project 12 non-leak gates verification summary report

hnperial Irrigation District

Metropolitan Water District ofSoutliern California

Water Conservation Agreenlent

Project 12

Non-Leak Gates

Verification Summary Report

Conservation Verification Consultants

March 1995

Imperial Irrigation District

Metropolitan Water District ofSouthern California

Water Conservation Agreement

Project 12Non-Leak Gates

Verification Summary Report


March 1995


March 17, 1995

Water Conservation Measurement Committee Members

Mr. Gerald DavissonPalo Verde Irrigation District180 West 14th AvenueBlythe, California 92225

Mr. Kirk DimmitMetropolitan Water District107 South 5th Street, Suit 200El Centro, California 92243

Mr. Robert KriegerKrieger and Stewart3602 University Avenue, Suite 201Riverside, California 92501

Mr. Jesse SilvaImperial Irrigation DistrictP.O. Box 937Imperial, California 92251

Mr. Joseph SummersWCMC ChairmanSummers EngineeringP.O. Box 1122Hanford, California 93232

Dear Sirs,

Transmitted herewith is the Conservation Verification Consultants "Project 12 - Non-Leak GatesVerification Report".

Non-Leak Gates verification procedures are set forth in the "Non-Leak Gates VerificationImplementation Plan - Final Document" dated January, 1992 and "Non-Leak Gates VerificationImplementation Plan - Addendum" dated November 14, 1992.

The conservation estimates presented herein are based on field observations and data collected by theImperial Irrigation District Hydrography Unit and data analysis by Imperial Irrigation District WaterResources Staff.


//~k ~eller, PhD, .E -

,C~..,.~t . . ~~4r, PE

I/

CONTENTS

Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................. 1

2.0 CONSERVATION VERIFICATION PROCEDURE ............. 2

3.0 LEAKAGE MEASUREMENT .......................... 2

4.0 PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATES ....................... 4

5.0 WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATES ................... 5

6.0 PROJECTED 1995 CONSERVATION SAVINGS .............. 7

7.0 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS ..... 7

TABLES

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

NON-LEAK GATE PROJECT PLAN PROPOSED NON-LEAK GATE SITES

V-NOTCH WEIR CHARACTERISTICS

V-NOTCH WEIR MONITORING PERIOD AND MEASURED LEAKAGE

ALTERNATIVE LEAKAGE DETERMINATION

PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATES

NON-LEAK GATE SITES AND WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATE

CVC(mbk)

File :CONTENT2.RPT

VSR_P 12

-i- March 16, 1995

FIGURES

1. NON-LEAK GATE SITES(Figure 4.1, "Project 12: Non-leak Gate Project Plan - Final Report")

o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESSOUTH ALAMO SPILL AT HEBER ROADHEMLOCK LATERAL 2B HEADINGASH LATERAL 6 HEADING

o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESBEST CANAL SPILL AT GATE 110SPRUCE MAIN CHECK AT LATERAL 4

o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESCENTRAL MAIN SPILL NO. 4 .SUMAC LATERAL 2 HEADING

o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESELDER LATERAL 13 AT GATE 95WORMWOOD LATERAL 7 HEADING

6. PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESWISTERIA LATERAL 7 HEADING

7. PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESACACIA LATERAL 9 HEADING

o PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESTRIFOLIUM LATERAL 14 HEADINGTRIFOLIUM LATERAL 15 HEADINGTRIFOLIUM LATERAL 16 HEADING

9. PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATESO’BRIEN LATERAL HEADING

CVC(mbk)File :CONTENT2.RPT -ii-

VSR PI2March 16, 1995

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Project No. 12 of the Water Conservation Agreement between the Imperial Irrigation District

(IID) and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) provides for

replacement of leaking wooden water control gates with non-leak aluminum gates at selected sites

in the IID distribution system. Non-leak gates conserve water by reducing the volume of water

lost as leakage past water distribution control structures.

Out of 127 potential non-leak gate sites, IID Water Resources (WR) staff selected 25 sites to

investigated for inclusion in the Non-leak Gate Program. These sites included 19 lateral

headings, three mid-lateral spills, and three lateral check structures. The 25 sites selected were

identified in "Project 12: Non-leak Gate Project Plan - Final Report" dated October, 1991.

Table 1 lists the 25 proposed non-leak gate sites and Figure 1 depicts the location of the sites as

presented in Figure 4.1 of the Project Plan.

Verification procedures were developed for the Non-leak Gate Program and are set forth in the

"Non-leak Gate Verification Implementation Plan - Final Document" dated January, 1992 and

"Non-leak Gate Verification Implementation Plan - Addendum" dated November 14, 1992.

Conservation estimates are based on field observations and data collected by IID Hydrography

Unit and data analysis by liD WR staff.

Conservation procedures and estimates are presented in the following sections:

2.0 Conservation Verification Procedure

3.0 Leakage Measurement

4.0 Project 12 Non-leak Gates

5.0 Water Conservation Estimates

6.0 Projected 1995 Conservation Savings

7.0 Operation and Maintenance Recommendations

CVC(mbk)

File:NONLKCVC.RPT 1VSR PI2

March 16, 1995

2.0 CONSERVATION VERIFICATION PROCEDURE

As stated in the Non-Leak Gate Verification Implementation Plan, the amount of water conserved

by a non-leak gate was to be determined as the difference between pre-project (wooden gate) and

post-project (aluminum gate) leakage. The selected verification method called for the installation

of a monitoring station that would measure the flow of water for a period of at least 30 days

before and after the installation of a non-leak gate. However, IID WR staff and the CVC, after

inspecting completed non-leak gate installations, determined that with the gates properly installed

and operated there should be no measurable leakage. Therefore the measured leakage for the

time periods after installation of a non-leak gate was, with one exception which will be identified

later, not used for verification. Only the pre-project measured or estimated leakage was used

in establishing the quantity of water that could be conserved with a non-leak gate; the post-

project leakage rate was assumed to be zero.

3.0 LEAKAGE MEASUREMENT

Gate leakage flow rates needed to be determined only during the occurrence of flow rates within

the range of expected gate leakage, which was estimated to range from less than 0.02 cfs up to

0.8 cfs. Measurement hardware had to accurately measure flow across the range of estimated

leakage and not interfere with higher flow rates encountered during normal lateral or canal

operations.

The V-notch weir, an accurate flow measuring device suited to low flows, was selected as the

best method for measuring gate leakage. IID staff fabricated compound V-notch-rectangular weir

plates which could provide measurements across the range of leakage and yet not interfere with

operational flows when installed in a canal or lateral. Since flows greater than the capacity of

the V-notch may result in submergence of the weir plate, the weir plates were not rated for flows

exceeding the capacity of the V-notch. The V-notch weir installed in Acacia Lateral 9 is shown

in the photographs on the following page.

CVC(mbk) VSR P12

File:NONLKCVC.RPT 2 March 16, 1995

V-NOTCH WEIR - ACACIA LATERAL 9

It was possible to install V-notch weir plates at 18 of the 25 selected sites to monitor and record

leakage when no deliveries were being made through the gate or check. Each monitoring station

included a V-notch weir plate and a Celesco water level sensor connected to a datalogger to

continuously monitor and record the average hourly flow at the site. The depth and angle of the

V-notch was selected for each site so that the leakage flow would be passed within the capacity

of the notch. Table 2 presents the dimensions and maximum rated flow of the V-notch for each

of the 18 monitored gates.

Pre-project leakage for each of the 18 sites with monitoring stations was determined by averaging

the hourly flows of water through the V-notch weir during periods of time when there were no

deliveries or operational spill. To eliminate the potential for considering flows for other

unscheduled purposes as leakage, flows greater than the maximum measuring capability of the

V-notch weirs were, in almost all cases, assumed to be scheduled deliveries and therefore were

not considered in the determination of leakage.

Table 3 summarizes the monitoring period and measured leakage for each of the 18 sites. This

information includes the number of hourly records obtained and the number of records that

recorded only leakage. Note that post-project gate installation data were utilized in the leakage

determination at Site No 4, Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 95. Post-project leakage estimate for this

site could not be assumed to be zero due to a standing water order of 0.5 cfs for the City of

Seeley water supply which, when rejected, remains in Lateral 13 and is not reflected in the CFS

files. To eliminate and/or minimize the possibility of considering rejected flows by the City of

Seeley as leakage, leakage measurements were collected prior to and after installation of the non-

leak gate. The average leakage measured for the period of time after installation of the non-leak

gate was subtracted from the measured average leakage for the period of time prior to the

installation of the non-leak gate, resulting in a leakage determination of 0.34 cfs (0.55 cfs - 0.21

cfs = 0.34 cfs). The determination of leakage for both periods of time are presented in

Table 3.

Alternative methods were utilized to determine pre-project leakage for four other sites. At Sites

2, 10, and 23, physical and operational characteristics prevented the use of V-notch weirs.

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2


Initial liD leakage estimates were made by field estimation techniques and used for Sites 2 and

10. A sharp crested weir and current meter measurements were used at Site 23. A portable

three-inch Parshall flume was used at Site 22. Table 4 lists these site locations, the alternative

methods used to measure pre-project leakage and the leakage determination.

4.0 PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATF~

For reasons described below, ten of the 25 proposed non-leak gate sites have been excluded or

dropped from Project 12.

Site Reason for Exclusion from Project 12

Site 6 Leakage flows at Elder Lateral 7 Check at Gate 63 were recorded for only two

percent of the monitoring period. After installation of a non-leak gate at this

site, additional downstream demands came on line which resulted in further

reduction in the leakage opportunity time. IID WR staff has concluded that the

monitoring period with the increased downstream demands is typical of normal

annual operations; therefore, Site 6 has been excluded from Project 12.

Site 9 A non-leak gate was installed at the S. Alamo E. Turnout at Lateral 10

Heading, but later removed due to operational problems.

Site 10 Inspection of Wisteria Lateral 1 Heading by liD WR staff and the CVC

confirmed that there is insufficient leakage to justify the cost of installing of

a non-leak gate at this site.

Sites 14 & 18 Because of insufficient leakage opportunity time, measurements were not made

at Redwood Lateral 5 Heading or Elder Lateral 5 Heading.

Site 15 It was recognized in the "Project 12: Non-leak Gate Project Plan" that in order

to take advantage of the potential leakage opportunity time at Redwood Lateral

CVC(mbk) VSR_PI2


8 Heading, the operation of Redwood Canal would have to be modified to

avoid using Lateral 8 for operational spill. As reflected in the limited leakage

opportunity time recorded during the monitoring period at this site, it has not

been practical to limit operational spill to the lateral. IID WR staff has

verified through field inspection and discussion with Division personnel that the

monitoring period is typical of normal annual operations; therefore, because

of limited leakage opportunity time the non-leak gate at Site 15 has been

excluded from Project 12.

Sites 16,17

& 24

During the monitoring periods for Alder Lateral 7 Heading, Elm Lateral 3

Heading and Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 Heading, flows past the existing

wooden gates were greater than flows resulting from just leakage. IID WR

staff concluded through field inspection and discussion with Division operating

personnel that the monitoring periods at these three locations were typical of

normal annual operations. Although non-leak gates were installed at these

sites, the gates are not included in Project 12 because of limited leakage

opportunity time.

Site 19 Realignment of Elder Lateral 7 resulted in reducing the leakage opportunity

time for the non-leak gate at Elder Lateral 7 Heading, from 53 to 1.5 days

annually. Site 19 has been dropped from Project 12 because of inadequate

leakage opportunity time.

The remaining 15 non-leak gates which constitute Project 12 are listed in Table 5.

5.0 WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATES

The estimate of water conserved annually at a non-leak gate was determined by multiplying the

average measured leakage rate in cubic feet per second (cfs) for each site by the conversion

factor 1.983, which converts cfs into acre-feet per day, and then multiplying that number by the

average annual leakage opportunity time in days.

CVC(mbk) VSR P12


Vc= 1.983 Q~. TO

V¢ = Estimated Water Conserved Annually, AF

QL = Leakage, cfs

To = Average Annual Leakage Opportunity Time, days

Average annual leakage opportunity time was determined by subtracting the percentage of time

that water was specifically being delivered through the gate at the proposed non-leak gate site

from the percentage of total time that water was present upstream of, but not necessarily being

delivered through the gate, and then multiplying that percentage by the number of days in a year.

To= 365 (Tu -Td)

To = Average Annual Leakage Opportunity Time, days

T. = Percentage of total time that water was present upstream of the gate, % (or ratio)

= Percentage of time that water was specifically delivered through the gate, % (or ratio)

The determination of average annual leakage opportunity time for canal check gates and lateral

headgates incorporated use of Lateral ProbeI and the CFS files 2. The CFS files were queried

to obtain water delivery data covering the period January 1, 1991 to December 31, 1993 for each

proposed non-leak gate site. Lateral Probe was used to analyze the queried CFS file data to

determine the percentage of total time that water was present at the proposed non-leak gate site

and the percentage of time that water was being delivered through the proposed non-leak gate

site. The estimated leakage opportunity times for mid-lateral spills were based on Division

operational data.

~ Lateral Probe is a computer program developed for estimating the water conveyance lossesin IID lateral canals.

2 CFS files are the IID records of water ordered, delivered and charged for each delivery.

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2


Water conservation estimates for the 15 non-leak gates in Project 12 are summarized in Table

6. Detailed location maps for the 15 sites are presented in Figures 2 through 9.

6.0 PROJECTED 1995 CONSERVATION SAVINGS

The projected 1995 Project 12 conservation savings is estimated to be 630 AF.

7.0 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE RECOMMENq)ATIONS

The effectiveness of the non-leak gates depends on proper operation and maintenance practices.

Therefore, it is recommended that:

I. Project 12 non-leak gates be clearly marked and identified in the field.

)Field operating personnel be instructed on Project 12 objectives to ensure that the gates are

operated and maintained to eliminate leakage when there is no water order downstream of

the gate.

Procedures be established that will ensure prompt corrective action is taken if a non-leak

gate requires maintenance.

A log be maintained by each Division of any non-leak gate problems requiring maintenance

and the action taken to correct the problem.

5. Copies of the maintenance logs be retained in the IID conservation verification files.

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2

FiI¢:NONLKCVC.RPT 7 M~,,h 16, 1995

Project 12 non-leak gates be inspected monthly through 1995 to ensure that the non-leak

gates are being operated and maintained to meet the Project objectives. A record of the

monthly inspections be retained in the IID conservation verification files.

QAfter 1995, sufficient inspections be made and documented by liD to ensure the integrity

of the Project 12 program.

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2Filc:NONLKCVC.RPT 8 March 16, 1995

TABLES

Table 1

NON-LEAK GATE PROJECT PLAN

PROPOSED NON-LEAK GATE SITES

SiteNo. Non-Leak Gate Location

1 South Alamo Spill at Heber Road

2 Best Canal Spill at Gate 110

3 Central Main Spill No. 4

4 Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 955 Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4

6 Elder Lateral 7 Check at Gate 63

7

89

10

1112

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2021

22

23

24

25

Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading

Ash Lateral 6 Heading

S. Alamo E. Turnout at Lateral 10 Heading

Wisteria Lateral 1 Heading

Wisteria Lateral 7 HeadingWormwood Lateral 7 Heading

Acacia Lateral 9 Heading

Redwood Lateral 5 Heading

Redwood Lateral 8 Heading

Alder Lateral 7 Heading

Elm Lateral 3 Heading

Elder Lateral 5 Heading

Elder Lateral 7 Heading

Sumac Lateral 2 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 14 Heading

Trifolium Lateral 15 Heading


Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 Heading

O’Brien Lateral Heading

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:I1DMEASA.TBL March 16, "~995

Table 2

V-NOTCH WEIR CHARACTERISTICS

SiteNmnber

V-NotchDepth

(inches)

V-NotchAngle

(degrees)Non-Leak Gate Location

1 South Alamo Spill @ Heber Road 8 30 0.24

3 Central Main Spill Number 4 10 22.5 0.31

4 Elder Lateral 13 @ Gate 95 6 120 0.77

5 Spruce Main Check @ Lateral 4 6 45 0.18

6 Elder Lateral 7 Check @ Gate 63 6 30 0.12

7 Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading 8 30 0.24

8 Ash Lateral 6 Heading 6 90 0.44

I 1 Wisteria Lateral 7 Heading 6 120 0.77

12 Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading 8 45 0.40

13 Acacia Lateral 9 Heading 6 45 0.18

15 Redwood Lateral $ Heading 8 90 0.90

16 Alder Lateral 7 Heading 6 60 0.25

17 Elm Lateral 3 Heading 6 45 0.18

19 Elder Lateral 7 Heading 6 90 0.44

20 Sumac Lateral 2 Heading 6 90 0.44

21 Trifolium Lateral 14 Heading 6 30 0.12

24 Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 Heading 6 60 0.25

25 O’Brien Lateral Heading 6 90 0.44

V-NotchMaximum

Flow(crs)

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:VNOTCH3.TBL March 16, "~995

Table 3

V-NOTCH WEIR MONITORING PERIOD AND MEASURED LEAKAGE

SiteNo.

Number of Number ofPre-Project lloudy Records llourty RecordsMonito~tg in With Only Leakage

Description Period Monltorlag Period Leakage (cfs)

South Alamo Spill @ Heber Road 10/01/93 to 01/19/94 2648 1673 0.05

Central Main Spill No. 4 09/07/93 to 11/16/93 1688 1675 0.02

Elder Lateral 13 @ Gate 95(Pre-Installation)(Post-Installation)

01/11/93 to 06/29/9306/30/93 to 09/30/93

40562232

995663

0.550.210.34

5 Spruce Main Check @ Lat. 4 08/22/92 to 11/02/92 1736 283 0.08

6 Elder Lateral 7 Check @ Gate 63 09/12/92 to 12/17/92 2076 49 0.02

7 Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading 12/22/92 to 02/11/93 1232 668 0.06

8 Ash Lateral 6 Heading 12/07/93 to 01/05/94 704 454 0.10

11 Wisteria Lateral 7 Heading 08/26/92 to 10/12/92 1136 588 0.42

12 Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading 07/19/92 to I0/12/92 2048 313 0.17

13 Acacia Lateral 9 Heading 10/15/93 to 02/09/94 2832 740 0.06

15 Redwood Lateral 8 Heading 04/15/93 to 06/18/93 1544 49 0.35

16 Alder Lateral 7 Heading 12/07/92 to 03/02/93 2048 0 -

17 Elm Lateral 3 Heading 10/15/93 to 12/14/93 1448 0 -

19 Elder Lateral 7 Heading 12/06/92 to 01/04/93 704 219 0.09

20 Sumac Lateral 2 Heading 01/11/93 to 02/10/93 704 397 0.38

21 Trifolium Lateral 14 Heading 04/16/93 to 07/01/93 1832 93 0.08

25 O’Brien Lateral Heading 05/03/93 to 07/01/93 1424 206 0.22

24 Trifolium Extension Lateral 9 01/01/94 to 02/08/94 920 0 -Heading

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:MONITPER.TBL March 16, "~995

Table 4

ALTERNATIVE LEAKAGE DETERMINATION

Site Measurement LeakageNumber Site Location Method (cfs)

2 Best Canal Spill at Gate 110 IID Field Estimate 0.01

10 Wisteria Lateral 1 Heading IID Field Estimate 0.01

22 Trifolium Lateral 15 Heading 3-inch Parshall Flume and 0.19Current Meter

23 Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading Sharp Crested Weir and 0.02Current Meter

CVC(mbk) VSR P12File:NLGMEAS.TBL March 16, /995

Table 5

PROJECT 12 NON-LEAK GATES

SiteNo. Non-Leak Gate Location

12

3

South Alamo Spill at Heber RoadBest Canal Spill at Gate 1 I0Central Main Spill No. 4

4 Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 955 Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4

7

8

11

12

13

20

21

22

23

25

Hemlock Lateral 2B Heading


Wisteria Lateral 7 Heading

Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading

Acacia Lateral 9 Heading

Sumac Lateral 2 Heading




O’Brien Lateral Heading

CVC(MBKr) VSR_PI 2File:IIDMEASC.TBL March 16, 1995

Table 6

NON-LEAK GATE SITES AND WATER CONSERVATION ESTIMATE

Leakage AnnualSite Location Leakage Opportunity ConservationNo. Location (Figure No.) (cfs) (days/year) (AF/year)

1 South Alamo Spill at Heber Rd. 2 0.05 3372 Best Canal Spill at Gate 110 3 0.01 3483 Central Main Spill No. 4 4 0.02 365

.Can:~iiCheck.Gatesii~:::::: :~": ~": :":~ :.. ’:: ’"::.: i:..~. : i..~ ’ " .... :: ~:.~:... ::~:~~:i: .. .... ~ ’.

4 Elder Lateral 13 at Gate 95 5 0.34 1825 Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4 3 0.08 35

337

14

1236

78

1112132021222325

Hemlock Lateral 2B HeadingAsh Lateral 6 HeadingWisteria Lateral 7 HeadingWormwood Lateral 7 HeadingAcacia Lateral 9 HeadingSumac Lateral 2 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 14 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 15 HeadingTrifolium Lateral 16 HeadingO’Brien Lateral Heading

Total Water Conservation Estimate

0.060.100.420.170.060.380.080.190.020.22

9775

130101103169129126116151

121510834121272148

566

632

CVC(mbk) VSR PI2File:IMPID3.TBL March 16, "~995

FIGU1LES

IRRIGATION DISTRICTTHE I~IPERIAL UNIT

Salt, onSea

FIGURE I

Project 12 Non-Leak GatesSouth Alamo at Heber RoadHemlock Lateral 2B Heading


HEBER

LAT 39

LAT 8

LAT ~

RD

DR

RD

LAT 5A

-.- P-2LAT

P-1RO LAT

LAT 6

RD

8

7

LAT 2

LAT ! ~,

F-

CANAL

YULECANAL

RoadsCanalsRivers

LEGENDGate & Gate Number8outh Alamo at Heber Road

¯ Hemlock Lateral 2B HeadingAsh Lateral 6 Heading

, N1.5 I

FIGURE 2

Project 12 Non-Leak GatesBest Canal Spill at Delivery 110Spruce Main Check at Lateral 4

PICKE]

Roads

RJvm,-s

LEGENDGate & G~te NumberBest Canal Spill at Dellvew 1 10

¯ ~pruce Main Check at Lateral 40 .5 1 1.5

FIGURE 3

Project 12 Non-Leak GatesCentral Main Spill No. 4

Sumac Lateral 2 Heading

RD

LAT3 2

~ :c RDSWARTHOUT RD

CANAL

RD

L1111

WEINERT RD

LARSEN

GRIMES RD

LILAC

RoadsC~malsRivers

~EGENDGate & Gate NumberCentral Maln Spill No. 4Sumac Lateral 2 Heading

1.5 ~

Wc~r Dc3xu~nv~ - GiS ~-

FIGURE 4

Project 12 Non-Leak GatesElder Lateral 13 at Gate 95

Wormwood Lateral 7 Heading

LATt

PARK

STEVENS

LAT2

VAUGHN

4

1

RD

RD

LAT 2:

WIXOMz RD

EVAN

DIEHL

O

11 \

KRAMER

RD

~101

SCHANIEL

RoadsCanalsR/vers

LEGENDGate & Gate NumberElder Lsteral 13 at Gate 95Wormwood Lateral 7 Heeding

Scale gn Miles ,~

0 -5 1 1.5 I

FIGURE 5

ProjectWisteria

12 Non-Leak GatesLateral 7 Heading

~)RTH ,R~P R ,1’2

WAHL

LAT 4

KUBLER

DAHLIA

-- , LAT 1-B

s FAWCETT

JASPER

BIRCH

/

P-1 tAT

RoadsCentsR~em

~.EGEND~ Gate & Gate Number

¯ Wlstede Lateral 7 Heading

FIGURE 6

Project 12 Non-Leak GatesAcacia Lateral 9 Heading

"~ I ~ UL,,,,-I~=- ~.. ~.. L. .~ ,.

DATE

RD

RoadsCanals

LEGEND~’ G~te & Gate Number

¯ Acacia Lateral 9 Headlng

1.5 i.

W,z~r De~r~ - G~

FIGURE 7

ProjectTrifoliumTrifoliumTrifolium

12 Non-Leak GatesLateral 14Lateral 15Lateral 16

HeadingHeadingHeading

LAT 13-A

ORR RD "

STEiNER RD

_L..E_.G. __E._N. _D

X~~ Gate &Gm Number~ Tdfollum Lateral 14 Heading¯ Trifollum Lateral 15 Heading~ Trifolium Lateral 16 Heading

~a/e /n M’i/es~~

0 .5 1 1.5

FIGURE 8

Project 12 Non-Leak GatesO’Brien Lateral Heading

LAT~ 13-B

LAT 13-A~

.. MC ~ ,KENDB~

GRUBLE RD~

Road=

Rlver~

LEGENDX~~ Gate & Gate Number

¯ O’Brlen Lateral Heading $ca~ /n M//es

¯ .~ 1

FIGURE 9

project 12 non-leak gates verification summary report

Documents