UTE RESERVOIR 1992 Sedimentation Study Reservoir...UTE RESERVOIR 1992 Sedimentation Study ......

UTE RESERVOIR1992 Sedimentation Study

U.S. Department of the InteriorBureau of Redamation

7-2090 (4-81)Bureau of Seclamation TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE

1 REPORT NO f-rMEN 8C4SS(OI C 3 RECIPIENTS CATALOG NO

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATEMay 1993

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODEUte Reservoir 1992 Sedimentation Survey

D-57537. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NO.

Ronald L. Ferrari __________________________9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO.

Bureau of Reclamation 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NO.Denver OfficeDenver CO 80225 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED

12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESSDIBR

Same

14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

D-575315. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Microfiche and hard copy available at the Denver Office, Denver, Colorado. Ed: TH

16. ABSTRACT

The Bureau of Reclamation completed a survey of Ute Reservoir in November 1992. Thesurvey report presents the results of an investigation to monitor changes caused by sedimentaccumulation in Ute Reservoir after 29.9 years of reservoir operation. The report alsodescribes the surveying procedures and equipment used in the 1992 investigation and providesdata for future surveys. The primary purpose of the 1992 survey was the collection of data tocompute the area-capacity relationships for operation of Ute Reservoir.

The 1992 survey determined that the reservoir has a storage capacity of 244,957 acre-feet anda surface area of 8,047 acres at spillway crest elevation 3787.0. Since closure in December1962, the reservoir has accumulated a volume of 27,809 acre-feet of sediment below elevation3787.0. This volume represents a 10.2-percent loss in total capacity and an average annualloss of 930 acre-feet for the operation period of December 1962 through November 1992.

17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSISa. DESCRIPTORS- reservoir area and capacity! sedimentationl reservoir surveys! sonar!sediment distribution! contour area! sedimentation survey!

b. IDENTIFIERS- Ute Reservoir! New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission!

c. COSA TI FIeld/Group COWRR: SHIM:18. DISTRIBUTiON STATEMENT 19. SECURITY CLASS 21. NO. OF PAGES

(THIS REPORt) 6UNCLA$$FIED

20. SECURITY CLASS 22. PRICE(THIS PA(3E(UNCL4SSFIED

UTE RESERVOIR

1992 SEDIMENTATION SURVEY

Ute ReservoirOwned and Operated by

New MexicoInterstate Stream Commission

1992 Sedimentation Survey Reportprepared by

Ronald L. Ferrari

BUREAU OF RECLAMATIONDIVISION OF EARTH SCIENCES

SURFACE WATER BRANCHSEDIMENTATION SECTION

DENVER OFFICE

DENVER, COLORADO

June 1993

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Bureau of Reclamation prepared and published this reportunder the supervision of Robert I. Strand, Head, SedimentationSection, Earth Sciences Division. The hydrographic survey wassupervised by Ronald Ferrari, Hydraulic Engineer, and assistedby Steven Hughes, Engineer Technician, of the Denver Office.Personnel from the New Mexico and Oklahoma Interstate StreamCommissions assisted in the hydrographic survey. Thepreliminary field work of locating and flagging the existingsediment range end markers was performed by the New MexicoInterstate Stream Commission. RDnald Ferrari completed thedata processing, sediment computations, area-capacity tables, andthe report. Robert I. Strand and James 0. Blanton ifi, HydraulicEngineer, consulted in the sediment computations and reportpreparation.

Mission

The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, andprotect water and related resources in an environmentally andeconomically sound manner in the interest of the American public.

The information contained in this report regarding commercial productsor firms may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes andis not to be construed as an endorsement of any product or firm by theBureau of Reclamation.

The information contained in this report was developed for the Bureauof Reclamation; no warranty as to the accuracy, usefulness, orcompleteness is expressed or implied.

CONTENTS

.................................................................................................

..................................................................................

..............................................................................................

...........................................................................................

...............................................................................................

.......................................................

...............................

...................................................................

..............................

.................................................................................................................................

......................................................

................................

...................................

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Page

Introduction 1Summary and Conclusions 1Surveys 2

Survey history 21992 resurvey 3

Reservoir Area and Capacity 3Development of 1992 contour areas 31992 revised storage capacity 4

Sediment Analyses 5Sedimentation accumulation 5Sediment summary 5

Reservoir Sediment Distribution 6Longitudinal distribution 6Lateral distribution 6

References 7

TABLESTable

1 Reservoir sediment data summary (1 of 2) 81 Reservoir sediment data summary (2 of 2) 92 Summary of 1992 survey results 103 Summary of sedimentation survey results 11

FIGURESFigure

1 Ute Reservoir location map 122 Ute Reservoir range location map (1 of 3) 133 Ute Reservoir range location map (2 of 3) 154 Ute Reservoir range location map (3 of 3) 175 Width adjustment method for revising contour areas 196 Area and capacity curves - Ute Reservoir 207 Longitudinal profile - Canadian River 218 Longitudinal profile,- Ute Creek 229 Longitudinal profile - Canadian River 23

10 Longitudinal profile - Ute Creek 2411 Sediment Range 1 - Canadian River 2512 Sediment Range 2 - Canadian River 2613 Sediment Range 3 - Canadian River 2714 Sediment Range 4 - Canadian River 2815 Sediment Range 5 - Canadian River 2916 Sediment Range 6 - Canadian River 3017 Sediment Range 7 - Canadian River 3118 Sediment Range 8 - Canadian River 32

CONTENTS -Continued

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

...................................

...................................

...................................

...................................

...................................

...................................

..................................................................

.................................

.................................

FigureFIGURES

Page

19 Sediment Range 9 - Canadian River 3320 Sediment Range 10 - Canadian River 3421 Sediment Range 11 - Canadian River 3522 Sediment Range 12 - Canadian River 3623 Sediment Range 13 - Canadian River 3724 Sediment Range 14 - Canadian River 3825 Sediment Range 15 - Canadian River 3926 Sediment Range 16 - Canadian River 4027 Sediment Range 17 - Canadian River 4128 Sediment Range 18 - Canadian River 4229 Sediment Range 19 - Canadian River 4330 Sediment Range 20 - Canadian River 4431 Sediment Range 21 - Canadian River 4532 Sediment Range 22 - Canadian River 4633 Sediment Range 101 - Ute Creek 4734 Sediment Range 102 - Ute Creek 4835 Sediment Range 103 - Ute Creek 4936 Sediment Range 104 - Ute Creek 5037 Sediment Range 105 - Ute Creek 5138 Sediment Range 106 - Ute Creek 5239 Sediment Range 107 - Ute Creek 5340 Sediment Range 201 - Dripping Springs 5441 Sediment Range 301 - Carros Creek 5542 Sediment Range 302 - Carros Creek 56

iv

INTRODUCTION

Ute Dam, located on the Canadian River in Quay County, New Mexico, is approximately 20 milesupstream from the New Mexico - Texas state line, 2.5 miles southwest of Logan, 3.5 miles downstreamfrom Ute Creek, and at river mile 673.1 (fig. 1). The dam, designed and constructed by the BechtelCorporation for the NMISC (New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission), was completed in May 1963.Storage began December 13, 1962. In April 1984 a modification project was completed whichconstructed a labyrinth spiiway and increased the height of the dam, dike, and spilway crest.

The dam is a rolled earthfihl structure 132 feet above the Canadian River streambed. The dam crest hasa maximum elevation of 3812.0 feet mean sea level and a crest length of 2,050 feet. The structureincludes an earthen dike section on the north bank of the Canadian River with a maximum height of 38feet and a length of 3,640 feet. A concrete labyrinth spillway section with a crest elevation of 3787.0feet and equivalent weir length of 3,360 feet is located upstream from an 840-foot-long ogee sectionbetween the main embankment and dike. The outlet tower, for low-flow releases, has a sill elevation of3725.0 feet.

Ute Reservoir, which extends into San Miguel and Harding Counties, has a length of 32 miles,summation of Canadian River and Ute Creek, and an average width of 0.55 mile at reservoir poolelevation 3800.0. The average width is determined by dividing the surface area by the reservoir lengthat elevation 3800.0. The total Canadian River and Ute Creek drainage area above the dam is 11,110square miles, of which 3,036 square miles contribute sediment inflow. The sediment contributing areais the total drainage area minus 1,110 square miles as identified by the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey)as probably noncontributing, 18 square miles of Ute Reservoir area, and 6,976 square miles ofcontributing drainage area above Conchas Lake dam.

At the beginning of reservoir storage in December 1962, Ute Reservoir had a calculated surface area of8,202 acres with a capacity of 272,766 acre-feet at elevation 3787.0.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This report presents the results of an investigation to monitor changes caused by sediment accumulationsin Ute Reservoir after 29.9 years of reservoir operations. It also describes the surveying procedures andequipment used in the 1992 investigation and provides data for future surveys. The primary purpose ofthe 1992 survey was the collection of data to compute the area-capacity relationships for operation of UteReservoir.

Table 1 contains a summary of reservoir sediment data for the 1992 survey. The 1992 survey determinedthat the reservoir has a storage capacity of 244,957 acre-feet and a surface area of 8,047 acres at spillway

1

crest elevation 3787.0. Since closure in December 1962, the reservoir has accumulated a volume of

27,809 acre-feet of sediment below elevation 3787.0. This volume represents a 10.2-percent loss in totalcapacity and an average annual loss of 930 acre-feet for the operation period of December 1962 through

November 1992.

SURVEYS

Survey History -

The original sediment ranges were surveyed by a NMISC contractor prior to inundation of water behindUte Reservoir dam and are referred to as the original, or 1963, data. Figures 2 through 4 illustrate therange line network for Ute Reservoir. The original surface areas for Ute Reservoir were determined byplanimetering topographic maps of the reservoir area developed prior to inundation. The topographic

maps have a scale of one inch equals four hundred feet with a 10-foot contour interval.

In 1975, USGS conducted a sediment resurvey of Ute Reservoir and calculated a storage capacity of136,235 acre-feet with a surface area of 5,229 acres at elevation 3770.0. Since closure in December

1962, the reservoir had a calculated sediment volume of 21,280 acre-feet below elevation 3770.0. The

sediment volume was computed using horizontal contour areas planimetered at5-foot contour intervals from the original reservoir topography that was revised using the 1975 survey

data. This volume represented a 13.5-percent loss in total capacity at elevation 3770.0 and an averageannual loss of 1,637 acre-feet for the 13-year operation period.

From October 1983 through March 1984 the USGS resurveyed Ute Reservoir and computed a revised

area and capacity table. This survey was conducted prior to the dam and spiiway modification, which

raised the spillway crest from elevation 3760.0 to elevation 3787.0. The survey consisted of establishing

new range end markers to replace those that would be inundated because of the increase in reservoir

water surface elevation. On most of the range lines this task included extending only one of the benchmarks because most of the original markers were established above elevation 3790.0. For two of therange lines it included changing the alignment of the original line, but the location was in the same

general area. The survey also established additional range lines for future monitoring. Prior to thissurvey the maximum reservoir water surface was elevation 3760.8, which occurred in 1982. The 1984

study calculated a storage capacity of 134,483 acre-feet and a surface area of 5,245 acres at elevation3770.0. Since closure in December 1962, the reservoir had a calculated volume of 23,032 acre-feet of

sediment below elevation 3770.0. This volume represented a 14.6-percent loss in total capacity and anaverage annual loss of around 1,097 acre-feet, below elevation 3770.0, for the 21 -year operation period

of December 1962 through December 1983.

2

1992 Resurvey

Fieldwork for the 1992 survey began in September 1992 and ended on November 20, 1992. Thepreliminary field work, performed by NMISC, consisted of locating and flagging the existing sedimentrange end markers and relocating the destroyed ones. The hydrographic survey was performed atreservoir elevation 3784.26 using Reclamation's small boat bathymetric and total station survey systems.The small boat system consisted of a sonic depth recorder and reflector prism mounted on the boat. Thedistances from a known point, usually one of the range end markers, to the small boat were determinedas it proceeded along the range line by an EDM (electronic distance measuring) instrument set up onshore aimed at the mounted reflector target. Range distances were communicated, by radio, from shoreto the boat at preselected intervals and marked on the sonar charts as the boat proceeded across thereservoir. The boat was held on course as closely as possible by radio communication from the EDMoperator to the survey boat. This system was used to collect the data for range lines Cl through C17,Dl, K!, and U! through U5. The data for range lines C18 through C22, Pt, U6, and U7 were collectedby a total station survey instrument and data recorder. Because the bottom at range lines C19 and C20was too soft to cross, the elevations were measured by wading near the shore and setting the rod on topof the delta. The top of the delta was defined as the elevation the rod first experienced resistance beforesinking. The measured elevation was then projected across to the original opposite bank of the range linefor computation purposes.

RESERVOIR AREA AND CAPACITY

Development of 1992 Contour Areas

For the purposes of the 1992 sedimentation analysis and to better represent storage changes the reservoirwas subdivided into segments using the range lines to delineate the limit of each segmental boundary.Reclamation digitized the segmental areas of the 10-foot contours for elevations 3680.0 through 3800.0using copies of the original one inch equals four hundred feet topographic maps provided by NMISC.The total segmented areas for the digitized 10-foot contours compared fairly well with the original areasand required only minor adjustments to match the original total areas.

The 1992 reservoir surface areas were computed by the width adjustment method as described by Blanton(1982) and illustrated on figure 5. The method entails computing the new segmented contour area, A1,between any two ranges by applying an adjustment factor to the original segmental contour area, A0. Thecomputed adjustment factor for each segment was the ratio of the new average width to the originalaverage width for both the upstream and downstream ranges at the specified contour elevation. Thesecalculations were computed by Reclamation's computer program RESSED. The input data included theoriginal and 1992 range line data along with the segmented areas for the specified contour elevation. Theprogram computes the 1992 surface area for each segment at the given contour elevations. A comparison

3

of simultaneous plots of original and 1992 range profiles indicated the lateral distribution of sediment atthe different measured contour elevations. Where these plots indicate changes have occurred on the sideslopes of the reservoir, a judgement decision was made to determine whether the change was caused bysurvey inaccuracies or actual deposition or erosion. The adjustment factor was set to 1.0 if it was judgedthe measured change was survey inaccuracy. Additional modifications to the calculated width adjustmentfactor were done to better represent the contour surface area changes. Because the original topographyof Ute Reservoir had only 10-foot contours, it was decided that a better representation of the sedimentsurface areas should be obtained. These sediment surface areas were developed by plotting the 1992average bottom profile versus the original thaiweg profile and transferring the location of the 1992contour crossing to the original topography, and digitizing the resulting sediment surface areas. Thisprocedure was done for all contour crossings that terminated within a segment.

The RESSED program output lists the revised areas for each segment and notes where judgement led tooverriding the adjustment factors. The output also notes where the adjustment factors were overriddento reflect the digitized surface areas of the contours that terminated within the segments. The 1992 totalreservoir surface area at a given contour was the summation of all segmental areas at that elevation. The

1992 total area computation results are listed in column 2 of table 2.

1992 Revised Storage Capacity

The storage-elevation relationships based on the 1992 underwater survey data were developed usingReclamation's area-capacity computer program ACAP (Reclamation, 1985). The 1992 surface areasresulting from the RESSED computations at 10-foot contour intervals from elevation 3680.0 through3790.0 and the original surface area at elevation 3800.0 were used as the control parameters for

computing reservoir capacity. The original surface area of 11,237.1 acres was used for the 3800.0contour because it was judged that the reservoir has not affected this contour area. The program

computes an area at elevation increments of 0.01- to 1.0-foot by linear interpolation between the givencontour intervals. The program begins by testing the initial capacity equation over successive intervalsto ensure that the equation fits within an allowable error limit, which was set at 0.000001 for UteReservoir. This capacity equation is then used over the full range of intervals fitting within this allowable

error limit. For the first interval at which the initial allowable error limit is exceeded, a new capacityequation (integrated from basic area curve over that interval) begins testing the fit until it also exceeds

the error limit. Thus, the capacity curve is defined by a series of curves, each fitting a certain regionof data. Final area equations are derived by differentiating the capacity equations, which are of secondorder polynomial form:

4

y = a1 + a2x + a3x2

where:

y = capacity,x = elevation above a reference base,

a1 = intercept, anda2 and a3 = coefficients

Results of the 1992 Ute Reservoir area and capacity computations are listed in table 1 and table 2, andplotted on figure 6. A separate set of 1992 area and capacity tables will be published for the 0.01-, 0.1-,and 1-foot elevation increments. The 1992 area and capacity computations results are listed in columns(4) and (5) of table 2. Column 2 in the table gives the original measured contour areas used in theoriginal area and capacity computation and column 3 gives the original capacity computed by ACAP.Both the original and 1992 area and capacity curves are plotted on figure 6 for a visual comparison ofchanges. The 1992 survey determined that the reservoir has a storage capacity of 244,957 acre-feet anda surface area of 8,047 acres at spiiway crest elevation 3787.0.

SEDIMENT ANALYSES

Sedimentation accumulation

Sediments have accumulated in Ute Reservoir to a total volume of 27,809 acre-feet below elevation3787.0, spiliway crest, since storage began in December 1962. This volume represents a 10.2-percentloss in total capacity and an average annual accumulation rate of 930 acre-feet for the 29.9-year periodof operation. The net sediment accumulation rate from the contributing basin was 0.306 acre-feet persquare mile per year for the same period. The measured annual inflow rate is about 36 percent of theoriginal estimate of 2,590 acre-feet for runoff conditions experienced prior to 1962. The original estimatewas based upon computed yield rates for Pajarito Creek, Ute Creek, and the Canadian River.

The estimated average annual water inflow into Ute Reservoir for the years 1963 through 1989 was49,614 acre-feet, see table 1 (Reclamation, 1992). This estimate represents about 27 percent of thehistorical flow of the Canadian River at the USGS stream-gauging station at Logan, New Mexico, whichis located immediately downstream from Ute Dam. This gauge measured 100 percent of the historicalinflow to the reservoir, which was 186,100 acre-feet per year for the period of 1935 through 1962.

5

Sedimentation Summary

The results of the sediment data and volume computations for the 1992 survey are shown in table 1 andtable 2. The data include a tabulation of incremental sediment inflow volume and sediment accumulationcomputed for the period between initial conditions and the 1992 resurvey. Table 1 includes informationon the drainage basin, records of estimated inflow, reservoir operations, and reservoir storage.

Table 3 compares the area and capacity results of the original versus the 1975, 1984, and 1992 surveys.The 1975 and 1984 surveys were accomplished by the USGS prior to the spillway modification. The

maximum reservoir water surface for the operation period of these studies was elevation 3760.8, whichoccurred in 1982. This table is given for comparison purposes only because a description of the 1975and 1984 sediment study analysis on how their areas were calculated was not available. The original and1992 capacity values were computed by Reclamation's program ACAP using the measured surface areas.The 1975 and 1984 values were computed by a different program and are slightly higher than the ACAPresults using the same surface area input. The last column gives the unadjusted total segment areas thatwere digitized by Reclamation from the original topographic maps, as described in the development of1992 contour areas section. For the 1992 sediment analysis, adjustment factors were applied to the

digitized segmental areas to make them equal to the original total areas listed in column 2. Reclamation'swidth adjustment method uses the original areas that developed the original area-capacity table.

RESERVOIR SEDIMENT DISTRIBUTION

Longitudinal Distribution

The distribution of sediment throughout the length of the reservoir is illustrated by plots of the thalwegprofile representing the original and 1992 resurveyed profiles for the Canadian River and Ute Creek asshown on figures 7 and 8. The distribution of sediment is also illustrated by plots of the thalweg profilesof the original, 1975, 1984, and 1992 resurveyed profiles for the Canadian River and Ute Creek as shown

on figures 9 and 10. Thalweg elevations representing original and the resurveyed reservoir conditionswere taken from the 1992 survey notes and large scale plots of the 1975 and 1984 range line data.Except for the possibility of some missed low points, the plotted profile should closely resemble actualchannel bottom conditions during the original range survey completed prior to inundation of the reservoir.Except for some minor inaccuracies in sounding and being slightly off line, the bottom of the 1975, 1984,and 1992 profiles should closely represent channel bottom conditions at the time of those resurveys. The

channel distance used for range line location is the original river channel distance from the dam to eachrange line in an upstream direction on the Canadian River and from the confluence to each range line in

an upstream direction on Ute Creek.

6

Lateral Distribution

For this study, the 1963 range line data were determined using several sources because the original surveynotes or coordinate data were not available. A 1983 sediment projection study by Reclamation determinedthe distance versus elevation for many of the original range lines by digitizing large scale plots of the originalrange lines provided by NMISC. Plots from the USGS 1984 sediment resurvey were used to modify the 1963data files because the length and alignment of some of the ranges were affected. Those portions of the rangelines surveyed for the first time in 1984 were imported into the 1963 data files to be used in measuringchanges caused by sediment deposition. Some major changes were made to the 1963 data files for range linesC4 and ClO along with some minor changes to a few other sections. NMISC provided large scale range lineplots which included superimposed data from the 1963, 1975, and 1984 surveys. Examination of these plotsalong with the 1992 survey plots suggested that the 1963 data had a bust in the plotted data for sections C4and ClO. This theory was supported by the one inch equals four hundred feet topography maps of thereservoir area. The range lines were plotted by Reclamation from left to right bank looking downstream.

Ground profiles for the 32 original sediment ranges are shown on figures 11 through 42. The 1992 rangeprofile data is superimposed on these plots to indicate the changes which have occurred and to represent ingeneral the lateral distribution of sediment within the reservoir from elevation 3800.0 and below. A 1992survey was not accomplished for range lines P1 because of destroyed monuments and time restraints. The1992 survey did get some elevation shots of the creek channel of P1, which indicated no change since 1963.No resurvey was done for the range lines located upstream from C22 and U7 because they were located aboveelevation 3800.0 and it was judged that no reservoir deposition had occurred above that elevation.Modifications were done to the 1963 and 1992 survey cross section data for input into Reclamation'scomputer program used for sediment analysis. These modifications included changing the cross section labelsfor each range line; that is, Cl through C22 became 1 through 22, Dl became 201, Ki and K2 became 301and 302, and Ui through U7 became 101 through 107. Modification to the 1992 data included shiftingstations slightly to better align features and removing measured data that was not actual sediment build up.For sediment computation purposes, a complete section was needed for all ranges. For this reason, theoriginal data was inserted into the 1992 data file to complete the areas not surveyed in 1992.

REFERENCES

Blanton, James 0. ifi, Procedures for Monitoring Reservoir Sedimentation: Technical Guideline, Bureauof Reclamation, Denver, Colorado, 1982.

Bureau of Reclamation, A CAP85 User's Manual, Denver Office, Denver, Colorado, 1985.

Bureau of Reclamation, Surface Water Supply Technical Memorandwn, Eastern New Mexico Water SupplyProject, Denver Office, Denver, Colorado, September 1992.

7

RESERVOIR SEDIMENTDATA SUMHARY Ute Reservoir

NAME OF RESERVOIR .1DATA SHEET NO.

1. OWNER Interstat. Stream Cocxr&ission 2. STREAM Canadian River 3. STATE New Mexico

A 4. SEC. 21 TWP. 13N RANGE 33E 5. NEAREST P.O. Logan 6. COUNTY Quay

M 7. LAT 35 20' 35" LONG 103 26' 37" 8. TOP OF DAM ELEVATION 3812.01 9. SPILLWAY CREST EL. 3787.02

T 10. STORAGE 11. ELEVATION 2. ORIGINAL 13. ORIGINAL 4. GROSS STORAGE 15. DATEE ALLOCATION TOP OF POOL SURIACE AREA, Ac CAPACITY, Al ACRE- FEET STORAGE

BEGANa. FLOOD CONTROL

RV

b. MULTIPLE USE12/13/62

O c. POWERIR

d. WATER SUPPLY 3787.0 8,202 222,900 272,766 16. DATE

C.________________ ________________

NORMALOPERATION

f. CONSERVATION 3741.6' 2,376______________

29,158________________

49,866 BEGAN

g. INACTIVE 3725.0' 1,238 20,708 20,708 5/1963

17. LENGTh OF RESEROOIR 32' MILES AVG. WIDTH OF RE., RVOIR 0. 55 MILES18. TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA 11,140 SQUARZ MILES 22. MEAN ANNUAL PRECIPITATION INCHES

A19. NET SEDIMENT CONTRIBUTING AREA 3,0411 SQUARE MILES 23. MEAN ANNUAL RUNOFF 0.084 INCHES

20. LENGTH MILES AV. WIDTH MILES 24. MEAN ANNUAL RUNOFF 49,614' ACRE-FEET

21. MAX. ELEVATION MIN. ELEVATION 25. ANNUAL T4P. MEAN F RANGE 'F to F26. DATE OF 27. 28. 29. TYPE OF 30. NO. üi 31. SURFACE 32. CAPACITY 33. C/I

U SURVEY PER. ACCL. SURVEY RANGES OR AREA, AC. ACRE-FEET RATIO Al/AlR YRS. YRS. INTERVALVE 12/62 Contour CD) 10-ft 8,202' 272,766' 5.50Y

011/92 29.9 29.9 Range CD) 32 8,047' 244,957' 4.94

A

A26. DATE OF 34. PERIOD 35. PERIOD WATER INFLOW, ACRE FEET WATER INFLOW TO DATE, AlSURVEY ANNUAL

R C? E IP.a. MEAN ANN. b. MAX. ANN. c. TOTAL a, MEAN ANN. b. TOTAL

11/92 49,614' 238,196' 1,339,591' 49,614' 1,339,591'

26. DATE OF 37. PERIOD CAPACITY LOSS, ACRE-FEET 38. TOTAL SEDIMENT DEPOSITS TO DATE, AlSURVEY

a. TOTAL b. AV. ANN. c. /MI.2-YR. a. TOTAL b. AV. ANNUAL c. /MI.2-YR.

11/92 27,809 930 0.306 27,809 930 0.306

26. DATE OF 39. AV. DRY 40. SED. DEP. TONSfMI.2-YR. 41. STORAGE LOSS, POT. 42. SEDIMENTSURVEY WI. (#/F) INFLOW, PPM

a. PERIOD b. TOTAL TO a. AV. b. TOTAL TO a. b.DATE ANNUAL DATE PER. TOT.

11/92 0.341b0 10.2010

26. 43. DEPTH DESIGNATION RANGE IN FEET BELOW CREST ELEVATION 3787.0DATEOF 109.0- 87.0- 77.0- 67.0- 57.0- 47.0- 37.0- 27.0- 17.0- 7.0-SURVEY 87.0 77.0 67.0 57.0 47.0 37.0 27.0 17.0 7.0 Crest

PERCENT OF TOTAL SEDIMENT LOCATED WITHIN DEPTH DESIGNATION

11/92 10.0 13.6 9.1 6.4 9.5 11.9 14.4 12.4 8.0 4.7

26. 44. REACH DESIGNATION PERCENT OF TOTAL ORIGINAL LENGTH OF RESERVOIRDATE 0-10 10- 20- 30- 40- 50- 60- 70- 80- 90- 100- 105- 110- 115- 120-

SURVEY 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 105 110 113 120 125

________PERCENT OF TOTAL SEDIMENT LOCATED WITHIN REACH DESIGNATION

N/A

Table 1. - Reservoir sediment data summary (page 1 of 2).

45. RANGE IN RESERVOIR OPERATION

YEAR MAX. ELEV.' MIN. ELEV." INFLOW • AF YEAR MAX. ELEV. MIN. ELEV. INFLOW, AF1963 3728.6 3701.6 28,606 1964 3733.0 3726.5 14,6131965 3759.9 3731.2 102,302 1966 3760.1 3753.0 41,2101967 3760.0 3756.5 68,324 1968 3757.5 3755.3 17,8101969 3760.1 3755.6 127,376 1970 3758.4 3756.1 17,0851971 3757.4 3755,5 39,364 1972 3760.0 3755.0 74,3561973 3758.2 3756.0 13,304 1974 3756.2 3753.7 9,3251975 3755.8 3753.9 16,376 1976 3755.3 3753.2 19,2811977 3758.6 3753.8 45,230 1978 3756.6 3754.6 16,8091979 3760.1 3755.8 32,936 1980 3756.8 3753.6 20,0271981 3759.6 3753.0 82,189 1982 3760.8 3743.6 117,6591983 3742.6 3739.6 14,050 1984 3745.0 3739.4 18,3291985 3748.7 3745.1 43,046 1986 3764.9 3756.1 45,9261987 3787.2 3765.3 238,196 1988 3786.0 3783.9 35,9061989 3786.2 3783.3 39,956 1990 3784.8 3782.4 -

199l' 3786.0 3783.7 - 1992 - - -

46. ELEVATIOn - AREA - CAPACITY DATA FOR C. .IGINAL CAPACITI' -ELEV. AREA CAP. ELEV. A CAP. ELEV. AREA CAP.

3678 0 0 3680 6 6 3690 140 6083700 322 2,789 3710 590 7,352 3720 975 15,1773725 1,238 20,708 3730 1,500 27,552 3740 2,226 46,1853741.6 2,376 29,158 3750 3,162 73,124 3760 4,131 109,5883770 5,454 157,515 3780 6,973 219,652 3787 8,202 272,7663790 8,729 298,164 3800 11,237 397,996

46. ELEVATQN - AREA - ( SPACITY DATA FoR 1992 CAPa j.TyELEV. AREA CAP. ELEV. AREA

__________

CAP. ELEV. AREA CAP.3703.3 0 0 3710 239 801 3720 818 6,0863725 1,058 10,777 3730 1,299 16,670 3740 1,904 32,6823741.6 2,051 35,846 3750 2,823 56,310 3760 3,669 88,7643770 5,224 133,229 3780 6,758 193,141 3787 8,047 244,9573790 8,599 269,925 3800 11,237 369,106

47. REMARKS AND REFERENCES

Original dam height, prior to 1984 construction, was elevation 3801.0.

2 Crest elevation of labyrinth spillway completed in April 1984. Original spillway crest elevation 3760 .0.

Design capacity elevations raised after labyrinth spillway completion in 1984.

This elevation is for an inactive pool for fish and wildlife purposes established by agreement between the NewMexico Interstate Stream Coosnission and the New Mexico State Game Coninission.

Elevation established by sill of outlet works.

6 Total length includes 24 miles of Canadian River and 8 miles of Ut. Creek.

Represents noncontributing area of 1,110 mi.2, reservoir area of 13 mi.2, and contributing drainage area aboveConchas Lake of 6,976 mi2.

*Estimated annual inflow to Ute Reservoir for calendar years 1963 through 1989 (27 years). Values from Bureau ofReclamation report dated September 1992 titled "Surface Water Supply Technical Memorandum, Eastern NewMexico Water Supply Project."

Surface area and capacity at elevation 3787.0, spillway crest. Area and capacity calculated by Bureau ofReclamation program ACAP.

'° Average annual and total sediment deposits divided by 272,766 acre-feet (original capacity at elevation 3787.0).

End-of-month values from USGS publications.

12 January 1991 through September 1991 data only.

48. AGENCY MAKING SURVEY Bureau of Reclamation49, AGENCY SUPPLYING DATA Bureau of Reclamation J DATE February 1993

Table 1. - Reservoir sediment data summary (page 2 of 2).

Table 2. - Summary of 1992 survey results.

0

(1)

ELevation(feet)

(2)

OriginatArea

(acres)

(3)

OriginaLCapacity

(acre-feet)

(4)

1992Area

(acres)

(5)

1992Capacity

(acre-feet)

(6)MeasuredSedimentVotune

(acre-feet)

(7)

PercentMeasuredSediment

(8)

PercentReservoir

Depth

3800 11,237.1 397,996 11,237.1 369,106 28,890 - -

3790 8,729.3 298,164 8,599.0 269,925 28,239 - -

3787 8,202 272,766 8,047 244,957 27,809 100.0 100.0

3780 6,973.1 219,652 6,757.9 193,141 26,511 95.3 93.6

3770 5,454.3 157,515 5,224.4 133,229 24,286 87.3 84.4

3760 4,131.1 109,588 3,668.7 88,764 20,824 74.9 75.2

3750 3,161.7 73,124 2,822.7 56,310 16,814 60.5 66.0

3740 2,226.1 46,185 1,903.6 32,682 13,503 48.6 56.9

3730 1,500.4 27,552 1,298.8 16,670 10,882 39.1 47.7

3720 974.7 15,177 818.0 6,086 9,091 32.7 38.5

3710 590.3 7,352 239.1 801 6,551 23.6 29.4

3703.3 411 3,998 0 0 3,998 14.4 23.2

3700 322.3 2,789 0 0 2,789 10.0 20.2

3690 113.9 608 0 0 608 2.2 11.0

3680 6.4 6 0 0 6 0.02 1.8

3678 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0

(1) ELevation of reservoir water surface.(2) OriginaL reservoir surface area.(3) OriginaL caLcuLated reservoir capacity conuted using ACAP from originaL measured surface areas.(4) Reservoir surface area from 1992 survey.(5) 1992 caLcuLated reservoir capacity co.rçuted using ACAP from 1992 surface areas.(6) Measured sediment votune = coLuiwi (3) - cotuin (5).(7) Measured sediment expressed in percentage of total sediment (27,809).(8) Depth of reservoir expressed in percentage of totaL depth (109 feet).

Table 3. - Summary of sedimentation survey results.

Elevation

(feet)

Original'Area

(acres)

OriginaL'Capacity

(acre-feet)

1975*Area

(acres)

1975*Capacity

(acre-feet)

l984Area

(acres)

l984Capacity

(acre-feet)

1992'Area

(acres)

1992'Capacity

(acre-feet)

Digitized51962 Surface

Areas(acres)

____________

3800

____________

11,237

_______________

397,996

__________

-

_____________

-

___________

11,112

______________

368263

___________

11,237

______________

369,106 11,060

3790 8,729 298,164 - - 8,428 271,174 8,599 269,925 8,629

3787 8,202 272,766 - - 7,947 246,617 8,047 244,957 -

3780 6,973 219,652 - - 6,834 194,882 6,758 193,141 6,806

3770 5,454 157,515 5,229 136,235 5,245 134,483 5,224 133,229 5,257

3760 4,131 109,588 3,842 90,470 3,821 89,574 3,669 88,764 4,067

3750 3,161 73,124 2,820 58,044 2,833 56,305 2,823 56,310 3,077

3740 2,226 46,185 1,928 34,351 1,854 32,959 1,904 32,682 2,182

3730 1,500 27,552 1,332 18,545 1,361 16,958 1,299 16,670 1,456

3720 975 15,177 852 7,855 850 6,111 818 6,086 947

- 3710 590 7,352 288 2,960 264 1,258 239 801 606

3703.3 411 3,998 167 839 0 0 0 0 -

3700 322 2,789 0 0 0 0 0 0 313

3690 114 608 0 0 0 0 0 0 108

3680 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

3678 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Area and capacity values from table dated 12/5/63. Area and capacity co,ç,uted by RecLamation's area-capacity program ACAP.Area and capacity values from table dated Dec. - Jan 1975-76. Area and capacity not copputed by ACAP.Area and capacity values from table dated 1/1/84. Area and capacity not copputed by ACAP.Area and capacity values from table dated 11/92. Area and capacity corçuted by ACAP.Total of segmental surface areas digitized by Reclamation for the 1992 lJte Reservoir sedimentation study from the originaltopographic maps. For the 1992 sednent analysis en adjustment factor was applied for the digitized surface area vaLue toequal the original surface areas listed in co(tew 2.

0in

Figure 1. - Ute Reservoir location map.

12

)

5

V/7 --

+

+4-

cc cs-'

:A

000 f 4:

¼- r' . -- .-

,) I (i çs

F

TEN A IV CcA IC

I .5

1 -

CF UTE DM LOGAN

:*

w

I -

t - -

-

I

I I:

I(

-,

:i - / /

f(1 )4 I

;)h.' - -. f_

t5Gr\F 4/

f- --I 9OO

K' ( ,." -

,f( jI'

/

•'f" 'cJ ;

I :.::-

-

4.

tpoo (P00 0

w

Figure 2. - Ute Reservoir range location maps

13

+ -f

++ sin is

+

Pc

+ .ftO.OOO

4

+ + +

I +

is.••

sin IC

+

Ii 55i': I I

tpoo poo 0 tPOO

*C*LE is FEEt

./ I

) -

! -1-i,-'.

/4/

'isi'

L

+ +

+ +

+

-I-

+ I. ll$OOO

+ i.uo.000

+

- i.,uooo+

E

Figure 3. - Ute Reservoir range location maps15

asp

•SYCM I)S4 JStlf I

t000 1.000 0 2000 v.000

$C*LL iØ FELT

NDlIO.W

•4•f4• Ma. •aStf I

Figure 4. - Ute Re.ervoir range location maj17

WIDTH ADJUSTMENT METHOD FOR REV/SINGCON TOUR AREAS IN CO4VPU TAT/ON OP

RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION

Sediment

Scheme tic Segmentof Reservoir

In/tie! SurveyContour AreoDownstream Width(/pstreom Width

New Survey4, Contour 4reo (Computed)

Downstream WidthUpstream Width

w,,*w,ll

41z40( W0'1LW011 )2

Figure 5. - Width adjustment method for revising contour areas.

19

Sediment Ronge

pzj

P1CD

0

mDI

DI

C)

D1tiDIC)P...rt'4

C)

P14CDPD

ID

IDPDIDP140

P1

3800

3790

3780

3770

3760

3750

U

3740

z0

3730

>

El 3720

U

3710

3700

3690

3680

3670

AREA (100 ACRES)120 H O 100 90 80 7 11) 60 50 4 0 30 20 1 11) U

// '

/ /

CAPAC ITY AREA. - _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ -

I

- _______________ _______________ -

LEGEND H\ç1992 SURVEY 'I

I ___________________________________________ I

____ ____1%3 (ORIGINAL) SURVEY

____ ___ ___ ____ ____ ____

O 40 80 120 160 201) 240 260 320 361) 411

CAPACITY (1000 ACRE-FEET)0

UTE RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEY

0

'.4

0

I-..

0

0

C)'U

'U

'U

0

3800

3780

ti•:i 3760wzzO 3740

-j

3720

3700

I I I I I I-

- A,. CANADIAN RIVERA

I-- coN

-

-

-

1

0

1

\/-i992ThaIweg

1963 ThalwegC)

-

LI)0 C')

0 c

I t I i I I I I II

25 20 15 10 5MILES ABOVE AXIS OF DAM

0

I-..

P1m

cr

0

rt

I-..

P10

P.-.

P1

0

3800

3780

t 3760wLLzzQ 3740

3720

3700

UTE RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

UTE CREEK

-

_-1992ThaIweg

- 1963 Thaweg ----

- -

F.- If) C') CJ -

I I I I I I I I I ili I I I i III I

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0MILES ABOVE AXIS OF DAM

P1w

0

P...rt

P...

C3

P...

m

a.I...

P...

P1

3800

3780

3760

wU-

3740z0

3720

3700

3680

UTE RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEYSI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

CANADIAN RIVER

1983 Thalweg

1963 Thalweg

-

(D_ 1975 Thalweg-

C.) F'- to ' c'

25 20 15 10MILES ABOVE AXIS OF DAM

5 0

UTE RESERVOIR SEDIMENTATION SURVEY

I.e.

tlm

0

0

tO

rtC0.

P10Pt,I-..

0

ft0

0

3800

3780

Iii 3760wU-zzQ 3740

3720

3700

3680

I I I I I I I I I I I

UTE CREEK

1983Thaegi992Thaeg

1975 Thaeg - -

1963 Thalweg -

I I I II I I I8 7 6 5 4 3 2

MILES ABOVE AXIS OF DAM0

-------

C10

I-.

vam

010

rt

m

(1P1

p...

p...

0P1

3820

3800

3780

I-UiUJ

3760

z0

3740

3720

3700

3680

UTE RESERVOIR

GROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION 1

1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

I

I

*

________________________ ________________________ ________________________ _______________________ ________________________

I

-

500 10 00 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 50 00 5500 60C

DISTANCE - FEET

0

02-01-2993 13: 21; 20 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSVS VER I PSPLT : ute63'nb PLOT 2

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION 2

________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3820

3800

m

3780_____

I-w

Q W

pS.) 37600

0

'a _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

0 .<_____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

>ww

3720a.

370001

3680 30

OISTANCE - FEET

//

L7.D 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500 6000 6500 70

-------

02-01-1993 13:21:27 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER I PSPLT a:ute53mb PLOT 3


________ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

3820

8003

P1

3780

I-0.

wP) U.

3760 ________ ____mCt

____ ____ ____ ____ ________ ____

z) 0

I-I

3740>

I LAJ-JLii

3720

3700P1

3680-

DISTANCE - FEET

I) 50 0 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 50(

-------

pj

P10

0

0

rt

0

'U

'U

'U

I-i.

0P1

3820

3800

3780

ww

3760

z0

3740

3720

3700

3680


1992 SURVEY_______ 1963 SURVEY

I

0 20 0 40 0 600 80 0 f 0 00 1200 14 00 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 30(

DISTANCE - FEET

02-01-1993 13; 22; 12 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLISYS VER I PSPLT : uteb3mb


________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY3640 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

ITj

3820 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

P1

I-.U'

3800 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

vmQ. LU

Uim 3780 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

çP I

z0

3760

U' >___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

I U_i-Ju_i

- _ - - - -

3740 ______ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

3720P1

___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

3700500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 40C 0

DISTANCE - FEET


-------

-

I-

P1ID

(I.m

OlD

ID

a'

I.4IDP1

1992 SURVEY________ 1963 SURVEY

3840

3820 ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________1

3800

1-wwIL 3780

z

_ _ _

9I-I

3760>w-Jw /

3740

3720 -

3700o 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 40C

DISTANCE - FEET

3840

3820

P1w

• 3800

F-ab" W

IL 3780

vQb

I-IID 3760-J >

Lu-jLu

3740I...

3720P1

-------

--

3700


1992 SURVEY1963 SURVEY

-.\t_ _

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 55(

DISTANCE - FEET

02-01-1993 13; 22; 27 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS YEA I PSPLT e; uteb3mb PLOT 15


________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3820

3810I-..

3800I-.

3790

O WWIi 3780

m -.

r I

Z 37700

m'-4

3760I W

-J

37500.

3740

0'1• 3730

3720- DO

DISTANCE - FEET

__ K________

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 14 00 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 281

1 I*

-------

02-01-1993 13: 22: 33 5URAU OF !ECLAHATION PLTSYS VA I PSPLT a: ute63b PLOT 17


1992 SURVEY________ 1963 SURVEY

3810

3800I.-

P1

3790

37800. Ui

Ui(4 U...

3770

z0I-I _________ _________ _________

0 - 3760 _________ _________ _________

I W-JUi 3750

DI0.P...OP

3740

I-"

0 _______

3730

3720- - - )0

DISTANCE - FEET

N _

) 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 40(

02-01-1993 13: 22: 37 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS YEA 1 PSPLT : ute63mb PLOT 18

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION iO

________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 192 SURVEY

3810

3800

tl

9 3790

(n

3780(.3

Li.

3770

-.o <>W 3760-J

3750

3740

3730)O

DISTANCE - FEET

D 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 20(

-------

()C,'

-

• II

13; 22: 42 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER I PSPLT a:uteb3mb

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION ii

________ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY3860 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________

3840 __________ __________ __________ __________

3820 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________

w3800 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________

z0

3780 - ________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

U-i-JUi

3760 - -. _________ _________ _________ _________

3740 _________

1

3720o 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 18C

ph

P1

P.-,

m

tDCt

0

'-I

C)

'-I-

•10P1

'0

OISTANCE - FEET


------- 1992 SURVEY1963 SURVEY

IU..'tD

a) 0

ft

0

p')

0

0'

0'

I-..

0II

3860

3840

3820tJLiJLi

3800

w 3780

3760

3740

• Th_

D 200 40_0 600 800 10

_00 12_00 1400 16

DISTANCE - FEET

-------

- ----

02-01-1993 13: 22:50 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER I PSPLT e:ute63mb PLOT 2

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION i3

________ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY3860 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________

3840 __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ _________

3820 __________ __________ __________ __________ _________

Ow

m IL

rt

3800 _________

m

_________ _________ _________ _________ _________

'-, >

-JW 3780 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

Q.

3760 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

Pt

3740C __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________

__J0

DISTANCE - FEET

- - -S -

-

- -

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 feC


-------

---

pz,

P10

P..)

Va00.

co0

0

0

0.P...0'

.4rnP1

_______ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

3830

3820

3810

ft 3800IL

3790P-I

>w 3780 - ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______

-jw

-377O -

3760

375oo 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 13( 10

DISTANCE - FEET

-------

1ID

I-fl

('3ID

CD

g1

IDI-'(71

C)

DI

-

IDP1

3830

3820

3810

uJwLi 3800

z0

3790

3780

3770

3760

t


________ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

- - -. - -

) 100 20 0 30 0 400 500 60 0 700 80 0 900 10 00 11 00 1200 13(

DISTANCE - FEET

0

02-01-199 13: 23:05 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS YEA I PSPLT e;ute63mb PLOT 25


________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3830

j 3820

3810

tn0 I-0.

Uio

3800rt

Z0

3790

37800.

DI

3770II

3760 )O

DISTANCE - FEET

-_-.-.__

'I,

I

) 10 0 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 11 00 1200 13

-O1-1S93 13: 23: 10 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS YEA I PSPLT ; ute63mb


________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY3830 _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ ______ _______ _______

ITJ

3820 ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______

P1

p'.)

-4

3810 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

(D I-iiiUi

m Li_ 3800 _______ _______ _____________ ______ _____ _____ _____ _____ ______ ______ _____

\0a 1-4ID

37901-

/

-4 >ILl

C) LU

3780 -0.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

I-..--

1-3770 - ______ ______ ______ ______ID ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______

P1

376oo 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 11 00 1200 13C 0

DISTANCE - FEET

02-01-1993 13: 23: 24 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER 1 PSPLT : ute63b PLOT 30

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECT ION 18

________ 1963 SURVEY - ------ 1992 SURVEY

3820

PzJ

3810

mILl

3800

3790U

ri U

0.I-.0'

3780I-

0II ________

3770Do

DISTANCE - FEET

V

V

I_________

/

D 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 24

-------

pyny yr NLPA!U! u, UiiJ


1992 SURVEY________ 1963 SURVEY

3870

3860ph

38 05

0

38 0I 4

mUJLU 3830

c)m U..(t

Z 3820: 0Q *-4

I-I-.o > 3810 _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____ _____

LU

8 03 0

3790 - - ____

- -

__________ ______

-3780

3770w500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000

DISTANCE - FEET

02-01-1993 13: 23:34 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS YEA j PSPLT o;ute63mb PLOT 32


________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3870

3860p...

1

38500

3840wwU..

3830

3820i'.)

o •<>w-J

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

W 3810

0.p...

3800zj

p...____ ____ ____

_____ _____

3790

3780

DISTANCE - FEET

--

D 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600 2800 3000 3200 34(

-------

WUHAU ur 1!..LAMAIW IT VCN I


1992 SURVEY________ 1963 SURVEY

3870

638 0xj

P10 _________3850 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

3840

p.-. WIL

0

3 308 ____________________ ____

çt

zp

38200 I-

p.J >Lu

I-JLu 3810 ___________

0.I.-

3800

\4O 3790t1

.

3780ü 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200

DISTANCE - FEET

02-01-199 3 13: 23: 44 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER 1 PSPLT a: ute63mb PLOT 34

UTE RESERVOIR

GROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION 22

________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3870

3860

3850

3840

Q W3830

O ID

çt I

Z 38200

ID I-

38 0> 1I

wJ

C)3800

3790

3780

3770(- -- --

OISTANCE - FEET

___ 1

IIII

____

_________________

_____

_________________I----

_______________

I

____ ____ ____

_________________

____

____ ____

I

I

_________________

____

_________________

____

_________________ _________________

____

_________________

____

_________________

____

_________________

____

) 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 22(

-------

I-.-

P1

Cl)0

0

0

0

ft0

C)IIID0

3820

3800

3780LULUIL

3760

LU 3740

3720

3700(


1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

____________ ____________ /\ ____________ ____________

/-

____________

. /

200 400 60 0 80 0 100 0 1200 140 0 1600 1800 2000 220

OISTANCE - FEET

0


-------

Izj

IIa'

a'

a'

çt

a'

I-.0

C(1a'

a'a'

1992 SURVEY_______

1963 SURVEY

3840

3820

3800wwL.

3780 ________ _______

I-

>uJ-J

_______ _______ _______ _______ ______ _____

w 3760

__ ___3740 ___ _ _

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800

DISTANCE - FEET

-------

-


_______ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

3810

3800

_________ /(3770

3760 -

\3750

-\-----

3740

373O50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600

DISTANCE - FEET

-------

0

-

-------

1

m0

c*.ID

IDID

3820

3810

3800

I-LULUIL 3790

z0

3780

3770

3760

3750


1992 SURVEY________ 1963 SURVEY

- - - -

--

-- - - - - - - - - - -

I.:LI- *_11

0 1 00 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 11(

DISTANCE - FEET

-------

02-01-199 3 13: 21:55 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER I PSPLT :ute63mb PLOT 9


1992________ 1963 SURVEY SURVEY

3840

8 03 3

I-..

P1G 3820

L ii 3810ID0.

LiiLi

01

3800'-4I-.

'0ID

i 3790,- iioU' W

73 80

01mIt)

_______

3770

3760-- - )0

OISTANCE - FEET

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10(

02-01-1993 13: 21:59 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VEA 1 PSPLT ute63inb PLOT 10

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION ±06

_______ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3830 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________

3820

tfl LiJ3810

CI,p.,) 0

ft

0ø,

> 3800I.,'

-J

cft0

793 000

3780

OISTANCE - FEET

. II

___3 100 200 300 40

_0 50_0 600 700 800 9cJ

-------

-

O-O1-199 1; 2;O UAEAU OF RECLAMATION PLISYS VER I PSPLT p:ute63mb PLOT II


_______ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

3840

'xi

j 3830

3820

(4 • I

0'-4I-

3810• >

oLuJ

-4 Lu

0

3800ID0

3790C - - )0

DISTANCE - FEET

/ ;-

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 11 00 12(

UTE RESERVOIRGROUND PROFILE FOR SECTION 2O

-------

U'

Pt

0

0

I:

________ 1963 SURVEY 1992 SURVEY

3860

3850

3840

3830 - ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

ww

3820

z

3810

>ILl-JW 3800

3790

3780

377oo 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

DISTANCE - FEET

•1 1*

-------


1992 SURVEY________ 1963 SURVEY

3840

3830

CP10

3820

Cl) $-a UJ 3810. U

aia U..01

rtZ 38000'-I

3790____

I U

C)P1'1 37800

C)P100 3770r

376oo 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 13C 0

DISTANCE - FEET

02-01-199 3 13; 23: 17 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PLTSYS VER PSPLT ; ute63mb PLOT 28


________ 1963 SURVEY ------- 1992 SURVEY

3830

ii 3820

t)

(a(D

I.-w0. _______3810 _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______

0) 0

rt

P1zQ

0I-,I.-

LI 3800o

.) _JI Lu

001P1P10w 37900P1

3780(

DISTANCE - FEET

) 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 55

Date post:	21-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vanphuc
View:	224 times
Download:	2 times

UTE RESERVOIR 1992 Sedimentation Study Reservoir...UTE RESERVOIR 1992 Sedimentation Study ......

Documents