niland Extension Heading (GallcanoReservoir)

4. Central Main Canal Reach, from the Central Main Canal Heading on the AAC to the No. 4 Heading(Fudge Reservoir)

5. Westside Main Canal Reach 1, from Central Main Check on the AAC to No. 8 Check (SheldonReservoir)

6. Westside Main Canal Reach 2, from the No. 8 Heading to Trifolium Extension Heading (CarterReservoir)

The operational procedures described above constitute an upstream canal control process, wherescheduled water deliveries are released into canals and routed from upstream to downstream according tothe operations schedule. The control objective at flow control locations, such as main canal and lateralheadings, is to maintain scheduled deliveries. Between flow control locations, the control objective atcheck structures is to maintain constant target upstream water levels.

Pre-Project System Automation Facilities

Prior to implementation of Project 15, IID had already either fully or partially automated certain watercontrol functions. Many main canal check structures were equippcd with local hydraulically-activatedconstant upstream water level control devices, so that flow changes could be routed through the maincanal system without the need to manually adjust the check structures. In addition, most of the majorwater control structures were equipped with hardwire telemetry, which was used to remotely monitor andcontrol operational thnctions. However, prior to the IID/MWD Program, the entire lower reaches of boththe EtlL and WSM Canals were manually operated.

A major problem with the original hardwire telemetry system was poor reliability of communicationswith the various sites. Communications were frequently interrupted, requiring that IID either "let thesystem take care of itself’ or dispatch operators to manually control operations, which could not alwaysbe done in a timely manner. In either case, the quality of water control functions was adversely affected.

Table 2 lists 25 major IID control sites that were equipped with hardwire telemetry prior toimplementation of Project 15. An illustration of the extent of reliability problems with this system is thatthere were conmmnications outages at all 25 sites during the year, ranging from as few as 14 days to asmany as 118 days and averaging 47 days per site. The total duration of communication outage rangedfrom 31 to 1907 hours, or 0.4 percent to 21.8 percent of the total time in the year. liD operators haveindicated that these outages were a drain on operations resources and adversely affected the quality ofwater control operations. Site communication has been dramatically improved by the new and upgradedfacilities described in the next section.

CVC(DE)6

FINAL - ~L~,’I" 1999ggd>c \1002..pl 5_auto\FINAL_PI 5_VSR [X)C

Project 15 - System Automat~on ’:"Verification Summary Report "

Table 2. Communication Reliability of Major Water Control Siteswith Hardwire Telemetry in 1990

Drop 1 59 16.2% 198 2.3%

EHL Check 118 32.3% 1907 21.8%

Allison Check 111 30.4% 1728 19.7%

New River Check 27 7.4°/[, 100 1.1%

&AC Wisteria Check 29

~,AC WSM Canal Heading 42

EHL Canal No. 11 Check 51

91Rositas Supply Canal Heading

-_-HL Canal Orchid Check

EHL Canal Oak Check

7.9% 110 1.3%

11.5% 171 2.0%

14.0% 325 3.7%

24.9% 1189 13.6%

24.4% 1297 14.8%

16.2% 591 6.7%

89

59

EHL Canal Nectarine Check

,~ingh Reservoir

WSM Canal Fern Check

’WSM Canal Foxglove Check

WSM Canal Fillaree Check

WSM Canal No. 8 Check

Sheldon Reservoir

CM Canal Dahlia Check

CM Canal Newside Check

CM Canal No. 4 Check

Fudge Resewoir

Rositas Supply Canal at Rose Canal Heading

Sperber Reservoir

Average

Maximum

Minimurn

=HL Canal Myrtle Check 76 20.8% 674 7.7%

=HL Canal Standard Check 42 11.5% 184 2.1%

46 233 2.7%12.6%

13.7% 263 3.0%

13.4% 300 3.4%

11.8% 255 2.9%

7.7% 114 1.3%

4.4% 83 0.9%

4.7% 96 1.1%

11.8% 150 1.7%

5.5% 42 0.5%

4.1% 31 0.4%

3.8°,"0 36 0.4%

3.8% 31 0.4%

3.8°A 31

5O

49

43

28

16

17

43

20

15

14

14

14

47

118

14

0.4%

12.7% 406 4.6%

32.3% 1907 21.8%

3.8% 31 0.4%

Source File: Outage.xls

CV(’(I }E~ 7 FINAl. - MAY 1999ggd’c b,..." pl’ aut,,}INAl. PI5 VSR IX)C

Project 15 Facilities

Water Control SitesUnder Project 15, IID’s existing system automation facilities were modernized and new facilities wereconstructed, involving improvements at a total of 63 water control sites (Table 3). Thirty-four sites arecategorized as "major" sites because they are equipped with walk-in, air conditioned steel enclosures andbackup electrical generators. All of these sites already had some form of automation and were upgradedwith the improvements provided under Project 15. Originally, most of these were remote-manualcontrolled structures, meaning that they could be monitored and controlled from the Water Control Centerwith the previously described hardwire telemetry system, but the control was not automated.

Six sites are categorized as "minor" sites and are not equipped with air-conditioned enclosures or backupgenerators. None of these sites were previously automated, so the improvements made at these locationsserved to expand IID’s automatic water control capability.

Another 23 sites are categorized as "overshot (OS) gate" sites. These are the checks along the EHL andWSM Canals that were previously manually controlled and have been equipped with ADLGs (orovershot) gates. These gates have also served to expand IID’s automatic water control capability.

Detailed descriptions of each of the 63 sites listed in Table 3 are provided in Appendix A; a map showingthe locations of the sites is presented in Figure 2.

System automation features are also included with the six Program-sponsored regulating reservoirsconstructed under or incorporatcd in the Program (see Table 1). These features, such as automated inletand outlet controls, were constructed with the funding associated with the respective reservoir or lateralinterceptor projects. Theretbre, the reservoir sites are not included in Table 3; however, they areconsidered to be functional components of Project 15.

Water Control CenterA new Water Control Center (WCC) was also constructed under Project 15. The WCC accommodates thecentralized radio communications equipment, computers and main canal operations staff who operate themain canal and reservoir system. The center piece of the WCC is a large schematic display of the canaland reservoir system. The display simultaneously provides real time operating conditions and trendsthroughout the system, such as discharge rates at flow control sites and water levels at level control sitesand reservoirs. "Ilais facilitates a "systemwide" view and operational perspective that was not possibleprior to implementation of Project 15.

Operations staff say that with the new system, they spend less time monitoring and manually controllingindividual sites, allowing them to plan and operate the system strategically, in an integrated manner.Another benefit of the WCC is the improved reliability of the radio communications system compared tothe old hardwire telemetry system it replaced.

eVe(DE) 8FINAl. - MAY 1999

ggc~>c kl(’~2\plS_auto\FlNAI._Pl5 VSR

~i..i:Project 15 - s)~slem .4 utomation ..

~;i!iI(e_ rification Su~imary Repor~_i:iiiii-{

Table 3. liD Water Control Sites with System Automation Modernized or Added UnderProject 15

Major S~tes (34)

AACAAC

Coachella Turnout upgradeupgrade

AAC Drop 1 ~ Rant major upgrade4 AAC F~ast Highline Turnout nejor upgrade5 AAC East Highline Sideman Heading6 AAC7 AAC8 AAC

upgradeEast Highline C21e~ rrajor upgradeA~lison Check rrajor upgradeCentral Main major upgrade

9 AAC New River ~ major upgrade10 AAC New River Spillway rraj~ upgrade11 AAC Wistaria Check major upgrade12 AAC Vv~stside Main Turnout major upgrade13 EHL East Highline Ched< 1 major upgrade14 EHL East Highline Power Rant major upgrade15 EHL East Highline Check 11 rrajor upgrade16 EHL Orchid Check major upgrade17 EHL Oak Check major upgrade18 EHL Myrtle Check majo~ upgrade19 EHL Standard Check

,Si ngh Resewoi rEHL2021

Z Lateral Heading

upgradeupgrade

EHL Vail Supply Turnout rrajo~ upgrade22 EHL Nectarine A Ct’ed~ major upgrade23 EHL upgrade24 EHL l~land Extension Heading major upgrade25 RST ~ Turnout major upgrade26 RST Rose Turnout

Fudge Reservoir - No. 4 HeadingFern CheckFoxglove CheckRllaree Check

RST2728293O3132

Sheldon P, esewoir- No. 8 Heading

upgradeupgradeupgradeupgradeupgradeupgradeupgradeupgradeupgrade

Table 3 continued next page

Source file: InventoD’.xls

c,,c,[,,) 9 FINAl.- MAY 1999ggd:,c’.l(K)2~plS_aulo".FINA[. PI5 VSR DO("

i.-:-,.:Project 15.. System Au~bmation:..::

:i . iEerification.Summary_!~ep°rt i~-- "

Table 3. liD Water Control Sites with System Automation Modernized or Added UnderProject 15 (continued)

Minor Sites (6)35 AAC !South Alamo Tumout minor new36 EHL Rositas Turnout minor new37 EHL ’Orange Heading minor new38 BRI Alder Turnout minor new39 BRI Acacia Turnout minor new40 WSM !Tdfolium 13 Check minor new

Dvershot Gate Sites (23)41 EHL East Highline E Check osgate new42 EHL ’East Highline H Check osgate new43 EHL East Highline J Check osgate new44 EHL East Highline K Check osg. ate new45 EHL Flowing Wells Check osgate new46 EHL East Highline Check 37 osgate new47 EHL East Highline Check 46 osgate new48 EHL East Highline W Check osgate new49 WSM Tam,3rack Check osgate new50 WSM Trifolium 1 Check osgate new51 WSM Trifolium 2 Check osgate new52 WSM Tdfolium 4 Check osgate new53 WSM Tdfolium 5 Check osgate new54 WSM Trifolium 6 Check osgate new55 WSM Tfifolium 9 Check osgate new56 WSM Trifolium 10 Check osgate new57 WSM Trifolium 14 Check osgate new58 WSM Trifolium 16 Check osgate new59 WSM Westside Main 60 Check osgate new60 WSM Westside Main 65 Check osgate new61 WSM Westside Main 67 Check osgate new62 WSM Westside Main 93 Check osgate new63 WSM Westside Main 99 Check osgate new

osgate overshot gateAAC AJI-Amedcan CanalBRI Briar CanalCM Central MainEHL East HighlineRST Rositas Supply CanalWSM Westside Main Canal

Source file: Inventoo,.xls

CVC(DE:)] 0

FINAL- .MAY 1999ggct>c ’1002 plS_ auto’FINAI._ PI5

Figure 2. Locations of IID Water Control Siteswith System Automation Modernized or Added Under Project 15

07/O~.O~:$~:22.Tlm GIIITI’FIG2.AML

Operational Implications

The system automation facilities constructed under Project 15 have improved IID’s capability to managemain canal flows. Yor the structures where existing automation was upgraded, the benefits are improvedcommunications reliability and more precise and accurate control resolution. For example, the hydraulicautomatic gates used at many main canal checks prior to Project 15 typically could maintain an upstreamtarget water level within +0.2 feet. In comparison, the new digital/mechanical control systems maintaintarget levels within +0.02 feet. This higher precision reduces fluctuations in main canal water levels andresults in flow changes moving through the canals to reservoirs more quickly. Thus, reservoirs havebecome better early indicators of flow mismatches in the system, allowing operators to formulateappropriate corrective responses sooner than they previously could. This in turn enables the operators toprovide more flexible, responsive water deliveries.

The quality of liD’s water control capability has been improved most where new system automationfacilities have been constructed. These facilities are concentrated on the check structures along the lowerreaches of both the EHL and WSM Canals. The reaches are EHL Canal Reach 2, from Nectarine Check toGalleano Reservoir, and WSM Canal Reach 2, from the No. 8 Heading at Sheldon Reservoir to CarterReservoir. Checks in both reaches were previously manually operated grade board structures. As part ofProject 15, one or two automatic drop-leaf gates (ADLG) have been installed at each check. These arelocally controlled to maintain an operator-set constant upstream water level. Complementary operation ofthe ~,q-ade boards in the other check bays is required to keep the discharge through each ADLG within itsoperating range.

The ADLGs allow flow changes to be passed automatically dox~na these reaches with minimal water levelfluctuation. Thus, better use can be made of Galleano and Carter Reservoirs for regulating flowmismatches.

cvc~t)~) 12 ~:~nau- MAY 1999gg~’,¢ " lO02..pl 5. auIo’.FINAI._PIS_VSR.DOC

REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES

Four studies were commissioned by the Water Conservation Measurement Committee to explore thewater conservation potential of system automation and serve as a basis for defining the project withrespect to its water conservation functions. ~,~,~en designing these studies it was recogmized that systemautomation per se did not result directly in water conservation, but that the improved water controlcapability made possible by system automation may lead to water conservation.

It was hypothesized that water losses from both the liD distribution system and farms are related to theAccuracy, Steadiness and Responsiveness of water deliveries, so the studies were designed andimplemented to test this hypothesis. Each of the studies is discussed below and a summary of all fourstudies is presented in Table 4. The proposals that were prepared to define and guide each of the studiesare presented in Appendix C.

Study #1 Correlation of Lateral Spillage With Steadiness andAccuracy of Lateral Heading Flows

Study #1 was designed to exanaine whether and how the volume of lateral spillage is affected by thesteadiness of lateral inflow. The study was based on the Palm, Township and "E" Laterals and hourlyspillage data from selected 7-day "windows" during the period March to October 1992 was used. As aresult of the study, it was discovered that statistically significant positive relationships exist betweenlateral spillage and lateral heading unsteadiness.

However, the best models for each of the three canals included different parameters. Because the Palmand Township were quite similar in most respects (location, operator, delivery volume, and unsteadinesscharacteristics), a single model was devcloped for them. That model had the form:

where:

RSS = 11.725 + 3.9065E-01 x STDi - 2.0423E-02 x SUMi

RSSSTDiSUM~

= relative sum of spillage (percent)= standard deviation of inflow (cfs-hr)= sum of inflows (cfs-hr)

(R-’=0.54)

Analysis of output from the model indicated that spillage from these t~vo laterals could be reduced byabout 20 percent if the unsteadiness of lateral inflow could be reduced by 50 percent. Thus, it wasconcluded that, to the extent that System Automation can be used to hold lateral inflow more steady(relative to "without" System Automation conditions), it has potential to reduce lateral spillage.

ggd>c \1002,pl 5 ..auto’,FINAL. P I 5_ VSR. I)12)(7

Project 15 - system A utomationVerification Summary Report

Table 4. Summary of Studies Conducted in Support of Project 15 - System Automation

#l--Correlation ofLateral Spillage withSteadiness andAccuracy of LateralHeading Flows

To determine whether andhow lateral spillage lossesare correlated with theaccuracy and steadiness ofwater deliveries into lateralsfrom main canals.

Statistical correlation of observed lateralspillage as the dependent variable withthe steadiness of lateral inflows andother parameters as independentvariables. Initial analysis was based onspillage and flow records for three EHLCanal laterals: the Palm, Township andthe "E".

#2--Correlation ofTailwater withSteadiness andAccuracy of FarmDeliveries

#3---Correlation ofExcess Tailwater withResponsiveness of FarmDeliveries

#4--Appraisal ofProposed SystemAutomation Plan forProject 15

To determine whether andhow farm tailwater lossesare correlated with theaccuracy and steadiness offarm deliveries.

Io determine whether andto what extent excesstailwater is produced fromsurface-irrigated fields dueto lack of responsiveness inthe delivery system.

To compare the reliability(accuracy and steadiness)and responsiveness ofwater deliveries into lateralheadings with and withoutthe System AutomationProject.

Statistical correlation of observed farmtailwater as the dependent variable withindexes of farm delivery accuracy andsteadiness and other parameters as theindependent variables; analysis basedon records from 104 irrigation events on12 different fields with 8 different crops.The empirical surface irrigation modelSRFR was also used to evaluate theeffects of variable inflow rates on thevolumes of tailwater produced from oneborder-irrigated alfalfa field.Statistical analysis and interpretation ofthe actual farm tailwater hydrographsfrom the same 104 irrigation eventsused in Study #2.

Hydrodynamic simulation model wasdeveloped for Operating Reach 1 of theEHL Canal (from the AAC to SinghReservoir). The model included explicitsimulation of the procedures used byliD to manage EHL flows and SinghReservoir levels. The model was usedto examine lateral heading flowsteadiness with and without SystemAutomation and under different levels ofdelivery responsiveness at lateralheadings.

Work was originally commissioned in 1992.Initial analysis is documented in February 3,1993 report (CH2M HILL 1993). Collection "paired" lateral heading and spillage datawas initiated in 1993 for possible futureanalysis; paired heading and spillage datacurrently being analyzed. Outcome of thiscurrent analysis pending.Work was commissioned in 1992 andcompleted in 1993. Work is documented in aJanuary 29, 1993 draft report (Keller-BliesnerEngineering 1993)covering both Studies #2and #3; report was not finalized.

Work was commissioned in 1992 andcompleted in 1993. Work is documented in aJanuary 29, 1993 draft report (Keller-BliesnerEngineering 1993)covering both Studies #2and #3; report was not finalized.

The model was developed by the Universityof Colorado Center for Advanced DecisionSupport for Water and Engineering Systems(CADSwes) under CVC direction. Work wascommissioned in 1992 and completed in1993. Model development is documented inAugust 9, 1993 report (CADSwes 1993).Model output has been used by the CVC in avariety of ways to explore the effects of theProject 9 12-Hour Delivery Program onlateral heading delivery steadiness.

Statistically significant positive correlations werefound between lateral spillage and heading inflowunsteadiness. It was concluded that systemautomation had the potential to save water to theextent that automation could be used to holdlateral inflows more steady as compared to"without-automation" conditions.

Contrary to the original hypothesis that deliveryinaccuracy and unsteadiness cause increasedtailwater, both the statistical and empirical parts ofthe study indicated that tailwater production iseither negatively correlated or not related withdelivery unsteadiness. Thus, it was concluded thatthere is no conservation potential associated withusing System Automation to achieve moreaccurate or steady deliveries to farms.

Excess tailwater occurred on 56% of the 104irrigation events studied. The excess tailwater wasnot found to be correlated with soil type, croppingpattern or field position along the lateral. It wasconcluded that excess tailwater occurs as a resultof poor irrigation management and lack of deliverysystem responsiveness; however, in this study, theeffects of the two contributing factors could not bedistinguished. It was concluded that, to the extentthat system automation can be used to increasedelivery responsiveness, there is significant waterconservation potential.

As applied to the simulated reach of the EHLCanal, the System Automation Project improvedthe reliability and precision of the existingautomated control system, but did not change thebasic water control capability. The simulationdemonstrated that, within limits, water notdelivered into laterals and held in the EHL Canalfrom providing increased lateral headingresponsiveness can be effectively managedwithout increasing EHL Canal spillage. Modelresults were initially interpreted to mean thatlateral heading fluctuations increased withincreased lateral heading responsiveness;however, in subsequent analyses, this conclusionwas found to be not valid.

ggd>c.\ 1002~,p 15_auto\FlNAL_P 15..VS DOC

In view of the lack of high-quality spillage and heading data and the small number of laterals available foranalysis, the WCMC approved plans to simultaneously measure heading and spillage riows from severalselected laterals for possible future analysis. Monitoring and analysis of this data is ongoing in the contextof addressing the effects of Project 9 - 12-Hour Delivery Program on lateral spillage losses. The periodsof available record as of the end of Water Year 1998 for the monitored laterals arc presented in Table 5.

Table 5. Laterals With Overlapping Heading and Spillage Discharge Records as of theEnd of Water Year 1998

Period of Overlapping HeadingLateral Name and Spillage Records

Daffodil 8/8/96- 9/30/98Ebony 8/8/96 - 9/30/98Mayflower 4/15/94 - 12/31/95MulberryOrangeStandard

7/7/93- 12/31/9510/31/94 - 9/30/987/7/93 - 12/31/95

Trifolium Lateral 8 10/31/94 - 8/31/97Trifolium Lateral 9 5/12/94 - 4/24/97Trifolium Lateral 12 5/12/94 - 8/31/97

Study #2 Correlation of Tailwater with Steadiness and Accuracy ofFarm Deliveries

This study was designed to explore whether and how farm tailwater losses are correlated with theaccuracy and steadiness of farm deliveries. IID provided hourly’ delivery and tailwater flow records for104 irrigation events on 12 different fields for the analysis. Other data available for each field included:crop, field size, field (irrigation "run") length, field slope, soil type and distance to the farm turnout fromthe lateral heading. On average, the fields were found to have a slightly lower application per irrigationevent and higher tailwater fraction than the full set of records from which the sample was selected.

Analysis of the delivery data revealed that liD zanjeros estimate farm deliveries to be an average of 0.2cfs (or 4.2 percent) more than is actually delivered; thus, actual deliveries to farms are less than recorded.Further, the absolute error (difference between the flow reported by the zanjeros and the flow computedfrom broad-crested weir data) of the zanjeros’ measurement were normally distributed about the mean.However, no correlation was found between tailwater production and the error in farm delivery.

Various indexes of unsteadiness were computed from the delivery data and correlated with tailwater(expressed as absolute volume and as a percentage of delivery) using linear regression techniques. Othervariables such as field identity’, irrigation method and volume of water delivered were also tested asindependent variables in the regressions. This analysis revealed that the tailwater fraction (tailwatervolume divided by volume of water delivered) is dependent on the irrigation method and volume of waterdelivered, and not on the unsteadiness of the delivery" riow rate.

The absolute volume of tailwater was found to be related to the unsteadiness of the delivery asrepresented by either thc standard deviation or the coefficient of variation of the flow. However, contraryto the study’s hypothesis, the relationship was inverse, indicating that tailwater volume decreases asdelivery unsteadiness increases.

cvcwE; 15 FINAL - May 1999gg~"c ~,1002~,p 15_auto~FINAI. _P 15 ..VSR I)OC

i..:..Pr_oJec_t 15 ~ sYStem A Uto_m atiqn _!: !ii:} ~e_r. iJ.’.t, cat_iqn Sum.mary.R.eport

This relationship was explored further through mechanistic simulation using the surface irrigation modelSRFR, which was used to represent one of the sample flat (border) irrigated fields and calibrated usingactual delivery and tailwatcr data. Using the calibrated model, tailwater volume was predicted underdifferent randomly generated inflow conditions representing increasing degrees of unsteadiness. Thesimulation was conducted to represent changing borders based on advance to a specified distance alongthe field for adequate irrigation, a good on-farm management practice. The model confirmed thestatistical findings that tailwater volume decreases as delivery unsteadiness increases.

Based on the results of both the modeling and statistical analysis, it was concluded that there is noconselwation potential associated with using System Automation to achieve more accurate or steadydeliveries to farms, at least within the magnitudes of unsteadiness experienced in IID.

Study #3--Correlation of Excess Tailwater with Responsiveness ofFarm Deliveries

A certain amount of tailwater is necessary with surface irrigation methods to achieve adequate intakeopportunity times at all locations in a field. However, excess tailwater will occur if the irrigation deliverycannot be shut off when irrigation is complete or the irrigation "sets" are not changed (to the next portionof the field) at the proper time. The objective of Study #3 was to examine the occurrence of excesstailwater and, in particular, the relationship of this excess water to the responsiveness, or flexibility, offarm deliveries. The data set used for this study is the same as used for Study #2. It is comprised ofrecords for 104 irrigations on 12 different fields.

Tailwater hydrographs of the 104 irrigation events were constructed and inspected to identify theoccurrence of excess tailwater. Indicators of excess tailwater were: 1) increasing peak tailwater floxv ratesas the end of an irrigation event approaches; 2) non-uniform peak tailwater flow rates within the irrigationevent; 3) the base tlow of tailwater between sets did not drop below 10 to 20 percent of peak flow; 4)non-uniform set times during the irrigation event; 5) a finish head was required to complete the irrigation.Based on these criteria, it ~vas found that 56 percent of the events had excess tailwater. This comparedclosely with independent analyses by IID that indicated 63 percent of all deliveries in IID had excesstailwater.

No consistent relationships were found between excess tailwater and the various attributes of the differentfields, including crop, soil type and position along the lateral. The study suggests that differences inexcess tailwater among the 12 fields probably are more strongly related to differences among farmers intheir ability to match water orders with field irrigation requirements than to differences in physicalcharacteristics.

The conclusion that was reached is that, to the extent that system automation can be used to increasedelivery responsiveness, there is significant potential to conserve water. (This, of course, is theconservation basis for Project 9--12-Hour Delivery Program.)

Study #Zl~Appraisal of Proposed System Automation Plan

This study involved development of a hydrodynamic simulation model of the uppermost operationalreach of the EHL Canal, from its heading on the All-American Canal to Singh Reservoir at NectarineCheck. The model was developed by the University of Colorado Center for Advanced Decision Supportfor Water and Engineering Systems (CADSwes) under CVC direction.

c,,c(D,;, 16 FINAL - May ~999ggd:>c ~.1002".p 15_.autII~FINAL_P 15 _ VS R D(.)("

The model was unique and useful because, in addition to simulating the hydraulic characteristics of theEHL Canal, it incorporated logic that simulated liD’s procedures for scheduling EHL heading releases inresponse to division orders and water storage levels in Singh Reservoir. Thus, the model simulated boththe physical and management aspects of EHL Canal operations. The hydrodynamic portion of the modelwas calibrated by adjusting channel roughness and other unknown parameters until predicted canal waterlevels matched observed levels at known flow rates. Similarly, the operational portion of the model wascalibrated by changing operations rules until predicted water levels in Singh Reservoir matched observedlevels. This was done in close consultation with IID operations staff. The model was used to examinelateral heading flow steadiness with and without System Automation, under different levels of 12-hourdelivery (12-tID~) and flexible 24-hour delivery (Fx24-HD2) use, representing a range in deliveryresponsiveness.

As applied to the simulated reach of the EHL Canal, the System Automation Project improved thereliability of the existing automated control system, but did not appreciably change IID’s basic watercontrol capability. This is because the upgraded automated systems merely replaced existing automationfacilities (see Section 2). However, the simulation demonstrated that, within limits, water not deliveredinto laterals and held in the EIIL Canal due to increased lateral heading responsiveness can be effectivelymanaged without increasing EHL Canal spillage. The model was used, among other purposes, to explorethe effects of 12-HD water returned to the EHL Canal on lateral heading flow fluctuations. Nostatistically significant correlation was found between the number or magnitude of 12tIDs and lateralheading discharge steadiness.

~ A farm water delivery event sponsored under Project 9 of the IID/MWD Conservation Program with a nominalduration of 12 hours; however, actual durations can be shorter or longer.2 A farm water delivery event that is ordered as standard 24-hour delivery but is shut off early (before 24 hours) recorded in IID’s delivery detail data.

CVC(DE) 17 FINAL - May 1999

ggd.:,c \l(~2~plS_auto~,FINAL PI5 VSR DOC

TARGETED LOSSES AND CONSEQUENTIAL EFFECTS

The definition of the System Automation project was adapted (within the conceptual descriptioncontained in the IID/MWD Water Conservation Agreement) based on the findings of the supportingstudies summarized in the preceding section. Based on these studies, it was concluded that there are threeprimary water conservation mechanisms associated with system automation. These are that there shouldbe:

1.

2.

3.

A reduction of lateral spillage from having steadier lateral inflow (Study # 1);

The prevention of main canal spillage from having enhanced reservoir operations (Study #.4); and,

A reduction of excess tailwater from providing increased delivery flexibility (Study #3).

Each of these mechanisms is discussed in the following sections; however, only the latter two wereultimately employed to generate water savings.

Reduction of Lateral Spillage from Steadier Lateral Inflow

It was concluded from Study #1 that lateral spillage can be reduced if lateral heading flows can be heldmore steady. System automation can be used to achieve steadier lateral inflows by automating lateralheadgates for flow control or by automating main canal check structures for upstream water level control.

Automated lateral headgates were evaluated for a conservation project located along the EIIL CanalReach 1 where lateral headings are more prone to fluctuation than in other main canal reaches and,therefore, where lateral spillage tends to be larger. To implement the project would have requiredinstallation of a flow measurement structure downstream of each lateral heading with a signal sent back toa programmable controller at each headgate. Operators would have been able to set a target flow for eachlateral according to delivery demands and the controller would adjust the headgate as needed to maintainthe target flow. A study of the project revealed that the potential water savings could be cost-effective butthat the total estimated savings were relatively small and could be captured more efficiently by lateralinterceptor projects. Therefore, the project was not pursued. This investigation is documented in thereport "Feasibility Assessment of Automated Lateral Headings for Spillage Reduction" (DavidsEngineering 1994).

As mentioned earlier, automated drop-leaf gates (ADLGs) have been installed at the check structuresalong the lower operating reaches of the WSM and EHL Canals. These check structures, which typicallyhave two or three bays each, use grade boards for water level control. They were previously completelymanually controlled, meaning that grade boards were added or removed to try to maintain constant waterlevels as flows varied. Due to the relatively coarse resolution inherent in grade board control, manpowerlimitations and other factors, upstream water levels varied considerably, resulting in fluctuation of lateralheading discharges.

ADLGs have been installed in one or two bays of each structure, resulting in semi-automated operation.The ADLGs automatically accommodate flow changes that are within their hydraulic capacity whilegrade boards must be adjusted to handle flow changes that exceed ADLG capacity. The ADLGsaccommodate the typical evening and nighttime flow increases that result from increased deliveryflexibility. This is done by the hydrographer setting checks during the day run to pass most of thescheduled flow over or under the grade boards and only a little through the ADLG. Then as flexible

cvc(r~ 18 FINAl.- May 1999ggd>c \1002\p 15..auto’.FINAI._P 15_VSR DO(?

deliveries are shut offand main canal flows increase, the ADLGs gradually drop to pass the increasewhile upstream water levels are held constant.

Thus, along these two main canal reaches, lateral heading flows are steadier than they were prior toinstallation of the ADI.Gs, and it can be inferred (from the results of Study #1) that spillage from theaffected laterals has been reduced. However, the WCMC has elected to not bring these savings into theProgram.

Prevention of Main Canal Spillage from Enhanced ReservoirOperations

At the time the IID/MWD Program was initiated, IID had constructed 5 main canal regulating reservoirs(including Carter Reservoir), which had substantially reduced main canal spillage from historical levels.At that time, the only appreciable main canal spillage remaining occurred at the following sites:

¯ East Highline Canal at "Z" Spill¯ Vail Supply Canal Spill at North End Dam, and¯ Vail Main Canal Spill at Lateral 7.

Two new main canal regulating reservoirs were designed and constructed under the Program to capturethe remaining main canal spillage and the associated savings were assigned to the respective reservoirprojects. In addition, the pre-existing Carter Reservoir and its associated captured main canal spillagesavings were placed into the IID/MWD Program. Thus, three main canal reservoirs have been sponsoredunder the Program to capture main canal spillage (Table 6).

Table 6. Main Canal Regulating Reservoirs SponsoredUnder the IID/MWD Water Conservation Program

Robert F. Carter Project 1--Robert F. Carter Westside Main Canal/Trifolium Storm DrainReservoir ReservoirBernard Galleano Project 4--Bernard Galleano East Highline CanaV"Z" SpillReservoir ReservoirRussell Reservoir Project 17--Mulberry-D Lateral Vail Supply CanalNail Supply Canal Spill at

Interceptor North End Dam (including flows from theMulberry-D North Interceptor Canal); VailMain CanalNail Main Canal Spill at Lateral 7.

For each of the reservoirs listed above, the conservation savings are based on the reduction of spillagefrom levels that existed prior to the IID/MWD Program. However, historical spillage would have beenlarger than the measured quantities if at that time IID had provided the degree of delivery flexibility that itpresently does. Thus, the three reservoirs capture historical measured spillage and they prevent additionalmain canal spillage that would have occurred in their absence due to increased delivery flexibility.

The following discussion illustrates how main canal spillage is prevented by the Carter Reservoir. CarterReservoir regulates flow mismatches that occur near the end of the Westside Main (WSM) Canal,including those caused by 12-HDs and Fx24-ItDs provided in the area served between Carter Reservoirand Sheldon Reservoir. As lateral heading and farm delivery gate flows are reduced to provide flexible

ggct>c ".l L~J2’p 15_aulo,FI NAI._P 15_MS R. IX)C

deliveries, surplus water accumulates in the WSM Canal and automatically flows downstream into CarterReservoir. It is then re-regulated Ibr future deliver3, into the Trifolium Extension Canal.

However, if Carter Reservoir (and the ADLGs) did not exist, it would be necessary to reduce WSM Canalflows at the No. 8 Heading and store the surplus water (resulting from flexible deliveries) in SheldonReservoir. It would bc practically impossible to perfectly anticipate lateral flow changes and coordinatethem with flow changes at the No. 8 Heading; therefore, some additional spillage would occur from theWSM Canal. This spillage is analogous to lateral "shutoff loss spillage" that occurs from laterals whenfarm deliveries are reduced or shut off.

Gallcano Reservoir serves a similar function on the EHL Canal. Absent Galleano Reservoir, it would benecessary to reduce EHL flows at Nectarine Check to store surplus water in Singh Reservoir. Since theflow cuts could not be implemented perfectly some spillage in addition to that associated with ordinary(without delivery flexibility) operations would occur at "Z" Spill. The same analogy applies to the RussellReservoir in relation to the Vail Supply Canal Spill at North End Dam and Vail Main Canal Spill atLateral 7.

The function of the main canal reservoirs in preventing flexibility-induced spillage is enhanced by certainfacilities constructed under the System Automation Project. These include automated inlet and outletgates installed on the reservoirs themselves and previously described ADLGs installed at checks along thelower EHL and WSM Canal operating reaches. The ADLGs arc particularly helpful because surplus maincanal flows are automatically routed to the reservoirs with minimal fluctuation in main canal water levels.

Singh Reservoir system automation improvements represent a special case. That reservoir is a non-Program facility and was originally designed to handle EHI, Canal fluctuations occurring between theEIIL Canal Heading and the Nectarine Check, a distance of about 29 miles. Captured water could bedischarged only into the Vail Supply Canal. With the introduction under the Program of the Russell,Willey and Young Reservoirs, all of which feed captured water into the Vail Canal service area, operationof Singh Reservoir was constrained because of the diminished demand for water through the Vail SupplyCanal. Therefore, improvements were made under the Program to restore the usefulness of SinghReservoir. These include: upgrading the automated control of the reservoir inlet gate; installing anautomated pump outlet so that captured water can be discharged into the EHL Canal to meet demandsdownstream of the Nectarine Check; and desilting the reservoir to restore its original storage capacity.These improvements allow Singh Reservoir to be used as before the Program, in a dedicated manner forregulation of EItL Canal fluctuations. Because these improvements have merely restored the SinghReservoir’s original capability, no water savings are attributed to them.

Bevins Reservoir, which was constructed as a feature of the Plum-Oasis Lateral Interceptor Project, alsoposes a special case. It was designed solely to regulate intercepted flows for delivery into the RedwoodCanal. The connection between the reservoir and the Redwood Canal is automated to hold a constantwater level upstream of the Redwood Lateral 5 check. The connection is able to convey water in bothdirections to achieve this objective. If the water level upstream of the check drops, additional water isdelivered from the reservoir to the canal; if it rises, less water is delivered. Or, if there is surplus in theRedwood Canal, the connection will automatically convey the extra water into Bevins Reservoir. In thisway, the connection has established a new flow control heading on the Redwood Canal. Bevins Reservoircaptures all spillage that would have occurred due to deliveries upslxeam of the Redwood Lateral 5Check. Spillage downstream of the Redwood Lateral 5 Check has also been reduced because the lateral isshorter in an operational sense.

cvc(o~) 20 FINAL - May 1999ggd-,c \ I 0~2.p 15_autoXFINAI._P 15__VS R.DOC

~P~oject. ~ 5.=_._ System .A..utq.t_nation: ..:.

Thus, there are five reservoirs whose automated features work to prevent spillage from main canals. (Thisincludes the Redwood Canal, which is not technically part of the main canal system, but is regarded assuch in this instance.) However, Program savings are assigned to only four because the improvementsmade to Singh Reservoir only restored its original regulating capability. Due to the enhancing effects ofsystem automation on reservoir operations, the conservation savings associated w~th prevention offlexibility-induced main canal spillage are assigned to the System Automation Project. These savings arelimited to those associated with Fx24-HDs because prevention of any spillage caused by 12-HDs, whichare sponsored under the Program, cannot be counted as Program savings.

Reduction of Excess Tailwater from Increased Delivery Flexibility

The results of System Automation Study #3 confirmed that excess tailwater losses could be reduced byproviding more flexible water deliveries, particularly the ability to shut water off when irrigation iscomplete. The results of Study #4 showed that the improved main canal water control capability providedby system automation plays an important role in increasing delivery flexibility. Recognizing that Project 9(12-Itour Delivery Program) provided the ability for growers to shutoff early, the WCMC decided define the System Automation Project as an augmenting project to the 12-Hour Delivery Program and toassign a portion of the 12-Hour Delivery Program savings to System Automation. The basis for thisassignment is discussed next under Verification Strategies.

CVC(DE) 21 FINAl. - M.ay 1999ggd>c \1002’,p| 5_auto~.FINAL PI 5_VSR.IYO("

VERIFICATION STRATEGIES

There are three conservation mechanisms associated with System Automation, two of which areemployed with Project 15. Verification strategies are presented in this section for the two activeverification mechanisms.

Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) from Enhanced ReservoirOperations

The water savings attributable to Project 15 ("Prevented Main Canal Spillage [Fx24-HD]") occur as result of enhanced operations at the Bevins, Carter, Galleano and Russell Reservoirs. Each reservoir, withits automated features, prevents spillage that, in the absence of the reservoir, would occur in excess ofhistorical quantities. The prevented spillage is counted as conservation savings to the extent that it isassociated with IID’s Fx24-HDs. ttowever, prevented spillage associated with the consequential effects of12-HDs is not counted because the 12-HD on-farm savings are assigned to Project 9. This is based on theverification principle that prevention of losses that are a consequence of another Program-sponsoredconservation project does not constitute a savings.

A spillage differential strategy is used to compute Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD). Accordingto the spillage differential strategy, the volume of water conserved is equal to the difference between thevolume of Fx24-HD induced spillage that would occur in the absence of the reservoir ("without-project"spillage) minus the volume that actually occurs with the reservoir ("with-project" spillage). The "with-project" spillage is equal to zero3, so it is only necessary to estimate the "without-project" spillage.

The "without-reservoir" spillage is computed using the following steps:

1. Identify the farm delivery gates and related laterals that are operationally associated with or"tributary" to each reservoir.

2. Identify Fx24-HD delivery events in each reservoir tributary area.

3. Compute the "spillage duration" for each Fx24-IID event.

4. Compute the spillage volume for each event by multiplying the flow rate turned back to the maincanal system by the spillage duration.

5. Sum the spillage volumes for all events associated with all reservoirs to determine Prevented MainCanal Spillage (Fx24-HD).

Each of these steps is described in additional detail in the following sections.

Step l--ldentify Farm Delivery Gates and Laterals Associated with EachReservoir

The purpose of this step is to identify the farm delivery gates and laterals that are associated with each ofthe four automated reservoirs under "with-Project" conditions and would have to be managed differentlywith respect to flexible deliveries under "without-Project" conditions. It is assumed that the "without-

3 Any main canal spillage that does occur is charged against the associated reservoir or interceptor project; therefore,

the "with-project" spillage is always equal to zero.

cvc(o~.~ 22 FINAL - May 1999ggd>¢ \ lfN2g.~ 15_auto\FINA L_ P 15_VSR.DOC

Project" condition means without the four reservoirs but with the various other projects in the IID/MWDProgram.

As explained in the previous example of the Carter Reservoir, if the reservoir did not exist, flexibilitywater returned to the WSM Canal from all of the laterals and direct delivery gates downstream of the No.8 Heading would need to be cut at the No. 8 Heading and held in Sheldon Reservoir. However, assumingthe Trifolium Lateral Interceptor would exist and operate as it does, it is reasonable to also assume that allflexibility water from the intercepted laterals would be conveyed to the interceptor (Willey) reservoir andnot cut at the lateral headings. Thus, the laterals that would have to be managed differently if CarterReservoir did not exist are all of the laterals located downstream of the No. 8 Heading except thoseincluded in the Trifolium Interceptor Project. The WSM direct delivery gates are also included in thisgrouping because they are not in the interceptor area.

Using these conventions, the areas of interest associated with each reservoir were identified. Each of theseareas is described below.

¯ Bevins Reservoir: All of the Redwood Canal delivery gates.

¯ Carter Reservoir: All of the WSM Canal laterals and direct delivery gates located downstream ofthe WSM No.8 Heading (at Sheldon Reservoir), except the laterals included the Trifolium Lateral Interceptor Project area.

Galleano Reservoir: All of the E|IL Canal laterals and direct delivery gates located downstream ofthe EHL Nectarine Check, except those included in the Mulberry-D LateralInterceptor Project.

¯ Russell Reservoir: All of the Vail Main Canal laterals and direct delivery gates.

A list of the specific canal names (used in IID’s delivery records) comprising each area are provided Table C-1 in Appendix C.

Step 2mldentify Fx24-HD EventsFx24-HD events were identified on a gate-by-gate basis as those with ending times outside the normaloperation window for the gate. However, events that lasted 2.5 hours or less beyond the normal operationwindow were defined as "late runs" rather than early shutoffs and excluded.

These conventions are consistent with those used for the lateral spillage analyses, which involvesidentification of Fx24-HD events. The reader is referred to the report Canal Spillage Analysis in Supportof Conservation Savings Verification fi~r Projects 3, 8, 9, 15 and 17 Interim Report No. 2 for additionaldetail regarding analysis of IID’s delivery detail records and identification of Fx24-HD events.

Step 3--Compute Spillage Duration by EventThe effectiveness with which IID could manage flexibility water without the four reservoirs dependsprimarily on the flow lag times along the main canals and the advance notice of delivery shutoff (orreduction) that growers would be required to provide to IID. The spillage duration of each event wascomputed as the flow lag time between the associated lateral heading and the closest upstream main canalregulating reservoir minus 4 hours. However, the spillage duration used was subject to the constraints thatit never be less than 2 hours and never more than the remaining duration of the event.

CVC(DE) 23 FINAl. - May 1999ggd-’c \ 1002’.,pl 5_auto’,fINA L. P 15. VSR. DOC

Flow lag times for each lateral were derived from flow lag times between major main canal checksprovided by IID. The specific lag times used for each lateral are presented in Table C-I, Appendix C.

The 4-hours subtracted from each lag time represents the assumed advance notification that growerswould be required to provide to IID. Such a rule presently exists, although it is not strictly enforced.However, under "without-Project" conditions, it is assumed that the rule would be strictly enforced toreduce main canal spillage.

The spillage duration is constrained by the limits that it cannot be less than two hours nor more than theremaining normal delivery duration. The 2-hour minimum duration reflects the manner in which IIDwould most likely assimilate the shutoffnotifications into main canal operations. It would not be practicalto adjust main canal headings by very small increments each time a notification was received. Instead, thenotifications would be accumulated until a relatively large heading adjustment could be made. It wasassumed that the accumulation interval would be 4 hours. Further assuming a random distribution ofevents within the 4-hour accumulation period, each event would have an average minimum spillageduration of half of the 4-hour period, or two hours, ttowever, the duration obviously could not exceed thetime remaining in the normal delivery. Three examples are provided below to better illustrate how thespillage durations and volumes are computed (Table 7). Each example deals with a Fx24-ItD event of cfs that is shut off early.

Table 7. Computation of Spillage Duration for Three Hypothetical Fx24-HDs

1 I 8 12 I 4 { 22 8 12

I10 I 6

3 8 1 10 i 1

In Example 1, the delivery is shut off 12 hours early and is located along the main canal on a lateral witha 4-hour flow lag time. The lag time minus four hours (the advance notification time) is zero, meaningthat spillage theoretically could be completely avoided. However, the minimum spillage duration of twohours is applied to reflect the impracticality of perfectly timing the main canal flow reduction.

The next example is identical to the first, except that the lateral is more distant from a point of regulation.In this case, the flow lag time is 10 hours (as would be the case for laterals located on the TrifoliumExtension if the Carter Reservoir was not there), so the spillage duration is 6 hours (10-4 hours) and constraints do not apply.

In Example 3, the flow lag time of 10 hours minus 4 hours indicates a spillage duration of 6 hours;however, the spillage duration is limited to only one hour--the remaining delivery duration.

Step 4~Compute Spillage Volume by EventThe prevented main canal spillage volume is computed for each Fx24-HD event by multiplying thechange in delivery flow rate by the spillage duration determined from Step 3.

Step 5--Sum Event Spillage VolumeThe total prevented main canal spillage volume associated with each reservoir is computed by adding theprevented spillage volumes for each event.

c-,..c(~) 24 FINAL - May 1999gg’d:,c d 002",pl 5_auto~.FINAL. P I 5_VSR DOC

project is - System Automation :: :.¯ .Verification S~mmaryReporQ .:~ ..

Computation of Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) for WaterYear 1998

The computed volume of Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) will vary from year to yeardepending on the number, size, duration and location of Fx24-III) events. Prevented spillage for WaterYear 1998 was computed for each of the lbur reservoirs using the conventions noted above (Table 8).During this period there were a total of 1,521 Fx24-HD events that would have caused 1,622 AF4 of maincanal spillage, an average of" slightly more than one AF per event. It can be seen that Carter Reservoir,which is farthest from the assumed closest alternative point of regulation and thus has the longest flow lagtimes, has the highest average spillage per event compared to the other reser~’oirs.

Table 8. Prevented Main Canal Spillage (Fx24-HD) Events andVolumes for Water Year 1998

Bevins 171 1.13151Carter 412 515 1.25Galleano 502 449 0.89Russell 456 487 1.07Total 1,521 1,622 1.07

Reduction of Excess Tailwater from Increased Delivery Flexibility

A portion of the on-farm savings (Reduced Farm Delivery [12-1tD]) and consequential effects (InducedMain Canal Spillage [Fx 12-HD] and Induced Lateral Spillage[12-HD]) attributable to Project 9--12-Ilour Delivery Program are assigned to Project 15 on the basis of relative annualizcd costs. Thecomputation of annualized costs of the two projects and the basis for sharing savings and consequentialeffects between them was initially presented in Appendix D of the Projected 1998 Water ConservationSavings with Supporting Documentation in Tabular Summaries (CVC 1998). That material is alsopresented below (with minor changes) tbr the convenience of the reader.

BackgroundA large amount of water that would be discharged from farms to drains is conserved as a result of the on-farm savings associated with the 12-Hour Delivery (12-HD) Program (Project 9). However it would be practical to operate the 12-HD Program without the level of automation and communications providedby Project 15, System Automation, for which most of the conservation savings are indirect. (This isespecially true in view of the additional flexibility IID is now offering for ordinary 24-hour orders.)Therefore, it is reasonable to view Projects 9 and 15 as a combined conservation activity and allocate theProject 9 conservation savings and consequential effects between them. A logical basis tbr this allocationis to prorate the conservation and consequential effects savings according to the relative annualizedcapital plus operating costs of the two projects.

Not all of the components and measures that are included in Project 15 are relevant to or needed forproviding the delivery flexibility needed for Project 9. Therefore, only those portions of Project 15 that

* Prevented main canal spillage was computed to be 1,622 AF during Water Year 1998. However, the WaterConservation Measurement Committee decided to use a value of 1,440 AF for the Projected 1999 Consen, ationSavings so that the total projected 1999 savings would be 108,500 AF.

cvc.,E) 25 FINAl. - May 1999

ggd:,c \1002,pl__.aut6FINAI._PI. VSR

are directly related to providing delivery flexibility necessary for 12-HDs at the farm turnouts will beincluded in the combined annual cost analysis.

Cost Basis for Portion of Project 15 Needed for 12-HDsThe main System Automation components of Project 15 that are relevant to providing more flexibledeliveries to farm turnouts include:

The automatic drop leaf gates in the check structures along the lower reaches of the Westside andEast Highline Main Canals;

ii. The automatic regulating and pumping facilities associated with the offline storage reservoirsalong the three main canals;

iii. The automatic regulating and pumping facilities associated with the lateral interceptor systemstorage reservoirs; and

iv. The associated portions of the District-wide water management communications and controlsystems and the related portions of the Water Control Center.

These items are capital intensive and there is also a significant annual operating and maintenance costassociated with them. As of the end of 1997 the actual capital cost of facilities that are directly related toproviding the flexibility needed for the 12-HD Program (and other 24-hour order flexibility being offeredby IID) was estimated to be $5,904,3315 expressed in 1988 dollars. This compares to a total capital costfor automation of$11,310,012 expressed in 1988 dollars. Thus its ratio to the total is5,904,331/11,310,012 = 0.522. Furthermore, the total projected annual O&M cost for all of the Project 15facilities in 1998 is anticipated to be approximately $450,000. Thus the portion of O&M costs related toproviding flexibility is 0.522 x $450,000 = $234,900.

In order to allocate conservation savings between Project 15 and 9 on a relative cost basis one logicalmethod is to use their respective anticipated annual costs for the 1998 calendar year. To utilize an annualcost basis, the related Project 15 capital costs must be annualized. To do this, first the cost in 1988 dollarsmust be escalated to 1997 dollars using the same construction cost index that was employed to deflate allcapital expenditures back to 1988 dollars. That rate has averaged 3% over the 1988 to 1997 period6.

Based on a 3% index, the appropriate multiplier (Compound Amount Factor) for the I0 year period is + 0.03)l° = 1.3436. Thus the equivalent capital cost in 1997 dollars for the Project 15 facilities that aredirectly related to flexibility is 1.3436 x 5,904,331 = $7,933,059.

The next step is to annualize the current total capital cost over the n = 35 year life (followingconstruction) of the IID/MWD Conservation Agreement. The appropriate multiplier (Capital RecoveryFactor, CRF) for doing this using an interest (or discount) rate ofi -- v is:

CRF = [i (1 + 0"]4(1 + i)"- 1]

5 Based on analysis of Program accounting records by IID and MWD staff as conveyed to the CVC September 25,

1997.6 By mutual agreement, IID and MWD have used the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation composite construction cost index

(CCI) for computing comparable construction costs. Over the period 1988 to 1997, covering the majority of theProgram’s construction activity, the composite CCI averaged about 3% annually. Thus 3%, compounded over the10-year period, is used in this computation to convert 1988 to 1997 costs.7 By mutual agreement, IID and MWD have used a discount rate of 8% to compute equivalent annual costs from

capital costs.

CVC(DE) 2 6 FINAl. - May 1999ggd:>c:\ 1002~.p 15_ auto’d-’INA I._P 15_VSR I-YOC

= [0.8 (1 + 0.08)3~]/[(1 + 0.08)35- 1] = 0.08580

Thus the annualized capital cost is 0.08580 x 7,933,059 = $680,656.

The projected 1998 O&M cost for all of the Project 15 facilities directly related to providing flexibledeliveries is $234,900 (see above). Therefore, the total projected annual capital and O&M cost for theProject 15 facilities directly related to providing flexible deliveries is 680,656 + 234,900 = $915,556.

Annual Cost of Providing 12-HDs

The way Projects 9 and 15 are configured, the costs associated with having additional labor and theirtravel (zanjeros, night patrolmen, hydrographers, and office staff) to manage the associated 12-HD waterflow changes are the only charges made to Project 9. (Thus Project 9 is only charged for the direct O&Mrelated to making the 12-IID flow changes because the necessary automation hardware andcommunication facilities provided by Project 15 are not included.) This direct O&M cost for 12-ttDs isprojected to be $1,512,800 during calendar year 1998, which is $62/12-HD for the anticipated 24,400 12-I-tDs. The total projected 1998 capital plus O&M costs for the related system automation of $915,556, isequivalent to $37.50/12-HD. Thus the total projected cost per 12-HD is $99.50.

AHocating the Associated Conservation SavingsBased on the above, the total capital plus O&M cost for 12-HDs for 1998 is projected to be:$1,512,800 + $915,556 = $2,428,356. Thus the portions (or ratios) of the Conservation Elements andConsequential Effects Elements that should be assigned to each part of the combined (9 and 15) Projectsare:

For Project 9: $1,512,800/$2,428,356 = 0.623

For Project 15:$915.556/$2,428,356 = 0.377

These values are used for computing the portion of 12-IID conservation savings and consequential effects(lateral spillage) associated with the two projects.

CVC(DE) 27 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c \1002\p15 auIo~.FINAL_PI5..VSR DOC

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

IID’s water management capability has been substantially improved by the upgraded and expandedSystem Automation facilities provided under Project 15 (and in the case of reservoirs, under therespective reservoir or associated lateral interceptor projects). The primary conservation benefit realizedfrom system automation is more effective main canal water control, which enables increased deliveryresponsiveness at lateral turnouts and farm delivery gates. Thus, the System Automation Project is anessential complement to the 12-Hour Deliver?,’ Program (Project 9) and the two projects are viewed as single conservation activity. Based on an analysis of relative annualized capital costs associated with thetwo projects, 62.3 percent of the Reduced Farm Delivery (12-HD) achieved by providing 12-ttDs assigned to Project 9 and 37.7 percent to Project 15.

Additionally, system automation enables prevention of main canal spillage that would result from IID’spractice of providing increased flexibility in 24-hour delivery duration (Prevented Main Canal Spillage[Fx24-HD]). This is accomplished by enhanced operation of main canal regulating reservoirs sponsoredunder the IID/MWD Agreement. These savings were computed to be 1,622 AF in Water Year 1998.

Studies conducted in support of Project 15 indicate that steadier lateral heading flows achieved by newautomation of check structures along the lower reaches of the EHL and WSM Canals have resulted inreduced spillage from the affected laterals, tIowever, the Water Conservation Measurement Committeehas elected not to assign these savings to the System Automation Project.

cvc(o~.) 28 F1NAI.- May 1999ggd>¢ \1002’,p 15_auto’ FINAL_P 15_VS R I)OC

REFERENCES

CADSwes 1993. East Ilighline Canal tlydrodynamic Model Development and Simulation Data Outputfor Phase 1 of Conservation Savings Study #4 for the System Automation Project.

CtI2M HILL 1993. System Automation Verification Study #1. Memorandum from EduardoLatimer/CH2M HILL to Conservation Verification Consultants.

Davids Engineering 1994. Feasibility Assessment of Automated Lateral Headings for Spillage Reduction.

Keller Bliesner Engineering 1993. System Automation Verification Study 2/3. Draft.

CVC(DE) 29 FINAl.- May 1999

ggd>c \1002~pl 5_auto~,I-INAL_PI5_VSR DOC

APPENDIX ADESCRIPTIONS OF SYSTEM AUTOMATION SITES (63)

(Presented in thc order listed in Table 3, page 9.)

CVC(DE) 30 FINAL - May 1999ggd.>c.\ 1002"015_auto\FINAL_ P 15_VSR DO("

iiiiiProject 1 ~ "Systoh MUtotnation ’

:.!Iled.fication Summao’ Report

Site No. 1COACHELLA TURN OUT

Coachella Main Canal ]’urn Out is located near the midpoint of the All American Canal. It is 15.4 milesdownstream of Pilot Knob Check and 36.1 miles from the AAC Ilcading. It is located near the Mexicanborder, 32 miles east of Calexico. Access roads are north side of Interstate 8 at Gordons Well off rampthen east 0.5 mile; T16S R20E Section 31. The Coachella Turnout and Drop 1 Powerplant are co-locatedat this site.

There are five top seal radial gates each able to pass between 10 and 15 cfs (0.28-0.42 m3/s) cfs pertenth-foot of gate opening, depending on the elevation of Drop No. 1 pond. These gates are 9-1/2 ft. (2.9m) wide and are in automatic flow control. Flow feedback is made using a modified Parshall Flumelocated 600 ft. (183 m) do~anstream of the Coachella Canal Turnout. A second PLC (programmable logccontroller) installed in the control module operates this structure. Coachella Valley Water Districtmonitors flows at this structure.

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. A direct microwave link to Imperial allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADASystem and if necessary operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Drop No. 1 Run ttydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher

CVC(DE) 3 ] FINAL - May 1999ggd>c’\ 1002"p 15..aut o~aVlNAL_P 15 _VS R. DOC

~i!Vd~iJTeation Summ~ry Report ....

Site No. 2DROP 1 CHECK

Drop 1 Check is located near the midpoint of the All American Canal. It is 15.4 miles downstream ofPilot Knob Check and 36.1 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located near the Mexican border, 32 mileseast of Calexico. Access roads are north side of Interstate 8 at Gordons Well off ramp then east 0.5 mile;T16S IL20E Section 31. The Coachella Turnout and Drop 1 Powerplant are co-located at this site.

Diversions to the Coachella and Imperial Valleys are made at this site. Six top seal radial gates, each ableto pass between 20 and 30 cfs (.56-.85 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening, are operated at Drop 1 Check.This structure services the IID.

The pond is used for storage and fluctuates between an elevation of 157.00 (ft. (47.9 m) msl and 162.50ft. (49.5 m) msl. The four outside gates are 16-1/2 ft. (5.0 m) wide while the two inside gates are 14 (4.3 m) wide. Gates three and four are operated in tandem using a common motor. All gates are operatedby remote control and cannot be hand operated.

Normally water is directed through the power plant that is co-located at this site and the check gates areclosed. This site has been automated with a local controller, however it is remote-manually operated bythe Drop 4 operator. Flow is maintained by modulation of the power turbines with feed back from anacoustic flow meter located downstream 1.5 miles at Sta. 19+73.

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. A direct microwave link to Imperial allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADASystem and if necessary operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Drop No. 1 Run Ilydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control

Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 32 FINAL- May 1979ggd-’,c’\1002\pl 5_auto\FINAl,_P 15_VSR

Site No. 3DROP 1 POWER PLANT

AAC Drop 1 Power Plant is located near the midpoint of the All American Canal, 15.4 miles downstreamof Pilot Knob Check and 36.1 miles from the AAC Heading. The power plant is near the MexicanBorder, 32 miles east of Calexico. To reach the access road on the north side of the AAC, take Interstate8 Gordons Well offramp, then travel east about 0.5 miles; T16S R20E Section 31. Coachella Turnout isco-located at this site.

System automation under Project 15 at AAC Drop 1 Power Plant provides monitoring of flowcharacteristics though the hydroelectric plant to assist in flow control at EHL Turnout. Output data areupstream water elevation, downstream water elevation, wicket gate position, blade angle, and electricpower generation.

CVC(DE) 33 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c \I002\pI5_auto\FINAL_PI5_VSR

~-iiVeri3~calion Sum~n-a~,. Reporti:.!...i

Site No. 4EAST HIGHLINE TURNOUT

East Highline Turnout, located upstream of the EHL Check, is near the lower end of the All AmericanCanal, 20.2 miles downstream of Drop 1 Check and 56.3 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located nearthe Mexican border, 11 miles east of Calexico. Go east on Highway 98 to the EHL Canal service road, goSouth 0.1 miles to the AAC. EHL Check, EIIL Turnout, and EHL Sidemain tIeading arc located here.T17S R16E Section 1.

This structure has been automated with a local controller doing downstream flow control. There are sixradial gates at the head of the EIIL with each gate able to pass approximately 10 cfs (2.83 m 3/s) pertenth-foot of gate opening. One of two module installed PLCs operates this structure.

An Acoustic Velocity Meter (AVM) located about 1.5 miles downstream of the heading is used as theflow feedback mechanism. Typically the Drop 4 operator maintains the flow by making adjustments atthe EIIL Power Plant. Only in emergencies is the heading placed in automatic control. This allows themaximum power production for any given flow at the discretion of the Drop 4 operator.

The Drop No. 1 Run Hydrographer conducts local operation. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Western Division performs structure maintenance. Automatic Control System maintenance isperformed by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 34 FINAL - May 1999ggd:,c:\1002",pl 5_a~to~INAL_P 15_VS R DOC

Site No. 5EAST HIGHLINE SIDEMAIN HEADING

East Highline Sidemain t leading is located just downstream of EHL Check near the end of the AllAmerican Canal, 20.2 miles downstream of Drop 1 Check and 56.3 miles from the AAC Heading. It islocated near the Mexican border, 11 miles east of Calcxico. Go east on Highway 98 to the EItL Canalservice road, go South 0.1 miles to the AAC. EHL Check, EHL Turnout, and EHL Sidemain Heading arclocated here. TI7S RI6E Section 1.

This structure has been automated with a local controller doing downstream flow control. There is oneeight-foot-wide radial gate at thc head of the EHL Side Main able to pass approximately 10 cfs (2.83 3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening.

Normally the heading is in automatic downstream flow control with fcedback from a broad-crested weirlocated immediatcly downstream of the structure.

The Drop No. 1 Run Itydrographer conducts local operation. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Western Division performs structure maintenance. Automatic Control System maintenance isperformed by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 35 FINAL- May 1999ggd>c \ 1002\p 15_auto\FrNA L. P 15...V S R.

Site No. 6EAST HIGHLINE CHECK

East Highline Check is located within the lower end of the All American Canal, 20.2 miles downstreamof Drop 1 Check and 56.3 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located near the Mexican border, 11 mileseast of Calexico. Go east on Highway 98 to the EHL Canal sen, ice road, go South 0.1 miles to the AAC.EHL Check, EtlL Turnout, and EHL Sidemain Heading are located here. T17S R16E Section 1.

This site has been automated with a local controller doing upstream level control. Five radial gates, eachable to pass approximately 10 cfs (0.28 m~/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening are operated at this site. Thegates are 18 ft. (5.5 m) wide.

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. One of two module mountedPLCs operates the structure equipment. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the sitevia the SCADA System and if necessary operate it by remote control.

The Drop No. 1 Run IIydrographer conducts local operation. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Western Division makes structure maintenance. Automatic Control System maintenance is madeby the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc~t~) 3 6 rrs^~.- r.ay ~999ggd>¢ \10O2X, pl 5_auto"TINAl.. PI5_VSR DO(,"

!i: !Verifidatio.n_. Summary ?Report :-|

Site No. 7ALLISON CHECK

Allison Check is located within the lower end of the All American Canal. It is 3.9 miles downstream ofEI[L Check and 60.2 miles fiom the AAC Heading. It is located on the Mexican border east of VencillRoad and south of Highway 98; T17S R16E Section 17.

Five radial gates regulate flow; each gate will pass approximately’ 10 cfs (0.28 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gateopening. Gates No.’s 1 and 3 can be manually operated. The gates are 17 ft. (5.2 m) wide.

The site has been automated to operate in upstream level control; upstream level setpoint is 1039.55. Amodular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the radial gatesin upstream level control. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADASystem and if necessary operate it by remote control.Local operation is conducted by the Allison Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenancc is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

ggd>c ~ lO02\p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VSR

Site No. 8CENTRAL MAIN CHECK

Central Main Check is located within the lower end of the All American Canal. It is 4.5 milesdownstream of Drop No. 5 Power Plant and 67.1 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located near theMexican border 2 miles east of Calexico. Cross Roads are SE comer of Bowker Road and Highway 98;T17S R15E Section 8. Central Main Turnout is co-located at this site.

There are four radial gates, each able to pass approximately 20 cfs (0.57 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gateopening. These gates are 15-1/2 ft. (4.7 m) wide. The pond is used for storage and fluctuates between1012.80 ft. (3.9 m) and 1014.20 ft. (4.3

The site has been automated to operate in two modes. Normally the check is in flow control if theupstream level is between 1012.80 and 1014.20. Outside this operating band the check operates inupstream level control. Flow feedback is made with a rated siphon located 0.5 mile downstream of thecheck.

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and ifnecessary operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Allison Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvctD~) 3 8 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c\ 1002\p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VS R.DOC

ii..~:V._..~ific_ qtion.Summa@:-Repo~t. ::::!:-.

Site No. 9NEW RIVER CHECK

New River Check is located within the lower end of the All American Canal. It is 4.5 miles downstreamof Central Main Check and 72 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located near the Mexican border 2miles west of Calexico. Cross roads are Highway 98 and the AAC. south 0.5 miles; TI7S R14E Section15. New River Spillway is co-located at this site.

At this site the AAC. crosses the New River through twin 15.5 ft. (4.7 m) diameter steel pipes. These dipbelow the grade of the AAC in the form of an inverted siphon. The siphons are mounted on piers withsufficient height to provide the area required to allow the maximum expected flow of the New River toflow beneath. Two radial gates, each able to pass approximately 8 cfs per tenth-foot of gate opening aremounted on the check. These gates are 16-1/2 ft. (5 m) wide. Both gates can be manually operated.

This structure has been automated to operate in upstream-level control. During emergencies the check canbe placed in downstream-flow control and the spillway will operate in upstream-level control; excessspills into the New River. Flow feedback is made using a pair of acoustic velocity meters one in eachsiphon.


Local operation is conducted by the New River Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

cvc(D~) 39 rrs^~- May 19.~9ggd>c\ 1002~u I 5_aato\FINA I._P 15_V S R DOC

¯ .::iVerification Summary Report

Site No. 10NEW RIVER SPILLWAY

There are four top seal radial gates, each able to pass 11 cfs (0.31 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening, this structure. These gates are 7-1/2 ft. (2.3 m) wide. This structure has been automated to operate in flowcontrol or upstream-level control. Normally the check is in upstream level control and the spillway is insupervisory control from Water Control. If the Water Control operator places the spillway in automatic,the spillway will discharge excesses to the New River.

During emergencies the check can be placed in downstream-flow control and the spillway will operate inupstream-level control, discharging excesses to the New River.

CVC(DE) 40 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\ 1002\pl 5_auto\FINAL_P 15_VSR

ii ==~ V.e~ifi.ca~ion_ . Summa.ry Report. ’

Site No. 11WISTARIA CHECK

Wistaria Check is located within the lower end of the All American Canal. It is 1.2 miles downstream ofNew River Check and 73.9 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located near the Mexican border 3 mileswest of Calexico. Cross Roads are Hammers at the AAC; T17S R14E Section 20.

There are three radial gates at this structure; each passes approximately 15 cfs (0.72 m3/s) per tenth-footgate opening. These gates are 10-1/2 ft. (3.2 m) wide and are in upstream level control.A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and ifnecessary operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the New River Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVCIDr) 41 FINAL - May 1999ggd> c :"., 1002\p 15_autoWINAL_P 15_VSR EK)C

--5::: !~e~ification SummaryReport

Site No. 12WESTSIDE MAIN TURNOUT

West Side Main Turn Out is located at the lower end of the All American Canal. It is 4.5 milesdownstream of Wistaria Check and 80.3 miles from the AAC Ileading. It is located near the Mexicanborder 10 miles west of Calexico. Cross roads are 0.5 miles south of Anza Road and Wormwood Roadintersection at the AAC.; T17S R13E Section 20.

There are two radial gates each able to pass approximately 20 cfs (0.57 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gateopening. These gates are 13 ft. (4 m) wide. The pond is used for storage and fluctuates between 94.20 ft.and 94.30 ft. This site has been automated to operate in downstream-flow control with upstream-leveloverride. Flow feedback is made using a rated drop downstream of the check; WSM Drop No. 1.

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and ifnecessary operate it by remote control. Local operation is conducted by the New River RunHydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by Water Control. Structure maintenance is made byWestern Division. Automatic Control System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit.In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc(D~) 42 FINAL. May 1999ggd>c \ 1002’,p 15_auto~INA L_P 15_ V S R. DO("

Site No. 13EAST HIGHLINE CHECK

East ttighline Check 1 is located approximately 1200 feet downstream of the EHL Turnout, near theMexican border, 11 miles east of Calexico. Go east on Itighway 98 to the EttL Canal sen’ice road, goNorth 0.1 miles. EHL Check 1 and EHL Power Plants are located here. T17S R16E Section 1.

This structure is fully automated in upstream level control. Control equipment resides in a pedestal-mounted cabinet on the west side of the structure. Emergency power is supplied via the generator at thecontrol house near the EttL Turnout. There are six electrically operated gates, each passing approximately12 cfs (0.34 m 3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening. A pedestal mounted PLC controls this structure.

The Drop No. 1 Run Hydrographer conducts local operation. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Western Division performs structure maintenance. Automatic Control System maintenance isperformed by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

cvc(o~.) 43 FINAL - May 1999

ggd>c\1002\pl5_auto\F|NAl.. PI5 VSRDOC

i.2i~-Verification Summary Report

Site No. 14EAST HIGHLINE POWER PLANT

East Highline Power Plant is located approximately 1200 feet downstream of EItL Turnout, near theMexican border, 11 miles east of Calexico. Go east on Highway 98 to the EHL Canal service road, goNorth 0.1 miles, EIIL Check 1 and EHL Power Plants are located here. T17S R16E Sectionl.

System Automation under Projcct 15 at the AAC Drop 1 Power Plant provides monitoring of flowcharacteristics through the hydroelectric plant to assist in flow control at EHL Turnout. Output data areupstream water elevation, downstream water elevation, wicket gate position, blade angle, and electricpower generation.

CVC(DE) 44 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c \ 1002\p 15 _auto\FINAL _.P 15 _VS R.

i . Verification Sumtnary Report. ’::

Site No. 15EAST HIGHLINE CHECK 11

East Highline Check 11 is located within the upper end of the EHL and is 7.1 miles (11.4 km) below No.1 Check. It is located south of the Whitlock Road and Nelson Road intersection 6 miles east of Holtville.This structure is fully automated in upstream level control. There are six electrically operated radial gates.These gates run approximately 12 cfs (0.34 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening. There is approximately two hour flow travel time from the EHL Turnout (T.O.).


CVC(DE) 45 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c. \ 1002~p 15 _auto\FINA L_P 15_V S R DOC

i.! i~Vgr._ificaiion: Summary Report

Site No. 16ORCHID CHECK

Orchid Check is located within the upper end of the EHL and is 16.7 miles (26.9 kin) downstream of theEHL T.O. It is located 1 mile north of the Keystone Road EHL Canal intersection, 12 miles southeast ofBrawley.

This structure is fully automated in upstream level control. Six slide gates discharge approximately 8 cfs(0.23 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening. Orchid Check has a total travel time of 4 hours from the headof the EHL.

This check is the first reach on the EHL Canal in which water can be stored. During low flows this pondcan be fluctuated from an elevation of 1009.00 ft. (307.5 m) to 1010.00 ft. (307.8 m) msl but at high it is held between 1009.00 ft. (307.5 m) and 1009.50 ft. (307.7 m) msl. When this pond is fluctuated becomes necessary to adjust the head gates of the first three laterals upstream of this check. Even thoughit is a small amount, it is helpful in the overall operation of the EItL Canal.


Local operation is conducted by the Orchid Check Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 4 6 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c ~.10()2~pl 5_auIo~FINAL_.P 15..VSRDOC

Site No. 17OAK CHECK

Oak Check is located within the upper end of the EtlL and is 20.9 miles (33.6 km) downstream of theEHL T.O.. It is located 1.5 miles north of the Highway 78 and EHL Canal intersection, 11 miles east ofBrawley.

This structure is fully automated in upstream level control. There arc six electrically operated radial gates.These gates run approximately 10 cfs (0.28 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening. There is approximately five hour riow travel time from the EHL T.O.


Local operation is conducted by the Orchid Check Run ttydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC~DE) 47 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\ 1002’,p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VSR. DOC

Site No. 18MYRTLE CHECK

Myrtle Check is located within the upper end of the EHL and is 24.1 miles below the EHL T.O. It islocated at the intersection of Chalupnik Road and the EHL Canal 11 miles northeast of Brawley.

This structure is fully automated in upstream level control. There are five electrically operated slide gates.These gates pass approximately 12 cfs (0.34 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening. There is approximatelya six hour flow travel time from the EHL T.O.

Like at the Orchid Check this pond can be used to store a small amount of water. During low flows pondelevations can be varied from 996.00 ft. (303.6 m) to 997.00 ft. (303.9 m) but at high flows it is between 996.00 ft. (303.6 m) and 996.50 ft. (303.7 m). When this pond is fluctuated it becomes necessaryto adjust the head gates of the first three laterals upstream of the check.


Local operation is conducted by the Orchid Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvcwE) 48 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\1002\pl 5_autokFINAL_P 15_VSR.DOC

¯ " ~.I(erification :Summa_D’ Report ..:

Site No. 19STANDARD CHECK

Standard Check is located within the middle portion of the EItL and is 27.3 miles (43.9 km) below thcEHL T.O. It is located at the intersection of Titsworth Road and the EItL Canal 13 miles northeast ofBrawley.

This structure is fully automated in upstream levcl control. There are five electrically operated slide gates.These gates pass approximately 8 cfs (0.23 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening. There is approximately seven hour flow travel time from the EHL T.O.


Local operation is conducted by the Orchid Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 49 FINAL - May 1999ggd>¢.\1002~p 15_auto\FINA L_ P 15_VS R. DOC

~.!:iVe~ification Su_~tnary Report ..

Site No. 20SINGH RESERVOIR

Kakoo Singh Reservoir is located near the midpoint of the EHL Canal. It is located 11.5 miles east ofCalipatria. Cross roads are Albright Road and EHL Canal; T12S R15E Section 25. Adjacent structures areVail Supply T.O. and Nectarine Check.

Singh Resewoir stores water received from the EHL Canal and diverts it by gravity into the Vail SupplyCanal. Flow into the reservoir is controlled and measured by an overshot gate. The inlet gate isautomatically operated to maintain upstream level control at the Nectarine Check pond. A six-foot-wideslide gate diverts water into the Vail Supply Canal; a hydraulic ram drives the gate.

General features of the reservoir include:¯ Area 32.00 Acres

¯ Capacity 323.00 Acre Feet¯ Max. Depth 11.00 Feet¯ Water Surface Elev. 986.40 Feet (at capacity)

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System andif necessary operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Nectarine Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 50FINAL - May 1999

ggd~¢ \ 1002",p 15_auto\FINA L_P 15_’v’S R. DOC

Summary Report.:

Site No. 21VAIL SUPPLY TURNOUT

Vail Supply T.O. is located near the midpoint of the EHL Canal. It is located 11.5 miles east of Calipatria.Cross roads are Albright Road and EIIL Canal; T12S R15E Section 25. Adjacent structures are SinghReservoir and Nectarine Check.

Three six-foot-wide radial gates are operated at this structure in automatic flow control with feedbackfrom Drop 0. Flow is supplemented from the Singh Reservoir by gravity into the Vail Supply Canalupstream of Drop 2. The combined flows from the Vail Supply T.O. and the reservoir make up the VailSupply Canal order.

A modular building houses a standby generator and the control equipment. A PLC operates the siteequipment. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and ifnecessa/y operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Nectarine Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 5 1r~y,xt.- May 1999

ggd>c’\1002\pl 5_auto~,FINAI._P 15_VSR.DOC

~---:iV.:.eri3qcqfion Summary.Report :..;: "

Site No. 22NECTARINE A CHECK

Nectarine A Check is located 1 mile west of highway 115 on Albright road, about 4 miles southeast ofCalipatria.

The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two bays have manually operated wooden slide gates; bothwith easy lifts. The third bay has an automated overshot gate. A PLC operates the overshot gate inupstream level control. Two solar panels charge a pair or batteries. These supply electric power to thegate motor, gate position sensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allowsWater Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessary operate it by remote control.

Upstream level setpoint is 3.25 Normally the Hydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25 cfsof the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream level aschanges come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate.

Local operation is conducted by the Vail Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE)52

fINAL - May 1999ggd>¢ "., 100 2’,p 15_auIo\FINAL_P 15_VSR.DOC

~:. i.:i~ Verifi.c_a~ion Summary Report

Site No. 23Z LATERAL HEADING

Z Lateral Heading is located at the end of the EHL Canal adjacent to the Galleano Reservoir.One four-foot-wide aluminum slide gate is operated at this site. The site has been automated to operate inflow control with feedback from a broadcrested weir.

CVC(DE) 5 3 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c \ 1002\p 15_auto~,FINAL_P 15_VS R. DOC

~@Verification Summary Report

Site No. 24NILAND EXTENSION HEADING

Niland Extension Heading is located at the end of the EHL Canal adjacent to the Galleano Reser~’oir.One six-foot-wide aluminum slide gate is operated at this site. The site has been automated to operate inflow control with feedback from a broadcrested weir. The site is part of the System Wide MonitoringProgram.

CVC(DE) 54 FINAL - May 1999gg6>c:\1002kp 15_auto",FINAL_PI 5_VSR

Site No. 25REDWOOD TURNOUT

Redwood Turnout is located 1/4 mile east of the Meloland Road and Grumbles Road intersection, or thesoutheast comer of the Sperber Reservoir.

Two six-foot-wide aluminum slide gates are operated at this site. The site has been automated to operatein flow control with feedback from a broad crested weir. Upstream level is maintained by a hydraulicautomatic gate that serves as an inlet to the Sperber Reservoir.

A modular pedestal houses the control equipment. There is a link to the control house located at the southwest comer.

CVC(DE) 5 5FINAL - May 1999

ggd>c \ 1002~p 15_ auto"~ZINAL_P 15. VS R DOC

Site No. 26ROSE TURNOUT

Rose Turnout is located at the Meloland Road and Grumbles Road interscction, or the southwest corner ofthe Sperber Resen’oir.

Two six-foot-wide aluminum slide gates are operated at this site. Gate actuation is made using ahydraulic-fluid-pump system. The site has been automated to operate in flow control with feedback froma broad crested weir. Water can also be released from the reservoir through a 72-inch (1.82 m) electric-radial gate into the Rose Canal that works in conjunction with the Rose Turnout gates. Upstream level inthe Rose Pond is maintained by a hydraulic automatic gate that serves as an inlet to the Sperber Reservoir.

CVC(DE) 5 6 FINAL - May 1999ggd.>c \ 1002\p 15. auto\FINA L_P 15_VS R.

Site No. 27RUBBER TURNOUT

Rubber Turnout is located at the Meloland Road and Grumbles Road intersection, or the southwest cornerof the Sperber Reservoir.

One six-foot-widc aluminum slide gate is operated at this site. Gate actuation is made using a hydraulic-fluid-pump system The site has been automated to operate in flow control with feedback from a broadcrested weir. Water can also be released from the reservoir through a 72-inch (1.82 m) electric-radial gateinto the Rubber Canal that works in conjunction with the Rubber Turnout gates. Upstream level in theRose Pond is maintained by a hydraulic automatic gate that serves as an inlet to the Sperber Reservoir.

CVC(DE) 5 7 F~’~ - May 1999

8gd>c.\100~\pl5 auto\FINAl PI5 VSR.DOC

:.~roject 7 5 - System ,4 Utomatian.ii:-Verification SummaryReport.

Site No. 28DAHLIA CHECK

Dahlia Check is located within the upper end of the Central Main Canal 3.5 miles southwest of El Centro.It is 6 miles (9.7 kin) downstream of the Double Weir power plant and 9 miles (14.5 km) from the head the CM. Cross roads are Wahl Road south on C.M. Canal; T16S R13E Section 35. Dahlia Spill,Eucalyptus Canal tteading and Elder Canal Heading are co-located at this site.

There are three electrically operated radial gates. Gate discharge is approximately 10 cfs (0.28m3/s) pertenth foot of gate opening. This structure is fully automated in upstream level control. Emergencydischarges are made through the spill structure. If this occurs the spill structure trips into upstream levelcontrol. The check automatically trips into downstream flow control with flow feedback from thedownstream drop structure.


Local operation is conducted by the Dahlia Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 5 8FINAL - May 1999

ggd>c\ l(X12 ,p 15 _auto~flNA L _P 15 _VS R. DOC

Site No. 29NEWSlDE CHECK

The Newside Check is 7.5 miles dov, aastream of Dahlia Check and 16 miles (25.7 kin) from the head the CM Canal. Flow time between the Dahlia and Newside Checks is two hours. The Newside Check hasa total flow time of four hours from the head of the CM. Site location is intersection of Aten Road andAustin Road. The Dandelion and Newside lateral head gates are located at this check.

There are four 6-foot side gates installed at this check; one hydraulic-automatic radial gate and threehydraulic-ram slide gates are installed at this site. Remote manual control is available through theSCADA system. A metal building houses the old Quindar based system. This has been integrated to theSCADA system with a PLC and digital radio.

Local operation is conducted by the No. 4 Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc(o.) 59 VlNAL-May 1999ggd>c \ 1002"~p 15_.auto\FIN AL _. P 15 _VS R DOC

=System Automation

i:.(:~Verifieation Summary Report..-.

Site No. 30FUDGE RESERVOIR - NO. 4 HEADING

No. 4 Heading is located near the end of the Central Main Canal 8 miles (12.9 kin) downstream of theNewside Check and 24 miles (38.6 km) from the CM T.O. The flow time bem:een these checks is threehours. Total flow time from the head of the CM is seven hours. There are three drop structures betweenthe Newside Check and No. 4 Heading Check. It is located south of the Austin Road and Highway 86intersection 2.5 miles southwest of Brawley. No. 4 Heading and Lavender Heading are located adjacent tothe reservoir.

Three radial gates are operated at this facility. One gate is a hydraulic automatic and serves as the inletgate to Oscar Fudge Reservoir, but it can also be used as a check gate. The other two are electric radialcheck gates. Two hydraulic-ram gates are located behind the hydraulic-automatic gate within the bay.

One gate leads into the reservoir. The other controls flow into the siphon for downstream dischargecontrol. When the reservoir inlet gate is opened and the siphon gate is closed water flows into thereservoir. When the siphon gate is opened and the reservoir inlet gate is closed this automatic radial gatefunctions as a check gate.

Remote monitoring and control is made using the SCADA system. The slide gates cannot be operated byremote control and must be operated at the site. Local operation is conducted by the No. 4 RunHydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by Water Control. Structure maintenance is made byWestern Division. Automatic Control System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit.In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 60 FINAl. - May 1999ggd:,c:\1002"~p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VS

~i.~-_Project.. 15 -SystethA utotnation "::~--_--.VerifiCation Summary ~Report ...

Site No. 31FERN CHECK

Fern Check is the first control structure on the West Side Main Canal. It is 6.9 miles (11.1 kan) fromthe WSM Canal T.O. The flow time is two hours from the head of the WSM Canal. Take Drew Roadsouth of I8 and turn west on Wixom Road until it ends then south to the WSM Canal. Fern Headingand Fern Side Main are located adjacent to this structure.

There are four radial gates of which three are remotely controlled while the fourth is a hydraulic-automatic gate. These gates pass approximately 12 cfs (0.34 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening.Remote manual control is available through the SCADA system. A metal building houses the oldQuindar based system. This has been integrated to the SCADA system with a PLC and digital radio.

Local operation is conducted by the Fern Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenanceis made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 61 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c\ I O02\p 15. auto"aClNAL_P 15_VS R. DO("

Site No. 32FOXGLOVE CHECK

Foxglove Check is two and one-half miles (4 km) downstream from the Fern Check and nine miles (15.3kin) from the head of the WSM. The flow time between these checks is one-half hours with a flow time oftwo and one half hours from the head of the WSM. Foxglove Check is four miles southwest of Seeley.Take Evan ttewes Highway to Westside Road south to Vaugh Road then west to Hyde Road to the WSMCanal. Foxglove T.O. is located adjacent to this structure.

There is a hydraulic-automatic gate located at this structure in addition to three remotely controlled radialgates. The gates will discharge approximately 15 cfs. (0.42 m3/s).Remote manual control is available through the SCADA system. A metal building houses the old Quindarbased system. This has been integrated to the SCADA system with a PLC and digital radio.

Local operation is conducted by the Fern Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc(oE) 62 FINAL - May 1999ggd>¢.\1002~.p 15_autokFINAL_ P 15_VS R DOC

?.i~-~V...e_.~ific..ation Summary R_eport .:

Site No. 33FILLAREE CHECK

Fillaree Check is eight and one-half miles (13.7 km) downstream from the Foxglove Check and 18 miles(29.8 km) from the head of the WSM. The flow time between these checks is three and one-half hourswith a flow time of six hours from the head of the WSM. Take Westmoreland Road north of I8 to theWSM Canal. Fillaree T.O., Flax T.O. and Dixie Spill are located adjacent to this structure. There is ahydraulic-automatic gate located at this structure and also four remotely controlled radial gates. Thesegates will discharge approximately 10 cfs (0.28 m3/s) per tenth-foot of gate opening.

Remote manual control is available through the SCADA system. A metal building houses the old Quindarbased system. This has been integrated to the SCADA system with a PLC and digital radio. Localoperation is conducted by the Fern Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by Water Control.Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance is made bythe Water SCADA Suppo~-t Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.


ggd>c \ 1002~.p 15_autoWINAL_ P 15 _ V S R. DOC

Site No. 34SHELDON RESERVOIR - NO. 8 HEADING

No. 8 Heading is located near midpoint of the West Side Main Canal. It is 1.5 miles (12.1 km) from theFillaree Check and 25.5 miles (15.8 kin) from the WSM Canal T.O. "Ilae flow time between these checksis two hours and eight hours from the head of the WSM. It is located 1/4 mile west of the Edgar Roadand Forrester Road intersection, seven miles east of Imperial. Sheldon Reservoir, Thistle Iteading andSumac Heading are located adjacent to this structure.

Three hydraulic-ram slide gates along with a hydraulic-automatic radial gate control flow at this s~ructure.The hydraulic-automatic is used as the inlet gate to the Sheldon Reservoir, but it can also be used as acheck gate. Two hydraulic-ram gates are located behind the hydraulic-automatic gate within the bay.

One gate leads into the reservoir. "lhe other controls flow into the siphon for downstream dischargecontrol. When the reselwoir inlet gate is opened and the siphon gate is closed water flows into thereservoir. Then the siphon gate is opened and the reservoir inlet gate is closed this automatic radial gatefunctions as a check gate. The slide gates cannot be operated by remote control and must be operated atthe site. Remote manual control is available through the SCADA system.

Local operation is conducted by the Fern Run tIydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc¢~E) 64 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\ 1002~p 15__auto~,FINA 1 ._P 15_VSR. DOC

Site No. 35SOUTH ALAMO TURNOUT

South Alamo Canal Turn Out is located within the lower end of the All American Canal. It is 0.2 milesupstream of Drop No. 5 Power Plant and 65.9 miles from the AAC Heading. It is located near theMexican border 3.5 miles east of Calexico. Cross Roads are SE comer of Bowker Road and ttighway 98then east along the AAC past Drop No. 5; T17S R15E Section 13. There are two radial gates at the headof the CM T.O., each gate discharges approximately 10 cfs per tenth-foot of gate opening. Downstreamflow control is maintained by the automatic equipment with flow feedback from an Acoustic VelocityMeter located 500 feet downstream from the heading.

A modular pedestal houses the control equipment. A PLC operates the site in flow control. Radiocommunication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessary operateit by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Allison Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(r~E) 65 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\1002kp 15_autokFINAL_P 15_VSR. DOC

Site No. 36ROSITAS TURNOUT

Rositas T.O. is located at the east end of Norrish Road on the EIIL Canal. It is 2 miles downstream ofEIIL Check 11 and 5 miles east of Holtville. This structure is the heading for the Rositas Supply Canal.Three six-foot-wide radial gates are operated at this site. The site has been automated to operate in flowcontrol with feedback from a broadcrested weir; the weir is 7500 feet downstream of the turnout. Ametering bridge is used to maintain the weir rating. The site is part of the System Wide MonitoringProject.

A modular pedestal houses the control equipment. One PLC operates the radial gates and monitors theweir. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and ifnecessary operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Check 11 Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

cvc~oE) 66 FIN^I.- May 1999ggd>¢:\1002\pl 5_au to~.,FINAL_P 15_VSR DOC

!i.i:~-Veri~cation Summary Report :.-= =-

Site No. 37ORANGE HEADING

Orange Heading is located 1.5 miles downstream of the Orchid Check on the east bank of the EHL Canal.It is located 13 miles from Brawley and 1.5 miles south of the Highway 78 and the EItL Canalintersection. One six-foot-wide aluminum slide gate is operated at this site. The site has been automatedto operate in flow control with feedback fiom a broadcrested weir. Solar cells power the system withbattery backup.

A modular pedestal houses the control equipment. One PLC operates the slide gate and monitors the weirlevel. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and, ifnecessary, operate it by remote control. Local operation is conducted by the Orchid Run Hydrographer.Remote operation is conducted by Water Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division.Automatic Control System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case ofemergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.


gg~’,c \ 1002’~p 15_aut o"~FINA L_P 15_VS R. DOC

Site No. 38ALDER TURNOUT

Two six-foot-wide aluminum slide gates are operated at the Alder Turnout structure. The structure hasbeen automated to operate in flow control with feedback from a broad crested weir. Upstream level ismaintained by a hydraulic automatic gate located on the south side of the CM Canal.

cvc(oE) 68 FINAL - May I999ggd>c \ 1002\p 15_auto\grNAL_P 15_VS R

:. ~-Project 15 - System Automation=.=.5~:V.. eri.fication Summary Report...

Site No. 39ACACIA TURNOUT

Acacia Turnout is located at the end of the Briar Canal adjacent to the Alder Turnout and north bank ofthe CM Canal. It is 0.7 miles downstream of CM Check/Turn Out. It is located northeast of Calexico atthe intersection of Cole Road and Bowker Road.

Three six-foot-wide aluminum slide gates are operated at the Acacia Turnout site. The site has beenautomated to operate in flow control with feedback from a broad crested weir. Upstream level ismaintained by a hydraulic automatic gate located on the south side of the CM Canal.

A modular pedestal houses the control equipment. One PLC operates the slide gates and monitors theweir levels in both Acacia and Alder Turnouts. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitorthe site via the SCADA System and, if necessary, operate it by remote control.

Local operation is conducted by the Dahlia Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 69 FINAL - May 1999ggd>cA 1002",p 15_auto~INAl._P 15_ VSR DOC

Site No. 40TRIFOLIUM 13 CHECK

Trifolium Lateral 13 Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is 2.2 miles downstreamof Trifolium 10 Check and 42.0 miles from the AAC Heading. The flow time between these two checks is45 minutes and 13.6 hours fiom the head of the WSM T.O. It is located 4 miles west of Westmoreland.Take tIighway 86 south on Buck Road to the WSM Canal.

At this check there are three 72-inch (1.82 m) automated drop-leaf gates. Upstream level control maintained by the control system.

A modular pedestal houses the control equipment. A PLC operates the site in upstreana level control.Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessaryoperate it by remote control. The site operates with utility power and has battery backup.

Local operation is conducted by the No. 8 tleading Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control Systemmaintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water ControlDispatcher.

CVC(DE) 70 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c. \ 1002\p 15_auto\Fl NA L_ P 15_VS R

Site No. 41EAST HIGHLINE E CHECK

East Highline E Check is located at the lower end of the EI./L Canal. It is located at the Young Road andEHL Canal intersection, 7.5 miles east of Calipatria. The site has two main structures. Originally onestructure with three wooden-slide gates and three weir-board gates was operated. A second single-baystructure was installed perpendicular to the EHL channel with an automated overshot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control at a set point of 880.70. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.

Local operation is conducted by the Nectarine Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. AutomaticControl System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contactthe Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc(Dv.) 71 FINAL - May 1999

ggd>c:\ 1002\p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VS R

Site No. 42EAST HIGHLINE H CHECK

East Highline tt Check is located at the lower end of the EtIL Canal. It is located at the MontgomeryRoad and EHL Canal intersection, 7.5 miles northeast of Calipatria. The site has two main structures.Originally one structure with three wooden-slide gates was operated; two as undershot and one asoverpour. A second single-bay structure was installed perpendicular to the EttL channel with anautomated overshot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control at a setpoint of 877.30. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.

Local operation is conducted by the Flowing Wells Run IIydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. AutomaticControl System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contactthe Water Control Dispatcher.

cvc(~) 72 FINAL - May 1999gg~t’>c\1002\pl 5_auto\FINAL_P 15. VSR.DOC

Site No. 43EAST HIGHLINE J CHECK

East Highline J Check is located at the lower end of the EtlL Canal. It is located at the Hoober Road andEItL Canal intersection, 7.5 miles northeast of Calipatria. The site has two main structures. Originally onestructure with four wooden-slide gates was operated; two as undershot and two as overpour. A secondsingle-bay structure was installed perpendicular to the EHL channel with an automated overshot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level con~ol at a setpoint of 873.60. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.

Local operation is conducted by the Flowering Wells Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conductedby Water Control. Structure maintenance is made by North End DivisionfProject Management. AutomaticControl System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contactthe Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 73 FINAL - May 1999ggd>¢’\1002\p 15_.auto~,FINAL_P 15 VSR.DOC

Site No. 44EAST HIGHLINE K CHECK

East Highline K Check is located at the lower end of the EHL Canal. It is located at the Sinclair Road andEHL Canal intersection, 8 miles northeast of Calipatria. The site has two main structures. Originally onestructure with three wooden-slide gates was operated; two as undershot and one as overpour. A secondsingle-bay structure was installed perpendicular to the EHL channel with an automated overshot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level con~ol at a setpoint of 871.50. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.

Local operation is conducted by the Flowing Wells Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. AutomaticControl System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contactthe Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 74 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\ 1002\p 15_auto\FINAL_.P 15_VSR.

5i -:-V.._er.ificationSumma.ry.Report. .

Site No. 45FLOWING WELLS CHECK

Flowing Wells is a check located at the lower exad of the EHL Canal. It is located 0.25 mile north of thePound Road and EHL Canal intersection, 3 miles southeast of Niland.

Originally one structure with three wooden-slide gates was operated; they were operated as overpourgates. This check is located 1.4 miles below N Check and 9.4 miles from Nectarine Check. "Iqaere is a 5hour travel period from Nectarine Check.

An automated overshot gate was installed on the west bay. A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstreamlevel control at a setpoint of 861.20 Two solar panels charge a pair of batteries. These supply electricpower to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC. Radiocommunication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.


CVC(DE) 75 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c \1 O0 2’~o 15_auto~FINAL_P 15_VSR DOC

i~:~.v.e_r_ifiC~fion .Summary Report


East tlighline Check 37 is located at the lower end of the EHL Canal. It is located south of the NoffsingerRoad and EHL Canal intersection, 2 miles east of Niland. The site has two six-foot-wide bays. One bayhas a manually operated wooden slide gate. The other bay was retrofitted with an automated overshotgate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control at a setpoint of 855.95. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.


CVC(DE} 76 FINAL - May 1999~g£:’c \1002\p 15_autokFINAL_P 15_VSR DOC


East Highline Check 46 is located at the lower end of the EHL Canal. It is located southeast of theWilkins Road and EHL Canal intersection, 2 miles northeast of Niland. The site has two structures.Originally one ten-foot-wide bay with a single wooden slide gate was operatcd; the gate has dual gatelifts. A second single-bay structure was installed perpendicular to the EHL channel with an autotnatedovershot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control at a set-point of 842.20. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.

Local operation is conducted by the Flowing Wells Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted byWater Control. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. AutomaticControl System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contactthe Water Control Dispatcher

CVC(DE) 77 FINAL - May 1999gg~"c.\1002\p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VS R

:-ProjeCt:.~ S~- syStem Autbmati6-~i l.iiVerification Summa_ry Report...

Site No. 48EAST HIGHLINE W CHECK

East Highline W Check is located at the lower end of the EItL Canal. It is located at the Beach Road andEI:IL Canal intersection, 2 miles north of Niland. Originally one structure with two wooden-slide gateswas operated; both as undershot. An automated overshot gate was installed on the east bay.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control at a setpoint of 849.10. Two solar panelscharge a pair of batteries. "lqaese supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to collect data from the site.Local operation is conducted by the Flowing Wells Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conductedby Water Control. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. AutomaticControl System maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contactthe Water Control Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 78FINAL - May 1999

ggd>¢:\ 1002\p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_VSR. DOC

Site No. 49TAMARACK CHECK

Tamarack Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 3 miles southeast ofWestmoreland, on Kalin Road and 0.5 miles north of Fredericks Road. The check maintains upstreamlevel for the Tamarack Heading. The structure has four six-foot-wide bays. Three of the bays havemanually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. The fourth bay has an automated overshotgate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotelyby the Water Control Operator.

Two solar panels charge a pair or batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate positionsensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor fordata and control the site.

Local operation is conducted by the Thorn Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. Automatic ControlSystem maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the WaterControl Dispatcher.

CVC(OE) 79 FINAL - May 1999ggd>c:\ 1002\p 15_auto\FINAL_P 15_ VSR.DOC

ii.!ii!~7~ification.Summary Report...-.~.:-~


Trifolium 1 Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 2.75 miles southeast ofWestmoreland, 0.25 miles east of the WSM Canal and Highway 86 intersection. The check maintainsupstream level for the Trifolium Lateral 1 IIeading.

The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two of the bays have manually operated grade-board gates;one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automated overshot gate that operates in either irrigate or nonirrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotely by the Water Control Operator.

Upstream level setpoint is 866.60. Normally the Hydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate.



CVC(DE)80

FINAt, - May 1999ggd>c:\ 1002\p 15_ autokFINAL_P 15_VS R.DOC

. :!-::Verification Summary Report.. . .


Trifolium Lateral 2 Check is located within the lower end of the West Side Main Canal. It is 0.6 miledowns,earn ofTrifolium 1 Check and 35.8 miles from the WSM Heading. It is located on the west sideof the Highway 86 and WSM Canal intersection between Brawley and Westmoreland. The structure hastbur six-foot-wide bays. Two bays have manually operated wooden slide gates with lifting mechanisms.The third bay has a manually operated easy-lift mechanism, and the fourth bay has an automated overshotgate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control. Two solar panels charge a pair of batteries.These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC.Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessaryoperate it by remote control.

Upstream level setpoint is 865.50. Flow time is ten minutes from Trifolium 1 Check and 11.5 hours fromthe WSM Heading. Normally the Hydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25 cfs of theexpected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream level aschanges come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate. Local operation isconducted by the Thorn Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by Water Control. Structuremaintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance is made by WaterSCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

gg6:’c:\1002~,p I 5_amo\FINAL_I~ I 5_’VSR.DOC


Trifolium Lateral 4 Check is located within the lower end of the West Side Main Canal. It is 0.6 miledownstream ofTrifolium 1 Check and 35.8 miles from the WSM Heading. It is located 2 miles southeastof Westmoreland.

The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. One bay has a manually operated wooden slide gate fitted witha lifting dog mechanism, the second has an easy lift. The third bay has an automated overshot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control. Two solar panels charge a pair of batteries.These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC.Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessaryoperate it by remote control. Upstream level setpoint is 863.00. Normally the Hydrographer presets themanual gates to pass all but 25 cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulateflow to maintain upstream level as changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by theovershot gate.

Local operation is conducted by the Thorn Run Hydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by Western Division. Automatic Control System maintenance ismade by Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the Water Control Dispatcher.

eve~DE) 82 FINAl. - May 1999ggd.>c \ 1002\p 15_auto\FI NA L_P 15 _VS R


Trifolium Lateral 5 Check is located within the lower end of the West Side Main Canal. It is located onthe west side of the Forrester Road and WSM Canal intersection, 1 mile south of Westmoreland.

The structure has two six-foot-wide bays. One bay has a manually operated wooden slide gate with aneasy lift. The second bay has an automated overshot gate. A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstreamlevel control. Two solar panels charge a pair or batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor,gate position sensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Controlto monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessary operate it by remote control.



c~.c(o~) 83 FINAL - May 1999ggd.>¢ ’d 002’,,p | 5_autokFINAL_P | 5_VSR DOC


Trifolium Lateral 6 Check is located within the lower end of the West Side Main Canal. It is located 0.5mile west side of Forrester Road, about 1 mile south of Westmoreland.

]’he structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two bays have manually operatedwooden slide gates; one with a lifting dog and one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automatedovershot gate.

A PLC operates the overshot gate in upstream level control. Two solar panels charge a pair or batteries.These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstream level sensor, radio and PLC.Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor the site via the SCADA System and if necessaryoperate it by remote control.

Upstream level setpoint is 859.50 Normally the IIydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate.


CVC(DE) 84 FINAL - May 1999ggd.:’c’\ 1002’~p 15_auto~qqA L .. p 15_V S RDOC


Trifolium 9 Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 2 miles southwest ofWestmoreland, 0.5 miles west of the Lack Road and WSM Canal intersection. The check maintainsupstream level fbr the Trifolium Lateral 9 Heading.

The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two of the bays have manually operated grade-board gates;one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automated overshot gate that operates in either irrigate or nonirrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotely by the Water Control Operator.

Upstream level setpoint is 856.40. Nom~ally the Hydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate.



CVC(DE)85

FINAL - May 1999ggd~>c’\ 1002\p 15_auto\FI NA L_P 15 _ VS R


Trifolium 10 Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 2.5 miles southwestof Westmoreland near the ttoskins Road and Steiner Road intersection. The check maintains upstreamlevel for the Trifolium Lateral 10 Heading. The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two of the bayshave manually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automated overshotgate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotelyby the Water Control Operator.

Upstream level setpoint is 854.50. Normally the Hydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate. Two solar panelscharge a pair or batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor for data and controlthe site.


cvc(t~r) 86 ~’~ - ~y ~ggd>c \ 1002\p 15 ..autokFINA L_P 15_VS R. DOC

" ~ iVerification Summary Report .


Trifolium 14 Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 4 miles west ofWestmoreland, 0.25 mile south of the Garvey Road and Highway 86 intersection. The check maintainsupstream level for the Trifolium Lateral 14 IIeading. The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two ofthe bays have manually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. ]’he third bay has an automatedovershot gate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selcctable by the local zanjero orremotely by the Water Control Operator.



CVC(DE)87

FINAL - May 1999ggd>c \ 1002kp 15_autoWl NA I._ P 15_VS R. DOC


Trifolium 16 Check is located within the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 5 miles west ofWestmoreland, 0.5 mile northwest of the Garvey Road and Highway 86 intersection. The check maintainsupstream level for the Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading.

The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two of the bays have manually operated grade-board gates;one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automated overshot gate that operates in either irrigate or nonirrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotely by the Watcr Control Operator.

Upstream level sctpoint is 843.90. Normally the Hydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate.

CVC(DE) 88FINAL -/’,lay 1999

ggd>c’\l (~32’,p 15_autokFINAL_P I 5_V’SR DOC

Summary Report.

Site No. 59WESTSIDE MAIN 60 CHECK

Westside Main 60 Check is located within the middle portion of the WSM Canal. It is located 1.5 mileswest of Brawley, at the Cady Road and Kalin Road intersection. The check maintains upstream level forthe various deliveries including WSM Delivery 60. The structure has four six-foot-wide bays. Three ofthe bays have manually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automatedovershot gate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero orremotely by the Water Control Operator.



Local operation is conducted by the Thorn Run Hydrog-rapher. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. Automatic ControlSystem maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the WaterControl Dispatcher.

ggd>¢ ’,10~2\p 15_autokFINAL_P 15_VS R. DOC

:.:-=.Verification~Summary Reportii::.:i--.~: ...... i


Westside Main 65 Check is located within the middle portion of the WSM Canal. It is located 1.5 mileswest of Brawley, at the Fredericks Road and Kalin Road intersection. The check maintains upstream levelfor the WSM Delivery 65. The structure has 2 bays. One of the bays has manually operated grade-boardwith an easy lift. The second bay has an automated overshot gate that operates in either irrigate or nonirrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotely by the Water Control Operator.



cvc(Dv.) 90 FINAL - May 1999ggd> c \ I 0~32’~p 15_auIoWINAL_P 15 _VSR. DOC

E.=:.V. d_rification Sutnma.ry Report.


Westside Main 67 Check is located within the middle portion part of the WSM Canal. It is located 3 milessoutheast of Westmoreland, 0.25 miles west of Kalin Road and WSM Canal intersection. The checkmaintains upstream level for Deliveries 67 and 66. The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two of thebays have manually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automatedovershot gate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero orremotely by the Water Control Operator.

Upstream level setpoint is 871.50. Normally the tlydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate. Two solar panelscharge a pair or batteries. Thesc supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor for data and controlthe site.

Local operation is conducted by the Thorn Run ttydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. Automatic ControlSystem maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the WaterControl Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 91 FINAL - May 1999ggd’.’c \ IOO2~.p 15_autoWINAL_P 15_VSR DO(7


Westside Main 93 Check is located near the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 4 miles west ofWestmoreland, 0.25 miles northwest of the Garvey Road and Buck Road intersection. The checkmaintains upstream level for Deliveries 93 and 92. The structure has three six-foot-wide bays. Two of thebays have manually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automatedovershot gate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero orremotely by the Water Control Operator.

Upstream level setpoint is 848.90. Normally the ttydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstream levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate. Two solar panelscharge a pair or batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor for data and controlthe site.

Local operation is conducted by the Thorn Run tlydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. Automatic ControlSystem maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the WaterControl Dispatcher.

CVC(DE) 92 FINAl, - May 1999ggd>c:\1002~pl 5_auto\FINAL_P 15_VSR DOC


Westside Main 99 Check is located near the lower end of the WSM Canal. It is located 4 miles west ofWestmoreland, at the Garvey Road and Bannister Road intersection, adjacent to Highway 86. ]’he checkmaintains upstream level for Delivery 99. The structure has three six-foot-wide bays, Two of the bayshave manually operated grade-board gates; one with an easy lift. The third bay has an automated overshotgate that operates in either irrigate or non irrigate mode. This is selectable by the local zanjero or remotelyby the Water Control Operator.

Upstream level setpoint is 841.50. Normally the Ilydrographer presets the manual gates to pass all but 25cfs of the expected flow. This allows the overshot gate room to modulate flow to maintain upstreana levelas changes come in during the day. Up to 80 cfs can be handled by the overshot gate. Two solar panelscharge a pair or batteries. These supply electric power to the gate motor, gate position sensor, upstreamlevel sensor, radio and PLC. Radio communication allows Water Control to monitor for data and controlthe site.

Local operation is conducted by the Thorn Run Itydrographer. Remote operation is conducted by WaterControl. Structure maintenance is made by North End Division/Project Management. Automatic ControlSystem maintenance is made by the Water SCADA Support Unit. In case of emergency contact the WaterControl Dispatcher.

CVCID~~ 93ggd>c. \ I O0 2\p 15_auto~ INAL_P 15 ._VS R DOC

F|NAL - MAY 1999

APPENDIX BSYSTEM AUTOMATION SUPPORTING STUDY PLANS

Note: The data contained in this appendix is reproduced in text only and does not contain tables andfigures from the original documents.

CVC(DE) 94 FINAL - MAY I~9

ggd>c \ 1002~p l 5_~.uto\.Fl N &L_P 15_VSR DOC

:..: Project 15 ::.System :4utomatwt ̄ "

Study #1Correlation of Lateral Spillage With

Steadiness and Accuracy of Lateral Heading Flows

Study Purpose

Automation of IID’s distribution system in itself probably does not result in water savings. Itowever, systemautomation is expected to result in increased accuracy (A), steadiness (S), and responsiveness (R) in deliveries from Water Control to dwisions and from divisions to farms. To the extent that inaccuracy,unsteadiness, and unresponsiveness result in water losses under existing operations, System Automation canbe expected to save water.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether and how lateral spillage losses are correlated with theaccuracy and steadiness of deliveries to lateral headings. Ifa correlation can be established it may be possibleto approach veritication indirectly by inferring water conservation from measured changes in accuracy andsteadiness of lateral heading flows between pre- and post-project conditions.

Analytical Approach

The uncertainty involved in conducting a study of this type makes it practically impossible to map out inadvance all of the tasks that should be conducted and exactly what analytical procedures should be used.Therefore, it is advisable to proceed in a phased manner to allow opportunity for course correction and avoidwasted eflbrt.

"l‘he following study task outline represents the procedure wherein theories would be developed and tested toprovide direction for the next phase. "Ihe First Phase involves generating alternative theories that explainhow lateral spillage losses might be related to steadiness and accuracy of lateral heading deliveries.Preliminary analyses will be conducted using a subset of the screened data identified in Task 2 to testdifferent theories in search of valid and useful ones. ]he analytical procedures to be used in the second phasewill be adapted based on the findings of this activity.

The Second Phase of the study would involve revisiting Tasks 3 through 8 described in the outline, but stillnot necessarily using the complete data set. Instead, the tasks would be conducted using a subset of theavailable data to test and adapt analytical procedures. Successive iterations of the study would concentrate onexpanding data coverage and fine-tuning procedures.

At the conclusion of each pass through the tasks, an assessment would be made to determine whether thestudy had adequately achieved its objectives or another iteration was warranted.

Available Data

Lateral spillage data are available from several sources, including:

The ongoing lateral spill study conducted by the Hydrography Unit; this study covers 27randomly selected laterals

CVC0,E~ 95 FINAL - MAY 1999ggd:’c \ 1002 ~p 15._aut o",FI N A L_ P 15._VS R. DOC

~!:...P.. .roject ! 5....~ System A uto_m_ a~ot.t...=_.-.)iiii~e_r_i~c.a.tiOn ~S.u.n_ i._.n.i.ar~.R~P.o..~_~ ~!~::i!~:

Operations monitoring by Water Control hydrographers; this activity covers approximately20 laterals

The lateral fluctuation study conducted by the Water Resources Unit; this study covers theMunyon and the Myrtle Laterals

The Plum-Oasis pre-project data collection

Study Outline

The following tasks provide a procedural outline of the study. Tasks 3 through 8 could be repeated one ormore times, each time expanding data coverage, until the objective of verifying water conservation has beenmet or the study was determined to be inconclusive and therefore should not be continued and a final reportwritten.

Task 1-Field Inspection of Spill Recorders (completed)

Each of the lateral spill recording sites will be inspected to assess the quality of data collected there.Observations will include whether the lateral has one or more spill points and an assessment of the accuracyand reliability of the measurement arrangement. Fields notes will be prepared and filed along withphotographs of each site.

Task 2-Lateral Screening and Selection

Based on the field inspections of each site, review of data, and discussions with IID staff, the laterals will bescreened to those that are judged to have sufficiently accurate data to justify inclusion in the study.

Task 3-Compile Lateral History

An operation history will be prepared for each lateral included in the study. The history will document thefollowing aspects of the laterals operational patterns ovcr the period of spillage record, subject to thelimitations of available data.

Concrete liningMaintenance procedures and schedulesGate repairs and changesZanjeros assigned to the lateralMethod of check gate setting (overpour or undersho0

Task 4-Lateral Spillage Simulation (by IID Staff)

Hydraulic modeling using CanalCAD will be conducted on laterals for which a detailed history can beestablished as a means of verifying the reasonableness of the spill data. In particular, it will be important toknow whether lateral check gates were operated as overpour or undershot controls. The objective will be toconstruct a record of lateral inflow over time as input to the model; the model will then calculate changes infarm deliveries and end spillage that would theoretically result from variable lateral inflow. The modelresults will be compared to actual spillage records and analyzed to gain insights to lateral operation and assessspill data quality.

cvc~,) 96 FINAL - IvL~.y 1999ggd,>c\ 1002\p I 5_auto~,FINAL_P 15...VSR

Task 5-Develop A and S Standard Indexes

Standard A and S indexes will be developed for each lateral selected from Task 3. Depending on theavailability of data, the indexes will be developed for daily periods but might be combined into compositesrepresenting longer time periods if necessary; for example, monthly or seasonal periods. The A index isintended to reflect how close actual delivery rates were to the ordered rates. The steadiness index is intendedto reflect to what de .grcc the actual delivery rate fluctuated about the mean. The period (frequency) andamplitude of fluctuation arc characteristics that might be used in the quantitative expression of the S index. Ifdata limitations prevent the development of separate A and S indexes it might be necessary to develop asingle A and S index that combines the important aspects of each.

Task 6-Develop Normalized Spillage Expressions

Lateral spillage records will be normalized against farm deliveries for daily periods or possibly against cropET for monthly or seasonal periods of analysis. Normalization against crop ET is the preferred approach;however, this is not appropriate for short time periods.

Task 7-Data Analysis

Regression analyses will be performed to discover whether and how normalized lateral spillage (dependentvariable) is correlated with the A and S indexes (independent variables). Alternative ways to explore possiblecorrelations include:

Using different combinations of independent variables (A index separately, S indexseparately, and A and S indexes together)

Using different time periods (daily, monthly, seasonal [crop oriented], annual)

Using different groupings of records based on: zanjero, lateral length, extent of concretelining, etc.

Task 8-Review and Brainstorming

Findings and indications from Task 7 will be presented graphically for purposes of review and discussion. Ifwarranted, a brainstorming session will be held with key liD staff and the CVC team. The purpose of thistask will be to review findings and determine whether another study phase (to expand data coverage) warranted.

Task 9-Report

When data analysis is concluded, a technical memorandum will be prepared documenting the procedures andfindings of the study.

First Phase Budget

We estimate for the First Phase a budget in the range of $30,000 to $40,000 will be required to carry out thepreliminary work required. Based on our knowledge at this time it is not practical to provide a budgetestimate for the Second Phase of this study. However, after completion of the First Phase we should be ina position to provide a detailed budget estimate for the recommended followup (Second Phase) activities.

cvc(r>E) 97 FINAL --MAY 1999ggd’>c.\1002"~pl5, auto~,FINAI._Pl5 VSR PA)C

Study #2Correlation of Tailwater with

Steadiness and Accuracy of Farm Deliveries

Study Purpose

Automation of IID’s distribution system in itself probably does not result in water savings. However, systemautomation is expected to result in increased accuracy (A), steadiness (S), and responsiveness (R) in deliveries from Water Control to divisions and from divisions to farms. To the extent that inaccuracy,unsteadiness, and unresponsiveness result in water losses under existing operations, System Automation canbe expected to save water.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether an how farm tailwater losses are correlated with accuracyand steadiness of farm deliveries. If a correlation can be established it may be possible to approachverification indirectly by inferring water conservation from measured changes in accuracy and steadiness offam~ deliveries between pre- to post-project conditions.

Analytical Approach

The uncertainty involved in conducting a study of this type makes it practically impossible to map out inadvance all of the tasks that should be conducted and exactly what analytical procedures should be used.Therefore, it is advisable to proceed in a phased manner to allow opportunity tbr course correction and avoidwasted effbrt.

The following study task outline represents the procedure wherein theories would be developed and tested toprovide direction for the next phase. ~Ihe First Phase involves analyzing the data from 100 to 200 irrigationevents (a small subset). Preliminary analyses will be conducted using a subset of the screened data identifiedin Task 1 to test different theories in search of valid and useful ones. The analytical procedures to be used inthe second phase will be adapted based on the findings of this activity.


At the conclusion of each pass through the tasks, an assessment would be made to determine whether thestudy had adequately achieved its objectives or another iteration was warranted.

Available Data

liD offered an in-house irrigation scheduling service for 4 years during the early- to mid-1980s. As part ofthat service, water deliveries and tailwater were measured for each field in the program on an event-by-eventbasis analyzing the data from 100 to 200 irrigation events (a small subset). Data are in two basic forms:(l) delivery and tailwater hydrographs (flow vs time) in EZ Logger files (digital) and Stevens recorder (analog), and (2) summarized delivery and tailwater volumes by field by event. The summary records arecontained in one large database file (.DBF) and include the following information.

ggd-,c \ 1002"~p 15_ auto’,FINAL_ P 15 VSR.DOC

¯ Record serial number

¯ Irrigation start date

¯ Location code (lateral and gate identifier)

¯ Volume delivered

¯ Volume tailwater

¯ Crop and irrigation type (flat or row)

¯ Field size (acres)

¯ Grower code

¯ Year of program (1, 2, 3, or 4)

¯ Whether deliveries were available on a more flexible basis compared to normal

¯ Comments

Whether the field was associated with the lateral fluctuation study or use of CIMIS data orneutron probe scheduling technique

In addition, identical records were kept of deliveries and tailwater on conVol fields not participating in theirrigation scheduling service. About 70 percent of the data records are from fields in the program and theremainder are from control fields.

Study Outline

The following tasks provide a procedural outline of the study. Tasks 2 through 6 could be repeated one ormore times, each time expanding data coverage, until the objective of verifying water conservation has beenmet or the study was determined to be inconclusive and therefore should not be continued and a final reportwritten.

Task 1-Screen Delivery and Tailwater Data (by [ID staff)

The delivery and tailwater records from IID’s irrigation scheduling program will be reviewed and screened byTim O’Halloran and Doug Welch. The purpose will be to draw on their first hand knowledge of the data toselect a subset of records considered to be representative of actual field conditions (but not biased towardthose records that appear to show the hypothesized correlation).

Task 2-Inventory and Screen Farm Delivery Gates

The farm delivery gates associated with the data set from Task 1 will be inventoried (listed) and thenscreened with respect to the characteristics of water flow at those locations. The objective will be to identifya sample of gates covering a broad range of accuracy and steadiness conditions. This would be done by

cvca>E) 99 FINAL = MAY 1999ggd>c \1002\pl 5_aulo\FINAL_P 15._VSR.DOC

(1) talking with division staff, (2) visually inspecting delivery hydrographs, and (3) use of simple hydraulicmodeling to predict A and S conditions, if possible.

Task 3-Develop A and S Standard Indexes

Standard A and S indexes will be developed for each gate selected from Task 2. The indexes will bedeveloped for each irrigation event but might be combined into composites representing longer time periodsif necessary; for example, monthly or seasonal periods. The A index is intended to reflect how close actualdelivery rates were to the ordered rates. The steadiness index is intended to reflect to what degree the actualdelivery rate fluctuated about the mean. The period (frequency) and amplitude of fluctuation arecharacteristics that might be used in the quantitative expression of the S index. If data limitations prevent thedevelopment of separate A and S indexes it might be necessary to develop a single A and S index thatcombines the important aspects of each.

Task 4-Develop Normalized Tailwater Expressions

Records of field tailwater will be normalized against water deliveries for single irrigation events or possiblyagainst crop ET tbr monthly or seasonal periods of analysis. Normalization against crop ET is the preferredapproach; however, this is not appropriate for short time periods.


Regression analyses will be perfomaed to discover whether and how normalized tailwater (dependentvariable) is correlated with the A and S indexes (independent variables). Alternative ways to explore possiblecorrelations include:

Using different combinations of independent variables (A index separately, S indexseparately, and A and S indexes together)

Using different time periods (event, monthly, seasonal [crop oriented], annual)

Using different groupings of records based on: crop type, irrigation type (fiat vs. row), soiltype (from SCS maps), field size (acres), other parameters listed above


Findings and indications from Task 5 will be presented graphically for purposes of review and discussion. Ifwarranted, a brainstorming session will be held with key IID staff and the CVC team. The purpose of thistask will be to review findings and determine whether another study phase (to expand data coverage) warranted.

Task 7-Report


cvc(~r, 1 O0 F~.~A,.- M~V ,999ggd>¢:\1002’.pl 5_auto’£1NAI._P 15_VSR DOC

First Phase Budget

We estimate for the First Phase a budget in the range of $25,000 to $30,000 will be required to carry out thepreliminary work required. Based on our knowledge at this time it is not practical to provide a budgetestimate for the Second Phase of this study, ttowever, after completion of the First Phase we should be in aposition to provide a detailed budget estimate for the recommended followup (Second Phase) activities.

CVC(DE)101ggd>c ’~1002\pl 5_autokFINAL_P 15_V$ R.DOC

FINAL - MAY 1999

Study #3Correlation of Excess Tailwater withResponsiveness of Farm Deliveries

Study Purpose

Automation of liD’s water distribution system in itself probably does not result in water savings. However,System Automation is expected to result in increased accuracy (A), steadiness (S), and responsiveness (R) water deliveries from Water Control to divisions and from divisions to farms. Therefore, to the extent thatinaccuracy, unsteadiness, and unresponsiveness result in ~vater loss under existing operations, SystemAutomation can be expected to save water.

IID records of tailwater patterns (hydrographs) indicate that the volume of tailwater occurring late in irrigation event is frequently larger than the volume of tailwater occurring early. Furthermore, it ishypothesized that this excess tailwater might result from farmers not being able to shut their water off whenenough has been applied. To the extent that farmers are constrained in their ability to shut water off, thcirrigation system can be thought of as lacking responsiveness.

The purposes of this study are to:

1) Confirm the occurrence and establish the magnitude of excess tailwater losses

2) Determine whether and how excess tailwater losses are correlated with systemresponsiveness

If a correlation can be established it may be possible to approach verification indirectly by inferring waterconservation from measured changes in system responsiveness between pre- and post-project conditions.

Analytical Approach

The uncertainty involved in conducting a study of this type makes it practically impossible to map out inadvance all of the tasks that should be conducted and exactly what analytical procedures should be used."Iherefore, it is advisable to proceed in a phased manner to allow opportunity for course correction and avoidwasted effort.

The following study task outline represents the procedure wherein theories would be developed and tested toprovide direction for the next phase. The First Phase involves analyzing the data from 100 to 200 irrigationevents (a small subset) of the screened data identified in Task 1) to test different theories in search of validand useful ones. The analytical procedures to be used in the second phase will be adapted based on thefindings of this activity.


CVC(DE) 102 F1s,~t.- .MAY 1999ggd>c:\1002~p 15_autokFINAL_P 15_ VSR DOC

At the conclusion of each pass through the tasks, an assessment would be made to dctermine whether thestudy had adequately achieved its objectives or another iteration was warranted.

Available Data

IID offered an in-house irrigation scheduling service for 4 years during the early- to mid-1980s. As part ofthat sere’ice, water deliveries and tailwater were measured for each field in the program on an event-by-eventbasis. The full data sct includes about 8,000 individual irrigations (i.e., events). Data are in two basic forms:(1) dclivery and tailwater hydrographs (flow vs time) in EZ Logger files (digital) and Stevens recorder (analog), and (2) summarized delivery mad tailwater volumes by field by event. The summary records contained in one large database file (.DBF) and include the following inforrnation.

Record serial number

Irrigation start date

Location code (lateral and gate identifier)

¯ Volume delivered

¯ Volume tailwater

¯ Crop and irrigation type (fiat or row)

¯ Field size (acres)

¯ Groover code

Year of program (1, 2, 3, or 4)

Whether deliveries were available on a more flexible basis compared to normal

¯ Comments

Whether the field was associated with the lateral fluctuation study or use of CIMIS data orneutron probe scheduling technique

In addition, identical rccords were kept of deliveries and tailwater on control fields not participating in theirrigation scheduling service. About 70 percent of the data records are from fields in the program and theremainder are from conlrol fields.

Study Outline

The following tasks provide a procedural outline of the study. Tasks 2 through 5 could be repeated one ormore times, each time expanding data coverage, until the objective of verifying water conservation has beenmet or the study was determined to be inconclusive and therefore should not be continued and a final report~tten.

cvcloE) 103 V~NAL- MAY 1999ggd>¢ \1002Xpl 5_auto~J-’INAL_P 15_VSR DOC

Task 1-Screen Deliver5, and Tailwater Data (by liD staff)

The delivery and tailwater records from liD’s irrigation scheduling program will be reviewed and screened byTim O’Halloran and Doug Welch. The purpose will be to draw on their first hand knowledge of the data toselect a subset of records considered to be representative of actual field conditions (but not biased towardthose records that appear to showy excess tailwater; wc are also interested in why certain fields and events didnot have excess tailwater).

]’ask 2-Characterize Excess Tailwater

Tailwater hydrographs from the farm deliver,:’ gates selected in Task 1 will be analyzed to determine thevolmne of excess tailwatcr (if any) associated with each irrigation event. The volume of excess tailwater trillbe determined by contrasting the patterns of tailwater runoff between the early and late portions of the event.If tailwater peak flows and volumes are significantly larger in the latter part of the event, this will indicateexcess tailwater. The exact methodolog-y for determining excess tailwater x~411 be developed based oninspection of a sample of the tailwater hydrographs. Once established, it will be applied consistently to allhydrographs.

Because there arc many thctors other than system responsiveness that could cause different volumes of excesstailwater among fields and from one irrigation event to another on a given field (e.g., weather, field size, croptype and stage of growth, soil type and condition, etc.), the excess tailwater volumes determined above willneed to be normalized for use in correlation analyses (Task 4). Possibilities for normalizing includeexpressing excess tailwater as a fraction of: (1) other (non-excess) tailwater occurring in the same event,(2) water delivered, and (3)crop ET (appropriate for long time periods only, such as months, seasons, years).

The absolute and normalized excess tailwater values for each irrigation event will be added to the summarydatabase for correlation analyses.

Task 3-Develop Standard R Indexes

A standard R index will be developed for each farm delivery gate included in the study group (from Task 1).]he indexes will be developed for each irrigation event but might be combined into composites representinglonger time periods if possible; for example, monthly or seasonal periods. The R index is intended to reflectthe degree of responsiveness allowed by the system at the location of each farm delivery gate in the studygroup. The parameters selected to represent responsiveness are yet to be determined and might includefactors such as: (1) gate position on the lateral (as a measure of water travel time from the main canal),(2) lateral position on the main considering proximity to regulating reservoirs or other points of flow control,(3) whether the lateral can be operated as an interceptor (for example in the Thistle lateral series which spillinto the Westside Main), (4) total flow in the lateral during the subject irrigation event (from CFS files),(5) number of deliveries being made on the lateral during the subject irrigation event, (6)division, (7) zanjero.

The R indexes will be added to the summary database for correlation analyses.


Regression analyses will be performed to discover whether and how normalized excess tailwater (dependentvariable) is correlated with the R index (independent variable). Alternative ways to explore possiblecorrelations include:

CVC(DI’!)104

FINAL - MAY 1999ggd>c ~d002~.pl5_auto",FINAl.. P15_VSR DOC

System Automation

S.u£i!m. ..ary.

¯ Using different time periods (event, monthly, seasonal [crop oriented], annual)

Using different grouping of records based on: crop type, irrigation type (flat vs. row), soiltype (from SCS maps), field size (acres), other parameters listed under Task


Findings and indications from Task 4 will be presented graphically for purposes of review and discussion. Ifwarranted, a brainstorming session will be held with key lid staff and the CVC team. The purpose of thistask will be to review findings and determine whether another study phase (to expand data coverage) warranted.

Task 6-Report


First Phase Budget

We estimate for the First Phase a budget in the range of $20,000 to $30,000 will be required to carry out thepreliminary work required. Based on our knowledge at this time it is not practical to provide a budgetestimate tbr the Second Phase of this study. Itowever, after completion of the First Phase we should be ina position to provide a detailed budget estimate for the recommended followup (Second Phase) activities.

CVC(DE)1 05

FINAL - MAY 1999ggd:,c \1002\p 15_auto~FINAL_P 15_VSR DO(:7

Study #4Appraisal of Proposed

System Automation Plan for Project 15

Study Purpose

The purpose of Study #4 is to compare reliability and responsiveness under pre- and post-systemautomation conditions. This involves anticipating the behavior of the main canal flows and lateral headingdeliveries after the proposed system automation is put in place as planned.

Tables 4-1 through 4-6s show the existing and proposed levels of automation of the structures along liD’ssystem of main canals. The layout of canals and locations of the various structures are shown in Figures 2-1and 4-1 through 4-3.9

Analytical Approach

The strategy for anticipating the behavior after the automated system is in place will be to first model selectedoperational reaches1° of the system. It is anticipated that this will be done by using the Canal CAD hydraulicmodel program developed for liD as part of the IID/M WD Conservation Program. For convenience we willcall these site-specific models, operating reach models (ORMs).

Two ORMs will be developed for each of the selected operational reaches. One for pre- and one for post-system automation conditions. The analysis of the effects of system automation will then be based oncomparing the two simulated main canal system perfomaances resulting from different operating (flow)conditions or demands placed on the reach under study.

Selected Operational Reaches

As a beginning strategy we recommend modeling m’o operational reaches:

The reach along the East Highline Canal from its heading on the AAC to Singh Reservoir;this represents a steep operating reach with relatively few control structures

The reach along the Westside Main Canal between the Sheldon and Carter Reservoir; thisrepresents a relatively flat canal reach with many control structures

SFrom the CVC report Stud), of Relationships Between System Automation and Water Conservation for Project 15: SystemAutomation.

9Ibid.

l°An operational reach is a section of main canal between its heading and the first off-stream reservoir that is available forreceiving spills from it; or a section of main canal between a reservoir that can be used to make up flow shortages and adownstream reservoir that can receive spills.

CVC(DE) 106 FI,~.- MAY 1999ggd>c. \ 1002\p 15_auto\FINA I ._ P 15_V SR DO(’

Specific Analysis

Reliability in terms of the accuracy and steadiness of the lateral heading deliveries will be studied separatelyfrom the responsiveness analyses. The reliability analyses ~ill compare pre- and post-automation projectconditions in temas of how the reliability of deliveries at each lateral heading is affected.

We anticipate that the system automation package as proposed will improve the reliability of deliveries fromlateral headings that are well within the main canal pools (close to the upstream side of automated checks)."lqaese headings will have the benefit of upstream flow controls, tIowever, headings that are not served fiommain canal pools, especially those near the downstream side of the checks, may be adversely affectcd by theproposed automation. This is because the buffering afforded by building up (or depleting) pool storage willbe lost.

In addition to the normal transience that occurs in the system, an attempt will be made to simulate the effectsof malfunctions and communications outages that now occur with the existing (hard-wired) telemetry systemand hydraulic automatic gates. Such malfunctions result.

Responsiveness will be approached by placing increased demands on the systcm and analyzing the effects ofdoing this on system reliability. For example, adding more and more 12-hour deliveries stresses the mainsystem’s abilit 3, to accommodate large differences between day and night flows. Allowing variable lengthdeliveries also stresses the capacib’ of the main system operators to accommodate the resulting uncertainties.

Responsiveness gives the system extra flexibility, both on the daily overall (or macro~ ~) and hourly demandsat points of delivery (or micro~2) levels. The accumulation of many micro changes that are biased in thedirection of increased or decreascd flows impinges on the macro responsiveness of the main system.

Order carry-overs are used to adjust the collective user demands to fit the operational capacity of the mainsystem to accommodate demand changes and deliver the necessary flow’s on the macro level (seeFigure 2-2). The responsiveness studies will endeavor to test the value of automation in reducing thenumber and length of carry-overs needed.

Responsiveness studies will also be dcsignaed to test micro responsiveness. This is the ability under pre- andpost-project conditions to allow users to adjust (by flow or duration changes) the volume of water deliveredto match the flow or volume required to complete each irrigation event. This is needed to adjust for changesresulting from the general impossibility to order the exact amount of water needed to complete eachirrigation, order and delivery mismatches, and the effects of carry-overs.

The effects of carry-overs could potentially be handled without putting much demand on macro or microresponsiveness. For example, if an order is carried over for 2 days the flow or duration of delivery could beincreased accordingly, so the quantity of water available per day since the last imgation remains the same.The feasibility of doing this will be tested.

~Macro flexibility (or daily flexibility) is dependent on controlling carD,-overs to manage demand and reservoirs collect spills.

12Micro (hourly) flexibility, such as 12-hour deliveries and variable length-of-time deliveries requires more automationand in-canal storage to handle flow changes.

cvctD~ 107 FINAL - MAY 1999ggd>¢ \ 1002’,pl 5_ auto~TINAL. P 15_VS R DOC

The analysis of pre- and post-project responsiveness will include the affects of planned system automationon in-canal storage. In addition to the planned for automation of main canal headings, reservoir inflows andoutflows, and main canal checks, the study will include an analyses of the potential benefits that could bederived by the addition of automated downstream flow-controlled lateral headings.

Data Required

The data required to carry out the simulation studies indicated are of the following seven types:

The physical characteristics, facilities, and structures along the main canal reaches understudy for both pre- and post-system automation conditions

Historic flow demands and requirements

The management strategies currently used by "water control managers" hydrographers

The management procedures, sequences, and physical movements of water controlmanagers and hydrographers

Some information on resulting delivery reliability and responsiveness for pre-projectconditions

¯ Some information on resulting water levels and spills for pre-project conditions

Some information on existing downtime of both the communications and remote controlsystem and the automatically controlled structures

Anticipated/desired changes in macro- and micro-responsiveness resulting from systemautomation

Study Outline

The following tasks provide a procedural outline for the study. Task 3 requires verifying the models for theEHL and Westside Main Canal operating reaches. Tasks 4 and 5 require running the models using a series ofdifferent operating scenarios.

Task 1-Build Model for Each Canal Reach

This will require inputing the model with the physical characteristics, facilities, and structures along the maincanal reaches. In the preliminary stages, the canal cross-sections along the operating reaches may be takenfrom the E-drawings. If, during the calibration process (see Task 3), it is impossible to adequately synthesizemeasured flow characteristics with the model’s output, it may be necessary to generate (by surveying) andinput the existing canal cross-sections.

Task 2-Characterize Existing Operations

This requires equipping the operating reach models (ORMs) with specific management strategies,procedures, sequences, and movements used by the water controls managers and hydrographers.

CVC(DE)108ggd>c \1002\p 15_autokFINAl._ P 15..VSRDOC

FINAl, - MAY 1999

Task 3-Calibrating;~erifying the ORMs

This will be a t~vo-step process. First, synthesized hydraulic behavior of the canal reach represented by eachpre-project ORM must be checked in a sequence of steady-state snapshots or clips against measured flowcharacteristics. This is to verify that the model inputs are reasonably correct in terms of flow cross-sections,channel roughness, structure configurations, and flow change transfers and that the ORM is functioningadequately.

The second step is to verify each pre-project ORM in terms of real time (dynamic) management. This willrequire comparing the synthesized canal behavior against measured field behavior. This phase of theverification is to check the management-related inputs to each ORM (see Task 2) and the ORM’s ability synthesize the operational behavior of the selected canal reach.

Task 4-Reliability Analyses

Each ORM will be operated to carry out simulation studies to address the reliability issues outlined above.

Task 5-Responsiveness Analysis

Each ORM will be operated to carry out simulation studies to address the responsiveness issues outlinedabove.


If warranted, a brainstorming session will be held with key IID staff and the CVC team, The purpose of thistask will be to review findings and determine whether another study phase (to expand data coverage) warranted.

Task 7-Report


Budget

The budget will be estimated following the identification of the study team and development of animplementation strategy.

CVC~DE) 1 09 F~N^L- MAY 1999ggd>c \1002~4~15_ auto"J:INAL_PI5_VSR DOC

APPENDIX CLATERALS AND ASSOCIATED FLOW LAG TIMES USED TO COMPUTE

PREVENTED MAIN CANAL SPILLAGE (Fx24-HDD) BEVINS, CARTER,GALLEANO AND RUSSELL RESERVOIRS

CVCtOE) I 1 0 F~AL -. MAY 1999ggd>c:\1002\pl 5_auto’fflNAL_P 15_VSR DOC

Table C-1. Laterals and Flow Lag Times Used to Compute Prevented Main Canal Spillage(Fx24-HD) for Bevins, Carter, Galleano and Russell Reservoirs

Flow LagReservoir Time

Name Canal Name (hours)

CARTER !THORN 1.5ITHORN LATERAL 1 1.9!TUBEROSE 2.0iTURNIP 2.2ITRIFOLIUM LATERAL1 4.1WESTSIDE MAIN 5.2!TRIF©LIUMLATERAL13 6.4TRIFOLIUMLATERAL14 6.6TR FOL UMLATERAL15 6.8TRIFOLIUMLATERAL16 7.5POE 8.0BARTH 8.5TR FOL UMEXTENSION 9.0

RUSSELL INECTARINE A 2.0!VAIL LATERAL 1 3.0VAIL LATERAL 2

;3.2

VAIL LATERAL 2-A 3.3IO’BRIEN 3.5!VAIL MAIN i 3.7;VAIL LATERAL 3 3.8iVAIL LATERAL 3-A 4.0iVAIL LATERAL 4 4.2.VAIL LATERAL 4-A i 4.3

iVAILLATERAL 5 4.5IVAIL LATERAL 5-A 4.7VAILLATERAL 6 4.8

IVAIL LATERAL 7 5.0

GALLEANO E 1.8

G2.12.42.73.0

J 3.33.6

EAST HIGHLINE

MN

3.94.24.54.85.1

Q

R SIDEMAIN

5.45.7

6.0

IS

!W

6.36.66.97.27.57.8

~NILAND LATERAL 1NIl_AND LATERAL 2NILAND EXTENSIONNILAND LATERAL 3NILAND LATERAL 4NIl_AND LATERAL 5NILAND LATERAL 6

8.18.48.79.09.39.69.910.210.5

Source file: Table C-1 .xls

CVC(DE) 1 1 1 ~~.~,~L-. MAY 1999ggd>c:\I0~J2’plS_auto\FIN.,M PI5 VSR DOC

project 15 -- system automation verification summary report

Documents