Technical Memorandum 4
Supplemental Water Need of the
On-Project Plan Area
Prepared for
Klamath Water and Power Agency
July 2012
Contents
Section Page Acronyms and Abbreviations ...............................................................................................................................v 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1‐1 1.1 Introduction and Purpose ............................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.2 Content ........................................................................................................................................... 1‐1 1.3 Summary of Findings ...................................................................................................................... 1‐1 2 DIVERSION Monitoring ....................................................................................................................... 2‐1 2.1 Limitation on DIVERSION ................................................................................................................ 2‐1 2.2 Uncertainty Regarding Use of Refuge Allocation ........................................................................... 2‐3 2.3 Measurement of Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA ...................................................................... 2‐3 2.4 Evaluation of Limitation on DIVERSION as Compared to Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA ........ 2‐3 2.5 Development of Monthly DIVERSION Guide .................................................................................. 2‐8 2.6 Formation of Operations Committee ........................................................................................... 2‐13 3 Identify/Evaluate System Demands .................................................................................................... 3‐1 3.1 Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA .................................................................................................. 3‐1 3.2 KPSIM .............................................................................................................................................. 3‐2 3.3 TM 3 ................................................................................................................................................ 3‐3 3.4 Demands for Development of the OPP .......................................................................................... 3‐5 4 March through October Supplemental Water Need ............................................................................ 4‐1 4.1 Supplemental Water Need of the OPPA ......................................................................................... 4‐1 4.1.1 Calculation of Supplemental Water Need of the OPPA .................................................... 4‐1 4.1.2 Estimate of Monthly Supplemental Water Need of the OPPA .......................................... 4‐3 4.2 Supplemental Water Need to Meet the Refuge Allocation............................................................ 4‐6 5 November through February Supplemental Water Need ..................................................................... 5‐1 5.1 Supplemental Water Need for the OPPA ....................................................................................... 5‐1 5.2 Supplemental Water Need to Meet the Refuge Allocation............................................................ 5‐2 6 References .......................................................................................................................................... 6‐1 Tables 2‐1 3‐1 4‐1 4‐2 4‐3 4‐4 5‐1 Example of Development of Seasonal DIVERSION Guide Based on the Dry year Average Cumulative Percentage of Historical March through October DIVERSION and a Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION, Exclusive of Any Refuge Allocation, of 330,000 Acre‐Feet (330 TAF). ........................................................ 2‐12 Estimated Quantity of Other Sources of Water for Use Within the On‐Project Plan Area .......................... 3‐4 Potential DIVERSION of 330,000 Acre‐Feet (330 TAF) Following Upper and Lower Envelopes and Dry Year Average in Thousands of Acre‐Feet (TAF). ................................................................................................... 4‐5 Potential Monthly Supplemental Water Need Based on a Limitation on DIVERSION, Exclusive of Any Refuge Allocation, of 330,000 Acre‐Feet (330 TAF) Following the Upper and Lower Envelopes and Dry Year Average in Thousands of Acre‐Feet (TAF). ................................................................................................... 4‐5 Potential Maximum Monthly Supplemental Water Need in Thousands of Acre‐Feet (TAF). ...................... 4‐6 Monthly Demand Quantity for Summer Refuge Allocation. ........................................................................ 4‐7 Monthly Demand Quantity for Winter Refuge Allocation. ........................................................................... 5‐2 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
III
CONTENTS, CONTINUED
Figures Page 1‐1 Comparison of the Dry Year Average DIVERSION to the Seasonal DIVERSION Guide.. ............................... 1‐2 2‐1 March through October Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION. ........................................................................ 2‐2 2‐2 Settlement Points of DIVERSION .................................................................................................................. 2‐5 2‐3 Average, Maximum, and Minimum Monthly March through October DIVERSION to the OPPA for the Period 1986‐2000. ........................................................................................................................................ 2‐6 2‐4 Average, Maximum, and Minimum Cumulative Monthly March through October Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the Period 1986‐2000. ............................................................................................................ 2‐7 2‐5 Average, Maximum, and Minimum Cumulative Percent of March through October Histroical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the Period 1986‐2000. ............................................................................................................ 2‐8 2‐6 March through October Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the Period 1986‐2000. .............................. 2‐9 2‐7 Dry Year March through October Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA. ....................................................... 2‐10 2‐8 Average, Maximum, Minimum and Dry Year Average Cumulative Percent of March through October Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the Period 1986‐2000 .................................................................... 2‐11 2‐9 Example Seasonal DIVERSION Guide for Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION, Exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, of 330,000 Acre‐Feet (330 TAF) ................................................................................................ 2‐12 3‐1 Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA the Period 1961‐2000. ........................................................................... 3‐2 3‐2 KPSIM Project Demand within the OPPA. .................................................................................................... 3‐3 3‐3 On‐Project Plan AreaTotal Estimated OPPA Demand and Potential Supply Sources . ................................. 3‐4 3‐4 Comparison of KPSIM Project Demand and Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the Period 1961‐2009. ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3‐5 4‐1 Estimated March through October Supplemental Water Need Under the Limitation on DIVERSION for the Period 1961‐2010. ........................................................................................................................................ 4‐2 4‐2 Estimated Maximum March through October Supplemental Water Need as Compared to the Limitation on DIVERSION, Exclusive of Any Refuge Allocation. .......................................................................................... 4‐3 4‐3 Potential Range of Monthly Supplemental Water Need Based on Historical 1991 DIVERSION and the Limitation on DIVERSION .............................................................................................................................. 4‐4 5‐1 Historical November through February DIVERSION to the OPPA for the period 1986‐2010. ...................... 5‐1 IV
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
Acronyms and Abbreviations
cfs DIVERSION cubic feet per second The total amount of water from the Klamath system diverted from specific Upper Klamath Lake and Klamath River diversion facilities (known as the “Settlement Points of Diversion”) as identified and calculated under Term 1.a.‐c. of Appendix E‐1 to the KBRA DWR California Department of Water Resources EID Enterprise Irrigation District ESA Endangered Species Act ITRC Irrigation Training and Research Center of California Polytechnic State University KBRA Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement KDD Klamath Drainage District KID Klamath Irrigation District Klamath Project Klamath Reclamation Project KWAPA Klamath Water and Power Agency KWUA Klamath Water Users Association LKNWR Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge LRDC Lost River Diversion Channel MAF million acre‐feet OPP On‐Project Plan OPPA On‐Project Plan Area OPPAC On‐Project Plan Advisory Committee OWRD Oregon Water Resources Department Reclamation Bureau of Reclamation Summer Period March through October TAF thousand acre‐feet TID Tulelake Irrigation District TLNWR Tulelake National Wildlife Refuge TM technical memorandum UKL Upper Klamath Lake USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey Winter Period November through February (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
V
SECTION 1.0 Introduction
1.1
Introduction and Purpose
This technical memorandum (TM) is the fourth in a series of TMs to develop the On‐Project Plan (OPP) for the Klamath Water and Power Agency (KWAPA). The following list identifies the content of TMs 1, 2 and 3. 
TM 1 identifies the project goals/objectives and approach for development of the OPP. 
TM 2 identifies the water supply and operations for the On‐Project Plan Area (OPPA). 
TM 3 estimates individual irrigation district water requirements/demands within the OPPA. This TM 4 has two basic purposes. First, it provides a conservative estimate of the amount of water needed to align water supply with demand in the OPPA in light of the Limitation on “DIVERSION” of Klamath River and Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) water provided in the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and described in TM 2. Subsequent TMs will evaluate and recommend the options and combinations of options in the form of alternatives to address this supplemental water need. As described in TM 1, the types of options to be evaluated are expected to include conservation and efficiency, storage, groundwater substitution, demand management, and other measures. Second, to provide a level of guidance to the OPPA entities and KWAPA in operating in light of the Limitation on DIVERSION this TM evaluates past dry year diversions in order to arrive at estimates of deliveries that would distribute the available Klamath River and UKL water supply during the March through October period. By distributing the Limitation on DIVERSION by month and using an average dry year demand by month an estimate of the monthly quantity of supplemental water supply necessary to align water supply with demand within the OPPA was calculated. For the purposes of this TM, the March through October (summer period) supplemental water need was the main area of focus; however, the November through February (winter period) Limitation on DIVERSION has been addressed for both agriculture and the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge (LKNWR). For the purposes of this TM, “DIVERSION” is used when the reference is to all Settlement Points of Diversion and consistent with the definition in Appendix E‐1 to the KBRA. Water diverted at a single point of diversion or in some manner not consistent with the definition of “DIVERSION” in Appendix E‐1 of the KBRA will be referred to as “diversion” or “diversions”. However, as identified in Section 2.4 of this TM, “DIVERSION to the OPPA” is also used and refers to DIVERSION, exclusive of any deliveries to the LKNWR through the Ady Canal at the state line. 1.2
Content
This TM contains the following sections: 




Section 2.0 – DIVERSION Monitoring Section 3.0 – Identify/Evaluate System Demand Section 4.0 – March through October Supplemental Water Need Section 5.0 – February through November Supplemental Water Need Section 6.0 – References 1.3
Summary of Findings
As further described in this TM, an estimated maximum monthly and seasonal supplemental water need for the OPPA was determined for the purpose of the development of the OPP. In addition, a seasonal DIVERISON Guide was developed to aid KWAPA and the OPP irrigators with planning and monitoring efforts under the Limitation on DIVERSION. This summary of findings focuses on the summer period, as it is directly pertinent to the OPP planning efforts; however estimated supplemental water need for the winter period within the OPPA is also discussed further in this TM along with LKNWR summer and winter demand. (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
1-1
1 INTRODUCTION
Historical DIVERSION from the Klamath River to the OPPA were evaluated and analyzed to determine the quantity and pattern of historical DIVERSION. As a conservative estimate, the average DIVERSION pattern for the drier years (1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1994) for the March through October period was calculated. This “dry year average” provides a conservative approach to evaluating historical DIVERSION and demand during years where the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, may be equal to 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF). As a planning tool, this dry year average was combined with the Limitation on DIVERSION to develop a seasonal DIVERSION Guide. The seasonal DIVERSION Guide provides an informal upper threshold for DIVERSION based on the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, of 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF). Figure 1‐1 provides a comparison between the estimated seasonal DIVERSION Guide developed in Section 2‐5 and the dry year average historical DIVERSION to the OPPA. The difference between the seasonal DIVERSION Guide (based on 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF)) and the dry year average historical DIVERSION illustrates an estimated supplemental water need that may occur during drier year types within the OPPA. Based on this example, the supplemental water need, calculated as the difference between the cumulative historic dry year average DIVERSION (412,000 acre‐feet (412 TAF)) and the cumulative seasonal DIVERSION Guide (330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF)) is equal to 82,000 acre‐feet (82 TAF). FIGURE 1-1 COMPARISON OF THE DRY YEAR AVERAGE DIVERSION TO THE SEASONAL DIVERSION GUIDE.
In practice, the OPP will eliminate differences between the historical DIVERSION and the curve representing the DIVERSION Guide, and the cumulative DIVERSION would be monitored throughout the March through October period relative to the seasonal DIVERSION Guide to assist in operating within the Limitation on DIVERSION. This seasonal DIVERSION Guide would function strictly as a planning tool to evaluate how DIVERSION to the OPPA during a given year compares to historical DIVERSION patterns applied to the Limitation on DIVERSION. 1-2
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
1 INTRODUCTION
The objective of the analysis, using historic hydrology, was to estimate the maximum supplemental water need that may occur under the Limitation on DIVERSION. Calculation of a maximum seasonal supplemental water need provides an estimate of the quantity and magnitude of supplemental water needed for future planning efforts and development of the OPP. The OPP will be developed to adequately address the maximum expected March through October supplemental water need or series of supplemental water need that may occur during a given time period. However, identifying the total seasonal supplemental water need may not be entirely adequate for the development of the OPP and future planning efforts in complying with the Limitation on DIVERSION. Therefore, an analysis of the supplemental water need on a monthly basis to help define potential operations and planning efforts was performed. Results presented in Section 4.2 show the maximum monthly shortage may be on the order of 45,000 to 55,000 acre‐feet for a given month. The months of April through July are when this maximum supplemental water need has occurred based on past operations. This represents a worst case March through October monthly supplemental water need for the reasons previously identified. RDD/120160003 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
WBG081511182522RDD
1-3
Section 2.0 DIVERSION Monitoring
As described in TM 1 and TM 2, KBRA Section 15.2 contains commitments to develop, implement, and administer an OPP for the OPPA. The purpose of the OPP is to align water supply and demand in areas of the OPPA in light of permanent limitations on Klamath River and Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) water diversion and water delivery obligations for national wildlife refuge purposes that will arise under the KBRA (KBRA Section 15.1.2). Pursuant to Appendix E‐1 of the KBRA the OPP entities are to monitor DIVERSION at the Settlement Points of Diversion and report quantities to the Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) in accordance with any valid Order of Determination or Decree. In order to accomplish this task, guidance for monitoring DIVERSION during the summer (March through October), with recognition of the winter (November through February) period is being provided in this Section of the TM. Guidance for monitoring DIVERSION are recommended based on an evaluation of the Limitation on DIVERSION as compared to historical DIVERSION from the Klamath River, as further described below and in Section 4 of this TM. This section of the TM identifies the Limitation on DIVERSION, together with uncertainty regarding use of the Refuge Allocation within the OPPA for irrigation use prior to delivery to the LKNWR. The historical DIVERSION are analyzed and evaluated to arrive at a seasonal “DIVERSION Guide” for monitoring DIVERSION under the KBRA Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation. This DIVERSION Guide together with an Operations Committee will be useful in monitoring and reporting DIVERSION to OWRD, and providing for the delivery to meet the Refuge Allocation as required pursuant to the KBRA. 2.1
Limitation on DIVERSION
Under the KBRA, “DIVERSION” is a defined term that, generally, means the combined total amount of Klamath River and UKL water diverted from several DIVERSION locations (the Settlement Points of Diversion).The Limitation on DIVERSION, as defined in the KBRA, does not include other sources of water including the Lost River that may be available for diversion at the Settlement Points of Diversion as further described in Section 2.4 of this TM. During the March through October period, the Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION is based on the forecasted net inflow to UKL during the period April 1 through September 30. The March 1 Natural Resources Conservation Service 50 percent exceedance forecast for net inflow during April 1 through September 30 will be used. For the March through October Limitation on DIVERSION, the KBRA identifies the following: 
If the forecast is 287,000 acre‐feet or less, Limitation on DIVERSION is 378,000 acre‐feet, including a Refuge Allocation of 48,000 acre‐feet. 
If the forecast is more than 287,000 acre‐feet, but less than 569,000 acre‐feet, the Limitation on DIVERSION is the quantity in thousands of acre‐feet that results from application of the following equation: 378
42.64 287
282 (1) Including Refuge Allocation that results from application of the following equation: 48

7.64 – 287 282 (2) If the forecast is 569,000 acre‐feet or more, the Limitation on DIVERSION is 445,000 acre‐feet, including a Refuge Allocation of 60,000 acre‐feet. The Limitation on DIVERSION includes the summer Refuge Allocation, measured at the points of delivery of the Refuge Allocation, ranging from 48,000 to 60,000 acre‐feet (48‐60 TAF) depending on the same forecast of April through September inflow to UKL. Consistent with the KBRA, this TM refers to water provided to meet the Refuge Allocation as “delivery”. The Refuge Allocation consists of water provided for the LKNWR Wetlands, LKNWR cooperative farming lands, refilling Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge (TLNWR) sumps after intentional draining by the Refuges, Refuge‐approved walking wetlands, and conveyance losses associated with delivery to walking (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
2-1
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
wetlands from bypassing Anderson‐Rose Dam and delivery to LKNWR via North Canal (if agreed upon in the future by the Refuge Manager and Klamath Drainage District). Figure 2 ‐ 1 depicts the Phase 1 March through October Limitation on DIVERISON. FIGURE 2-1 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER PHASE 1 LIMITATION ON DIVERSION.
The Limitation on DIVERSION during the winter period is 80,000 acre‐feet (80 TAF), including a Refuge Allocation of 35,000 acre‐feet (35 TAF). The Klamath Basin Coordinating Council can notify OWRD that additional winter DIVERSION is acceptable up to a specified quantity, as long as the quantity is authorized pursuant to water rights. The winter Refuge Allocation may be increased up to 60,000 acre‐feet (60 TAF) when available under applicable law, subject to any agreement for delivery of water. This potential increase above the ordinary winter Refuge Allocation of 35,000 acre‐feet (35 TAF) will be charged against the summer Refuge Allocation, unless the summer Refuge Allocation is augmented by new storage based on a Klamath Basin Coordinating Council recommendation. As a practical matter, the water delivered for the Refuge Allocation is not required to be water from UKL or Klamath River. In other words, the OPPA could divert up to the Limitation on DIVERSION, so long as quantities of water actually delivered for the Refuge Allocation (from any source) are in the specified amounts (KBRA section 15.1.2.E). This may be relevant to ultimate implementation and administration issues, but it is not a factor that adds to overall water availability and thus is not considered further in this TM. Although the purpose of the OPP is to align water supply and demand consistent with the Limitation on DIVERSION, the KBRA also identified the development of the Drought Plan (KBRA Section 19.2). As identified in the KBRA, the Drought Plan provides a method by which “Extreme Droughts” shall be declared such that those future years would be similar to 1992 and 1994, the only two Extreme Drought water years (WY) in the period 1961 to 2000. The KBRA provides that the Limitation on DIVERSION can potentially be reduced further, as defined in the Drought Plan, during these Extreme Drought years. The Drought Plan also identifies other response measures to address these year types. The KBRA itself does not require the OPP to directly address further 2-2
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
limitations that could occur in these Extreme Drought years; however, recognition of these years and potential flexibility within the OPP will be important. 2.2
Uncertainty Regarding Use of Refuge Allocation
The quantification of supplemental water need in this TM assumes that water for the summer Refuge Allocation will not consist of return flows from irrigated lands in the OPPA. This assumption is acknowledged to be conservative, but it is appropriate for planning purposes. As previously described, KBRA provides summer Refuge Allocation of 48,000 to 60,000 acre‐feet depending on hydrologic conditions. Historically LKNWR (the assumed primary user of the Refuge Allocation) has received water directly from the Klamath River via the Ady Canal and from the P‐Canal after water was pumped through D‐Plant from Tule Lake. A portion of water pumped through D‐
Plant is return flow and drainage water that was previously diverted from the Klamath River and used for irrigation purposes within the OPPA. This operation has allowed water to be used for the benefit of irrigation prior to delivery to LKNWR. However, the ability to continue these operations in the future is uncertain. In recent years due to various factors, there has been decreased pumping through D‐Plant. Under the KBRA, it is contemplated that some portion of the summer Refuge Allocation will be met from D Plant, and it is allowable to deliver water for the Refuge Allocation that is return flow; in other words, some water may be used for delivery within the OPPA and still also go toward the Refuge Allocation (KBRA Section 15.1.2.D; Appendix E‐1, Term 7 (page E.15). However, for the purposes of this TM, the uncertainty of providing water through D‐Plant for the Refuge Allocation together with the desire for the OPP to maintain a conservative approach, and retain flexibility for the potential Extreme Drought years, this TM assumes that none of the Refuge Allocation can be used for agriculture first. Also, as explained in Section 2.1, the Refuge Allocation may be used at locations other than LKNWR, depending on the decisions of the Refuge Manager. It is assumed that by far the greatest percentage of use of the Refuge Allocation will be at LKNWR and this TM effectively assumes the entire Refuge Allocation quantity of water will be used at LKNWR, and not available in the OPPA. 2.3
Measurement of Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA
2.4
Evaluation of Limitation on DIVERSION as Compared to
Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA
The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) maintains records of diversions at key locations within the Klamath Reclamation Project (Klamath Project), including the Settlement Points of Diversion, for accounting purposes. These records are compiled into a spreadsheet commonly referred to as “MODSUM”, which identifies monthly diversions at various locations. Each year Reclamation updates the MODSUM spreadsheet with the diversion values and provides it to KWUA and KWAPA upon request. The diversion values include both measured and unmeasured quantities which estimate diversions to the Klamath Project. The DIVERSION data to the OPPA were used throughout the development of the Limitation on DIVERSION and the negotiation of the KBRA. Exhibit E‐1 of the KBRA refers to the potential of new monitoring devices on the Settlement Points of Diversion and the need to develop a correlation with the past measurements. This has not occurred, therefore, for the purposes of the analysis within this TM, Reclamation’s MODSUM accounting spreadsheet and DIVERSION data to the OPPA are utilized. The review of monthly historical DIVERSION to the OPPA is focused on the 1986 through 2000 period. This period is considered representative of OPPA demands, prior to significant constraints or potential constraints placed on the Klamath Project due to the full implementation of the Endangered Species Act. Only the Settlement Points of Diversion, both measured and unmeasured, are presented here, as this analysis is focused on the OPPA. As previously described in TM 2 the Settlement Points of Diversion are specific points at which water from UKL or the Klamath River is diverted to beneficial use. These include A‐Canal on UKL, specified structures on the Lost River Diversion Channel (LRDC), and specified structures on the Klamath River and Lake Ewauna. Figure 2‐2 identifies the location of the Settlement Points of Diversion. RDD/120160003 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
WBG081511182522RDD
2-3
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
The Settlement Points of Diversion and their locations are also identified in KBRA Appendix E‐1, pp. E.11‐12 and E.39. As shown on Figure 2‐2, the Settlement Points of Diversion include both measured and unmeasured facilities. Unmeasured facilities are assumed to have specified diversion quantities that contribute toward the DIVERSION (KBRA Appendix E‐1, p. E.14). The March through October quantity for the unmeasured Settlement Points of Diversion is equal to 7,440 acre‐feet. This quantity is assumed to be distributed over a monthly diversion pattern during the March through October period based on the same diversion pattern as within the Klamath Irrigation District/Tulelake Irrigation District Delivery System. This distribution and accounting methodology is utilized in Reclamation’s MODSUM spreadsheet, and is also applied to the analysis within this TM. The Settlement Points of Diversion are further defined in the KBRA, according to the point of control (defined as Points of Rediversion) associated with the Settlement Points of Diversion. This becomes important in the accounting and analyses of historical DIVERSION, as measurement at some of these locations are at the Points of Rediversion versus Points of Diversion. For example, the Settlement Point of Diversion for the Ady Canal is at the centerline of the Klamath River (within Lake Euwana); however the measurement and accounting of historical diversions to this canal are at the point of control (Point of Rediversion) the Ady Canal headworks near highway 97. Therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, the accounting of historical DIVERSION to the OPPA is consistent with the accounting methodologies and locations identified in Reclamation’s MODSUM spreadsheet and represent a combination of Points of Diversion and Points of Rediverison. 2-4
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
KID PUMPING PLANT #2
"
A CANAL
´
KID PUMPING PLANT #1
Upper
Klamath
Lake
A Ca
n al
KID PUMPING PLANT #3
MILLER HILL PUMPING PLANT
KID PUMPING PLANT #4 & 5
MODOC CULVERT
anal
Lost
R ive r
B Ca n a l
!
PIONEER PUMPING FACILITY
CCaa
nnaall
!!!
!
Nor
th C
an
NUMBER 1 DRAIN GATE
CC
"
! !" " !
FC
GGCaana l
"
!
Ca n l
NORTH CANAL
ADY SIPHON #6
!
KID PUMPING PLANTS #7-10
KID PUMPING PLANT #6
W est
D Can al
Lo st River
N
or
th
C an a l
ADY INTAKE CONTROL STRUCTURE
eek
Cr
er
i ll
M
STATION 48
l
na
Ca
ADY SIPHON #7
a
K l am
! at h S
t rai
!
!"
ts D
rain
n al
Ad y C a
ADY CULVERT #5
al
l
na
JOHNSTON PUMPING PLANT
ADY CULVERT #1-4
Gerber
Reservoir
!
EC
REAMES PUMPING PLANT
Area K
Leaselands
J
Canal
N
C
a
Canal
P
Cana l
-1
Lo st Ri ver
P
n
al
Sump 1A
Q Ca n a l
R
Sump
Sump 2
Leaselands
Leaselands
l
na
Ca
Oregon
M Can al
Sump
Sump 33
Leaselands
Leaselands
Sump 1B
Clear Lake
Legend
On-Project Plan Area
"
Measured DIVERSION
!
Unmeasured DIVERSION
Area
Area JJ
Klamath River
Watershed
California
0
5
Scale in Miles
Figure 2-2
Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement Settlement Points of Diversion
TM 4 – Supplemental Water Need of the On-Project Plan Area
Klamath Water and Power Agency On-Project Plan
WBG081511182522RDD_01-TM4.ai 05-03-12 dash
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
As identified in Section 2.2 this TM is not considering the potential use of any portion of the Refuge Allocation for agricultural uses prior to delivery to the LKNWR. Therefore, the historical diversions at the Ady Canal are reduced by the quantity being delivered to the LKNWR as measured at the Ady Canal at the state line. In this manner, only DIVERSION to the OPPA is being evaluated. The historical DIVERSION to the OPPA is identified by delivery systems within the OPPA. Total DIVERSION = Klamath Irrigation District /Tulelake Irrigation District Delivery System + Klamath Drainage District Delivery System + Other Delivery System where; Klamath Irrigation District /Tulelake Irrigation District Delivery System = A Canal + Klamath River diversion via LRDC 1 + KID Pumping Plants 1‐10 Klamath Drainage District Delivery System = North Canal + Ady Canal ‐ Ady Canal at State Line Other Delivery System = Ady District 1‐7 + Johnston Intake Channel + Modoc Culvert + Pioneer Intake Channel + Reames Pumping Plant Figure 2‐3 illustrates the range and average monthly historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the period of 1986 to 2000. FIGURE 2-3 AVERAGE, MAXIMUM, AND MINIMUM MONTHLY MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER DIVERSION TO THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD
1986-2000.
1 “Klamath River diversion via LRDC” means the result of the following: Station 48 Diversions plus Miller Hill Pumping Plant diversions, minus Miller Hill spill returns, minus releases from Wilson Dam to the LRDC.
2-6
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
Data presented in Figure 2‐3 indicates significant variability in historical DIVERSION to the OPPA, particularly in the April through June period. Higher variability early in the irrigation season is due to variability in precipitation and temperature, and the availability of water from other sources, that affects demand for water from the Klamath River. This variability in monthly DIVERSION is to be recognized as flexibility in the use of water under the Limitation on DIVERSION. Section 15.2.1.B of the KBRA states that “….the development of the On‐Project Plan will assume no significant change from historic availability of surface water supplies other than the limitations created by Section 15.3.1.A and Appendix E‐1, and no significant change from historic timing or scheduling of diversions, recognizing the variability in all of these parameters and applying appropriate judgment”. Therefore, minimum and maximum DIVERSION in individual months may bind the range of how water would be expected to be diverted in the future. However, due to the fact that minimum or maximum values may occur in different years, the monthly cumulative DIVERSION for an irrigation season is a better method for understanding how monthly variability contributes to variability across the irrigation season. Figure 2‐4 presents the minimum, maximum, and average cumulative monthly March through October historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for the 1986 through 2000 period. FIGURE 2-4 AVERAGE, MAXIMUM, AND MINIMUM CUMULATIVE MONTHLY MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER HISTORICAL DIVERSION TO THE
OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1986-2000.
Cumulative monthly March through October DIVERSION provide an approximation of how DIVERSION may be planned for in the future to meet demand and comply with the Limitation on DIVERSION. Therefore, for the purposes of this TM, the cumulative monthly DIVERSION are converted into cumulative percent of DIVERSION for any given year in order to create minimum and maximum bound on how DIVERSION may be planned for in the future. Figure 2‐5 illustrates the range and average cumulative percent of March through October DIVERSION during the 1986 through 2000 period. RDD/120160003 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
WBG081511182522RDD
2-7
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
FIGURE 2-5 AVERAGE, MAXIMUM, AND MINIMUM CUMULATIVE PERCENT OF MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER HISTROICAL DIVERSION TO
THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1986-2000.
The maximum line is representative of a year where a higher percentage of March through October DIVERSION occurs early in the irrigation season, perhaps due to a dry, warm spring. The minimum line is representative of years where DIVERSION is less in the spring but increase later in the irrigation season. This may be more representative of years with a cool, wet spring that delays the need for DIVERSION to the OPPA. 2.5
Development of Monthly DIVERSION Guide
Maximum, minimum, or average cumulative percentages presented in Figure 2‐5 can be multiplied by the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, in order to develop a seasonal “DIVERSION Guide” to assist in coordination (see KBRA Section 15.1.1.A.ii.c). For example, using the maximum cumulative percentages from Figure 2‐5 and a Limitation on DIVERSION would provide an upper seasonal DIVERSION Guide for cumulative DIVERSION that should not be exceeded when managing limited supplies under KBRA. However, additional analysis of historical DIVERSION data shows the maximum cumulative percentages illustrated in Figure 2‐5 is driven by the DIVERSION pattern for the 1992 irrigation season. Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA for 1992 show a monthly pattern that is inconsistent with typical operations, beyond just a higher percentage of DIVERSION occurring early in the irrigation season. Figure 2‐6 illustrates historical March through October DIVERSION for each year from 1986 through 2000, with 1992 shown as the dashed, bold line. 2-8
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
FIGURE 2-6 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER HISTORICAL DIVERSION TO THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1986-2000.
Data presented in Figure 2‐6 illustrate that in addition to high May DIVERSION in 1992, DIVERSION after May were low compared to other years. Relying solely on a year such as 1992 when the DIVERSION pattern was abnormally high early in the irrigation season and lower during the typical peak demand months in the summer could create an upper seasonal DIVERSION Guide that allows DIVERSION to be too high early in the season and does not preserve enough of the Limitation on DIVERSION for later months. However, reliance on an average of all years fails to recognize that in drier years DIVERSION will likely begin earlier in the irrigation season than more normal years. Therefore, an average DIVERSION pattern for drier years based on historical DIVERSION to the OPPA in the dry years of 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1994 was calculated. As presented in the following sections and illustrated in Figure 4‐2, these are also several of the years when seasonal supplemental water need is determined to be highest. Additional years with high supplemental water need such as 1977, 2001, and 2007 should not be included in the average dry year DIVERSION pattern because historical DIVERSION in those years either do not represent full OPPA demands (1977) or include water bank program activities (2001 and 2007). Figure 2‐7 presents historical DIVERSION for the dry years of 1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994, and the dry year average monthly DIVERSION. RDD/120160003 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
WBG081511182522RDD
2-9
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
FIGURE 2-7 DRY YEAR MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER HISTORICAL DIVERSION TO THE OPPA.
The dry year average seasonal DIVERSION illustrated in Figure 2‐7 can be used to develop a cumulative dry year percent of March through October DIVERSION for the purpose of developing a seasonal DIVERSION Guide. Figure 2‐8 illustrates the cumulative dry year percentage of March through October DIVERSION compared to the maximum, average, and minimum cumulative percentages presented previously in Figure 2‐5. 2-10
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
FIGURE 2-8 AVERAGE, MAXIMUM, MINIMUM AND DRY YEAR AVERAGE CUMULATIVE PERCENT OF MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER
HISTORICAL DIVERSION TO THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1986-2000
The dry year average cumulative percent of March through October DIVERSION can be combined with the Limitation on DIVERSION to develop a seasonal DIVERSION Guide. The seasonal DIVERSION Guide serves as an upper threshold for DIVERSION. Cumulative DIVERSION would be monitored throughout the March through October period relative to the seasonal DIVERSION Guide to assist in operating within the Limitation on DIVERSION. While it is possible to back‐calculate monthly DIVERSION Guide from the seasonal DIVERSION Guide, in practice it would be applied as a seasonal DIVERSION Guide so that DIVERSION in previous months that are less than the seasonal DIVERSION Guide allow for higher DIVERSION in future months, while DIVERSION that exceeded the seasonal DIVERSION Guide in previous months reduce flexibility and available Klamath River water in the remainder of the season. Figure 2‐9 provides an example of the seasonal DIVERSION Guide for a 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF) Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation. RDD/120160003 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
WBG081511182522RDD
2-11
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
FIGURE 2-9 EXAMPLE SEASONAL DIVERSION GUIDE FOR PHASE 1 LIMITATION ON DIVERSION, EXCLUSIVE OF ANY REFUGE
ALLOCATION, OF 330,000 ACRE-FEET (330 TAF)
The seasonal DIVERSION Guide illustrated in Figure 2‐9 can be quantified by month as presented below in Table 2‐1. TABLE 2-1 EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPMENT OF SEASONAL DIVERSION GUIDE BASED ON THE DRY YEAR AVERAGE CUMULATIVE
PERCENTAGE OF HISTORICAL MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER DIVERSION AND A PHASE 1 LIMITATION ON DIVERSION, EXCLUSIVE OF
ANY REFUGE ALLOCATION, OF 330,000 ACRE-FEET (330 TAF).
Month Seasonal DIVERSION Guide TAF March 7 April 44 May 90 June 153 July 220 August 279 September 316 October 330 2-12
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
2 DIVERSION MONITORING
A similar estimate given different scenarios of how the Limitation on DIVERSION may be calculated in order to provide monthly upper bounds for specific water year conditions in order to aid in planning efforts. In addition, as further described in Section 4 of this TM, the monthly DIVERSION Guide for a specific year can then be combined with estimated demand to calculate monthly quantities of supplemental water need and/or the quantity necessary to reduce demand for Klamath River water. 2.6
Formation of Operations Committee
Coordination, communication, and cooperation will be important to monitor and report DIVERSION of Klamath River water pursuant to the KBRA. The measured Settlement Points of Diversion (A‐Canal, Station 48, Miller Hill Pumping Plant, North Canal, and Ady Canal) represent over 95% of the DIVERSION and are operated by KID, TID and KDD. A working group or “Operations Committee” made up of individuals from these entities to work with KWAPA to provide the monitoring and reporting will be useful, and can also inform the coordination contemplated under section 15.1.1.A.ii. of the KBRA pertaining to tracking DIVERSION through the irrigation season. In addition, TID operates D‐Plant which serves one of the two existing delivery points for LKNWR of the Refuge Allocation. The other existing delivery point for the LKNWR is the Ady Canal at the State line. KDD and the LKNWR have a contractual arrangement for the use of the Ady Canal for deliveries to the LKNWR. Thus an Operations Committee made up of representatives of these three districts, using the information presented in this TM would be well suited to monitor and report DIVERSION and Refuge Allocation deliveries. Direct access to real‐time data at the measured Settlement Points of Diversion may prove useful to KWAPA and the Operations Committee when complying with the Limitation on DIVERSION of the KBRA. In addition, more extensive and improved measurement throughout the OPPA may assist the Operations Committee with management decisions relating to the system operations. Coordination with Reclamation relative to improved measurement, more timely access to data, and the responsibility for quality assurance and control will be imperative and is logical to occur through this Operations Committee. RDD/120160003 (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
WBG081511182522RDD
2-13
SECTION 3.0 Identify/Evaluate System Demands
This section of the TM is to provide, identify, and evaluate various approaches for estimating water demand from the Klamath River for the OPPA. Three approaches to evaluate demand were reviewed and are based on 1) historical DIVERSION to the OPPA, 2) simulated demand (KPSIM), and 3) crop water use and other factors as completed in TM 3. These approaches are described below, together with a recommendation of which demand estimate or estimates may be most appropriate for the development of the OPP. 3.1
Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA
Historical DIVERSION identifies the quantity of water diverted to and used on the OPPA from the Klamath River. Historical DIVERSION can be a good measure of future demands for that water or an alternative to it if historic conditions are representative of expected future conditions. However, historical DIVERSION may also reflect changes in project operations, cropping patterns, irrigated lands, regulatory constraints, water supply availability, and numerous other factors that may or may not change into the future. In the OPPA, historical DIVERSION for the period 1986 through 2000 are generally assumed to reflect a current and projected future level of development and irrigation operations. Historical DIVERSION records after 2000 include years when DIVERSION were curtailed due to regulatory constraints and years when water bank programs and activities were operated to meet demand and/or reduce surface water DIVERSION from the Klamath River. In some years it is possible to adjust historical DIVERSION records to account for activities such as increased groundwater pumping that occurred during the water bank program activities. For the purposes of this TM, adjustments were made to historical DIVERSION to account for water bank program activities. In summary, for many years, especially from 2001 to 2010, the historical DIVERSION quantity (plus any other source actually used that year) represents the actual demand, and this can be used as one means of estimating demand in future years. If a water bank program was employed, the quantity is added to the historical DIVERSION as a demand that would have existed but for the water bank activity. The historical DIVERSION to the OPPA together with estimates from water bank program activities is provided in Figure 3‐1. (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
3-1
SECTION 3.0 IDENTIFY/EVALUATE SYSTEM DEMANDS
FIGURE 3-1 HISTORICAL DIVERSION TO THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1961-2000.
3.2
KPSIM
A second method of estimating demand is based on estimates developed by Reclamation as input into the Klamath Project Simulation Model (KPSIM). KPSIM demands were developed by correlating historical Klamath River diversions to areas A1 (KID/TID Delivery System), A2 (KDD Delivery System), and the LKNWR with Klamath Falls precipitation. This estimate of demand does not include the portion of the “Other Delivery System”, located west of the railroad tracks parallel to Highway 97. This portion of the unmeasured diversions is presumed to be 4,840 acre‐feet (7.84 TAF) as identified in Appendix E‐1 of the KBRA. KPSIM demand was classified as one of four year types; above normal, below normal, dry, or critical based on precipitation in months leading up to the start of the irrigation season. Demand in above normal years is lowest while critical year demands are highest. One year type was used for A1 and LKNWR and a separate year type was used for A2. KPSIM demand was developed in approximately 1997 and relied upon historical diversions from approximately 1986 until 1997. Reclamation has since developed KPSIM demands through 2009 using the same precipitation based method. KPSIM demands are intended to estimate full demand of the OPPA (except for the “Other Delivery System”) and LKNWR, without the influence of factors that can prevent historical diversions from representing full demand. KPSIM demands are separated into demands for the OPPA and LKNWR. Figure 3‐2 provides the KPSIM demands for the OPPA plus the estimate of 4,840 acre‐feet (4.84 TAF) for that portion of the unmeasured diversions at the Settlement Points of Diversion not covered in the simulated demand in KPSIM. 3-2
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
SECTION 3.0 IDENTIFY/EVALUATE SYSTEM DEMANDS
FIGURE 3-2 KPSIM PROJECT DEMAND WITHIN THE OPPA.
3.3
TM 3
In TM 3, the demand for individual districts, regardless of the water source, was developed from the field level up. The demand estimated in TM 3 does not attempt to account for the available water sources or supplies available to meet this demand. The individual district demand in TM 3 was developed to form an overall common basis to understand the demand within each of the entities within the OPPA. As described in TMs 2 and 3, other water supplies in addition to Klamath River water, including reuse, are extremely difficult to quantify and document. The co‐mingling of water supplies together with the lack of available and reliable data for these other sources causes difficulty in estimating the additional quantities available. The most notable source of information is the Klamath Basin Investigation – Hydrologic Assessment of the Upper Klamath Basin – Issues and Opportunities – Draft Report (ITRC Report). It is important to note that this ITRC Report developed an overall comprehensive water balance into and out of the Klamath Project area (in the context of a number of subbasins) for 1999 to 2001. Data for Subregion 2 (KID) and Subregion 3 (TID) from the ITRC Report for the years 1999 and 2000 were utilized to estimate other sources of water supply within the OPPA. These years were used because they are considered above average (1999) and below average (2000) water years. The use of these two subregions covers the majority of the acreage within the OPPA. The following Table 3‐1 provides an estimate of the range of non‐Klamath River water supply available to the KID and TID portion of the OPPA based in part on the 2003 ITRC report. As described in the 2003 ITRC Report, the estimated quantity of reuse (drainage inflow and operational canal spill from KID to TID) were based on measurement sites that were poor or in some cases no devices were installed; and therefore, were assigned poor confidence intervals during evaluation of the water balance. Based on these observations and discussions with (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
3-3
SECTION 3.0 IDENTIFY/EVALUATE SYSTEM DEMANDS
district managers, an alternative method for estimating reuse using available flow data at other locations was used. This approach is further described in TM 2. TABLE 3-1 ESTIMATED QUANTITY OF OTHER SOURCES OF WATER FOR USE WITHIN THE ON-PROJECT PLAN AREA
Other Sources Lost River1 Other (surface storage, soil moisture, other minor springs/streams, & groundwater)1 Precipitation1 Reuse2 Estimated Total 1
Estimated Quantity TAF 22 ‐ 185 110 57 ‐ 85 100 – 150 289‐530 Values referenced from 2003 ITRC Report for 1999 and 2000. Alternative method of estimating reuse identified in TM 2
2 As identified in TM 2, the 1986 through 2000 (March through October) Klamath River DIVERSION ranged from 329,000 to 432,000 acre‐feet (329‐432 TAF), with an average of 387,000 acre‐feet (387 TAF). Average DIVERSION since 2001 has been significantly less, averaging approximately 340,000 acre‐feet (340 TAF) from 2002 through 2009. Using a value of 340,000 acre‐feet (340 TAF) of Klamath River DIVERSION in addition to the lower range of other sources (approximately 290,000 acre‐feet (290 TAF) per Table 3‐1 above) results in an estimated total water supply of approximately 630,000 acre‐feet (630 TAF). Figure 3‐3 presents this in graphical format. This total water supply is approximately 50,000 acre‐feet (50 TAF) less than the estimated “high” demand identified in TM 3. Such differences in supply and demand, which have been much greater in some years, have typically been met with the implementation of water bank activities which include a combination of increased groundwater pumping (in some years substantial quantities) and temporary land idling. FIGURE 3-3 ON-PROJECT PLAN AREA TOTAL ESTIMATED OPPA DEMAND AND POTENTIAL SUPPLY SOURCES.
3-4
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
SECTION 3.0 IDENTIFY/EVALUATE SYSTEM DEMANDS
3.4
Demands for Development of the OPP
For development of the OPP, it is appropriate to define the supplemental water need based on the larger of: the historical demand (Section 3.1); and simulated demand (Section 3.2). This approach is relatively conservative, and will provide for future uncertainty and some level of recognition for Extreme Drought years. For these reasons, the use of the higher of historical DIVERSION to the OPPA and the KPSIM demand are appropriate for estimating the supplemental water need to develop the OPP. Figure 4‐3 compares historical DIVERSION to simulated demand in KPSIM. FIGURE 3-4 COMPARISON OF KPSIM PROJECT DEMAND AND HISTORICAL DIVERSION TO THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1961-2009.
As identified in Figure 3‐4 during the 1961 through 1985 period, the simulated demand (KPSIM Demand) values are greater than the historical March through October DIVERSION. For the period 1986 through 2000, historical March through October DIVERSION generally exceed simulated demand. The historical DIVERSION to the OPPA identified above in Figure 3‐4 are adjusted to include quantities made available from water bank activities that occurred during the 2001 through 2009 period. As shown in Figure 3‐4, for the purposes of this TM, demand during the 2001 through 2009 period is driven by both the simulated demand and the historical March through October DIVERSION (including the water bank activities), depending on the year. (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
3-5
SECTION 4.0 March through October Supplemental Water Need
4.1
Supplemental Water Need of the OPPA
4.1.1
Calculation of Supplemental Water Need of the OPPA
This section describes supplemental water need of the OPPA under the Limitation on DIVERSION. The calculation of supplemental water need during the summer period provides a conservative or high estimate for the purpose of implementing the OPP. The objective of this analysis is to estimate supplemental water need that may occur under the Limitation on DIVERSION. The analysis estimates the maximum supplemental water need in the future for development of the OPP. Conservative assumptions are made for both the Limitation on DIVERSION and OPPA demand: specifically, relative to the Limitation on DIVERSION, “Phase 1” Limitations in KBRA Appendix E‐1, are used, and a conservative assumption relative to the flexibility of providing the Refuge Allocation, or a portion thereof, from the agriculture tailwater as described in Section 2.2. is used, and demand assumptions are as stated in Section 3.4. Supplemental water need is calculated as the difference between the higher of historical DIVERSION or simulated demand (KPSIM) of the OPPA and the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation. Potential future supplemental water need was calculated two ways to address the uncertainty in future supplies and demand, within the OPPA. The primary purpose of this calculation was to determine the most conservative (maximum) supplemental water need, or worst‐case scenario, for use in the development of the OPP, using historic hydrology. Available Klamath River water supplies under the Limitation on DIVERSION were compared against the estimates of demand to calculate the March through October supplemental water need of the OPPA. Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA and KPSIM demand were compared to the Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION exclusive of any Refuge Allocation. Therefore, there were two separate calculations made for the March through October supplemental water need: 1. Historical DIVERSION to the OPPA minus Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation (referred to as “Historical Supplemental Water Need”) 2. KPSIM demand for the OPPA minus Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation (referred to as “Simulated (KPSIM) Supplemental Water Need”) Figure 4‐1 illustrates the March through October calculation of the supplemental water need for the 50‐year period analyzed. Years without a column indicate adequate Klamath River water was available under the Limitation on DIVERSION to meet the estimated demand under each of the calculations. (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
4-1
SECTION 4.0 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
FIGURE 4-1 ESTIMATED MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED UNDER THE LIMITATION ON DIVERSION FOR THE
PERIOD 1961-2010.
Figure 4‐2 presents the maximum March through October supplemental water needed from the separate calculations of supplemental water need; that is, it depicts the same data as Figure 4‐1, except illustrates only the larger of the two values shown in Figure 4‐1 for a given year. The maximum supplemental water need is assumed to represent the maximum expected future supplemental water need within the OPPA. Figure 4‐2 illustrates that the maximum quantity of supplemental water needed during the period of analysis occur during 1990, 1991, and 1994 and can approach or exceed 100,000 acre‐feet (TAF). Under the KBRA, the differences could be larger in some “Extreme Drought” years, although such years were extremely infrequent in the period of analysis (only two of the years since 1961). 4-2
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
SECTION 4.0 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
FIGURE 4-2 ESTIMATED MAXIMUM MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED AS COMPARED TO THE LIMITATION ON
DIVERSION, EXCLUSIVE OF ANY REFUGE ALLOCATION.
It is important to recognize this represents a maximum supplemental water need using the Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, and assuming none of the summer Refuge Allocation (48,000 – 60,000 acre‐feet) is return flow at D‐Plant originating from irrigated lands in the OPPA. The ability to use return flow for the summer Refuge Allocation at D‐Plant/ P‐Canal, if it can be sufficiently predicted and planned for in a given year, could reduce the supplemental water need shown in Figure 4‐2 for the given years. 4.1.2 Estimate of Monthly Supplemental Water Need for the OPPA
Calculation of a maximum seasonal supplemental water need provides an estimate of the quantity and magnitude of supplemental water needed for future planning efforts and development of the OPP. The OPP will be developed to adequately address the maximum expected March through October supplemental water need or series of supplemental water need that may occur during a given time period. However, identifying the total seasonal supplemental water need may not be entirely adequate for the development of the OPP and future planning efforts in complying with the Limitation on DIVERSION. Therefore, an analysis of the supplemental water need on a monthly basis is necessary to help define potential operations and planning efforts. The Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation defines a seasonal volume of water made available to the OPPA. As previously described, KBRA Section 15.2.1 states that during the development of the OPP parties should assume “no significant change from historic timing or scheduling of diversions”. Therefore, the monthly pattern of historical DIVERSION was analyzed to establish the timing and scheduling of expected monthly DIVERSION under the Limitation on DIVERSION. On March 1 of each year the Limitation on DIVERSION is set pursuant to the KBRA. At this time it is possible to develop a corresponding range of potential monthly supplemental water need to be addressed by the OPP. Analysis of the Limitation on DIVERSION and supplemental water need presented in Figure 4‐2 identifies 1991 as the year of maximum supplemental water need during the March through October period of approximately (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
4-3
SECTION 4.0 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
103,000 acre‐feet (103 TAF). The Phase 1 Limitation on DIVERISON, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation provides 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF) in 1991 together with the maximum and minimum March through October cumulative historical DIVERSION illustrated in Figure 2‐5 and Table 2‐1 (presented in Section 2.4) were used to provide an estimate of the range of potential future monthly DIVERSION. Potential DIVERSION can then be compared with historical DIVERSION to the OPPA to estimate monthly supplemental water need during the summer period. FIGURE 4-3 POTENTIAL RANGE OF MONTHLY SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED BASED ON HISTORICAL 1991 DIVERSION AND THE
LIMITATION ON DIVERSION
Figure 4‐3 presents the results of this analysis. The “upper envelope pattern” illustrates potential DIVERSION under KBRA assuming the DIVERSION follow the “maximum” monthly percent of March through October cumulative monthly DIVERSION illustrated in Figure 2‐5 (Section 2.4). This pattern would meet or exceed historical 1991 DIVERSION early in the irrigation season (March through October) but result in shortages later in the season. In Figure 2‐5 DIVERSION for the upper envelope pattern were capped at the historical 1991 DIVERSION from March through June. The “lower envelope pattern” takes a smaller percentage of the summer period allocation early in the season. This pattern results in larger early season shortages and smaller late season shortages. Analysis using the dry year average pattern can also be used to calculate monthly supplemental water need. Analysis of upper and lower envelopes begins to define the potential range of monthly supplemental water need. In order to quantify the potential range, the monthly supplemental water need illustrated in 1991 was calculated. A similar analysis was also performed to compare the upper and lower envelopes and dry year average pattern with historical DIVERSION for the same dry years used to calculate the dry year average pattern (1987, 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1994). As illustrated in Figure 4‐2, these are years with large March through October 4-4
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
SECTION 4.0 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
supplemental water need. Additionally, these years, combined with the analysis for 1991 provide multiple years with expected supplemental water need under KBRA and a variety of historical monthly DIVERSION patterns. Potential monthly supplemental water need was calculated as the difference between historical DIVERSION to the OPPA and three potential seasonal DIVERSION patterns that represent the Limitation on DIVERSION that followed the upper and lower envelopes and dry year average patterns. The first step in this analysis is to calculate the potential monthly DIVERSION that follow the upper and lower envelopes and dry year average for the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, of 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF). The monthly estimates of DIVERSION are presented in Table 4‐1. TABLE 4-1 POTENTIAL DIVERSION OF 330,000 ACRE-FEET (330 TAF) FOLLOWING UPPER AND LOWER ENVELOPES AND DRY YEAR
AVERAGE IN THOUSANDS OF ACRE-FEET (TAF).
March April May June July August September October Upper Envelope 11.0 46.4 74.3 65.8 48.2 61.8 21.0 1.5 Lower Envelope 2.2 11.9 32.7 41.9 93.5 77.4 49.8 20.7 Dry Year Average 7.2 37.1 46.0 62.5 67.1 59.3 37.2 13.6 The potential monthly DIVERSION from Table 4‐1 is compared with historical DIVERSION from the six dry years and the monthly supplemental water need is calculated for each month. Table 4‐2 contains historical DIVERSION and the calculated monthly supplemental water need for each year using all three potential DIVERSION patterns. Supplemental water needs of zero indicate the potential monthly DIVERSION exceeds the historical DIVERSION for that month and year. For this analysis the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, of 330,000 acre‐feet (330 TAF) was used for all years though in years, such as 1987 the Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation, would actually be 338,800 acre‐feet (338.9 TAF). This assumption does not affect the results of the analysis. TABLE 4-2 POTENTIAL MONTHLY SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED BASED ON A LIMITATION ON DIVERSION, EXCLUSIVE OF ANY REFUGE
ALLOCATION, OF 330,000 ACRE-FEET (330 TAF) FOLLOWING THE UPPER AND LOWER ENVELOPES AND DRY YEAR AVERAGE IN
THOUSANDS OF ACRE-FEET (TAF).
Year March April May June July August September October 1987 Historical DIVERSION 5.1 49.5 69.7 76.7 61.6 68.3 51.2 25.5 Upper Envelope 0.0 3.1 0.0 11.0 13.4 6.5 30.1 24.1 Lower Envelope 2.9 37.7 37.1 34.8 0.0 0.0 1.4 4.9 Dry Year Average 0.0 12.4 23.7 14.2 0.0 9.1 14.0 11.9 Historical DIVERSION 10.6 34.1 46.7 72.1 94.0 72.7 53.4 23.8 Upper Envelope 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.4 45.9 10.9 32.3 22.4 Lower Envelope 8.4 22.2 14.0 30.2 0.6 0.0 3.6 3.2 Dry Year Average 3.4 0.0 0.7 9.6 26.9 13.4 16.2 10.2 Historical DIVERSION 8.3 42.8 50.1 69.4 96.1 78.0 55.2 22.7 Upper Envelope 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 47.9 16.2 34.2 21.3 Lower Envelope 6.1 30.9 17.4 27.5 2.6 0.6 5.4 2.1 Dry Year Average 1.1 5.6 4.1 6.9 29.0 18.7 18.0 9.1 Supplemental Water Need 1988 Supplemental Water Need 1990 Supplemental Water Need (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
4-5
SECTION 4.0 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
Year March April May June July August September October 1991 Historical DIVERSION 10.7 32.1 42.3 88.2 95.8 78.4 62.9 22.0 Upper Envelope 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.5 47.6 16.6 41.8 20.6 Lower Envelope 8.5 20.2 9.7 46.3 2.3 1.0 13.1 1.4 Dry Year Average 3.5 0.0 0.0 25.7 28.7 19.2 25.7 8.4 Historical DIVERSION 9.6 57.9 87.5 77.4 56.7 63.5 29.8 6.0 Upper Envelope 0.0 11.5 13.1 11.6 8.5 1.7 8.7 4.5 Lower Envelope 7.4 46.1 54.8 35.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dry Year Average 2.4 20.8 41.5 14.9 0.0 4.2 0.0 0.0 Historical DIVERSION 9.4 61.6 48.2 84.6 98.6 83.0 26.4 1.8 Upper Envelope 0.0 15.2 0.0 18.8 50.4 21.2 5.3 0.4 Lower Envelope 7.2 49.8 15.6 42.6 5.1 5.6 0.0 0.0 Dry Year Average 2.2 24.5 2.2 22.0 31.5 23.8 0.0 0.0 Supplemental Water Need 1992 Supplemental Water Need 1994 Supplemental Water Need The maximum monthly supplemental water need from Table 4‐2, identified by shading, is presented in Table 4‐3. TABLE 4-3 POTENTIAL MAXIMUM MONTHLY SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED IN THOUSANDS OF ACRE-FEET (TAF).
Maximum Monthly Supplemental Water Need March April May June July August September October 8 50 55 46 50 24 42 24 Results presented in Table 4‐3 show the maximum monthly shortage may be on the order of 45,000 to 55,000 acre‐feet (45‐55 TAF). This represents a worst case March through October monthly supplemental water need for the reasons previously identified. In addition, the monthly quantities provided in Table 4‐3 are not additive, as they were prepared to evaluate the greatest single month of supplemental water need. 4.2
Supplemental Water Need to Meet the Refuge Allocation
As indicated in TM 2, historical deliveries to the LKNWR from D‐Plant were incidental to Klamath Project operations. Under the KBRA, and for purposes of the development of the OPP, the Refuge Allocation ranges between 48,000 and 60,000 acre‐feet (48‐60 TAF) during the March through October period. As identified in Section 15.1.2.E. of the KBRA, the Refuge Allocation shall be comprised of water for the following: LKNWR wetlands; LKNWR cooperative farming lands; refilling of TLNWR sumps after intentional draining by the Refuges (as identified in Section 15.1.2.E.iii.b); Refuge‐approved walking wetlands (as identified in Section 15.1.2.E.iii.a); conveyance losses, if any, resulting from bypassing water at Anderson‐Rose Dam solely for LKNWR wetlands (as identified in Section 15.1.2.E.iii.c); and conveyance losses for any delivery to LKNWR via North Canal (as identified in Section 15.1.2.E.iii.d). For the purpose of TM 4, the Refuge Allocation for March through October (summer period) will be identified and is assumed to be used on LKNWR. Adjustments to the summer Refuge Allocation due to shortage (KBRA Section 15.1.2.F.) will be addressed in subsequent development of the OPP. The demand pattern for the LKNWR has been estimated and provided by US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) representatives. Using this demand pattern and the applicable summer Refuge Allocation ranging from 48,000 to 60,000 acre‐feet (48‐60 TAF), an estimate of the monthly summer Refuge Allocation demands are provided in Table 4‐4. 4-6
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
SECTION 4.0 MARCH THROUGH OCTOBER SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
TABLE 4-4 MONTHLY DEMAND QUANTITY FOR SUMMER REFUGE ALLOCATION.
Month Demand (Based on a 48 TAF Refuge Allocation) TAF Demand (Based on a 60 TAF Refuge Allocation) TAF March 0 0 April 2.9 3.6 May 4.2 5.2 June 4.7 6.0 July 5.6 7.0 August 4.8 5.9 September 13.7 17.2 October 12.1 15.2 Total 48.0 60.0 No supplemental water need has been calculated as the quantity identified in Table 4‐4 represents the demands of the LKNWR under KBRA. It should be noted the 48,000 acre‐foot (48 TAF) summer Refuge Allocation identified above is simply a proportionate reduction from the total 60,000 acre‐foot (60 TAF) summer demand of the LKNWR. In practice, the monthly distribution of the Refuge Allocation needs to be flexible in order to satisfy the given habitat and wildlife needs for any given year. This flexibility is required to a greater degree as the Refuge Allocation approaches the 48,000 acre‐foot (48 TAF) quantity. (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
4-7
SECTION 5.0 November through February Supplemental Water
Need
As described in TM 2 the winter period (November through February) Limitation on DIVERSION is 80,000 acre‐feet (80 TAF), including the Refuge Allocation of 35,000 acre‐feet (35 TAF). This quantity may be increased but, for purposes of this TM and development of the OPP the above quantities will be used, particularly since the potential increase is assumed to be an increase in the Refuge Allocation and not irrigation water available to the OPPA. 5.1
Supplemental Water Need of the OPPA
As identified in Section 8.1.3 of TM 2 winter DIVERSION have occurred to the OPPA. Figure 5‐1 shows the historical DIVERSION to the OPPA together with the 45,000 acre‐foot (45 TAF) winter period Limitation on DIVERSION, exclusive of any Refuge Allocation. The winter period water use is for beneficial use by irrigation, either for immediate crop growth or for forecasted requirements to raise soil moisture to field capacity in the soil moisture profile for utilization by plant growth in the subsequent irrigation season. In addition, the saturation of the soil profile ensures limited wind erosion of the peat soil during tillage which prepares the fields for the summer irrigation season. As an ancillary benefit, the saturation and flooding of fields during the winter period also provides habitat to migrating waterfowl. As identified in Figure 5‐1, in recent years little or no supplemental water was needed to meet winter diversions. A supplemental water need has not been calculated for the winter period as it is understood that management and use of the available quantity under the Limitation on DIVERSION will be adequate to satisfy demand. Water users will need to coordinate, communicate, and cooperate to divert water during the winter period to comply with the winter Limitation on DIVERSION. FIGURE 5-1 HISTORICAL NOVEMBER THROUGH FEBRUARY DIVERSION TO THE OPPA FOR THE PERIOD 1986-2010.
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
5-1
SECTION 5.0 NOVEMBER THROUGH FEBRUARY SUPPLEMENTAL WATER NEED
5.2
Supplemental Water Need to Meet the Refuge Allocation
Similar to the summer period for the LKNWR, the winter demand pattern for the LKNWR has been estimated and provided by USFWS representatives. Using this demand pattern and the initial winter Refuge Allocation of 35,000 acre‐feet (35 TAF), the monthly demands are shown in Table 5‐1. TABLE 5-1 MONTHLY DEMAND QUANTITY FOR WINTER
REFUGE ALLOCATION.
Month Estimated Demand TAF November 11.3 December 7.9 January 7.9 February 7.9 Total 35.0 Similar to the winter period for the OPPA no supplemental water need has been calculated as the quantities identified in Table 5‐1 represents the winter demand of the LKNWR under KBRA.
5-2
(TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
SECTION 6.0 References
Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). 2012 MODSUM accounting spreadsheet. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). KPSIM demands. Irrigation Training and Research Center (ITRC), California Polytechnic State University. 2003. Klamath Basin Investigation – Hydrologic Assessment of the Upper Klamath Basin – Issues and Opportunities – Draft Report. Prepared by Charles Burt and Beau Freeman for Bureau of Reclamation. May. (TM 4 JULY 2012 FINAL)
6-1