Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBradley Lake Reevaluation of Hydrology, Energy, and Capacity 1989RECORD COPY FILE NO. · ?re-o 1-L t M-~ .~a _ -----A-iiSica Powei AUiority 1 ,{' - "RE COR D COPY" Return to Bradley Project Files RE,.EVI\l.lJA1~!(.:>"N OF · ·HYDROLoa·v, Et~ER.GY, .t\riD Ci\PACITY BRi\D LEY LAI{E H"{Dr{OELEc·rRIC J:~ROJEC1 .. FEDER.AL El'IERGY REGQJ.ATORY COl'vlt~ISSION PROJEC7 110. P-8221-000 Pr~pared by STONE f, WEBSTER ENG!NF.:ERfNG COi~POR~.T;CM May 1~89 ·-----·------··--...J RE-EVALUATION OF HYDROLOGY, ENERGY, AND CAPACITY FOR BRADLEY LAKE HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Prepared for ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY May 1989 STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION Denver, Colorado TABLE OF CONT~1S TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE LIST OF TABLES ii LIST OF FIGURES v 1.0 SUMMARY 1-1 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2-1 3.0 PAST HYDROLOGIC STUDIES 3-1 3.1 Nuka Glacier Switch 3-1 3.2 Glacier Mass Balance 3-3 3.3 Middle Fork Diversion 3-4 3.4 Lower Bradley River 3-5 4.0 UPDATED HYDROLOGY 4-1 4.1 Runoff from Nuka Glacier 4-1 4.2 Glacier Mass Balance 4-4 4.3 Lower Bradley River 4-7 4.4 Comparison of the Past and Updated Inflow at Bradley Lake 4-12 5.0 PROJECT ENERGY AND CAPACITY 5-l 5.1 Past Study 5-1 5.2 Reservoir Operation Model 5-2 5.3 Updated Project Energy and Capacity 5-9 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6-1 6.1 Conclusions 6-1 6.2 Recommendations 6-5 7.0 REFERENCES 7-1 8.0 TABLES 9.0 FIGURES l LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 LIST OF TABLES Title Flow Adjustments Due to Glacier Mass Balance Change Adjustment to Recorded Bradley Lake Outlet Flows for Glacier Runoff Correlation Study of Streamflow Records in the Region Correlation Results for the Lower Bradley River Monthly Average Flow at Lower Bradley River Monthly Average Inflow to Bradley Lake (Updated Hydrology) Monthly Average Inflow to Bradley Lake (Past Hydrology) Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Power Loading Curve for the Original 102 MW Project Output (Weekdays) Power Loading Curve for the Original 102 MW Project Output (Weekend) Power Loading Curve for the Limited 40 MW Project Output Summary of Annual Average Energy Case No. 1 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 2 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW ii Table 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 LIST OF TABLES (continued) Title Case No. 3 -Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 4 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 5 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 6 -Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 7 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 8 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 9 -Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 10 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Case No. 11 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Case No. 12 -Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Case No. 13 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW Case No. 14 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW iii Table 5.20 5.21 5.22 LIST OF TABLES (continued) Title Case No. 15 -Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW Case No. 16 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to Project Capacity of 119 MW Case No. 17 -Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 40 MW Project Capacity and Annual Target Energy of 269,100 MWh lV -LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 1.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 LIST OF FIGURES Title Re-evaluation of Hydrology, Energy, and Capacity; General Flow Chart Re-evaluation of Hydrology, Energy, and Capacity; Detailed Flow Chart Area Plan of Nuka Glacier Runoff Comparison of Monthly Flow at Lower Bradley River between Past and Updated Hydrology Comparison of Monthly Inflow to Bradley Lake between Past and Updated Hydrology Historical Daily Flow at Bradley Lake Outlet Case No. 1 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 2 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 3 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 4 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading CUrve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 5 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 6 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW v Figure 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 Note: LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Title Case No. 7 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 8 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spi 11 but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 9 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 10 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Case No. 11 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Case No. 12 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Case No. 13 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW Case No. 14 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spi 11 but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW Case No. 15 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW Case No. 16 -Average Monthly Energy Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to Project Capacity of 119 MW Case No. 17 has same capacity as Case No. 1 and a separate graph is not presented. Refer to Table 5.22 for energy listing. vi Figure 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Title Project Capacity Curve Case No. 1 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 2 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 3 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 20 MW Case No. 4 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 5 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 6 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 25 MW Case No. 7 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 8 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 9 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 30 MW Case No. 10 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW Vll LIST OF FIGURES (continued) Figure Title 5.29 Case No. 11 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW 5.30 Case No. 12 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 45 MW 5.31 Case No. 13 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW 5.32 Case No. 14 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW 5.33 Case No. 15 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Base Load Operation but Limited to 2 Units Each at 51 MW 5. 34 Case No. 16 -Monthly Lake Levels Based on Hourly Loading Curve and Minimizing Spill but Limited to Project Capacity of 119 MW Note: Case No. 17 has same capacity as Case No. 1 and a separate graph is not presented. Refer to Table 5.22 for energy listing. viii 1.0 SUMMARY 1.0 SUMMARY Under its Contract with the Alaska Power Authority (APA), Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC) performed the re-evaluation of hydrology, energy, and capacity for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project. This work included the re-evaluation and collection of the hydrometeorological data, review of past studies, and updating of hydrological results and estimates of project energy and capacity. The review of the past hydrologic studies included reports done by the Corps of Engineers (COE, 1981), R&M Consultants, Inc. (R&M, 1983), and Stone & Webster (SWEC, 1986). The recommendation proposed in SWEC's 1986 report was used as the basis for this study. The runoff from glaciers in the Bradley Lake basin was adjusted to incorporate the results of the updated glacier mass balance change. The glacier mass change was re-calculated by using the Ninilchik River as the nonglacierized basin instead of Ship Creek. The runoff from Nuka Glacier was further updated to account for the flow revision by the U.S Geological Survey (USGS), and flow release to the Nuka River to meet the 5 cfs maintenance flow in accordance with the National Park Service agreement. Twenty nine years of daily flow at Bradley Lake outlet were used as the basis of streamflow records to simulate the large fluctuation of daily flow anticipated especially between August and October. The recorded daily flow was adjusted to account for the glacier runoff adjustment, Middle Fork Diversion, and water release to the Lower Bradley River to meet the minimum instream flow required to the Lower Bradley River by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license. Whenever on a given day there is a shortage of naturally occurring flow in the Lower Bradley River to meet the instream flow demand, water will be released from the reservoir to make up the shortage. In order to assess the amounts of flow released, estimates of flow in the Lower Bradley River were made. The flow from the Lower Bradley River was recomputed using the results of the USGS correlation study. Seven streams in the region were selected as the reference stations. It was necessary that several streamflow records be extended back to October 1957. Linear regression 6409R/LS 1-1 analysis was used to synthesize the streamflow data for those periods when no flow data were available. A review of the regional streamflow records was conducted so that the best available data could be used for the regression analysis. The flow data at Bradley Lake outlet; updated and modified to account for the Middle Fork Diversion, Nuka Glacier runoff, drainage basin glacier mass balance, and Lower Bradley River water release; were then used to make an updated project energy estimate. A computer model was developed and used to estimate the project energy generated at various operating conditions. The model was designed to simulate a multiple utility integrated power demand. The model was based on an hourly time increment and used the daily flow record. A reservoir routing was incorporated in the model to accurately predict the lake level and thus head, which is a major factor in addition to inflow in the effect on energy production. A series of curves for turbine and generator characteristics, transformer efficiency, and friction loss in the power tunnel were also included in the model. Flow charts (Figures 1.1 and 1.2) were prepared to swmnarize the major computation approaches used in the study. A total of 17 cases were performed to estimate the project energy generated at various project capacity and operating conditions. The study shows that the two units at 45 MW appears to be the optimum installed capacity. A smaller unit substantially reduces the generated project energy, whereas, a larger unit only slightly increases the generated project energy. Furthermore, since the installed units are capable of producing power higher than 45 MW per unit, the project should operate at a capacity higher than 45 MW if the project is operated by following the utili ties power loading curve or power loading curve with minimizing spill. However, each unit should operate at 45 MW capacity if the project is operated by following the base load condition. 6409R/LS 1-2 The study also concludes that if Bradley Lake Project is operated in conformance with load, not all available energy will be realized. It is recommended that greater flexibility in operating Bradley Lake should be considered in order to maximize its energy potential, while adjusting other system plants to meet load requirements. It is also recommended that APA authorize commencement of the development of a reservoir inflow forecasting computer model. Using the available meteorological data from APA' s network of meteorological stations around the project site, this model would allow the Project Operator to forecast available reservoir inflows for the next two weeks, one month, two months, and six months. This model would also generate a set of operating reservoir rule curves so that the reservoir levels can be operated with the forecasted inflows and available reservoir storage to avoid spilling and maximize the project energy production. 6409R/LS 1-3 2.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 INTRODUCTION As required by Contract, engineering studies were done to re-evaluate the hydrometeorological conditions of the Upper Bradley River, and the Middle Fork and Nuka Glacier Diversions. This work was divided into two phases. Phase 1 included the re-evaluation of available hydrometeorological data, past studies and Power Authority flow release commitments to meet agency requirements for releases to the Nuka River and Lower Bradley River. The updated hydrological data were then to be used to update the project energy and capacity estimates. Phase 2 would include a future study to develop a reservoir inflow forecasting computer model to analyze the collected hydrometeorological field data and forecast available reservoir inflows for the next two weeks, one month, two months, and six months. This computer model would also generate a set of operating rule curves so that the reservoir levels can be operated with the forecasted inflows and available reservoir storage to avoid spilling and maximize the project energy production. This report describes the results of Phase 1 work. The major work of the re-evaluation of hydrology, energy, and capacity consists of the following: 1. Review the studies completed by COE in 1981, R&M in 1983 and SWEC in 1986. 2. Obtain additional streamflow data from October 1982 to September 1986 collected at the gaging stations in the region, to be used in the correlation analyses. Also obtain daily flow records at Bradley Lake outlet to be used for the project energy study. The gage at Bradley Lake outlet was inoperative from October 1986 to July 1987. Therefore, the period of record from water year 1958 to 1986 was used in the study. 3. Perform flow adjustment due to the Nuka Glacier switch and the 5 cfs Nuka River maintenance flow in accordance with the National Park Service agreement. 4. Update the Bradley Lake basin glacier mass balance study. 6400R/LS 2-1 s. Perform a correlation study for the Lower Bradley River Basin. Where necessary streamflow records are incomplete, synthesize the missing data by means of further correlation studies. 6. Calculate the tunnel hydraulic head losses based upon the 13 ft power tunnel diameter. 7. Develop a computer model to estimate the project energy generated at various plant operating conditions. The model was designed to simulate a multiple utility integrated power demand and was based on an hourly time increment and used the daily flow records to simulate the anticipated large fluctuation of daily flow. 8. Conduct the energy production runs for a total of 17 cases. 9. Determine how plant generating capacity varies with reservoir level. 10. Prepare a report to summarize the above findings. Details of this study are discussed in Sections 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0. Conclusions and recommendations are presented in Section 6.0 6400R/LS 2-2 .eo., 440 400 360 iJ20 ;!:; ~ a: ~280 ~ ~ g;; 2.0 a: ..... ~ ':1!200 .... ~ ~I e: l ~ 160 ~ ...._ I 120 80 f: I .0~ h! t ~ I I t I ~ I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 \ I I 1 I I I I \ I I I 1 \ ,, \ I I l II\ I I\,\ I ~~ I \}~ \ I I! \I \A .. , r'l J I I i(:~ I I 1\. ,, ~ Q I 1955 I 1959 I 1960 I 1961 I 1!162 l 1963 -r-,96,4 l v 1965 I l I I \ I \ I lA I 'l I V \j ~ ;, \ I I I I I I 1 1 '" 'v ~ I ' ,.. I 19&7 T 1968 ----R&U ---swecee -• • -FROM RECOAOS I I II I -~ II ll l II " I ld /II I ' I I I I I I 1 \ I I I 1 I I I 1 I I l 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I ' I • I ~ ~ I I t I\ ,, I \ I AGURE4.2 COMPARISON Of MONTHLY FLOW AT LOWER BRADLEY RIVER BE1WEEN PAST ANOUPDATEOHYOROI.OGY . • : I . I :I •I ' \ . ~ \ --=~=-===--;, I : \; I I ----------------li ,_ I 3.0 PAST HYDROLOGIC STUDIES 3.0 PAST HYDROLOGIC STUDIES 3.1 Nuka Glacier Switch The terminus of Nuka Glacier is located on the divide between Nuka River and Bradley River, in the southeast portion of the basin. During the field survey in August 1955, USGS stated that the flow of Nuka River "appeared to be several times greater than the amount that drained toward Bradley Lake from the same glacier". A comparison of the aerial photographs taken in 1979 and 1952 showed that the terminus of Nuka Glacier had receded approximately 900 to 1000 ft since 1952. By July 1971 glacial recession had altered the subglacial channels so that nearly all runoff from Nuka Glacier was flowing into Upper Bradley River. Because of the shift in runoff from Nuka Glacier, Bradley River flows recorded from 1958 through 1970 were not strictly comparable to those recorded after 1970. In 1981, the COE made adjustments to the June through October flows in the Upper Bradley River for these early years by using the Streamflow Synthesis and Reservoir Regulation Model (SSARR) and by estimating the glacier runoff. The flow to the Nuka River was estimated to be 75 percent of the total runoff from the Nuka Glacier. No streamflow adjustments were made for the winter months (November to May), as it was assumed that Nuka Glacier is resting on bedrock and that winter precipitation falls as snow, so that neither baseflow nor rainfall runoff came from Nuka Glacier during the winter months. The estimated glacier runoff to the Nuka River between June and October was then added to the recorded flow at the Bradley Lake outlet. This adjustment increased the annual average flow at the Bradley Lake outlet by 46 cfs from 1958 to 1970. For the longer period from 1958 to 1979 (the full period of the COE study), the adjustment increased the average annual flow by only 25 cfs. since there was no flow adjustment after 1970. USGS established a gaging station in the Upper Bradley River in October 1979. Records obtained from this station showed that prior to 1982 the glacier runoff from the Nuka Glacier all flowed to the Upper Bradley 6389R/LS 3-1 River. By using the annual runoff r~cords from 1980 to 1982 measured at the Upper Bradley River, R&M indicated in their 1983 report that the flow adjustment by COE was conservative on the low side and additional flow should be added to the Upper Bradley River flow for the period from 1958 to 1970. With reference to the precipitation data at Seward for the period from 1958 to 1970 and the period from 1980 to 1982, and three years of annual runoff records at the Upper Bradley River, R&M estimated that the average flow adjustment to be added to the record at Bradley Lake outlet should be 89 cfs for the period from 1958 to 1970 instead of the 46 cfs estimated by COE 1n 1981. Therefore, in R&M's 1983 report, an additional 43 cfs was added to the annual runoff for 1958 to 1970 and distributed as monthly flows based on the same monthly distribution pattern developed by COE. Between 1983 and 1985, the runoff from the Nuka Glacier was approximately evenly split between the Nuka River and the Upper Bradley River. However, gaging records and a field visit in 1986 indicated that by 1986 the flow had again switched primarily to the Upper Bradley River. In 1986, APA had reached an agreement with the Department of Interior with regard to the diversion of the Nuka Glacier runoff. This agreement allows APA to divert all flows from the Nuka Glacier except a flow of no less than 5 cfs into the Nuka River between June and September for the National Park Service. Furthermore, in 1986, USGS revised the streamflow records of August 1980, July and August 1981, and September 1982 at the Upper Bradley River gaging station. This revision reduced the annual average flow between 1980 and 1982 by about 13 cfs. As discussed earlier, R&M's additional adjustment of glacier runoff was based on the data available prior to 1983. As a result of the additions and revisions of streamflow data and the agreement with the National Park Service, it became necessary to update the Nuka Glacier runoff to account for these changes. The method used in this study for updating the Nuka Glacier runoff is discussed in detail in Section 4.1. 6389R/LS 3-2 3.2 Glacier Mass Balance A glacierized basin possesses a water reservoir in solid form, which regulates runoff in a unique way. COE did not account for the changing of glacier mass in its hydrology report. R&M's study did include this factor in their evaluation of the glacier runoff. The principal assumption is that the glacier does not change in mass from year to year and remains in a static condition. This allows the glacier runoff to be adjusted in accordance with the annual change in the glacier mass. For example, for the years when the glacier mass balance increases, the streamflow records indicate flows lower than those which would have occurred if the glacier had not gained mass. Consequently, the streamflow should be adjusted upward to account for the glacier mass increases in those years. R&M used the Tangborn Runoff-Precipitation Model to predict the annual change of glacier mass in the Bradley Lake basin, which includes runoff from Nuka Glacier, Kachemak Glacier, and some smaller glaciers. In developing this model, R&M used Ship Creek as the nonglacierized basin, the Bradley River as the glacierized basin and the precipitation record at Seward. Based on these available data, an equation was developed to estimate the annual change in g 1 aci er mass. The method and data base are described in detail in R&M's 1983 report. In 1986, SWEC performed a review of the project hydrology for APA. As stated in the report, the glacierized and nonglacierized basins as referenced in the Tangborn Model should be closely related characteristically to the precipitation stat ion used in the computation. The coefficients derived for the equation would change depending on the data used for the glacierized and nonglacierized basins and precipitation station. In analyzing the glacier mass balance, R&M used Ship Creek as the nonglacierized basin. Ship Creek near Anchorage is a long distance from the Bradley River basin. The annual precipitation in the Ship Creek basin is much lower than the one at the project site. Therefore, it was recommended that the Ninilchik River basin would be a better nonglacierized basin for the Tangborn model. The 1986 SWEC report recommended that the glacier mass balance and the annual glacier waste in the Bradley Lake basin be re-calculated. The updated calculation is discussed in detail in Section 4.2. 6389R/LS 3-3 3.3 Middle Fork Diversion Based on the 1980 flow record, COE calculated a ratio which was used to estimate the additional flow available for diversion from Middle Fork into the Bradley Lake from May to October, the months for which diversion was originally planned. One reference ratio was developed for each of the six months considered. It represented the ratio of average monthly flow of Middle Fork and Bradley River in 1980. Based on the calculated ratio and the flow at Bradley Lake for each month, the corresponding monthly flows from the Middle fork diversion were estimated. These additional flows were then included to compute the total inflow to Bradley Lake. In 1983, R&M revised the monthly flow diversion from Middle Fork using additional data collected between 1980 and 1982. With reference to three flow ranges predefined by R&M, the monthly flows between 1958 and 1979 from the Middle Fork were re-calculated using the computed flow rate of each month and the recorded flow at the Bradley River. For April, it was assumed a constant flow at 4 cfs. At the time of the R&M study, the flow from Middle Fork would be diverted from May to October to Bradley Lake and the flow in the winter months would contribute to the Lower Bradley River without flowing into the Bradley Lake. The latest Middle Fork diversion plan is to intercept the Middle Fork flow year around and divert it into Bradley Lake. The diversion is designed for total interception of the Middle Fork flow up to the five year flood. No flow in the winter months will contribute to the Lower Bradley River. In 1986, SWEC re-evaluated the flow diversion from Middle Fork. With the assistance from USGS, SWEC conducted a study to determine whether more streamflow records in the region could be used to synthesize the flow at the Middle Fork. USGS recommended eight streams to be used in the correlation study. Those eight reference streams and the corresponding correlation coefficients are presented in Table 2 of SWEC's 1986 report. A series of multiple linear regression equations was developed to synthesize the monthly flow for the Middle Fork Diversion. The results were compared 6389R/LS 3-4 with the R&M' s study for the period from 1980 to 1985 and the R&M study matched reasonably well. R&M' s predictions are slightly lower than the recorded streamflow. Since the monthly flows estimated by R&M compared reasonably well with SWEC's 1986 study, no further refinement in the Middle Fork diversion flow estimates is reconunended. The only revision in the present study was to include the year around diversion from Middle Fork instead of only between May and October as developed in R&M's 1983 study. 3.4 Lower Bradley River Minimum instrearn flows are to be maintained and measured at the USGS gaging station above Riffle Reach in the Lower Bradley River. Whenever on a given day there is a shortage of the flow at the Lower Bradley River to meet this demand, water will be released from the reservoir to make up the shortage. Water released for this purpose reduces the project generation potential by about 12,000 MWh per year. The drainage area of the Lower Bradley River covers about 18 square miles. It includes the area below the Bradley Lake outlet and below the proposed Middle Fork diversion. No discharge records were available prior to 1983 except for a few isolated flow measurements. As discussed in R&M's 1983 report, the average monthly flows at the Lower Bradley River were estimated from the streamflow data at Barbara Creek, approximately 35 miles to the southwest. An adjustment ratio was developed using the annual average precipitation and drainage area at the Lower Bradley River and Barbara Creek. Since the flow record at Barbara Creek started in June 1972, the flow data for Barbara Creek were extended back to October 1957 using linear regression analysis with Ninilchik River and Anchor River. The adjustment ratio discussed above was then applied to the Barbara Creek recorded or synthesized flow to estimate the monthly average flow at the Lower Bradley River. In certain months, when the data appeared not reasonable as compared with the precipitation records at Homer or runoff pattern, additional adjustments were made. This occurred primarily for high flow periods and during breakup. The method is presented in detail in R&M's 1983 report. 6389R/LS 3-5 In 1986, SWEC re-evaluated the project hydrology. With the assistance of USGS, it was recommended that seven streams in the region could be used to develop a series of multiple linear regression equations to synthesize the flow at the Lower Bradley River. The results were compared with the apparent occurring flows at the Lower Bradley River, estimated by subtracting the Middle Fork and Bradley Lake outflow from the Bradley River flow as recorded at Tidewater. The record for Bradley River at Tidewater began in May 1983. A comparison was made by plotting the results from R&M's study and the USGS study for the period from 1981 to 1985, showing also the results from the recorded data beginning with May 1983. Compared with the USGS study, the Lower Bradley River flow generated by R&M was larger for winter and smaller for the summer months. Therefore, it was recommended in SWEC's 1986 report that the Lower Bradley River flow should be updated by correlation with the regional streamflow data. The updated calculations are discussed in detail in Section 4.3. 6389R/LS 3-6 ... 4. 0 UPDATED HYDROLOGY 4.0 UPDATED HYDROLOGY 4.1 Runoff from Nuka Glacier Nuka Glacial melt forms a pond called Nuka Pool at the terminus of the Nuka Glacier, as shown in Figure 4.1. Nuka Pool discharges water both into the Upper Bradley River and into the Nuka River. Water discharged into the Upper Bradley River flows to Bradley Lake. Water which is discharged into the Nuka River flows into the Kenai Fjords National Park. The glacier runoff to each side of the divide has historically varied significantly. In the current design, there are proposed structures designed to divert the glacial meltwater flowing through the Nuka Pool into the Upper Bradley River in accordance with Contract provision requiring the first 5 cfs increment of flow to be discharged into the Nuka River. The Contract, dated June 1986 between the APA and the U.S. Department of Interior, resulted from a Park Service interest in Nuka Glacier water runoff. The proposed structures are shown on Figure 4.1. Flow from the Nuka Pool to the Upper Bradley River will pass over a long, uniform weir constructed by modifying the naturally occurring rock weir at the pool outlet. At the Nuka River outlet of the pool, water will be constrained to flow through a 12-inch steel pipe in a gabion dike. This pipe has been sized so that it will discharge 5 cfs when the Nuka Pool level is at the elevation of the Bradley-side weir crest and flow is about to commence to the Upper Bradley River. No flow is allowed to enter the Upper Bradley River from the Nuka Pool until 5 cfs enters the Nuka River. As the flow rate into the Nuka Pool increases beyond 5 cfs, the Pool water surface level increases and meltwater passes to the Bradley River side over the outlet weir. The 100-foot length of the weir limits the amount the Pool water level can rise. As the water level rises, it wi 11 cause a moderate increase in the flow to the Nuka River side, up to a maximum total release of about 7 cfs. The present study includes the effect of this loss of water to the Nuka River. 6360R/LS 4-1 Since Nuka Glacier runoff flowing to the Bradley River side of the divide flows into Bradley Lake, flows recorded at the Lake outlet have included this glacial runoff. Depending on the time period, the amount of runoff from Nuka Glacier included in the recorded Bradley Lake outflow could be anywhere from 25 percent to 100 percent of the total Nuka Glacier runoff. A series of flow adjustments were made to the recorded flows at Bradley Lake outlet. The resulting modified outlet flows have taken into account the following flow adjustments: 1. Diversion of Nuka Glacier water to the Upper Bradley River 6360R/LS Unadjusted runoff from Nuka Glacier, QGU' was calculated. The methodology for the calculation of unadjusted glacier runoff, QGU' varied depending on the time period of record being considered. a. For the period 1958-1970 During this period, it was estimated that 75 percent of the glacial runoff was going down the Nuka River and that 25 percent was flowing into the Upper Bradley River (COE, 1981). The COE estimated the Nuka flows which would have been diverted to the Bradley River. The average annual flow adjustments were estimated to be about 46 cfs. R&M later revised this upward by 43 cfs to a total adjustment of 89 cfs. The present study applied the same methodology to revise the COE's flows, using four additional years of recorded data and revisions by the USGS to the recorded flows which R&M had used. This new adjustment reduced by 5 cfs the average annual flow adjustment made by R&M to the COE's flow to a total average annual flow adjustment of 84 cfs. b. For the period 1971-1979 During this period, it was estimated that 100 percent of the Nuka Glacier runoff was going into the Upper Bradley River 4-2 6360R/LS and no adjustment was needed. Nevertheless, in order to estimate the flow released, QNR' from the Nuka Pool to the Nuka River, the total Nuka Glacier runoff was needed. A correlation study was performed using the estimated Nuka Glacier runoff and the Bradley Lake outlet flow for each month June through October during the 1958-1970 period. The linear equation resulting from the correlation study was then used directly to estimate the Nuka Glacier runoff from the recorded Bradley Lake outlet flows for 1971-1979. Since the synthesized glacier runoff was only used to estimate the diversion to the Nuka River, which only varied from 5 to 7 cfs, the final adjusted Bradley Lake inflow is not sensitive to the accuracy of the correlation study used in estimating the Nuka Glacier runoff for this time period. c. For the period October 1980-August 1984 Upper Bradley River flow records started in October 1979 and continue to the present. The Upper Bradley River flow is measured by a gage about 1.2 miles downstream of the glacier terminus. From 1980 to 1982, since 100 percent of Nuka Glacier runoff was to the Bradley River side, the Upper Bradley River recorded flows, QUBR' were used directly as an approximation of %u· Since non-glacial runoff was also included in QUBR' the glacial runoff may be overestimated somewhat; but the difference is minimal. From Water Year 1983 to August 1984, the glacial runoff was split equally between the Nuka River and the Upper Bradley River. Therefore, QGU was estimated by 2 times QUBR' d. For the period September 1984-September 1986 Beginning with September 1984, Upper Nuka River flow records are available. For this period of time, unadjusted Nuka Glacier runoff can be estimated by the sum of recorded Upper Nuka River and Upper Bradley River flows. The Upper Nuka River flow is measured by a gage located 0.4 mile downstream of the glacier terminus. 4-3 2. Adjustments due to revised glacier mass balance The adjustments to account for the effect of glacier mass balance changes, which include Nuka Glacier, were derived by methodology explained in Section 4.2. The adjustments obtained by this process are presented in Table 4.1. 3. Required flow releases to the Upper Nuka River Since the rate of flow released through the pipe at the Nuka Pool to the Upper Nuka River is a function of the Nuka Pool elevation, which in turn is a function of the glacial runoff into the pool; the flow released to the Upper Nuka River, QNR, was calculated based on the adjusted glacier runoff, QGA, which is QGU altered to include the effect of glacier mass balance. For ~A greater than 5 cfs, QNR was calculated from a series of curves. For QGA between 0 and 5 cfs, QNR equaled QGA, since all flow up to 5 cfs is released to the Upper Nuka River. For QGA less than 0 (due to the effect of the mass balance adjustment in certain months), there was no Upper Nuka River diversion. The final adjustments to the recorded Bradley Lake outlet flows; to account for diversion of Nuka Glacier runoff, for basin glacier mass balance, and for required flow releases to the Upper Nuka River; are presented in Table 4.2. In addition to the modification of the recorded Bradley Lake outlet flows, other modifications were made to account for the Middle Fork diversion flows and fish release flows, as discussed elsewhere in the report. 4.2 Glacier Mass Balance As discussed in Section 3. 2, since the Ninilchik River provides a better reference basin as a nonglacial basin for use in the Tangborn model, it was recommended that the glacier mass balance for the Bradley Lake basin be re-calculated. 6360R/LS 4-4 The streamflow record at the Ninilchik River started in April 1963. The period of flow data used in the power study was from October 1957 to September 1986. Therefore, the flow data at the Ninilchik River needed to be extended 5 more years. A correlation study was performed for the Ninilchik River to synthesize the flow data for the period when the data were not available. Two different regression analyses, linear and logari thrnic, were conducted to establish the relationship between annual runoff at the Ninilchik River and the Bradley Lake outlet. It was found that the results from the two methods varied only slightly. Therefore, the results from the linear regression analysis were used to develop an equation. During the study, it was observed that the annual runoff of 1969 and 1980 at the Ninilchik River and the Bradley Lake outlet showed poor correlation compared with other periods. Additional study was performed to compare the data at the Ninilchik River to the annual precipitation data at Horner. Again, the data of 1969 and 1980 showed a poor relationship. Therefore, the flow records of 1969 and 1980 were taken out of the study of the correlation between the Ninilchik River and the Bradley Lake outlet. The flow record at the Ninilchik River for 1986 was not available from the USGS water resource record. Therefore, the annual runoff for 1958 to 1963, 1969, 1980 and 1986 were estimated from the linear regression equation by using the runoff at the Bradley Lake outlet. Furthermore, in order to match the estimated glacier mass balance, annual runoff records were needed from 1953 to 1957. Therefore, the annual runoff at the Ninilchik River was also estimated for this period. It should be noted that the streamflow record at the Bradley Lake outlet started in October 1957. The annual runoff from 1953 to 1957 was obtained from R&M's 1983 report, which used data for Kenai River at Cooper Landing to synthesize the runoff at Bradley Lake outlet for that period. The Tangborn runoff-precipitation model was then applied to the glaciers of the Bradley Lake basin. The estimated annual glacier mass balance data were obtained from R&M' s 1983 report. The annual runoff data at the Bradley Lake outlet were used as the glacial basin flow data, whereas, the 6360R/LS 4-5 annual runoff data at the Ninilchik River were used as the nonglacial basin flow data. The precipitation data at Seward were used as the index precipitation. From R&M' s report, it was assumed that 38 percent of the Bradley Lake basin was glacierized. Using the above data, the equation for annual mass balance change is: B = 2.632 (R -R ) + 4.253 P a n g a in which B = annual glacier mass balance, inch a R = annual runoff at the Ninilchik River, inch n R = annual runoff at the Bradley Lake outlet, inch g p = annual precipitation at Seward, inch a This equation was then applied to estimate annual mass balance of the Bradley Lake glaciers. The conversion from change in glacier mass balance to change in Bradley River flow is 1 inch/year of glacier balance change equivalent to 1.57 cfs in the Bradley River (R&M's 1983 report). It should be noted that in years when the glacier mass balance is positive (gaining), streamflow records indicate flows lower than those which would have occurred if the glacier had not gained mass. Consequently, streamflow values were increased these years. Using the thawing degree-days index, the change in annual runoff was distributed between June and September. The recorded monthly average temperature at Homer was used as the reference index. The flow previously adjusted for the Nuka Glacier switch was again adjusted for glacier balance changes. The monthly flow adjustments to account for the glacier balance changes are presented in Table 4.1. It is interesting to note that the cumulative net change of the glacier mass from water years 1953 to 1982 was a loss of about 51 inches of equivalent water depth taken over the glacierized portion of the Bradley Lake basin. By adding four more years (1983-1986), the cumulative net glacier change became about 297 inches, i.e., the glacier was gaining in mass. This increase coincided with the field observation that for eleven 6360R/LS 4-6 years prior to 1982, there was no flow into the Upper Nuka River and after 1982, the Upper Nuka River started to receive the glacier runoff. The gain in glacier mass may be interpreted as the extension of the glacier terminus from its condition prior to 1982, which may result in the flow diversion to the Upper Nuka River. However, it should be pointed out that this comparison was purely an observation and will require the aerial photographs to photograrnrnetrically determine the change in glacier mass and its effect on the glacier runoff. 4.3 Lower Bradley River As stated in Section 3.4, SWEC's previous review of the project hydrology in 1986 indicated that the monthly flows for the winter and summer months, generated by R&M in 1983, were larger and smaller, respectively, than those produced by the USGS's correlation study; and did not compare reasonably well with the field measurements. It was recommended that a correlation study should be performed to synthesize the flow records for the Lower Bradley River. The synthesized monthly flow for the Lower Bradley River was re-calculated using the coefficients as listed in Table 3 of SWEC's 1986 report. There are seven gaging stations in the region that can be used as reference stations for the flow syntheses. Only two stations, Power Creek and Kenai River at Cooper Landing, had flow records since October 1957. Since these two stations alone were not acceptable to synthesize the Lower Bradley River flow for all months, a correlation study was performed to extend data for the other required stat ions in those periods when no flow data were available for those other stations. A review of the regional streamflow records was conducted so that the best available data could be used for the regression analysis. The gaging stations used in the flow syntheses for the Lower Bradley River and the data extension at each station, if needed, are discussed briefly as follows: 1. Barbara Creek It was found that the flow for the Lower Bradley River is closely correlated to Barbara Creek. Only the flows in March, April and 6360R/LS 4-7 October were not used in the correlation. Since the flow record at Barbara Creek started in June 1972, the flow data had to be extended back to October 1957. The monthly flows at Barbara Creek from June 1972 to September 1986 were compared with the monthly flows at Power Creek for the same time period. By plotting and visually inspecting all the data, it was found that the data from July to October had to be separated from other samples. The monthly flows from November to June could be grouped as one category and still provided good correlation between Barbara Creek and Power Creek. From July to October, the monthly flows had to be plotted separately for each month due to the scattering of the data. Furthermore, it was found that the correlation coefficient of the linear regression analyses for August and September were 0. 383 and 0.508, respectively. These results indicated that the flows at Barbara Creek and Power Creek for August and September did not correlate well. Another method had to be adopted to extend the monthly flow at Barbara Creek for August and September. Table 4. 3 presents the constants derived from the linear regression analyses and the correlation coefficients for each analysis. For August and September, a review of the regional streamflow records showed that the streamflow record at the Ninilchik River provided the next best available data in the region for synthesizing flow at Barbara Creek. The result of the correlation analysis is presented in Table 4.3. However, the flow records at the Ninilchik River started in April, 1963; therefore, the flow at Barbara Creek for August and September still needed to be extended back to 1957. Review of the regional streamflow records failed to find any good reference station for Barbara Creek prior to 1963. Therefore, Barbara Creek was not used in the correlation study for synthesizing Lower Bradley River flows prior to 1963. The method used will be discussed later in this section. 6360R/LS 4-8 2. Power Creek Another major stream used 1n the correlation study for the Lower Bradley River was Power Creek, which was used for the months from January to May. The flow records at Power Creek were available from 1947. The published monthly average flows from the USGS water resource data were used. Furthermore, Power Creek provided the basis for extending flow records at Barbara Creek. 3. Kenai River at Cooper Landing The monthly flows from Kenai River at Cooper Landing were also used for the flow syntheses at Lower Bradley River. The flow records were available from 1947. The published monthly average flows from the USGS water resource data were used. Furthermore, this station provided the basis for extending flow records for Kenai River at Soldotna prior to 1965, used in synthesizing the June Lower Bradley River flows. 4. Ninilchik River The flows at the Ninilchik River were one of the three reference streams used for January at the Lower Bradley River. The records at this stream started in April 1963. Consequently, the flows needed to be extended prior to 1963. The monthly flow at Power Creek was first investigated for correlation with the Ninilchik River. But, the correlation coefficient was only 0.14, which implied that those two streams were relatively independent. Therefore, the extension of the Ninilchik River flow could not be based on the Power Creek. Review of the other streams which had records prior to 1963 failed to find any good reference streams for the Ninilchik River. Therefore, the flows at the Ninilchik River were only used after 1963. Prior to 1963, the January flow at the Lower Bradley River was not synthesized from the records at Ninilchik River, Power Creek, and Barbara Creek. The method used will be discussed later in this section. 6360R/LS 4-9 5. Anchor River Anchor River was used as one of the reference streams in the correlation analysis at the Lower Bradley River for March and April. The monthly flows in March and April at Anchor River from 1966 to 1973 and 1979 to 1985 were compared with the monthly flows at Ninilchik River for the same time period. The results of the linear regression analysis are presented in Table 4.3. Since the flows at the Ninilchik River were only available after 1963, the March and April monthly flow prior to 1963 for the Lower Bradley River were not generated from Anchor River and Power Creek, but by a method to be discussed later in this section. 6. Kenai River at Soldotna For June, the monthly flows at the Lower Bradley River were generated from the records at Barbara Creek, Kenai River at Cooper Landing and Kenai River at Soldotna. The flow records at Soldotna were only available after May 1965. The monthly flow records for June at Soldotna from 1965 to 1986 were compared with the records at Cooper Landing for the same time period. The results of the linear regression analysis are presented in Table 4.3. 7. Resurrection Creek Resurrection Creek was used initially as one of the three reference streams to generate the Lower Bradley River flow in April. The streamflow records at Resurrection Creek started in October 1967. Therefore, the data needed to be extended back to October 1957. However, a review of the regional streamflow records failed to indicate a good reference stream. If the Lower Bradley River flow were generated from the records of Power Creek and Anchor River instead the initially-proposed Power Creek, Anchor River and Resurrect ion Creek; the correlation coefficient would decrease only from 0.889 to 0.881. Therefore, the streamflow record at Resurrection Creek was dropped from the correlation study. 6360R/LS 4-10 As discussed above, since some of the flow records required for the methods discussed in SWEC 1 s 1986 report could not be extended by comparison with the other flow records in the region, alternative methods were used to replace the correlation coefficients recommended in the report, in those instances. The coefficients which did not change are presented in Table 4.4. Those which did differ from the coefficients in SWEC 1 s 1986 report are presented in Table 4.3, and the methods used to obtain the new coefficients are discussed below. In 1986, USGS performed a multiple linear regression analysis to relate the Lower Bradley River flows to gaged streams in the region. In SWEC 1 s 1986 report, the recommended correlation results were selected from various alternatives. Each alternative was ranked according to the value of the correlation coefficient. The recommended scheme used the alternative with the highest correlation coefficient, unless significant reduct ion in the amount of data extension needed in the correlation analysis could be realized by using an equation with a somewhat lower correlation coefficient. The general rule for the present approach was to use the SWEC 1986 recommended values as much as possible. For those time periods in which the data extension could not be performed with reference to other streams in the region, the next best ranking in the USGS correlation study was used to replace the SWEC 1986 recommended one. For example, the monthly flows at the Lower Bradley River for August and September were to be based on the flows at Barbara Creek and Kenai River at Cooper Landing. Since there was no proper base to extend the August and September flows at Barbara Creek prior to 1963, the flows for those months at the Lower Bradley River prior to 1963 were generated from the flows at Kenai River at Cooper Landing alone. This was the next best ranking in the USGS correlation study and the necessary data prior to 1963 were available. It should be noted that only the monthly flows in August and September from 1958 to 1962 were generated from this modified approach. The revised correlation results are presented in Table 4.3. 6360R/LS 4-11 Similarly, the March monthly flows of the Lower Bradley River prior to 1966 were based on the flows at Barbara Creek instead of the combination of Power Creek and Anchor River; for Apri 1, they were based on Power Creek instead of Power Creek, Anchor River and Resurrection Creek. It should be noted that data for the flow at Barbara Creek prior to 1966 did not exist and it was first synthesized from Power Creek, since there exists a good correlation between Power Creek and Barbara Creek. Prior to 1964, the January monthly flow at the Lower Bradley River was generated from the Power Creek and Barbara Creek instead from Ninilchik River, Power Creek and Barbara Creek. Once again, the flow at Barbara Creek prior to 1964 was estimated from the flow at Power Creek. The summaries of all those updated correlation results are presented in Table 4.3. Based on the multipliers and intercepts listed in Tables 4.3 and 4.4, the monthly flows at the Lower Bradley River were generated and the summary is presented in Table 4.5. The results were compared with the ones presented in R&M' s 1983 report and the comparison is shown graphically in Figure 4.2. In general, the summer monthly flow generated in this study is larger than the one by R&M, and for winter months the updated monthly flow is less than the one by R&M. 4.4 Comparison of Past and Updated Inflow at Bradley Lake The daily flow records at the Bradley Lake outlet were used as the base for calculating the total inflow into the lake. The daily flow was adjusted to account for the glacier runoff due to Nuka Glacier terminus switch, basin glacier mass balance. the 5 cfs Nuka River maintenance flow in accordance with the National Park Service agreement; and to account for flow from the Middle Fork Diversion. All adjustments had been calculated on a monthly basis. Each adjustment was assumed constant within each month, so the daily adjustments to the recorded daily flows at the Bradley Lake outlet were the same for each day in a given month. The monthly average inflows into Bradley Lake from water years 1958 to 1986 are presented in Table 4.6. The monthly inflows based on the past hydrology are presented in Table 4.7. The updated inflows were plotted against the previous results, as shown in Figure 4.3. 6360R/LS 4-12 The major factor in changing the flow distribution is the use of the Ninilchik River as the nonglacierized basin in the glacier mass balance study instead of Ship Creek as proposed by R&M in 1983. The distribution of annual runoff between Ninilchik River and Ship Creek is significantly different. The Ninilchik River is closer to Bradley Lake, whereas Ship Creek is near Anchorage. Due to the geographic difference between the two basins, the time distribution of runoff is different. Consequently, the annual adjustment for the glacier mass balance will be affected by the changes in the runoff distribution from the nonglacierized basin. As discussed in Section 4.2, the cumulative net change of the glacier mass from water years 1953 to 1982 was a loss of about 51 inches of equivalent water depth taken over the glacierized portion of the Bradley Lake basin. However, by adding four more years (1983-1986), the cumulative net change in glacier mass became about 297 inches. As pointed out earlier, for the years when the glacier mass balance increases, streamflow adjustment for those years should be increased accordingly. For example, the annual average net inflow to the lake would be 508 cfs based on the past hydrology study from 1958 to 1982, and it would be 515 cfs if the updated hydrology results were used for the same time period. However, by adding the next four years, from :983 to 1986, the annual average net inflow from 1958 to 1986 would decrease to 502 cfs using the past hydrology, but it would increase to 523 cfs using the updated hydrology. For the last four years (1983 to 1986), the annual average net inflow based on the updated hydrology was 108 cfs higher, compared with that based on the past hydrology. The increase in net inflow together with the higher lake level from 1983 to 1986 resulted in a slightly higher value for annual average energy between 1958 and 1986 than what was calculated and reported in the FERC License Application. It should be noted that the net inflow into the lake also considered a reduction for water releases from reservoir to meet the minimum instream requirement, if needed. 6360R/LS 4-13 5.0 PROJECT ENERGY AND CAPACITY 5.0 PROJECT ENERGY AND CAPACITY 5.1 Past Study SWEC performed a reservoir operation study to simulate the reservoir operation due to power generation. A historical streamflow record of 25 years (water years 1958 to 1982) was used. Average monthly streamflows were used in the analysis to determine energy, discharge, and reservoir level fluctuation on a monthly basis. The primary function of the Bradley Lake reservoir will be to regulate streamflow and provide for carry-over storage for producing energy throughout the year. The reservoir will be operated from Elevation 1080 to Elevation 1180. The uncontrolled spillway crest is at Elevation 1180. In the previous study, the reservoir operating rule was based on generating firm energy continuously whenever the reservoir was below the maximum operating pool elevation ll80. When the reservoir reached Elevation ll80 and streamflow exceeded the flow utilized for firm energy generation, the additional flow was utilized in producing secondary energy up to the total installed capacity of the project. The firm energy was determined by performing iterations for the 25 years of streamflow record so that the project would produce the maximum firm energy and only allow the reservoir level to reach the minimum operating elevation of 1080 once during the critical period. The critical period was determined as the time period between the m1mmum allowed reservoir level at 1080 and the preceding first occurrence of the full reservoir level at ll80. Having determined the critical period, the firm capacity, and energy; the computer model then calculated secondary energy and average annual generation. It should be noted that the above operating procedure could result in a small loss of potential secondary energy generated in wetter years. However, since the secondary energy was only about 10 percent of the total average annual energy, the loss of this potential secondary energy in wet 6332R/LS 5-1 years is considered very small. Therefore, the adopted rule is conservative from a firm energy standpoint and, consequently, from an overall economic standpoint also. Estimates of dependable capacity and firm, secondary, and average annual generation were computed on the basis of simulation of 25 years of reservoir operation. Inputs to the computer model consisted of the flow available for generation, the turbine-generator characteristics, reservoir capacity curve, power tunnel friction loss coefficient, and the centerline elevation of the turbine runner. The turbine-generator characteristics were based on the preliminary data solicited from various manufacturers. Maximum and minimum turbine flows for each unit were taken as 625 cubic feet per second (cfs) and 63 cfs, respectively. The turbine and generator efficiencies were assumed constant at 91 percent and 97 percent, respectively. The results of the previous study were presented and discussed in detail in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's 1 icense application, Volume I, Exhibit B, Section 4.8.2. The results are summarized as follows: Firm Capacity Average Annual Firm Energy Average Annual Secondary Energy Average Annual Total Energy 38.1 MW 334.1 GWh 35.1 GWh 369.2 GWh The critical period spans a 44 month period from October 1971 through May 1975. The reservoir would be regulated between Elevation 1180 and Elevation 1130 for the majority of the time. Spillway discharges occur in August, September, and October; and are of very limited frequency. 5.2 Reservoir Operation Model A new computer model was developed and used for this report to determine the project energy generated at various operating conditions. In order to precisely simulate a multiple utility integrated power demand for the Railbelt area, the model was based on an hourly time increment and used the 6332R/LS 5-2 daily flow records to simulate the anticipated large fluctuation of daily flow. The daily flow record for 29 years (water years 1958 to 1986) was used to simulate the daily reservoir operation. It can be seen from the historical daily flow record that the flow fluctuates significantly during August, September and October (Figure 5.1). Because of this, the use of daily flows rather than monthly average flows resulted in improvement of the model, especially during the spillway overflow periods. A brief description of each major characteristic built into the computer model is discussed as follows: 1. Turbine Performance Curves A series of six turbine characteristics curves were included to describe the relationship between turbine power output and flow required at six different net heads, 920ft, 1000 ft, 1085 ft, 1100 ft, 1150 ft and 1175 ft. The minimum power output of each unit ranged from 4.03 MW at the minimum head to 5.97 MW at the maximum head. The maximum power output of each unit ranged from 47.74 MW at the minimum head to 61.07 MW at the maximum head. These curves represented the turbine units to be installed and were obtained from the model tests by the Fuji Electric Co., Ltd. The curve at each head represented the envelope of the efficiency curves from 2 to 6 jet operation. Maximum and minimum turbine flow for each unit were 739 cfs and 61 cfs, respectively. To meet the given power demand at each hour, the required turbine flow at the corresponding lake level was linearly interpreted from these curves. 2. Generator Performance Curve 6332R/LS One curve was used to describe the relationship between the generator power and its efficiency. Generator efficiency ranged from 85 percent at 4.02 MW to 98 percent at 59.85 MW. A total of 17 points was used to describe the curve. For a given power 5-3 demand, the generator efficiency was linearly interpreted between two adjacent values. 3. Transformer Efficiency A single constant value at 99.45 percent was used to describe the transformer efficiency for all loads. 4. Power Tunnel Friction Loss The friction loss in the power tunnel and penstock and other minor losses for a given referenced flow were estimated from available publications. The hydraulic loss at a different given flow rate was assumed to be proportional to the square of the flow ratio with respect to the referenced flow. For one unit operation, the referenced friction loss was 17.5 ft with 768 cfs in the power tunnel. For two unit operation, the referenced friction loss was 48.8 ft with 1509 cfs in the power tunnel. On an hourly basis, the friction loss was subtracted from the gross head, which reflects the difference between the hourly Bradley Lake level and the centerline of the runner. 5. Spillway Rating Curve A spillway rating curve was incorporated in the model. This allowed accurate modeling of the relationship between storage and spill for the reservoir level above the spillway crest. It also provided a good estimate for the flow over the uncontrolled spillway. 6. Reservoir Capacity Curve 6332R/LS A reservoir capacity curve was incorporated in the model. This information provided the base to estimate the lake level fluctuation during the reservoir routing computation on an hourly basis. 5-4 7. Daily Flow at the Bradley Lake Outlet The daily flow records of the gaging station at the Bradley Lake outlet were used to describe the daily flow fluctuation. It should be noted that these data do not represent the final inflows used in the reservoir routing computation, which flows included adjustment to account for the glacier runoff, glacier mass balance, and diversion from and to other sub-basins. 8. Monthly Average Flow at the Middle Fork Diversion SWEC previously reviewed the hydrology in 1986 and found that the results presented by R&M compared reasonably well with the correlation study performed by the USGS and with the actual recorded flows which have been available since October 1979. Therefore, R&M' s results were input into the model. Since this flow, as well as other flow adjustment, is relatively small compared with the flow recorded at the lake outlet, the monthly average flow was used to simplify the computation. 9. Monthly Average Flow at the Lower Bradley River The monthly average flow at the Lower Bradley was updated in this study and the revised information was input into the model. This flow was compared with the daily instream flow requirement to determine whether there was a need to release water from the reservo1r to supplement instream flow. 10. Glacier Runoff 6332R/LS Flow adjustment was computed to include Nuka Glacier switch, glacier mass balance, and the 5 cfs Nuka River maintenance flow in accordance with the National Park Service agreement. The net inflow to the lake, then, was equal to the sum of the flow recorded at lake outlet, glacier switch and mass balance adjustments, Middle Fork Diversion, and the release from the reservoir to supplement the instream flow, if needed. S-5 11. Instream Minimum Flow The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission license requires a minimum instream flow to be ma~ntained. This flow is to be measured at the USGS gaging stat ion above Riffle Reach in the Lower Bradley River. The specified requirement 1s presented in Table 5.1. The model was developed to incorporate the ramp-up in May and ramp-down in September and November. For other months, the flow was maintained at the specified constant rate. Whenever the model indicated a shortage of the flow at the Lower Bradley River to meet this demand, water was released from the reservoir on a daily basis to make up the shortage. 12. Daily Power Demand 6332R/LS Three types of power demand were incorporated in the model. These inputs were on an hourly basis. The actual calendar days for each month were used. a. Utility Power Loading Curves The hourly power loading curve for each month comprised the energy projections by Chugach Electric Association, Inc., Golden Valley Electric Association, Municipality of Anchorage and Homer Electric Associ at ion. These data were transmit ted to SWEC on September 30 and October 5, 1988. 5-6 6332R/LS Basically, two cases of power loading were considered. The first case assumed no constraints on the original 102 MW project output and MWh. The second an annual available energy of 369,200 case assumed the project capacity is 1 imited to 40 MW and an annual energy 1 imi ted to 269,100 MWh. For the first case, there was no power demand for the Municipality of Anchorage at the weekend. Tables 5. 2 and 5. 3 present the hourly power load for the first case at weekdays and weekend, respectively. Table 5.4 presents the hourly power load for the second case. It should be noted that some of the original hourly power loads for the first case in June and July were less than 5 MW, which is the minimum acceptable power output by the turbine. Therefore, the hourly power loads were redistributed for Chugach and Homer in June and July so that the minimum total power load at each hour was larger than 5 MW. The redistribution of hourly power load did not, however, change the total daily power demand, so the daily reservoir operation could still be properly simulated. Table 5.2 reflects this adjustment. b. Utility Power Loading Curves Plus Minimizing Spill An option was added to the model so that the project would normally be operated in accordance with the utility power demand; but when there was a spill over the spillway and the power demand at that project generating hour did not exceed the specified capacity, the available spill was diverted into the turbine to generate power up to its specified capacity. This provided information about the additional energy that could be generated through minimizing spill. 5-7 c. Base Load Operation The third option of the project operation was to simulate two unit operation at a specified capacity continuously at every day of each month. The reservoir storage and the net inflow were used for power generation until the lake level reached the minimum operating elevation of 1080. When the lake level dropped below Elevation 1080 at any hour, the project stopped power generation until the next day. This operating constraint was also applicable to the other two options. In the above opt ions the model was progranuned so that it would select the optimum operation between one or two unit operation. This allowed the most efficient use of the reservoir storage for power generation. Single unit operation governed until the hourly power demand exceeded the specified single unit capacity. It should be noted that the above three options were based on the operation instructions from APA. The model could be modified to accommodate any loading condition requested by APA. 13. Monthly Target Energy and Daily Operating Hours 6332R/LS The model was developed to also simulate the project operation if the daily operating hours fall below 24 hours. A monthly target energy for each month is prescribed in the model. By combining the monthly target energy and daily required operating hours, the reservoir operation could be simulated. This option was not used in the production runs. However, the monthly target energy was input to determine the rel iabi 1 i ty of the project energy to meet the monthly utility power demand during the simulation of 29 years of project operation. S-8 14. Reservoir Routing Based on the net inflow and the outflow due to power generation and/or instream minimum flow, the reservoir routing was performed and the lake level was computed on an hourly basis, even though the flow was on a daily basis. This is due to the requirement of multiple hourly power demand. The reservoir routing was based on the hydrological routing method which solves the storage equation. The known data used were the elevation-storage curve and the elevation-discharge curve. As the lake level exceeded the spillway crest at Elevation ll80, the model estimated the spill rate. It should be noted that this model did not assume the entire storage volume above the spillway crest to be discharged at that instant. A spillway rating curve was provided to allow proper estimates of overflow based on the reservoir routing of total inflow and outflow. 15. Model Outputs The computer outputs consisted of the inflow into the reservoir, the flow at the Lower Bradley River, the water release to meet the instream minimum flow, the flow through turbines, the net generated power, the flow over the spillway, the lake level, the net head, and the energy produced. These values were computed on an hourly basis and the printouts showed daily average values. In addition, the monthly averages of the above values were also output, together with the maximum and minimum lake level in each month. Moreover, series of tables were created to summarize the results of each month for 29 years. The values summarized consisted of the average turbine flow, average spill rate, average lake level, average net head, the maximum and minimum lake level, and the total generated energy. 5.3 Updated Project Energy and Capacity Production runs were conducted for a total of 17 cases. described as follows: 6332R/LS 5-9 The cases are 1. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month but limited to 2 units each at 20 MW; 2. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month and minimizing the spill but limited to 2 units each at 20 MW; 3. based on the base load operation for entire year but limited to 2 units each at 20 MW; 4. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month but limited to 2 units each at 25 MW; 5. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month and minimizing the spill but limited to 2 units each at 25 MW; 6. based on the base load operation for entire year but limited to 2 units each at 25 MW; 7. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month but limited to 2 units each at 30 MW; 8. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month and minimizing the spill but limited to 2 units each at 30 MW; 9. based on the base load operation for entire year but limited to 2 units each at 30 MW; 10. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month but limited to 2 units each at 45 MW; 11. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month and minimizing the spill but limited to 2 units each at 45 MW; 12. based on the base load operation for entire year but limited to 2 units each at 45 MW; 6332R/LS 5-10 13. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month but limited to 2 units each at 51 MW; 14. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month and minimizing the spill but limited to 2 units each at 51 MW; 15. based on the base load operation for entire year but limited to 2 units each at 51 MW; 16. based on the hourly power loading curve for each month and minimizing the spill but limited to a total of 119 MW; and 17. based on the power loading curve but the project capacity limited to 40 MW and the target annual energy of 269,100 MWh. The annual average energy for each above case is presented in Table 5. 5. For each case, the summary of monthly project energy during the 29 years of simulation is presented in Tables 5.6 to 5.22. The monthly average energy for 29 years is also shown in Figures 5. 2 to 5.17. In these figures, the utility target energy and the base load target energy are plotted for reference. The utility target energy is the annual target energy expected to be generated with the hourly power product ion following the specified power loading curves. The base load target energy is the maximum energy generated in each month if the project is operating continuously at the specified capacity. The base load target energy values shown on the figures vary from month to month due to the use of the actual number of days in each month in summing the energy. The term "annual energy" used on the figures refers to the average annual energy produced using the given operating mode. A curve showing the project capacity with respect to the lake level is presented in Figure 5.18. 6332R/LS 5-11 It should be noted that the energy generation estimated in the previous study represented the optimum project operation to minimize the spill over a long period of time. Based on the past hydrology, the total annual average energy was 369,200 MWh, whereas, it would be 373,100 MWh with the updated hydrology using the same optimization procedure. The present operation schemes, as discussed in Section 5.2, are based on the energy projection by the four utilities and other baseload conditions. There are some differences in the project operation logic between the previous and present study. Furthermore, for the previous study the inputs and calculations were on a monthly basis, whereas, the inputs and calculations were on an hourly basis for the present study. The structures of the two models are different. Consequently, the results from two models differed, but not significantly. It can be seen from Table 5.5 that the estimated annual average energy varied with different operating schemes. The project energy generated each month is dependent on the inflow and lake level for that month. To demonstrate the Bradley Lake level fluctuation in each month, the average, maximum and minimum lake levels for each month are shown in Figures 5.19 to 5.34. The monthly average lake level is the average value for each month for 29 years; whereas, the maximum and minimum lake levels are the absolute maximum and minimum values in each month for 29 years. It can be seen that only for cases 1, 2, 4 and 5 did the reservoir level not reach the minimum operating level of 1080. As the specified unit capacity increased, the period of time with the lake level at Elevation 1080 increased. In general, the lake level was at its lowest during the spring. The plots of monthly energy and lake level for Case No. 17 are not presented in this report, since the case of project capacity limited to 40 MW and annual target energy of 269,100 MWh is similar to the case based on the power loading curve but limited to 2 units each at 20 MW. 6332R/LS 5-12 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Conclusions The re-evaluation of hydrology, energy and capacity for the Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project was performed for APA. We conclude that the previous studies done by COE in 1981, R&M in 1983, and SWEC in 1986 utilized the best data available at the time and employed sound approaches in conducting the studies. This present study was performed to refine the previous studies using revised data and updated project information. Our conclusions are summarized as follows: 1. Based on the revised USGS streamflow data, the Nuka Glacier runoff from 1958 to 1970 was updated using the method described in R&M's 1983 report. The revised flow data at the Upper Bradley River reduced the annual average flow by about 13 cfs between 1980 and 1982. With the 3 years of revised data plus an additional 4 years of new data, the glacier flow adjustments due to glacier terminus switch were re-calculated, resulting in a loss of about 5 cfs annually for the period from 1958 to 1970. 2. 6468R/LS Between 1971 and 1979, the entire glacier runoff flowed into the Upper Bradley River. The glacier runoff did not require any adjustment for this period to account for the glacier terminus switch. However, the total glacier runoff was needed in order to estimate the diversion to the Nuka River in accordance to the agreement with the National Park Service. A linear regression analysis was performed between the glacier runoff and the flow at Bradley Lake outlet in order to estimate the glacier runoff for the period between 1971 and 1979. Since the estimated diversion to the Upper Nuka River only varied from 5 to 7 cfs, the final adjusted Bradley Lake inflow was not sensitive to the accuracy of this correlation study. For the period from 1980 to 1986, the glacier runoff adjustment was based on either the USGS field observation or the recorded flows at the Upper Nuka River and Upper Bradley River. 6-1 3. The updated glacier mass balance was based on the annual runoff records at the Ninilchik River instead of Ship Creek. Due to the difference in runoff time distribution between the two basins, the calculated annual change in glacier mass was different. The estimated annual glacier mass gains from 1982 to 1986 appeared to coincide with the field observation that flow into the Upper Nuka River, which was absent for years prior to 1982, started again after 1982. It is possible to interpret the significant gain in glacier mass as the extension of the glacier terminus from the condition prior to 1982, resulting in the diversion of flow to the Upper Nuka River. However, this comparison was purely an observation and will require the aerial photographs to determine the change in glacier mass and its effects on the glacier runoff. 4. A correlation study was performed to synthesize the Lower Bradley River flow. Six reference streams in the region were used in the correlation study. It was necessary that four streamflow records be extended back to October 1957. Linear regression analysis was used to synthesize the streamflow data for those periods when no flow data were available. A review of the regional streamflow records was conducted so that the best available data could be used for the regression analysis. 6468R/LS The correlation coefficient for the streamflow data extension ranged from 0.81 to 0.94. The majority of the correlation coefficients for the flow syntheses on the Lower Bradley River ranged from 0.80 to 0.98, with the exception of 0.69 for January. For those months when the data could not be extended by the linear regression analysis, the next best ranking alternative in the USGS correlation study was used to generate the Lower Bradley River flow. The correlation coefficient of the substituted linear equations ranged from 0.67 to 0.87, with the exception of 0.35 for September from 1958 to 1963. The record with the 0.35 correlation coefficient was used for lack of a better record in September for the first six years. Since only six months were affected, the possible error introduced in 6-2 the synthesized Lower Bradley River flow had little effect on the prediction of long term project energy. 5. The synthesized flow at the Lower Bradley River was compared with that predicted by R&M in 1983. In general, the summer monthly flow generated in this study is larger than the one by R&M, and for winter months the updated monthly flow is less than the one by R&M. The updated monthly flow compared reasonably well with the USGS correlation study and the field record since 1983. 6. Due to the significant gain of glacier mass between 1983 to 1986, the adjusted streamflow to Bradley Lake increased accordingly. For this period, the annual average net inflow showed an increase of 108 cfs, compared with the past hydrology. This increase resulted in a slightly higher estimate of the annual average energy available from the project. 7. A new computer model was developed and used to estimate the project energy generated at various operating conditions. Since the model was designed to precisely simulate a multiple utility integrated power demand and used the daily flow records to simulate the anticipated large fluctuation of daily flow, the daily lake level prediction was accurate. With further refinements, such as including a series of turbine and generator characteristics curves, the projected turbine flow was more accurate. The built-in spillway rating curve in the model allowed more precise estimates in the overflow rate through the spillway. 8. Three different project operating modes were assumed for this study. Computer runs for 17 cases were performed to simulate various operating conditions and constraints. Among all the cases, the maximum annual average energy was 375,920 MWh, for 6468R/LS 6-3 the case with 2 units each operated at 45 MW base load. From Table 5.5, it can be seen that of the three operating modes investigated, following the power loading curves and minimizing spill produced more energy for a given capacity than following the power loading curves without minimizing spill; and using base load operation provided the most energy. 9. A computer run for 2 units each at 45 MW base load was conducted by using the past hydrological data but executing the run on the present model. The annual average energy was 357, 120 MWh with the past hydrology instead of the 375,920 MWh with the updated hydrology. The difference in energy production was due not only directly to the difference in inflow, but also to the head difference caused by the sensitivity of lake level to changes in inflow. This sensitivity, and its consequent effect on long term energy production, points to the desirability of optimizing reservoir operation to achieve the highest average operating head possible. 10. The energy predicted in the previous study resulted from a different project operating logic than the one assumed in this study. Furthermore, some variation in the results between the two models was introduced by differences in the model structures and assumptions. Since the present model utilized daily flow, performed computations on an hourly basis, and incorporated refined turbine and generator characteristics; the present model was able to provide more accurate results than the previous one, which was based on the monthly inflow, simplified assumptions and calculation on a monthly basis. 11. A project capacity curve was developed to demonstrate the project maximum capacity at different lake levels. Due to the enlargement of the power tunnel diameter from the previous 11 ft to the present 13 ft, and the refinement of turbine and generator characteristics, the project can actually operate at 119 MW maximum generator capacity with the lake level as low as ll46.9 ft. The project can still generate 108.5 MW with the 6468R/LS 6-4 lake at its minimum operating level of 1080 ft providing enough inflow for the turbine generator at that capacity. It should be noted that the power as described above is the net power produced by the project after accounting for the efficiencies of turbine, generator and transformer. The above points and examination of the energy curves lead to the final conclusion that if the reservoir is operated in conformance with load, not all available energy will be realized since the most water is available during the periods when demand is the lowest. Therefore, greater flexibility should be considered in operating Bradley lake in order to maximize its energy potential, while adjusting other system plants to meet load requirements. 6.2 Recommendations We recommend that system plants other than Bradley be used to follow load requirements, allowing Bradley to maximize its total energy contribution through the most efficient operation of its reservoir. As indicated in Section 6.1, long term annual energy production is sensitive to how the reservoir is operated. A set of operating reservoir rule curves would be an ideal tool for the project to optimize inflow and reservoir storage so that the project energy can be maximized within any constraints imposed by system operation. As defined in work package 22A, Phase 2 of the work would include a future effort to develop a reservoir inflow forecasting computer model to analyze the collected hydrometeorological field data and forecast available reservoir inflows for the next two weeks, one month, two months, and six months. This computer model would also generate a set of operating reservoir rule curves so that the reservoir levels can be operated with the forecasted inflows and available reservoir storage to avoid spilling and maximize the project energy production. In December 1986, SWEC recommended that APA consider the development of such a model, which would utilize the National Weather Service River flow Forecasting System (NWSRFS) as its basis. In light of the need for time to modify for project use the NWSRFS model and to calibrate it with available field data, we recommend that APA authorize at the present time commencement of the Phase 2 effort. 6468R/LS 6-5 7.0 REFERENCES 7.0 REFERENCES 1. U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers (COE}. Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Project, Design Memorandum No. 1, Hydrology. COE, Anchorage, AK, June 1981. 2. R&M Consultants, Inc. Bradley Lake Hydroelectric Power Project, Phase 1 -Feasibility Study, Final Report. R&M, Anchorage, AK, August, 1983. 3. 6478R/LS Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (SWEC}. Review of Bradley Lake Project Hydrology. SWEC, Anchorage, AK, October 1986. 7-1 8.0 TABLES FLOW ADJUSTMENTS DUE TO GLACIER MASS BALANCE CHANGE {CUBIC FEET PER SECOND) Water Year Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. 1958 293 366 345 173 1959 -23 -28 -29 -17 1960 104 159 134 83 1961 36 46 44 30 1962 160 224 223 77 1963 -288 -500 -497 -371 1964 -110 -126 -134 -98 1965 -22 -37 -37 -35 1966 -510 -651 -637 -472 1967 -271 -382 -378 -229 1968 170 226 240 107 1969 -477 -565 -469 -336 1970 -41 -50 -50 -27 1971 239 378 423 219 1972 -151 -247 -268 -154 1973 262 370 342 201 1974 -298 -388 -414 -305 1975 332 500 480 332 1976 -95 -150 -140 -83 1977 643 795 871 510 1978 -76 -103 -116 -65 1979 -167 -265 -258 -198 1980 488 616 542 406 1981 268 392 373 226 1982 -235 -314 -312 -218 1983 507 608 590 322 1984 554 643 654 429 1985 365 638 568 373 1986 70 88 85 57 TABLE 4.1 ADJUSTMENT TO RECOliDED DH.ADLEY LAKE OUTLET FLOWS FOR Gl.ACIEH RUNOJi'l'' MONTHLY AND ANNUAL MEAN DISCI~GE ADJUS'fHENT, IN CUBIC FEET PER SECOND Wat.er Year Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. Hay Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Annual 1956 97.6 65.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 534.5 632.2 635.8 252.9 186.1 1959 34.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 193.9 213.1 214.9 83.3 62.0 1960 20.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 268.3 397.6 349.1 187.2 102.3 1981 27.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 220.3 314.0 202.0 234.0 90.4 1962 39.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 326.0 458.8 420.5 153.1 118.1 1963 31.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -139.8 -204.6 -203.5 -141.6 -55.1 1964 68.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.4 115.2 164.5 112.2 44.2 1965 56.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 93.1 195.4 203.9 261.3 67.9 1966 71.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -317.5 -405.6 -113.8 -182.2 -79.1 1967 62.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -78.5 -107.3 -68.0 60.5 -11.1 1968 25.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 328.5 472.1 519.1 199.9 129.5 1969 29.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 179.7 -267.7 -251.0 -194.4 -72.3 1970 343.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 132.3 204.1 215.3 93.7 83.4 1911 -5.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 232.3 371.3 416.3 212.4 103.0 1972 -5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -151.0 -252.5 -273.5 -159.5 -70.5 1973 -5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 255.3 363.2 335.1 194.3 95.8 1974 -5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -298.0 -361}.0 -414.0 -310.2 -118.6 1975 -5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 325.1 493.4 473.3 325.1 135.1 1976 -5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -100.7 -156.0 -146.0 -·69. 1 -41.6 1977 -5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 636.7 790.4 868.9 503.2 234.2 1978 -5.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -81.7 -109.1 -122.1 -70.9 -32.6 1979 -5.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -112. 1 -270.3 -264.4 -203.7 -76.8 1980 -6.4 -5.4 -5.0 -0.3 -0.6 -0.5 -3.3 -5.3 481.2 610.0 535.8 399.2 167.0 1981 -5.7 -5.1 -5.0 -5.1 -4.8 -1.9 -4.7 -5.2 261.3 385.5 366.8 219.1 100.3 1982 -5.4 -5.2 -5.0 -3.3 -4.8 -2.5 -1.2 -5.2 -235.0 -319.4 -317.4 -224.8 -94.6 1983 23.1 1.0 5.8 0.6 -1.6 -0.6 -1.2 45.9 645.4 717.9 723.6 3'18. 3 217.9 1964 34.9 28.0 -0.0 -2.3 -0.7 1.4 -1.1 35.0 673.4 787.8 855.4 577.2 249.7 1985 56.2 1.5 -0.9 0.8 -1.6 -0.5 -0.5 -3.8 432.9 836.0 779.7 537.1 221.3 1966 25.6 -3.7 -1.3 -0.8 -0.5 -0.3 0.0 119.9 79.5 91.4 90.3 58.0 38.5 Average = 61.9 TABLE 4.2 Correlation Study of Streamflow Records in the Region St reamf I ow Reference Month Cor r e I at i on Intercept Correlation Period to Records to be Stream Multiplier Coefficient be Extended Extended Barbara Creek Power Creek July 0.454 -70.7 0.893 1957-1971 Barbara Creek Power Creek Nov-June 0.559 9.3 0.942 1957-1972 Barbara Creek Ni n i I chi k Aug&Sept 0.643 9.0 0.811 1963-1971 Anchor River N in i I chi k March 2.603 -85.5 0.905 1964-1965 1974-1978 Anchor River Ni n i I chi k Apr i I 1. 606 -23.3 0.941 1964-1965 1974-1978 Kenai River at Kenai River at June 1. 649 -509.0 0.942 1958-1964 Soldotna Cooper Landing Lower Bradley River Kenai River at August 0.0728 -291.8 0.674 1958-1963 Cooper Landing Lower Bradley River Kenai River at September 0.0405 -89.5 0.351 1958-1963 Cooper Landing Lower Bradley River Barbara Creek March 0.454 -4.0 0.846 1958-1963 Lower Bradley River Power Creek Apr i I 0.226 1. 2 0.867 1958-1963 Lower Bradley River Power Creek January 0.180 -2.2 0.666 1958-1963 TABLE 4.3 Correlation Results for the Lower Bradley River Station Ninilchik Power Barbara Anchor Resurrection Kenai R. @ Kenai R. @ Corr. Name: River Creek Creek River Creek Cooper Landing Soldotna Intercept Coer. USGS Station No: 15241600 15216000 15238820 15239900 15267900 15258000 15266300 Recorded Since: 1963 1947 1972 1978 1967 1947 _lliil Jan. 1.76743 0.05387 0.15248 -88.90357 0.69 Feb. -0.06187 0.28938 1.26044 0.88 Mar. 0.06769 0.11635 -4.03876 0.90 Apr. 0.17198 0.09129 -0.11433 2.17949 0.89 May 0.33854 0.72008 -55.21053 0.93 Jun. 1.00879 0.06316 -0.03367 -118.50406 0.80 Jul. 1.41199 -1 .44451 0.95 Aug. 2.23184 0.03317 -215.63019 0.90 Sep. 0.68239 0.02222 -76.71667 0.81 Oct. 0.03389 -49.68174 0.89 Nov. 0.75196 -9-30626 0.97 Dec. 0.55399 -2.99138 0.98 NOTE: 1. Data from Robert Lamke of USGS, Anchorage, Alaska 2. Q = Intercept + sum of the multiplier times station flow for anywhere from 1 to three stations TABLE 4.4 MONTHLY AVERAGE FLOW AT LOWER BRADLEY RIVER (CFS) OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT 195B 79. 138. 24. 18. 9. 12. 16. 171. 296. 491. 240. 32. 1959 72. 45. 28. 6. 7. 6. 10. 126. 224. 278. 100. 23. 1960 16. 67. 26. 13. 10. 9. 9. 153. 214. 301. 174. 61. 1961 14. 40. 53. 21. u. 11. 15. 180. 188. 223. 189. 132. 1962 105. 46. 21. 13. 9. 11. 11. 80. 170. 202. 56. 29. 1963 5. 77. 42. 14. 20. 25. 25. 130. 153. 280. 90. 81. 1964 38. 25. 46. 29. 11. 6. 19. 25. 245. 289. 206. 122. 1965 67. so. 37. -14. 8. 16. 35. 90. 125. 177. 126. 138. 1916 48. 31. 19. ·5. 6. 3. 18. 60. 187. 175. 272. 183. 1967 83. 73. 17. 16. 9. 7. 15. 86. 191. 210. 234. 247. 1968 61. 107. 34. 9. 21. 13. 24. 155. 163. 189. 69. 22. 1969 1. 44. 20. ·15. e. 9. 34. 121. 215. 154. -7. 12. 1970 216. 83. 61. 24. 18. 26. 32. 80. 215. 237. 138. 109. 1971 16. 66. 25. 3. 9. 6. 11. 37. 243. 336. 243. 72. 1972 36. 32. 14. 26. 6. 3. 6. 26. 107. 198. 123. 101. 1973 27. 29. 14. 36. 5. 4. 15. 86. 173. 209. 75. 50. 1974 6. 27. 16. -18. 6. ·2. 67. 120. 157. 120. 23. 185. 1975 41. 62. 23. 14. 5. 5. 12. 98. 283. 315. 114. 88. 1976 61. 27. 15. 7. 5. 3. 26. 205. 251. 240. 109. 230. 1977 76. 113. 63. 84. 23. 6. 24. 139. 274. 328. 512. 128. 1978 74. 29. 9. 16. 4. 11. 36. 134. 221. 185. 120. 112. 1979 75. 58. 43. 41. 8. 10. 29. 132. 182. 185. 303. 95. 1980 254. 204. 43. 73. 10. 16. 33. 169. 276. 298. 427. 100. 1981 146. 46. 22. 56. 22. 28. 25. 286. 197. 273. 339. 110. 1982 38. 75. 30. 47. 13. 10. 11. 56. 164. 174. 64. 223. 1983 67. 45. 53. -3. 5. 8. 24. 127. 160. 133. 64. 20. 1984 23. 157. 49. 12. 5. 18. 18. 89. 203. 193. 187. 91. 1985 96. 31. 28. 35. 18. 6. 9. 81. 232. 328. 90. 56. 1986 48. 15. 29. 28. 26. 14. 16. 126. 60. 51. 35. 18. MONTHLY AVERAGE INSTREAH FLOW REQUIREMENT 50. 40. 40. 40. 40. 40. 40. 45. 100. 100. 100. 100. TABLE 4.5 MONTHLY AVERAGE INFLOW TO BRADLEY LAKE (UPDATED HYDROLOGY) (CFS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT 1958 822.9 631.0 117.2 84.9 46.6 36.0 78.0 403.4 1776.2 1967.8 2201.6 655.0 1959 301.3 112.3 67.5 36.5 29.0 24.0 37.0 322.3 1104.0 1114.4 1116.4 432.0 1960 203.3 103.0 68.0 43.0 39.0 26.0 37.0 614.1 1077.0 1455.7 1344.9 702.2 1961 273.0 152.6 187.9 214.4 115.8 46.8 34.3 451.5 1051.5 1587.7 1345.6 1375.9 1962 374.0 127.6 79.4 61.0 36.0 24.0 43.0 187.1 1080.0 1425.1 1195.0 618.8 1963 295.1 352.4 133.1 120.9 94.0 72.0 49.0 247.7 562.7 1221.8 1129.7 990.4 1964 593.8 102.5 119.6 80.6 71.1 45.2 36.6 91.9 798.4 1240.0 1614.4 1171.7 1965 515.8 148.0 95.0 70.8 56.0 59.0 79.0 138.1 685.7 1245.3 1335.1 1845.5 1966 6l9.4 175.0 78.0 43.0 37.0 35.0 45.0 158.1 531.5 629.2 1726.2 1484.5 1967 568.7 69.7 48.3 38.8 35.7 32.3 39.6 263.7 718.6 1003.2 1332.5 1702.4 1968 252.7 249.1 142.6 105.9 97.9 112.5 66.3 321.1 966.4 1492.3 1677.1 662.0 1969 304.4 79.9 45.6 38.5 38.0 38.4 47.0 324.1 1329.1 1191.4 716.0 454.6 1970 2015.1 223.7 251.0 127.2 125.4 116.9 107.3 343.3 927.3 1424.5 1527.7 777.5 1971 216.7 423.5 84.7 50.4 40.8 34.5 35.0 121.0 937.2 1973.8 1848.1 771.9 1972 408.4 118.8 61.8 35.7 22.9 19.1 20.5 149.5 418.2 1071.4 1290.0 982.0 1973 448.5 130.0 63.1 38.4 30.2 26.0 31.8 134.7 915.0 1382.7 1314.5 1211.5 1974 611.9 182.8 55.8 35.7 25.9 21.4 26.7 236.8 308.2 566.6 711.3 1318.9 1975 384.2 248.7 118.4 61.3 48.1 38.2 34.1 366.7 1453.4 1678.6 1445.0 i276.9 1976 460.6 129.9 59.0 42.6 37.1 27.5 45.1 214.9 793.6 1072.9 1150.8 1313.7 1977 456.4 460.1 327.8 349.7 329.9 190.1 122.7 366.2 1721.9 2691.6 3142.6 1217.4 1978 443.0 17.0 41.5 37.9 45.0 47.3 59.8 303.6 748.8 1091.2 1220.2 1003.5 1979 609.2 170.5 116.3 48.1 34.5 29.9 35.4 302.6 610.4 843.6 1825.2 1268.0 1980 1264.6 440.6 88.8 72.0 85.4 17.1 59.1 334.8 1502.2 2149.6 2019.5 1411.0 1981 824.8 152.4 110.0 245.0 163.8 175.5 309.2 807.3 1261.6 2086.9 2192.5 1192.2 1982 330.8 278.5 106.1 55.2 77.6 47.6 39.8 140.9 509.4 931.5 699.3 1690.7 1983 302.9 127.5 159.8 128.5 70.3 49.4 49.7 399.4 1513.0 1797.8 1566.3 828.2 1984 374.7 353.5 199.5 80.7 60.9 146.5 76.2 299.8 1441.0 1787.4 2036.8 1221.6 1985 514.9 98.2 97.5 189.3 95.5 36.6 33.6 196.7 1092.1 1963.5 1693.6 1277.3 1986 346.3 67.3 86.7 67.4 66.7 52.3 40.6 409.4 881.9 1483.6 1647.5 1030.7 AVERAGE 522.3 206.4 110.7 89.8 70.9 58.2 59.3 298.3 990.2 1433.5 1519.5 1099.6 ANNUAL AVERAGE LAKE INFLOW • 538. TABLE 4.6 MONTHLY AVERAGE INFLOW TO BRADLEY LAKE (PAST HYDROLOGY) (CFS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT 1958 834.0 641.0 117 .o 85.0 47.0 36.0 78.0 403.0 1556.0 1684.0 1938.0 522.0 1959 309.0 112.0 68.0 37.0 29.0 24.0 37.0 322.0 1163.0 1193.0 1197.0 479.0 1960 210.0 103.0 68.0 43.0 39.0 26.0 37.0 614.0 1080.0 1472.0 1367.0 711.0 1961 280.0 153.0 188.0 214.0 116.0 47.0 34.0 451.0 1245.0 1854.0 1597.0 1547.0 1962 382.0 128.0 79.0 61.0 36.0 24.0 43.0 187.0 1022.0 1341.0 1110.0 594.0 1963 303.0 352.0 133.0 121.0 94.0 12.0 49.0 248.0 638.0 1347.0 1253.0 1091.0 1964 604.0 103.0 120.0 81.0 11.0 45.0 37.0 92.0 853.0 1300.0 1686.0 1228.0 1965 525.0 148.0 95.0 71.0 56.0 59.0 79.0 138.0 691.0 1250.0 1346.0 1859.0 1966 640.0 175.0 78.0 43.0 37.0 35.0 45.0 158.0 683.0 809.0 1928.0 1635.0 1967 578.0 70.0 48.0 39.0 36.0 32.0 40.0 264.0 911.0 1271.0 1602.0 1883.0 1968 260.0 249.0 143.0 106.0 98.0 112.0 66.0 321.0 659.0 1077.0 1234.0 470.0 1969 312.0 80.0 46.0 39.0 39.0 38.0 47.0 324.0 1231.0 1051.0 599.0 384.0 1970 2043.0 224.0 251.0 127.0 125.0 117 .o 107.0 343.0 861.0 1342.0 1440.0 738.0 1911 222.0 424.0 85.0 50.0 41.0 35.0 35.0 121.0 926.0 1959.0 1840.0 763.0 1972 414.0 119.0 62.0 36.0 23.0 19.0 21.0 149.0 536.0 1272.0 1506.0 1109.0 1973 454.0 130.0 63.0 38.0 30.0 26.0 32.0 135.0 820.0 1251.0 1199.0 1139.0 1974 618.0 183.0 56.0 36.0 26.0 21.0 27.0 237.0 364.0 625.0 777.0 1378.0 1975 389.0 249.0 118.0 61.0 48.0 38.0 34.0 367.0 1373.0 1567.0 1358.0 1192.0 1976 466.0 130.0 59.0 43.0 37.0 28.0 45.0 215.0 858.0 1172.0 1244.0 1370.0 1977 462.0 460.0 328.0 350.0 330.0 190.0 123.0 366.0 1440.0 2348.0 2775.0 995.0 1978 448.0 77.0 42.0 38.0 45.0 47.0 60.0 304.0 746.0 1085.0 1210.0 1004.0 1979 615.0 171.0 116.0 48.0 35.0 30.0 35.0 303.0 810.0 1160.0 2137.0 1505.0 1980 1268.0 446.0 94.0 72.0 86.0 78.0 62.0 340.0 1021.0 1540.0 1484.0 1012.0 1981 830.0 158.0 115 .o 250.0 169.0 177 .o 314.0 812.0 1000.0 1701.0 1826.0 973.0 1982 336.0 284.0 111.0 59.0 82.0 50.0 41.0 146.0 744.0 1251.0 1017.0 1916.0 1983 280.0 127.0 154.0 128.0 12.0 50.0 51.0 353.0 868.0 1196.0 988.0 513.0 1984 380.0 358.0 205.0 86.0 63.0 151.0 78.0 305.0 894.0 1151.0 1434.0 743.0 1985 521.0 103.0 102.0 194.0 99.0 38.0 35.0 202.0 734.0 1331.0 1132.0 911.0 1986 352.0 72.0 89.0 68.0 67.0 53.0 41.0 416.0 818.0 1402.0 1569.0 981.0 AVERAGE 528.8 207.9 111.5 90.5 71.6 58.6 59.8 297.8 915.3 1344.9 1441.1 1056.7 ANNUAL AVERAGE LAKE INFLOW • 515. TABLE 4.7 Minimum Instream Flow Requirements Date Flow May 1 45 cfs May 2 50 cfs May 3 55 cfs May 4 60 cfs May 5 65 cfs May 6 70 cfs May 7 75 cfs May 8 80 cfs May 9 85 cfs May 10 90 cfs May 11 95 cfs May 12 through September 14 100 cfs September 15 95 cfs September 16 90 cfs September 17 85 cfs September 18 80 cfs September 19 75 cfs September 20 70 cfs September 21 65 cfs September 22 60 cfs September 23 55 cfs September 24 through October 31 so cfs November 1 45 cfs November 2 through April 30 40 cfs TABLE 5.1 POWER LOADING CURVE FOR THE ORIGINAL 102 MW PROJECT OUTPUT (WEEKDAYS) MOMTHLY POWER LOAOII& CURVE (MW) DEC JAN fEB MAR APR MAY OCT NOV 1 11.11 30.03 14.42 34.42 .1.24 2 11.11 30.03 34.42 34.42 41.24 3 11.11 32.55 34.42 34.42 43.89 4 u.oo 34.95 37.32 37.32 41.54 5 11.79 37.47 43.13 43.13 49.19 o 18.51 39.87 40.03 41.03 51.97 7 21.58 42.78 50.70 50.70 54.02 8 15.39 19.71 78.52 78.52 82.18 9 19.05 72.10 84.32 84.32 84.95 10 09.81 H:BJ 85.46 85.4& 87.60 11 71.70 88.31 88.3& 87.150 12 73.47 79.55 91.27 91.27 88.11 13 75.36 81.07 94.17 94.17 90.21 14 70.50 81.95 95.94 95.94 91.90 15 77.25 83.97 97.07 97.07 92.91 II 78.01 84.98 98.21 98.21 94.04 17 78.77 85.86 99.34 99.34 95.05 II 79.15 86.87 99.97 99.97 95.18 19 78.39 85.86 98.84 98.84 94.55 20 77.25 84.47 97.07 91.07 92.91 21 71.70 77.03 88.31 88.31 84.95 22 47.25 67.31 76.75 76.75 74.10 23 37.91 59.815 62.23 62.23 1e.u 24 11.11 30.03 34.42 34.42 41.24 Sources: Chugach Electric Association Golden Valley Electric Association Homer Electric Association Municipality of Anchorage 12.50 11.74 8.33 12.50 11.74 8.33 12.50 13.38 8.33 14.14 15.02 9.72 18.81 11.151 12.152 20.95 18.43 14.01 10.41 20.45 16.11 17.46 40.152 20.98 71.151 48.20 29.75 72.51 50.03 30.38 74.53 51.17 31.71 76.68 Sl.31 33.1& 78.70 54.32 34.55 79.90 54.95 35.43 80.84 58.34 35.94 81.60 51.97 30.44 82.48 57.73 37.07 82.80 58.315 37.33 82.10 57.73 3&.82 80.84 50.72 35.94 74.53 51.157 31.71 01.20 44.98 26.22 55.72 39.93 19.15 28.&7 11.74 8.p JUNE JULY AUG 5.47 5.81 5.55 5.47 5.81 5.55 5.47 5.81 5.55 5.47 5.81 1.515 5.41 5.81 8.46 5.47 5.81 9.34 5.47 5.81 10.80 14.90 30.72 315.155 14.90 30.72 38.64 14.90 30.72 38.92 14.90 30.72 39.93 14.90 30.72 40.81 14.90 30.72 41.70 14.90 30.72 42.33 14.90 30.72 42.71 14.90 30.72 43.09 14.90 30.72 43.47 14.90 30.72 43.59 14.90 30.72 43.21 4.90 30.72 42.71 14.90 30.72 39.93 14.90 30.72 30.14 14.90 30.72 31.47 1.47 1.81 1.55 SEPT 8.84 8.84 10.10 11.315 12.12 13.89 15.27 41.19 42.40 43.72 44.98 415.24 47.00 47.50 48.51 49.02 49.52 50.03 49.52 48.77 44.98 39.93 315.27 8.84 TABLE 5.2 POWER LOADING CURVE FOR THE ORIGINAL 102 HW PROJECT OUTPUT (WEEKEND) MONTHlY POWER lOADING CURVE (HW) DEC JAM FEI MAR APR MAY OCT IIOV 1 11.11 30.03 34.42 34.42 41.24 12.50 2 11.11 30.03 34.42 34.42' 41.24 12.50 3 ll.ll 32.55 34.42 34.42 43.89 12.50 4 13.00 34.95 31.32 37.32 46.54 14.64 5 16.79 37.47 43.13 43.13 49.19 18.81 6 18.56 39.81 46.03 46.03 51.97 20.95 1 21.58 42.78 50.70 50.70 54.62 40.41 8 40.48 44.80 53.61 53.61 57.27 42.55 9 44.14 47.19 59.41 59.41 60.04 46.72 10 44.90 49.72 60.55 60.55 62.69 47.60 11 46.79 52.12 63.45 63.45 62.69 49.62 12 48.56 54.64 66.36 66.3& 63.70 51.77 13 50.45 56.16 69.26 69.26 65.36 53.79 14 51.59 57.04 71.03 71.03 66.99 55.05 15 52.34 59.06 72.16 72.16 68.00 55.93 16 53.10 60.07 73.30 73.30 69.13 56.69 11 53.86 60.95 74. 43 . 74.43 70.14 57.57 75.06 70.71 57.95 18 54.24 61.96 75.06 19 53.48 60.95 73.93 73.9J 69.64 '57.19 20 52.34 59.56 72.16 72.1 68.00 21 46.79 52.12 63.45 63.45 60.04 22 22.34 42.40 11.84 11.84 49.J9 23 13.00 34.95 37.32 37.32 41. 4 24 11.11 30.03 34.42 34.42 41.24 Sources: Chugach Electric Association Golden Valley Electric Association Homer Electric Association Municipality of Anchorage 55.93 49.62 41.29 30.81 21.17 11.74 8.33 11.74 8.33 13.38 8.33 15.02 9.72 16.66 12.62 18.43 14.01 20.45 16.16 21.71 17.55 23.35 20.32 25.12 20.95 26.76 22.34 28.40 23.73 29.41 25.12 30.04 26.00 31.43 26.51 32.06 27.01 32.82 27.64 33.45 27.90 32.82 27.39 31.81 26.51 26.76 22.34 zx.o7 16.79 1 .02 9.72 11.74 8.33 JUNE JULY AUG 5.47 5.81 5.55 5.47 5.81 5.55 5.47 5.81 5.55 5.47 5.81 6.56 5.47 5.81 8.46 5.47 5.81 9.34 5.47 5.81 10.86 5.47 ~-81 11.74 5.47 .81 13.63 5.47 5.81 14.01 5.47 5.81 15.02 5.47 5.81 15.90 5.47 5.81 16.79 5.47 5.81 17.42 5.47 5.81 17.80 5.47 5.81 18.18 5.47 5.81 18.56 5.47 5.81 18.68 5.47 5.81 18.30 5.47 5.81 17.80 5.47 5.81 15.02 5.47 5.81 11.23 5.47 5.81 6.56 5.47 5.81 5.55 SEPT 8.84 8.84 10.10 11.36 12.62 13.89 15.27 16.28 17.55 18.81 20.07 21.33 22.09 22.59 23.60 24.11 24.61 25.12 24.61 23.86 20.07 15.02 11.36 8.84 TABLE 5.3 POWER LOADING CURVE FOR THE LIMITED 40 MW PROJECT OUTPUT MONTHLY POWER LOADING CURVE (MW) JUNE OCT NOV DEC JAN FE8 MAR APR MAY JULY AUG SEPT 1 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 28.75 27.19 22.31 22.52 27.19 28.75 2 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 28.75 27.19 22.31 22.52 27.19 28.75 3 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.14 28.75 27.19 22.31 22.52 27.19 28.75 4 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 5 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 6 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 1 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 8 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 9 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 10 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 11 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 12 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 13 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 14 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 15 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 30.40 27.19 23.32 22.52 27.19 30.40 us 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.14 30.77 27.19 23.58 22.52 27.19 30.77 17 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 31.15 27.19 23.70 22.52 27.19 31.15 18 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 31.53 27.19 23.96 22.52 27.19 31.53 19 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 31.15 27.19 23.70 22.52 27.19 31.15 20 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 30.65 27.19 23.45 22.52 27.19 30.65 21 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 22 33.38 315.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 29.64 27.19 22.94 22.52 27.19 29.64 23 33.38 36.08 35.91 35.91 36.45 31.74 28.75 27.19 22.31 22.52 27.19 28.75 24 33.38 3&.08 35.91 35.91 3&.45 31.74 28.75 27.19 22.31 22.52 27.19 28.75 Sources: Chugach Electric Association Golden Valley Electric Association Homer Electric Association Municipality of Anchorage TABLE 5.4 Summary of Annual Average Energy (GWh) Power Loading Power Loading Curve Base Load Curve & Minimizing Spill 2@ 20 M'W 255.8 276.5 338.9 (Cases 1, 2 and 3) 2@ 25 M'W 291.5 312.8 366.3 (Cases 4, 5 and 6) 2@ 30 M'W 315.9 336.2 375.3 (Cases 7, 8 and 9) 2@ 45 M'W 342.5 360.8 375.9 (Cases 10, 11 and 12) 2@ 51 M'W 343.6 364.0 372.3 (Cases 13, 14 and 15) 119 M'W 366.4 (Case 16) 1@ 40 M'W(l) 269.2 (Case 17) Note: (1) Based on the power loading curve but the project capacity limited to 40 M'W and the target annual energy of 269,100 MWhs. TABLE 5.5 CASE NO. 1 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE BUT LIMITED TO TWO UNITS EACH AT 20 HW SUHHARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (HW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 22980. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255709. 1959 22980. 27397. 28963. 28961. 26880. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255713. 1960 22937. 27402. 28963. 28958. 27840. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19338. 256547. 1961 22895. 27407. 28961. 28961. 26880. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19033. 255196. 1962 22937. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18049. 18728. 255371. 1963 22980. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13489. 17674. 19033. 255781. 1964 22980. 27402. 28961. 28963. 27840. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17300. 19338. 256678. 1965 22937. 27402. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 17674. 19338. 255658. 1966 22895. 27407. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19338. 255549. 1967 22895. 27407. 28961. 28961. 26880. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19033. 255196. 1968 22937. 27407. 28958. 28963. 27840. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13489. 17674. 19033. 256698. 1969 22980. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255709. 1970 22980. 27397. 28963. 28961. 26880. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255713. 1971 22937. 27402. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 17674. 19338. 255658. 1972 22895. 27407. 28963. 28958. 27840. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19033. 256156. 1973 22937. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18049. 18728. 255371. 1974 22980. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13489. 17674. 19033. 255781. 1975 22980. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255709. 1976 22980. 27397. 28963. 28961. 27840. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 17674. 19338. 256658. 1977 22895. 27407. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19338. 255549. 1978 22895. 27407. 28961. 28961. 26880. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19033. 255196. 1979 22937. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18049. 18728. 255371. 1980 22980. 27407. 28958. 28963. 27840. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 11300. 19338. 256671. 1981 22980. 27397. 28963. 28961. 26880. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255713. 1982 22937. 27402. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 17674. 19338. 255658. 1983 22895. 27407. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18049. 19338. 255549. 1984 22895. 27407. 28961. 28961. 27840. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18049. 18728. 256288. 1985 22980. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13489. 17674. 19033. 255781. 1986 22980. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17300. 19338. 255709. HAXIHUH 22980. 27407. 28963. 28963. 27840. 24744. 21181. 17533. 7258. 13489. 18049. 19338. HINIHUH 22895. 27397. 28958. 28958. 26880. 24726. 20784. 17232. 6956. 12692. 17300. 18728. AVERAGE 22945. 27404. 28961. 28961. 27111. 24736. 21072. 17403. 7169. 13160. 17713. 19169. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) = 255804. TABLE 5.6 CASE NO. 2 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE AND MINIMIZING SPILL BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 20 MN SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MN-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 25950. 28650. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 27915. 29760. 28800. 296274. 1959 24904. 27397. 28963. 28961. 26880. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13489. 19220. 22090. 262310. 1960 22937. 27402. 28963. 28958. 27840. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 12692. 28689. 28800. 276648. 1961 23322. 27407. 28961. 28961. 26880. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 16694. 29760. 28800. 281103. 1962 25447. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 23149. 27044. 271296. 1963 23572. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13489. 19536. 28800. 268002. 1964 28412. 27402. 28961. 28963. 27840. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13489. 21937. 28800. 276210. 1965 26991. 27402. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 20919. 28800. 272418. 1966 28451. 27407. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18049. 23870. 265638. 1967 27144. 27407. 28961. 28961. 26880. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 26586. 266999. 1968 24486. 27407. 28958. 28963. 27840. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13579. 29760. 28368. 279757. 1969 24696. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17300. 19338. 257425. 1970 29030. 27713. 28963. 28961. 26880. 24735. 21181. 17232. 7258. 17377. 29760. 28800. 287888. 1971 23202. 27402. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13433. 29760. 28800. 277812. 1972 25715. 27407. 28963. 28958. 27840. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 20144. 260087. 1973 24366. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 20910. 28800. 269732. 1974 28716. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 13489. 17674. 19033. 261517. 1975 22980. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 28030. 28800. 275901. 1976 27000. 27397. 28963. 28961. 27840. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 17674. 24182. 265523. 1977 27112. 27407. 29094. 28958. 26880. 24744. 20982. 17382. 15844. 29760. 29760. 28800. 306723. 1978 25566. 27407. 28961. 28961. 26880. 24744. 20784. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18049. 26246. 265080. 1979 27902. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 13091. 23149. 28800. 275508. 1980 29492. 28284. 28958. 28963. 27840. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 24485. 29760. 28800. 296978. 1981 29760. 27482. 28963. 28961. 26880. 24735. 21181. 17232. 9097. 29760. 29760. 28800. 302610. 1982 23780. 27402. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 21181. 17232. 7258. 13091. 17674. 22756. 259919. 1983 24383. 27407. 28963. 28958. 26880. 24744. 20982. 17382. 7258. 21801. 29760. 28800. 287319. 1984 24403. 27407. 28961. 28961. 27840. 24735. 20982. 17533. 7107. 24068. 29760. 28800. 290556. 1985 26498. 27407. 28958. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17533. 6956. 16983. 29760. 28800. 284645. 1986 25527. 27402. 28961. 28963. 26880. 24726. 21181. 17382. 7107. 13489. 25216. 28800. 275634. MAXI HUM 29760. 28650. 29094. 28963. 27840. 24744. 21181. 17533. 15844. 29760. 29760. 28800. MINIMUM 22937. 27397. 28958. 28958. 26880. 24726. 20784. 17232. 6956. 12692. 17300. 19033. AVERAGE 25922. 27491. 28965. 28961. 27111. 24736. 21072. 17403. 7529. 16286. 24160. 26829. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HN-HRS) = 276465. TABLE 5.7 CASE NO. 3 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON BASE LOAD OPERATION BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 20 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (~-HAS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB ~A APR MY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1959 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1960 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 351357. 1961 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1962 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1963 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 21160. 27040. 29760. 29760. 28800. 340037. 1964 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 18720. 1840. 4320. 28040. 29760. 29760. 28800. 287158. 1965 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 22720. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 343357. 1966 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1967 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 10360. 14360. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 316557. 1968 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 26840. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 348437. 1969 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 8160. 12280. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 312277. 1970 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1971 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1972 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 351357. 1973 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29520. 1520. 7320. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 300437. 1974 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 15080. 17040. 29760. 29760. 28800. 323957. 1975 29760. 28800. 29760. 12480. 2240. 1920. 1680. 19720. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 243478. 1976 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 351357. 1977 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1978 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1979 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1980 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 351357. 19B1 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1982 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1983 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1984 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 351357. 1985 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. 1986 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 26880. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. 350397. MliMUM 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 27840. 29760. 28800. 29760. 28800. 29760. 29760. 28800. MINIMUM 29760. 28800. 29760. 12480. 2240. 1920. 1520. 4320. 17040. 29760. 29760. 28800. AVERAGE 29760. 28800. 29760. 29164. 26262. 28411. 24647. 25483. 28307. 29760. 29760. 28800. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HAS) • 338911. TABLE 5.8 CASE NO. 4 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 25 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 195B 27260. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 2425B. 173B2. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291468. 1959 27260. 32022. 34437. 34425. 32497. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291479. 1960 27182. 32053. 34437. 34412. 33660. 29456. 23920. 173B2. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 292437. 1961 27104. 32084. 34425. 34425. 32497. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20994. 290640. 1962 27182. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 290864. 1963 27260. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20994. 291487. 1964 27260. 32053. 34425. 34437. 33651. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292664. 1965 27182. 32053. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 291461. 1966 27104. 32084. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 23920. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 291226. 1967 27104. 32084. 34425. 34425. 32497. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20994. 290640. 1968 27182. 32084. 34412. 34437. 33660. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20994. 292572. 1969 27260. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291468. 1970 27260. 32022. 34437. 34425. 32497. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291479. 1971 27182. 32053. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 291461. 1972 27104. 32084. 34437. 34412. 33660. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20994. 291803. 1973 271B2. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 290864. 1974 27260 •. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20994. 291487. 1975 27260. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291468. 1976 27260. 32022. 34437. 34425. 33651. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 292675. 1977 27104. 32084. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 23920. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 291226. 1978 27104. 32084. 34425. 34425. 32497. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20994. 290640. 1979 27182. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 290864. 1980 27260. 32084. 34412. 34437. 33660. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292650. 1981 27260. 32022. 34437. 34425. 32497. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291479. 1982 27182. 32053. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 291461. 1983 27104. 32084. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 23920. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 291226. 1984 27104. 32084. 34425. 34425. 33660. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 291949. 1985 27260. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20994. 291487. 1986 27260. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 291468. MAXIMUM 27260. 32084. 34437. 34437. 33660. 29456. 24258. 17533. 7258. 13489. 18593. 21393. MINIMUM 27104. 32022. 34412. 34412. 32497. 29372. 23581. 17232. 6956. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 27195. 32065. 34426. 34427. 32777. 29418. 24071. 17403. 7169. 13160. 18235. 21173. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) • 291520. TABLE 5.9 CASE NO. 5 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE AND MINIMIZING SPILL BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 25 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 30993. 34004. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 28900. 37200. 34833. 345408. 1959 29063. 32022. 34437. 34425. 32497. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 293282. 1960 27182. 32053. 34437. 34412. 33660. 29456. 23920. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 31630. 302674. 1961 27207. 32084. 34425. 34425. 32497. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 34181. 36000. 321336. 1962 30237. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 23353. 296677. 1963 27670. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 30711. 301613. 1964 33142. 32053. 34425. 34437. 33651. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 34736. 311889. 1965 32242. 32053. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 30916. 306045. 1966 33348. 32084. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 23920. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 22970. 299048. 1967 32619. 32084. 34425. 34425. 32497. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 26798. 301959. 1968 29009. 320B4. 34412. 34437. 33660. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 29811. 33058. 318081. 1969 28962. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 293170. 1970 33699. 32303. 34437. 34425. 32497. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13489. 34530. 35271. 328812. 1971 27254. 32053. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 31095. 36000. 319041. 1972 29110. 32084. 34437. 34412. 33660. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20994. 293810. 1973 27182. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 21490. 291758. 1974 33582. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20994. 297808. 1975 27260. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 34170. 304245. 1976 31407. 32022. 34437. 34425. 33651. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 23865. 299294. 1977 30367. 32084. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 23920. 17382. 10929. 37200. 37200. 36000. 355883. 1978 30668. 32084. 34425. 34425. 32497. 29456. 23581. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20994. 294204. 1979 32450. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 29188. 304725. 1980 35669. 33536. 34412. 34437. 33660. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 24793. 37200. 36000. 347826. 1981 36177. 32132. 34437. 34425. 32497. 29414. 24258. 17232. 7258. 30662. 37200. 36000. 351691. 1982 27729. 32053. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 24258. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 292008. 1983 27104. 32084. 34437. 34412. 32497. 29456. 23920. 17382. 7258. 14813. 37200. 36000. 326561. 1984 28289. 32084. 34425. 34425. 33660. 29414. 23920. 17533. 7107. 20774. 37200. 36000. 334829. 1985 31647. 32084. 34412. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17533. 6956. 13489. 34575. 36000. 327260. 1986 29932. 32053. 34425. 34437. 32497. 29372. 24258. 17382. 7107. 13489. 20645. 36000. 311597. MAXIMUM 36177. 34004. 34437. 34437. 33660. 29456. 24258. 17533. 10929. 37200. 37200. 36000. MINIMUM 27104. 32022. 34412. 34412. 32497. 29372. 23581. 17232. 6956. 12692. 17796. 20994. AVERAGE 30386. 32196. 34426. 34427. 32777. 29418. 24071. 17403. 7296. 15856. 24791. 29798. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MN-HRS) ~ 312846. TABLE 5.10 CASE NO. 6 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON BASE LOAD OPERATION BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 25 MW SUMHARV FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 437997. 1959 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 437997. 1960 37200. 36000. 37200. 17150. 1900. 1250. 1800. 29900. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 308798. 1951 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 29450. 2500. li~8: ~3~~8: ~:888: U~88: U~88: ~:888: n~~U·: 1962 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 25650. 1953 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 6050. 4000. 2600. 13800. 29850. 37200. 37200. 36000. 314298. 1964 37200. 36000. 37200. 26400. 3550. 2350. 1850. 4450. 34500. 37200. 37200. 36000. 293898. 1965 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 6350. 4200. 7550. 35100. 37200. 37200. 36000. 344798. 1965 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 23300. 2250. 8300. 29450. 35350. 37200. 36000. 353048. 1967 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 9900. 1700. 1950. 14650. 33150. 37200. 37200. 36000. 319348. 1968 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 32000. 6200. 3450. 18000. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 353648. 1969 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 5200. 2050. 2400. 14600. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 318248. 1970 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 16500. 19050. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 400347. 1971 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 20400. 1800. 1750. 6050. 35350. 37200. 37200. 36000. 323348. 1972 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 34800. 30700. 1000. 7300. 23700. 36100. 37200. 36000. 354397. 1973 37200. 36000. 37200. 11950. 1350. 1250. 1600. 7400. 33800. 37200. 37200. 36000. 278148. 1974 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 31250. 1000. 1300. 13250. 17200. 32550. 32050. 36000. 312198. 1975 37200. 36000. 13750. 3350. 2250. 2000. 1700. 20800. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 263448. 1976 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 34800. 37200. 18200. 12150. 34000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 394347. 1977 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 15200. 21200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 401197. 1978 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 437997. 1979 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 7250. 1750. 17050. 34350. 36700. 37200. 36000. 351497. 1980 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 34800. 37200. 22250. 19300. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 407547. 1981 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 437997. 1982 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 437997. 1983 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 15150. 2550. 2550. 22250. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 336498. 1984 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 34800. 37200. 35300. 17050. 34800. 37200. 37200. 36000. 417147. 1985 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 437997. 1986 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 33600. 37200. 36000. 30950. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. 431747. MAXIMUM 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 34800. 37200. 36000. 37200. 36000. 37200. 37200. 36000. MINIMUM 37200. 36000. 13750. 3350. 1350. 1000. 1000. 4450. 17200. 32550. 32050. 36000. AVERAGE 37200. 36000. 36391. 34098. 25326. 19596. 13638. 20088. 34043. 36920. 37022. 36000. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) = 366321. TABLE 5.11 CASE NO. 7 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 30 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 195B 30651. 36136. 39180. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 318067. 1959 30651. 36026. 39218. 39180. 36979. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 318103. 1960 30454. 36136. 39218. 39142. 38309. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 319206. 1961 30258. 36246. 39180. 39180. 36979. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 317143. 1962 30454. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 317442. 1963 30651. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 318139. 1964 30651. 36136. 39180. 3921B. 3B277. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319510. 1965 30454. 36136. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 318124. 1966 30258. 36246. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 317789. 1967 30258. 36246. 39180. 39180. 36979. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 317143. 1968 30454. 36246. 39142. 39218. 38309. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 319273. 1969 30651. 36136. 39180. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 318067. 1970 30651. 36026. 39218. 39180. 36979. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 318103. 1971 30454. 36136. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 318124. 1972 30258. 36246. 39218. 39142. 38309. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 318473. 1973 30454. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 317442. 1974 30651. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 318139. 1975 30651. 36136. 39180. 39218. 31070. 1646. 1518. 12440. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 251644. 1976 30651. 36026. 39218. 39180. 38277. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 319546. 1977 30258. 36246. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 317789. 1978 30258. 36246. 39180. 39180. 36979. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 317143. 1979 30454. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 317442. 1980 30651. 36246. 39142. 39218. 38309. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319469. 1981 30651. 36026. 39218. 39180. 36979. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 318103. 1982 30454. 36136. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 318124. 1983 30258. 36246. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 317789. 1984 30258. 36246. 39180. 39180. 38309. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 318575. 1985 30651. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 318139. 1986 30651. 36136. 39180. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 318067. MAXIMUM 30651. 36246. 39218. 39218. 38309. 33452. 25574. 17533. 7258. 13489. 18593. 21393. MINIMUM 30258. 36026. 39142. 39142. 31070. 1646. 1518. 12440. 6956. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 30488. 36182. 39185. 39187. 37094. 32235. 24524. 17233. 7169. 13160. 18235. 21173. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) = 315866. TABLE 5.12 CASE NO. 8 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE AND MINIMIZING SPILL BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 30 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB HAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 35454. 38773. 39180. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 27098. 44640. 37459. 382026. 1959 32613. 36026. 39218. 39180. 36979. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 320064. 1960 30454. 36136. 39218. 39142. 38309. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 319206. 1961 30258. 36246. 39180. 39180. 36979. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 34372. 330521. 1962 33964. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 320952. 1963 30651. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 318139. 1964 30651. 36136. 39180. 39218. 38277. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319510. 1965 30454. 36136. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 30807. 327538. 1966 37376. 36246. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 324908. 1967 33946. 36246. 39180. 39180. 36979. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 24039. 323875. 1968 32420. 36246. 39142. 39218. 38309. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 27765. 36484. 346298. 1969 32156. 36136. 39180. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319572. 1970 37929. 36254. 39218. 39180. 36979. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 32625. 40367. 359412. 1971 30490. 36136. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 29658. 41173. 349403. 1972 31289. 36246. 39218. 39142. 38309. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 319505. 1973 30454. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 317442. 1974 30651. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 318139. 1975 30651. 36136. 39180. 39218. 30411. 1660. 1516. 12455. 7107. 13489. 17796. 27155. 256774. 1976 34248. 36026. 39218. 39180. 38277. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 323142. 1977 30258. 36246. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 38895. 44640. 43200. 391845. 1978 34796. 36246. 39180. 39180. 36979. 33452. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 321681. 1979 30454. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 22709. 319555. 1980 41716. 37293. 39142. 39218. 38309. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 22242. 44640. 43200. 388984. 1981 41356. 36026. 39218. 39180. 36979. 33307. 25574. 17232. 7258. 29687. 44640. 43200. 393656. 1982 30771. 36136. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 318441. 1983 30258. 36246. 39218. 39142. 36979. 33452. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 29299. 43200. 350303. 1984 31056. 36246. 39180. 39180. 38309. 33307. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13526. 44640. 43200. 368459. 1985 35767. 36246. 39142. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 33405. 43200. 360671. 1986 34135. 36136. 39180. 39218. 36979. 33161. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 40294. 340452. HAXIHUH 41716. 38773. 39218. 39218. 38309. 33452. 25574. 17533. 7258. 38895. 44640. 43200. HINIHUH 30258. 36026. 39142. 39142. 30411. 1660. 1516. 12455. 6956. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 32989. 36316. 39185. 39187. 37072. 32236. 24524. 17233. 7169. 15408. 24939. 29965. ANNUAl AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) = 336223. TABLE 5.13 CASE NO. 9 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON BASE LOAD OPERATION BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 30 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 43200. 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 525597. 1959 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 34320. 18540. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 490617. 1960 44640. 10080. 3780. 2280. 1980. 1200. 1800. 32580. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 274018. 1961 44640. 43200. 39480. 11820. 5880. 2520. 1740. 25620. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 350578. 1962 44640. 43200. 44640. 41880. 1680. 1200. 2160. 10260. 42060. 44640. 44640. 43200. 364198. 1961 44640. 43200. 26400. 6600. 4680. 4020. 2640. 13740. 31080. 44640. 44640. 43200. 309478. 1964 44640. 43200. 20220. 4500. 3540. 2400. 1860. 4500. 39660. 44640. 44640. 43200. 296998. 1965 44640. 43200. 44640. 23940. 2760. 3120. 4200. 7560. 37980. 44640. 44640. 43200. 344518. 1966 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 2220. 1740. 2340. 8340. 29340. 36780. 44640. 43200. 345718. 1967 44640. 43200. 44640. 8460. 1620. 1680. 1980. 14700. 37500. 44640. 44640. 43200. 330898. 1968 44640. 43200. 44640. 15840. 5040. 6240. 3480. 18000. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 356758. 1969 44640. 43200. 34140. 1980. 1860. 2040. 2460. 16320. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 322318. 1970 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 13380. 6540. 5880. 18660. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 397258. 1971 44640. 43200. 44640. 6240. 1920. 1740. 1800. 6120. 40200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 322978. 1972 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 10260. 960. 1020. 7380. 23340. 42360. 44640. 43200. 350278. 1971 44640. 43200. 12120. 2100. 1320. 1260. 1620. 7380. 38280. 44640. 44640. 43200. 284398. 1974 44640. 43200. 44640. 21060. 1200. 960. 1260. 13320. 17340. 32700. 33000. 43200. 296518. 1975 44640. 27240. 6720 •. 3360. 2280. 1980. 1740. 20520. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 284158. 1976 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 30180. 1380. 2160. 12120. 39660. 44640. 44640. 43200. 395098. 1977 44640. 43200. 44640. 38520. 16860. 10560. 6540. 21240. 41760. 44640. 44640. 43200. 400438. 1978 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 43200. 25800. 37860. 44640. 44640. 43200. 501417. 1979 44640. 43200. 29940. 2700. 1620. 1500. 1800. 16380. 34920. 43140. 44640. 43200. 307678. 1980 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 36540. 4200. 3180. 18420. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 415138. 1981 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 43200. 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 525597. 1982 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 43200. 32100. 27240. 44640. 44640. 43200. 497097. 1983 44640. 37980. 8820. 7200. 3360. 2580. 2580. 21540. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 304378. 1984 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 38160. 7980. 4020. 16740. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 419697. 1985 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 5460. 10800. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 454017. 1986 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 35040. 2760. 2040. 22980. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. 415618. MAll MUM 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 40320. 44640. 43200. 44640. 43200. 44640. 44640. 43200. MINIMUM 44640. 10080. 3780. 1980. 1200. 960. 1020. 4500. 17340. 32700. 33000. 43200. AVERAGE 44640. 41327. 37049. 26855. 16045. 11669. 9410. 18308. 38725. 43827. 44238. 43200. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) • 375291. TABLE 5.14 CASE NO. 10 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 45 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (HW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 35293. 42312. 49324. 49661. 45920. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 363723. 1959 35293. 41913. 49661. 49324. 45920. 3B871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 363723. 1960 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 28321. 1052. 1515. 16066. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 282744. 1961 34495. 42710. 49324. 49324. 45920. 39270. 22905. 13364. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 356850. 1962 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 363139. 1963 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38473. 6243. 11451. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 338372. 1964 35293. 42312. 49324. 49661. 47295. 3603. 1661. 3644. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292729. 1965 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 19190. 7512. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 347681. 1966 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25175. 16702. 6925. 12692. 18593. 21393. 362525. 1967 34495. 42710. 49324. 49324. 45920. 18118. 1724. 13614. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 314767. 1968 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 47666. 38473. 14960. 12198. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 349184. 1969 35293. 42312. 49324. 49661. 45920. 26194. 2316. 8290. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319095. 1970 35293. 41913. 49661. 49324. 45920. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 363723. 1971 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 363785. 1972 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 47666. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 364637. 1973 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 36243. 1027. 1396. 7189. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 281495. 1974 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38473. 6905. 12209. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 339792. 1975 35293. 42312. 49324. 22829. 2273. 1650. 1516. 12443. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 227426. 1976 35293. 41913. 49661. 49324. 47295. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 365497. 1977 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 363537. 1978 34495. 42710. 49324. 49324. 45920. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 362891. 1979 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38871. 5403. 14935. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 340768. 1980 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 47666. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 365531. 1981 35293. 41913. 49661. 49324. 45920. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 363723. 1982 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 363785. 1983 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 45920. 20365. 2346. 16342. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 320763. 1984 34495. 42710. 49324. 49324. 47666. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 364486. 1985 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38473. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 363785. 1986 35293. 42312. 49324. 49661. 45920. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 363723. MAXIMUM 35293. 42710. 49661. 49661. 47666. 39270. 25574. 17533. 7258. 13489. 18593. 21393. MINIMUM 34495. 41913. 48988. 22829. 2273. 1027. 1396. 3644. 6925. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 34963. 42476. 49371. 48457. 43810. 31999. 17037. 14708. 7158. 13160. 18235. 21173. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) = 342547. TABLE 5.15 CASE NO. 11 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE AND MINIMIZING SPILL BUT liMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 45 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHlY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB HAR APR HAY JUNE JUlY AUG SEPT TOTAl 1958 45251. 46501. 49324. 49661. 45920. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 17233. 66960. 38953. 448337. 1959 36667. 41913. 49661. 49324. 45920. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 365098. 1960 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 27359. 1025. 1515. 16066. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 281755. 1961 34495. 42710. 49324. 49324. 45920. 39270. 22905. 13362. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 356848. 1962 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 363139. 1963 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38473. 6267. 11432. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 338377. 1964 35293. 42312. 49324. 49661. 47295. 3603. 1661. 3644. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292729. 1965 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 19190. 7512. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 347681. 1966 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25175. 16702. 6925. 12692. 18593. 21393. 362525. 1967 34495. 42710. 49324. 49324. 45920. 18118. 1724. 13614. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 314767. 1968 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 47666. 38473. 14960. 12198. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 349184. 1969 35293. 42312. 49324. 49661. 45920. 26194. 2316. 8290. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319095. 1970 35293. 41913. 49661. 49324. 45920. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 363723. 1971 34894. 42312. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 24364. 366756. 1972 34607. 42710. 49661. 48988. 47666. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 364749. 1973 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 35142. 1027. 1396. 7189. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 280393. 1974 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38473. 6905. 12209. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 339792. 1975 35293. 42312. 49324. 22829. 2273. 1650. 1516. 12443. 7107. 13489. 17796. 33348. 239381. 1976 38947. 41913. 49661. 49324. 47295. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 369151. 1977 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25175. 17382. 7258. 20536. 66960. 63796. 462151. 1978 41026. 42710. 49324. 49324. 45920. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 369422. 1979 34894. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38871. 4084. 14906. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 339420. 1980 35293. 42710. 48988. 49661. 47666. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 51915. 64800. 443057. 1981 50493. 41913. 49661. 49324. 45920. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 24041. 66960. 61684. 478930. 1982 34994. 42312. 49661. 48988. 45920. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 363885. 1983 34495. 42710. 49661. 48988. 45920. 18556. 2348. 16349. 7258. 12692. 18593. 23207. 320777. 1984 34981. 42710. 49324. 49324. 47666. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 44545. 64600. 434928. 1985 42332. 42710. 48988. 49661. 45920. 38473. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 21988. 64411. 418034. 1986 40155. 42312. 49324. 49661. 45920. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 368586. MAXI HUH 50493. 46501. 49661. 49661. 47666. 39270. 25574. 17533. 7258. 24041. 66960. 64800. MINIMUM 34495. 41913. 48988. 22829. 2273. 1025. 1396. 3644. 6925. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 36663. 42621. 49371. 48457. 43739. 31936. 16992. 14707. 7158. 13923. 25496. 29719. ANNUAl AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) = 360781. TABLE 5.16 CASE NO. 12 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON BASE LOAD OPERATION BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 45 MN SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MN-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAl 1958 66960. 64800. 66960. 66960. 60480. 551/u. 3960. 22590. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 671397. 1959 66960. 64800. 17820. 2070. 1350. 1260. 1890. 17460. 59940. 65700. 61920. 24390. 385558. 1960 11340. 5760. 3180. 2250. 1980. 1260. 1800. 34560. 58410. 66960. 66960. 64800. 319859. 1961 18090. 8550. 10530. 11700. 6030. 2520. 1710. 25740. 57510. 66960. 66960. 64800. 341099. 1962 66960. 12420. 4410. 3420. 1620. 1260. 2160. 10170. 55170. 66960. 66960. 51210. 342718. 1963 16560. 19620. 7560. 6660. 4680. 3870. 2700. 13590. 31320. 65970. 59670. 63270. 295469. 1964 33570. 5760. 6660. 4410. 3690. 2340. 1800. 4590. 44370. 62370. 66960. 64800. 301319. 1965 66960. 8190. 5310. 3870. 2700. 3150. 4140. 7470. 36900. 66960. 66960. 64800. 337408. 1966 66960. 34560. 4230. 2250. 1800. 1800. 2250. 8370. 29520. 35010. 66960. 64800. 318508. 1967 66960. 23670. 2610. 2070. 1620. 1710. 1980. 14400. 40230. 56430. 66960. 64800. 343438. 1968 56070. 13590. 8100. 5850. 4950. 6210. 3510. 17820. 53820. 66960. 66960. 64800. 368638. 1969 33660: 4500. 2340. 2070. 1800. 2160. 2430. 18180. 57420. 66960. 54630. 23940. 270089. 1970 66960. 63360. 13950. 7290. 6210. 6480. 5850. 18810. 51840. 66960. 66960. 64800. 439468. 1971 27180. 23580. 4860. 2700. 1800. 1800. 1890. 6120. 50400. 66960. 66960. 64800. 319049. 1972 66960. 33930. 3330. 1890. 1080. 990. 990. 7470. 23040. 60120. 66960. 63720. 330478. 1973 24930. 7200. 3420. 2070. 1350. 1260. 1530. 7380. 50220. 66960. 66960. 64800. 298079. 1974 54810. 10350. 3060. 1800. 1170. 990. 1260. 13050. 17010. 32130. 35910. 58140. 229679. 1975 39780. 13950. 6660. 3330. 2340. 1980. 1710. 20610. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 353878. 1976 66960. 41040. 3240. 2250. 1710. 1440. 2250. 11790. 42930. 61560. 60030. 61650. 356848. 1977 44640. 25650. 18540. 19800. 16740. 10620. 6480. 20610. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 426598. 1978 66960. 64800. 66960. 66960. 29880. 2520. 3060. 16920. 41850. 61200. 66960. 59850. 547918. 1979 34830. 9450. 6570. 2790. 1530. 1530. 1800. 16740. 33390. 48780. 64260. 64800. 286469. 1980 66960. 64800. 22230. 4050. 4230. 4230. 3150. 18540. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 451708. 1981 66960. 64800. 66960. 31680. 8460. 9720. 16380. 46080. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 574558. 1982 66960. 64800. 39420. 3060. 3690. 2520. 2070. 7200. 27090. 53100. 40050. 62280. 372238. 1983 50130. 7020. 8730. 7290. 3420. 2520. 2520. 22410. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 367558. 1984 66960. 34200. 11880. 4320. 2970. 8100. 3960. 16560. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. 412468. 1985 66960. 64800. 23760. 10350. 5040. 1800. 1710. 9450. 60120. 66960. 66960. 64800. 442708. 1986 66960. 45990. 4770. 3600. 3240. 2790. 2070. 22140. 48420. 64800. 66960. 64800. 396538. MAXIMUM 66960. 64800. 66960. 66960. 60480. 55170. 16380. 46080. 64800. 66960. 66960. 64800. MINIMUM 11340 •. 4500. 2340. 1800. 1080. 990. 990. 4590. 17010. 32130. 35910. 23940. AVERAGE 52308. 31239. 15471. 9959. 6468. 4965. 3069. 16442. 49121. 62258. 63778. 60843. ANNUAl AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) • 375922. TABLE 5.17 CASE NO. 13 MONTHlY ENERGY BASED OM HOURlY LOADING CURVE BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 51 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JUlY AUG SEPT TOTAl 195B 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 173B2. 7107. 13489. 11796. 21393. 367054. 1959 35293. 41913. 510B4. 50686. 46466. 38B71. 25574. 17232. 725B. 13489. 17796. 21393. 367054. 1960 34894. 42312. 51084. 502B7. 22480. 1052. 1516. 16066. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 279627. 1961 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 39270. 19956. 13364. 725B. 12692. 18593. 20995. 357170. 1962 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 366407. 1963 35293. 42710. 502B7. 51084. 46466. 35947. 2427. 11451. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 335299. 1964 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46284. 2057. 1661. 3644. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292956. 1965 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 16169. 7430. 7258. 13091. 1B194. 21393. 347847. 1966 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25175. 14128. 6765. 12692. 1B593. 21393. 363058. 1967 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 15185. 1724. 13614. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 315103. 1968 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 48239. 38473. 11839. 12256. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 349417. 1969 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 23070. 2318. 8312. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319325. 1970 35293. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 367054. 1971 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 367054. 1972 34495. 42710. 51084. 502B7. 48239. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 367933. 1973 34B94. 42710. 50287. 51084. 25276. 1012. 1396. 7189. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 273235. 1974 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38473. 3790. 12193. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 339929. 1975 35293. 42312. 50686. 21606~ 2271. 1660. 1516. 12443. 1101. 13489. 17796. 21393. 227572. 1976 35293. 41913. 51084. 50686. 47841. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 368827. 1977 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25175. 17382. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 366806. 1978 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 39270. 24771. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 366160. 1979 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 36305. 1592. 14927. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 337652. 1980 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 48239. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 368827. 1981 35293. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 367054. 1982 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 367054. 1983 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 14142. 2346. 16342. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 317808. 1984 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 48239. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 367782. 1985 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 367054. 1986 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 367054. MAXIMUM 35293. 42710. 51084. 51084. 48239. 39270. 25574. 17533. 7258. 13489. 18593. 21393. MINIMUM 34495. 41913. 50287. 21606. 2271. 1012. 1396. 3644. 6765. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 34963. 42476. 50741. 49738. 43670. 31346. 16353. 14619. 7152. 13160. 18235. 21173. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (MW-HRS) • 343626. TABLE 5.18 CASE NO. 14 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE AND MINIMIZING SPILL BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 51 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (MW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAl 1958 46649. 46917. 50686. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 16137. 75888. 38864. 461226. 1959 36678. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 368439. 1960 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 21333. 1052. 1516. 16066. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 278480. 1961 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 39270. 19899. 13364. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 357112. 1962 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 366407. 1963 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 35831. 2406. 11470. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 335181. 1964 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46284. 1998. 1658. 3621. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292871. 1965 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 16152. 7413. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 347813. 1966 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25175. 14042. 6809. 12692. 18593. 21393. 363017. 1967 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 15127. 1723. 13602. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 315032. 1968 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 48239. 38473. 11870. 12193. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 349385. 1969 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 23039. 2336. 8309. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319309. 1970 35293. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 367054. 1971 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 367054. 1972 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 48239. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 367933. 1973 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 24993. 990. 1396. 7188. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 272929. 1974 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38473. 3748. 12209. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 339903. 1975 35293. 42312. 50686. 21569. 2271. 1656. 1516. 12444. 7107. 13489. 17796. 35814. 241952. 1976 38666. 41913. 51084. 50686. 47841. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 372201. 1977 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25175. 17382. 7258. 20171. 75888. 69072. 479258. 1978 41492. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 373156. 1979 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 34892. 1608. 14935. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 336263. 1980 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 48239. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 56936. 71763. 458338. 1981 51915. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 24194. 75888. 67003. 498082. 1982 34994. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 367154. 1983 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 12171. 2348. 16349. 7258. 12692. 18593. 23348. 317802. 1984 34948. 42710. 50686. 50686. 48239. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 47322. 70132. 446500. 1985 42359. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 19942. 68051. 422924. 1986 40511. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 372272. MAXIMUM 51915. 46917. 51084. 51084. 48239. 39270. 25574. 17533. 7258. 24194. 75888. 71763. MINIMUM 34495. 41913. 50287. 21569. 2271. 990. 1396. 3621. 6809. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 36776. 42635. 50741. 49737. 43620. 31220. 16351. 14613. 7154. 13878. 26618. 30625. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) = 363967. TABLE 5.19 CASE NO. 15 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON BASE LOAD OPERATION BUT LIMITED TO 2 UNITS EACH AT 51 MW SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (HM-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 75B8B. 73440. 758B8. 758B8. 6B544. 9690. 3978. 22440. 73440. 75888. 75888. 73440. 704408. 1959 7588B. 28152. 3570. 2040. 1326. 1326. 1836. 17748. 60690. 63240. 62730. 22950. 341494. 1960 11322. 5814. 3672. 2346. 1836. 1326. 1734. 34476. 57936. 75888. 75888. 46512. 318748. 1961 15198. 8466. 10404. 11628. 5916. 2550. 1734. 25296. 57630. 75888. 75888. 73440. 364036. 1962 40494. 7038. 4386. 3264. 1632. 1326. 2244. 9996. 58854. 75888. 71196. 32946. 309262. 1963 15912. 19380. 7446. 6630. 4692. 3978. 12550. 13362. 30090. 69156. 59976. 57630. 290801. 1964 34272. 5712. 6630. 4488. 3570. 2346. 1836. 4590. 42636. 66708. 75888. 73440. 322114. 1965 42024. 8262. 5304. 3174. 2652. 3162. 4080. 7446. 37128. 70482. 75888. 70380. 330580. 1966 68646. 9690. 4284. 2244. 1734. 1734. 2244. 8364. 28866. 35598. 73644. 73440. 310486. 1967 67626. 3978. 2550. 2040. 1632. 1734. 1938. 14280. 39372. 56508. 74052. 73440. 339148. 1968 37434. 13464. 8058. 5814. 4896. 6222. 3366. 17646. 53448. 75888. 75888. 61302. 363424. 1969 16524. 4488. 2448. 1938. 1938. 2040. 2346. 17442. 61404. 75888. 41514. 23154. 251123. 1970 75888. 53754. 13872. 7344. 6120. 6426. 5814. 18666. 51306. 74460. 75888. 60588. 450123. 1971 11934. 23358. 4692. 2652. 1938. 1836. 1734. 6222. 49980. 75888. 75888. 73440. 329560. 1972 63342. 6426. 3366. 1836. 1020. 1020. 918. 7548. 22746. 60792. 69870. 57834. 296716. 1973 24888. 7140. 3468. 2040. 1326. 1326. 1530. 7242. 50184. 73746. 73644. 68952. 315484. 1974 33864. 10098. 3162. 1134. 1224. 1020. 1224. 12852. 16728. 32130. 36414. 62526. 212975. 1975 33660. 13770. 6732. 3366. 2244. 2040. 1734. 19992. 70890. 75888. 75888. 73440. 379642. 1976 62220. 7140. 3162. 2346. 1734. 1326. 2244. 11730. 43248. 61506. 60282. 63240. 320176. 1977 39882. 25296. 18462. 19584. 16626. 10506. 6528. 20298. 73440. 75888. 75888. 73440. 455835. 1978 75888. 73440. 75888. 27030. 2040. 2550. 3162. 16524. 40800. 62730. 68952. 55182. 504183. 1979 34374. 9486. 6630. 2550. 1632. 1530. 1734. 16524. 33354. 47532. 70074. 73440. 298859. 1980 75888. 54978. 5100. 3978. 4182. 4182. 3162. 18360. 72420. 75888. 75888. 73440. 467463. 1981 75888. 73440. 25296. 13770. 8364. 9690. 16218. 46002. 67932. 75888. 75888. 73440. 561813. 1982 75888. 52836. 5916. 2958. 3774. 2550. 1938. 7140. 28254. 52938. 37944. 69666. 341800. 1983 41718. 6936. 8670. 7242. 3366. 2550. 2448. 22236. 73440. 75888. 75888. 73440. 393820. 1984 41106. 18666. 12036. 4386. 2856. 8058. 3876. 16422. 70380. 75888. 75888 •. 73440. 403000. 1985 75888. 35292. 5304. 10200. 4998. 1938. 1734. 10200. 59262. 75888. 75888. 73440. 430029. 1986 75888. 5610. 4692. 3570. 3264. 2754. 2040. 22644. 47124. 73440. 75888. 73440. 3903&1. MAXIMUM 75888. 73440. 75888. 75888. 68544. 10506. 16218. 46002. 73440. 75888. 75888. 73440. MINIMUM 11322. 3978. 2448. 1734. 1020. 1020. 918. 4590. 16728. 32130. 36414. 22950. AVERAGE 48946. 22950. 11762. 8230. 5761. 3405. 3032. 16334. 60792. 67703. 69465. 63946. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) • 372326. TABLE 5.20 CASE NO. 16 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE AND MINIMIZING SPILL BUT LIMITED TO PROJECT CAPACITY OF 119 MN SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (HW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 47729. 47031. 50686. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 16716. 88564. 38088. 474901. 1959 36698. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 368459. 1960 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 21473. 1050. 1515. 16029. 7258. 12692. 18593. 21393. 278579. 1961 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 39270. 19969. 13364. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 357183. 1962 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 366407. 1963 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 35947. 2427. 11451. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 335299. 1964 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46284. 2057. 1661. 3644. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 292956. 1965 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 16169. 7430. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 347847. 1966 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25175. 14128. 6765. 12692. 18593. 21393. 363058. 1967 34495. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 15185. 1724. 13614. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 315103. 1968 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 48239. 38473. 11839. 12256. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 349417. 1969 35293. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 23070. 2318. 8312. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 319325. 1970 35293. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13489. 17796. 21393. 367054. 1971 34894. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 367054. 1972 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 48239. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 367933. 1973 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 25276. 1012. 1396. 7189. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 273235. 1974 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38473. 3790. 12193. 6956. 13489. 18194. 20995. 339929. 1975 35293. 42312. 50686. 21606. 2271. 1660. 1516. 12443. 7107. 13489. 17796. 38776. 244954. 1976 37791. 41913. 51084. 50686. 47841. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 371325. 1977 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25175. 17382. 7258. 21694. 88445. 72286. 496553. 1978 41866. 42710. 50686. 50686. 46466. 39270. 24777. 17533. 7258. 12692. 18593. 20995. 373531. 1979 34894. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 34988. 1610. 14935. 7107. 13091. 18593. 20596. 336360. 1980 35293. 42710. 50287. 51084. 48239. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 65247. 75070. 469955. 1981 52988. 41913. 51084. 50686. 46466. 38871. 25574. 17232. 7258. 26556. 88564. 69672. 516864. 1982 34982. 42312. 51084. 50287. 46466. 39270. 25574. 17232. 7258. 13091. 18194. 21393. 367142. 1983 34495. 42710. 51084. 50287. 46466. 12311. 2348. 16349. 7258. 12692. 18593. 23242. 317836. 1984 34995. 42710. 50686. 50686. 48239. 38871. 25175. 17533. 7107. 13091. 53792. 71436. 454321. 1985 42018. 42710. 50287. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17533. 6956. 13489. 20289. 67049. 421928. 1986 40628. 42312. 50686. 51084. 46466. 38473. 25574. 17382. 7107. 13489. 17796. 21393. 372389. MAXIMUM 52988. 47031. 51084. 51084. 48239. 39270. 25574. 17533. 7258. 26556. 88564. 75070. MINIMUM 34495. 41913. 50287. 21606. 2271. 1012. 1396. 3644. 6765. 12692. 17796. 20596. AVERAGE 36827. 42639. 50741. 49738. 43635. 31238. 16354. 14618. 7152. 14032. 28447. 31024. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) = 366444. TABLE 5.21 CASE 00. 17 MONTHLY ENERGY BASED ON HOURLY LOADING CURVE BUT LIMITED TO 40 MW PROJECT CAPACITY AND ANNUAL TARGET ENERGY OF 269,100 MWH SUMMARY FOR MONTHLY ENERGY (HW-HRS) YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB HAR APR HAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT TOTAL 1958 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1959 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1960 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1961 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1962 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1963 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1964 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1965 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1966 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1967 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1968 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1969 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1970 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1971 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1972 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1973 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1974 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1975 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1976 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1977 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1978 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1979 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1980 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1981 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1982 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1983 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1984 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 269870. 1985 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. 1986 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. 268995. MAXI HUM 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 25369. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. MINIMUM 24835. i5977. 26717. 26717. 24494. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. AVERAGE 24835. 25977. 26717. 26717. 24705. 23614. 21441. 20229. 16544. 16755. 20229. 21441. ANNUAL AVERAGE ENERGY (HW-HRS) • 269206. TABLE 5.22 g·.o FIGURES M1288150 OBTAIN DAllY LAKE OUTLET REVISE lOWER BASIN ANALYSIS ENTER LOAD DATA, ETC. FLOWS ADJU~ GLAC ~ F REVISE TMENT ERRUN ~ ... -r -, DAILY COMPUTER MODEL --------- • COMPARE NEW RESULTS WITH PREVIOUS RESULTS UPDATE MIDDLE FORK FLOWS RE-EVALUATION OF HYDROLOGY, ENERGY, AND CAPACITY GENERAL FLOW CHART FIGURE 1.1 MODIFY GlACIER UPOATE FLOW INCORPORATE FUM RELEASES IIOOIFY PRIOR FLOW ADJUSTMENTS TO MASS BALANCE RECOROOFOR TO li'PER NUKA RIVER INCORPORATE U.S.G.S. REVISK>N OF PRIOR ADJUSTMENT UPPER BRADLEY RIVER ()L(; TO PARK SERVICE AGREEMENT RECORDS Al«l ALSO ADIYL RECOROO METHOD AND UPPER NUKA RIVER I I +~ r, r+ OBTAIN CAlCULATE ADJUSTMENT UPOA1E TO LAKE OUTlET FLOWS IIIOOlEFORK !:lilLY LAKE FOR ITEMS RELATIVE FLOWS OUTlET FLOWS TO GlACIER RUNOFF I I -- ----~_, rt-- --- -- --- - ------- - I -1 I INITIAl POWER GENERA TON FLOWS • IS SUBTRACT FLOW FOR OUTlET FLOWS • ... WA1ER NO-FISH RElEASE DEFICIT AOJJSTMENT • .. BEING -FROM INITIAl 1--I IIID!l.E FORK FLOWS PllED' GENERATlON FLOW SYNTHESIZE k MISSING lOWER I BASIN FLOWS YES t I IS I BASil NO WA1ER NO SUBTRACT SPUED UPDATE --SPillED MORE T""" ., CALCULA1ED -WATER FOR REQUIRED REO'OASH7 - FLOW FROM FISH LOWER BASIN FLOWS I FISH FLOW RElEASE? RElEASE DEFICIT RElEASES? I ' I YES YES SUBTRACT REMAINING ,~ DEFICIT FROM INITIAL I GENERAT10N FLOW --J I COMPUTE ENERGY : :: EN1ER LOAD DATA, --VARIOUS RUNS FOR RESERVOIR STORAGE CURVE, I .. llFFERENT LOADS AHO -MACHINE EFACIENCES, ETC. OPERATING METHODS ---L -- ---- - - -I------ -DAILY COMPUTER MODEL -- - . ,, COMPAREENERGYPROOUCED WITHTHAT PREVIOUSlY PREDICTED RE-EVALUATION OF HYDROLOGY, ENERGY, AND CAPACITY DETAILED FLOW CHART FIGURE 1.2 M1288151 '-·-~\ ..... -" ~ _/ \ _, ' \ . \ I \ . I . \ .. ,l L: NUKA "'' GLACIER ~ \ \ \ \ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I N.T.S. BRADLEY RIVER OUTLET WEIR ... -·· //-·) .·· AREA PLAN OF NUKA GLACIER RUNOFF -.--------------FIGURE 4.1 _ __. CURPS Of ENI.iiN~~RS 5000 I NiMUAl, IIMOfF • 141.~ A. C. fT. I I I Alii~UAl IHJNOH • lS6.lOO A.t. fT Nfl'tUAt. IUIOfF • 112.600 A.C. f1, AMII:~l autOff • 309.600 A. C. fT. AHMLIAL IUJHOrF • l06,100A.C, fT. ·-I I I I I I . Mll!Ht MIU OOSUI:VEO su~r. li • UOO C.F.S • 4500 HAliMUM DAIU 06SIIV(O All<i U • 4061) C.f.S. 1----Mo\lHift IHSlAHlAHE~ • .tiJJQ C.t.S. "!-""Jtti.JJ1 U1$TANTA"EM • 4UO C,t,S. 4000 3500 5000 t· 1-r-j· --HAll ..... MIU MURY£D AUG Z • UJO C.F, S. ~WUt l~lANUJt£01.JS • 2000 C. F. S. f-tMl!IQI OAH Y 08S£1l:Y£D AUG U • lllO C.F.S. I I I -MlUUt INS.lAIIlANEOOS • 1260 C.F.S. I\ 11 J f A I/\ N I I I ! \ 1/ Mt:AIII OUCKAIGC •'2'94 t).S. v f.V\ V'l!\ I I I ! w ~ \ fi:HI: DUCHAitG( • ~~~ C. F ,J, 1\ lfPtJ 'V\ ~:\ ~~H DISCHAifG{" 492 t,F,$, -f-~T_T_T_T_ --JII[Nf DHCHMG( • lll C.F.S. ~--r-, i"Y""'\ v --r-v ~\:_---:~.---r---r-""!----:/ ------~ ----·--~---,--1---if------_.:::-,.. F-7' J -0 N D J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A ~ 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1958 ·-1959 ------. ------·-----····-1960 '-1961 - 5000 4500 A'IIWAl RUNOFf • llS.400 A. C.. Ff, .AJtf«!Al RtlJrl(lrf • 290.900 A. C. n, AK!tUAI. RIICOFf .. 287,600 A.C. FT, AMttw. l'iUHOFF • )5J.100 A.C. FT. I I I I I I l I I - 4000 3500 !'UiliM DAtU MSUV£0 UP'l 16 • 3940 C.F.S.. MltXHUI I"S,~TAN(OU~ • 4230 C.F,S. T -· . . 3000 MAW1JM MllY 081£!~V(O SHT l£ • )040 C.f.S. *HK~f' JHSTMTANfM • :UOO t.r.S, I 2500 ~JIM t).AIU OIISU'tf:D AUG l~ • 2100 C.f.S. MlltUC MILY tBS£111V£D A~ U • lSOO C.f.S. j MAJIH.IH IN'SfAI'IfAHtOUS • J2SO t:.f.S, MlHI.IM 116TAIITMfOOS • lSO(I C,f,S. I 2000 1500 1000 vi 500 ...: 0 u lA 1-- I ~ '\ rv :V \\ A ,I\ I I I v 'vlj ~ / J \.J ('.. v \V \ tt:A..: OlSCHAA:G£ • 481 C.F,S. ir [-./V' I~ =-== ~""'"' .• ,. u.s. =._ JIII'Ait DHOOitG( • 4tH C.f.S. Jt:Aif oncttARGI • •os c.r .s. -...=-_c-r-l-7 -----t-T_--r-r-T--:;.-·-------~-J--[ --- """' --r-l--J-T-'-""' ,_ /" 0 N D .) F M A M J J A $ 0 N D J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 f M A ! -J M J J A 1963 1964 1965 !966 ~ w C) ~5000 :c ~ 4500 ~.tf~IIJAl AvtlOff • 146,200 A,C, fT, AIPWAl RUNOFf • 191,000 A.C. ff, ANWUA(. ~IMI)ff ~ l79,i00 A.t. rt, AMUAI. Al.l«)fF • ZS.,£00 A. C. fT. Q 4000 KI.JlfUI DII.JU 0BS£R~£0~ OCT HI " SUO t.r.s. -MAXUUl INHANJAitfOUS • S4&o C.f.S 3500 3000 . 2500 MH!tUt Mill OllS£RvtO, JON( Ui • 1400 (,F.S, ---~~-MxttU4 fK:S.lANTAii(OU$ • 21SO (,F,i. 2000 1500 1000 500 0 t!UUtl'l tlAtlf OIS£RV(O, .HJL'f l4 • ZUO (,f.$, 1 1\ A MAiHUI 11iSTANfAAEOUS " 2270 C.f .S. 1/~ t:t=..tl!i...ltl UAllV 08SCII'VED. AUG II • 1710 t.r.S. I I I I A 1---HAU....., J~SlA'CTANEOtiS • 2040 C.r.S. D\ I~ !A 1\ ~ 1\ l I I I A f l I I I v \ / w Yv .I M(M OISCkARGf • 514 C.f.S. ~ v ~ l I I I V¥ tt£•N OfSHIIt!IG( • ]]I} t.f,'S. /'/ KAA OtsCHA!lG£ • 41)2 C,f, S. ~AN oncH.&RG£ .. 196 c.r.s. _ f-= \ - j\::_::j f'.::;.A.~--,--r -_T_1 __ r f:------::v--t._:: --_r T-l--r--J -~~ '-.\_ f--}\1.. / ~ '~--r-T-T--r----v~ r- 0 N D J F M .II M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A !. 1968 1969 '--. 1970 ·~ -1971 5000 AH-.u,« RtltfOff • 2S0,400 A,(, H. AffNUAl IW!+Off • 104,900 A.C. FT. NtkUIIl JtiJI'f()(f • l04,000 A.C. n. AHJtUAL JttltQrf • 1?1,400 A.C. I'T, 4500 ~--4----r--~--~·--~ ---·---,r---i---i----r---+--- 1 4000 --!-r-----,---1--1--------·-+-t--+--t--t--1--t--t---t--1----1 3500 • 1---r----I I 3000 Mo\llif.lt o.lltv OIStRvtD, UPT, U • lOtO t.f,S, MAll""" DAllY OOS(ltY(D, S£PT, Z'l" 2150 C,F',S. -- "'-XI~ 1Jr!iTAHTM£0VS. • JlOO t.f.~. HAll...-UISTNITAACOUS • 2890 C. F.$. ~ "'""" ""'" oemY£D, ,'till( :•. "'"' c.r.s. --~ MAJ:IIV'f utstAA1ANEOOS • 2000 c.r.s. A ,. ::;::;: ~:iit.~~~~i"; ~~oz•" 14 • 0 c.r.s. -.+--+--+--+--l---l--+--+---+--1--l--+--.Jit-HH---4-_:It--+-1-+ l __ lr--t-1~+--+---111 A I I 1\ ~"'"''"'J,..I...s.l r.r-~A rVA[\..,.. ~ .. DISCitUO{•UIC.F.S. ./1\r--l_/'~ 1\ A ~~ .... :,O!A..: .. ,., ..... 1 f"'AIJ\'vJ\r/1 1 \f\ ~AAOISO!ARG(·4U<.f.5. _i}_M. V\\f \}-= v~--.::.T ·1 -r-r-l----.r:-1-------<J_--r-T-r-·c 7~----r.t ~-J--r--r_-1 1 --'' -;r--r--,--r-l--v 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N 0 J F II A M J J A S 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A '< 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 . --.. 1_973_ 1974 -1975 _ _,19<.;7,_,6,_ ________ . - r-HA:Wt.tt OAllV OOS£11.¥0 JULY 11, • l~ZO t:.f.S. J .. ~ .... '"t'AAI~S. ~~··u.s. A I I I I I --KAN DISOt4MiE •28S C.F.S. j'.J\ --ll\ ·-:r ·r-r--r-r--_:::.. ~----[..\,.C ~ 0 1\ -, 0 ~ 0 N 0 F M A M A s 196Z Afflfilltl Rt.IHOff • 312,200 A,C, ft. I I I I I I I MAXIfUI OAilY O!!S(QY£1) S(Pf. !8 • 3910 C. f.~. ~ MAlt"-"' INSTAIHAH£0US • 4180 C.f'.S. A ./1 V\ WI, H£J.Irill I)ISC~ARGl • 44S C.f.S, c. v !IV --1--r-r--r-r--v -- N D J F M A M J J A s 1967 AMUAl RUNOH • 1~.900 A. C. fT, HAtltU1 QA;IU 08SOtV£0, J.uG 2l • l9\0 C.f.~. .___ MAliJ-\IM: J,.SfA.'iTAl1(0US. • 2910 C.f.S • t-::-~ I'!U,'i OfUAAACi( • 406 C. f. S, '-_I_T_T_l--r N 0 J F M A 1972 MllHUf't lliSTAH1AI't(0US OISCHARGf fOR loiATU UARS 19):t·l910 ~DJUST(O 10 AtcOUNT FOR $1:tTf.M Of 1'4110 GLACIER fltMOff 1JiJO SRAOlV LAII(. ll 1,--J\ ;u. {\ \ /...---\: M J J A s I ----- Otil4INto~ U,S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT. ALASKA CORPS OF' £NGINE£Rii II.~CHOit.t.G&. f;IIJI •• A BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT lo.A-.. !HOMER, ALASKA """"'"" ,.au.um, (>ollt,.'·-·· DAILY DISCHARGE HYDROGRAPHS ~ Alt1-0Vtoi ~:·••••.W:t:•r· nilun ~t ...... ._ __ _ WIMitfH>I loCAl~ i DAft ~ .......... , .. flU N.IIWtU ·~ -.->Wih ... ...._ ...... "' FIGURE 5.1 Sht. 1 of 2 CORPS OF ENGINEERS U. S. ARMY ~000 ... UIA ouoorr. ~.100 u. H. ..."'" ~rr. l11,J~ A.C. 1 "· l=l l=r -RUNOH ..... ooo A. C. fT I []:]~ I~ I I r=! I I I >4~oo ~~ 1 1 ---1-=e=;+~' :---1---· --- i"AJ:!M:)M MUY oosr~~:no. Al!«i 4 • u1o c.r.s. MatH~-. MJH oosrRvta. u UJ .. u1o c.Ls. I 4000 MAXI~ H•~tAttt1A!t£Ous • o1a c.r.s. MAXItut tHslAHtAHt.M • 40?o c.r.s. -----• 1 I I I I l I I I I I I I I I """"'""I"""" .. '"· •uo 11 • mo t.r.s. 1 I 3soo I I I I I I I I' T I I I I I I n --.. .,_ !""'"'""'""' . ,.,. c.• '· ___, "1>"VV'o I MAXtOOH MnY oe:sntvEa. srn. t4. tHO c.r.l. • .JVVV t MAxuut IHSTAIITANtOOS • lito c.r.s. 1 ~III:UA.l RUNOH • U1.100 A. C. ff. 2~r--1--+-1--t--1---+--4--t--4--4· \ I I I I I N\ IV A --.f \· I j.)JIV \ A I I I I I All J'-1 A I /1 I~ A-) J~ IJ I l \J l -~ /'c~--;~~;·~~·~~S:.t::.·i-A~f.-----V-\-'"'~""c~""'·1 mc:s f' W\Jl ""'"""""••£·""·''· 1V'I',1V l! Jnrt .. I'("""'""Cf·""·'·'· j_:_1' j1~ · J n 'T--f/"Y'i-J lJ \It:_--l--r-l--·r_-7 .... ,__ ~ . ""\f[T'11\ J --r I 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A $ 0 N 0 J F M A M J J A S 0 N D J f M A M J J A S 0 N D A F M A M J J AJ.5 1500 1000 ..,; 500 u.: ..; 0 2000 f-----441 H-+--+---+--1--t---t--+-........cr- :: 1977 1978 1979 • 1980 w <.!) II: <( :c u (/) i5 - -- . l I . -- __ L_ • • -·-~ ... -- ---'--------' 1----- -U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ALASKA CORPS OF ENGINEER$ OWGN~ BRADLEY LAKE PROJECT j,_.,..;· ........ !HOMER, ALASKA ""'"" natA* WI DAILY DISCHARGE HYDROGRAPHS iA»fOVlth -·-l>olflll.'nno~on SVIMmll>! SCAU OAil e"'"''"•••• •••-c• ,_llS HU'-II(l ifrt.OMMIHOUh SHUT "' FIGURE 5.1 Sht. 2 of 2 70 60 50 ,....... ..c ~ 40 (!) '-"' / // >-(!) !l: w 30 z w [/ 20 10 0 1 ---- ~/ --- ~- ------· CASE NO. 1 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS 0 20 MW. BASED ON LOADING CURVE -· ~ ~ f----"':, \ --~~ ~ ~ ~ .___~ _ __L ______ -·----~ --. D ENERGY OUTPUT + UTIUTYTARGET - ANNUAL ENERGY =255.8GWh --::-I~ / "'"" ~/ j c---\ v 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.2 70 60 50 ,...... ..c ~ 40 C> "'-/ >-C> n:: w 30 z w 20 10 0 --------- r--- v/ r----L_ - , v --- [~--f ~ ----- ~ ·-·-. CASE NO. 2 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS ® 20 MW, LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL I ~---1---------r-·-----r-------1------~-- I I 0 ENERGY OUTPUT I -. I ----r-+ UTILITY TARGET "~ ~ ANNUAL ENERGY I -r-=276.5GWh "':. 1\ /) ltl. I.-~ 'i_---==i ~ i~ -; ~ /) ~--'1 ~~ --v v----------r--~ ~ ~ t ------------~ ~ I 1 3 5 7 9 11 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.3 70 60 50 .,......._ J: ~ 40 (!) '-" >-(!) ----~/ ,7~ f--- 0:: 30 w z w 'fT 20 ------- 10 ----+-- 0 1 3 CASE NO. 3 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS C 20 MW BASE LOAD ~ ~~ '""-~ 1\ D ENERGY OUTPUT + BASE LOAD TARGET - 0 REF. UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY - = 338.9 GWh ~ ------~~ ~ _[~ ~ "1:~ ~ I> ~ ~ v v-- / --~-- .""" v 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.4 ,........, ..c 3e (!) ........, >-(!) (t: w 7. w CASE NO. 4 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS 0 25 MW. BASED ON LOADING CURVE 70 ~----~------r----,-----~-----~----~-------~-------~----~~----~----, 60 -----+--1-------~---------+----4---- 50 --~----t -------- 40 .30 ----·--·-· .,.,..m 20 10 ----------+--------------------- 0 ENERGY OUTPUT + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY =291.5GWh ·-f +------ 0 I 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1} FIGURE 5.5 ,-..,. ..c ~ (.!) "-./ >-(.!) (t: w z LLI CASE NO. 5 lviONTHI.Y ENERGY 2 UNITS 0 25 MW. LOAD CURVE. MIN. SPILL 70 -....-------,-----.~---..-----,-----.....----, 60 oo ---·--sl w. // ,// // 40 --~ 30 ~ -=+----+-~----~ -+------ 10 ,·----·------- 0 --r-----r-----~----~------+------+ 1 3 5 7 MONTH (OCT.= 1) -----+----~ 9 ~ I J + -··---. --~·-~--- 0 ENERGY OUTPUT + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY = 312.8 GWh 11 FIGURE 5.6 1 ,....... ..c 3: (.? .._,. b n: U.l z w CASE NO. 6 110NTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS 0 25 MW BASE LOAD 70 -----.----.----n J~--~-~0-ENER~Y OUTPUT ------1-------------·t----+ BASELOADTARGET 60 -~ ___ 4 _____ -- 50 -r----1--;;t-·~-t-~+-------+--o ::::~::::GET • • 1 = 366.3 GWh ____ _j ___ j __ .. . I ---_J . --m--.. --15---=-------...,.......___ 1 --~+----r;-.----~= ... -=· --j_ ---+------I \ w----/ 30 +-···-··-j -----+---~-1-~---~---1---~--1--. ~~-----· ~'·' 20 ---------··-+---·--··------ / 10 --r------1----··-· ---1 ", l >4--f--------r-----t , 0 -+------+----1 1 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.7 ~ .c 70 60 50 ;: 40 t? "-"' >-(.? 0:: w 30 z w 20 10 0 -1---· / v/ / ,~· ··- 1 / v/ ~-----..-1 ___ .. CASE NO. 7 1\IIONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 30 MW. BASED ON LOADING CURVE l I I I 1-------f--.-.-- --~---~' --. ·f ~ ~~ t\ --------"\ "" --1--~ ---~a•- ~ ---I--· '\ --------~ ~ -~ ·-~~----· ----- t--I I I I I J I 0 ENERGY OUTPUT -- + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY t-= 315.9 GWh · ._......_ ·----··- _.J. ~ /~ 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.8 70 60 50 ,........ .c 3: 40 (.9 >...../ >-(.9 ct: v / [~ ~----- w z 30 w 20 -- 10 --1------ 0 3 CASE NO. 8 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS ® 30 MW, LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL ------r---- --~ ~ ~ "--, ~ ~\ ~ ~ ") r----· 5 7 MONTH (OCT.= 1) 0 ENERGY OUTPUT -- + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY = 336.2 GWh -,---~7 ~---- -/ v ~ ~ ----(// 9 1 1 1 FIGURE 5.9 70 60 50 "" ..r:: ;: 40 0 ........... >-0 a:= w 30 z L HL ------~ r .~ ~ ~ w 20 10 -,__.. 0 1 3 CASE NO. 9 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 30 MW BASE LOAD --· "--~ t>< ~~ -- ·-f- D ENERGY OUTPUT + BASE LOAD TARGET - 0 REF. UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY =375.3GWh - 2 -£ " ~\ / ~ \ ~ \ I ~ \ ~~ / ~' v ~ :J.-_-/ '-t:J \ / -----·-- 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.10 70 60 50 r-... ..c ~ 40 " '--' >-" It: 30 w z w 20 10 0 CASE NO. 10 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 45 MW, BASED ON LOADING CURVE --· --- ----- -------· - ----------- ·---------·- 3 5 7 9 MONTH (OCT.= 1) -- 0 ENERGY OUTPUT t UTIUTYTARGET ANNUAL ENERGY =342.5 GWh - 1 1 FIGURE 5.11 70 60 50 - ,........ ..c: 3: 40 C) '-"' >-C) ct:: w 30 z --- w 20 10 -··~"- 0 -- p ----- CASE NO. 11 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 45 MW, LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL ----· - -- ·-----~-· - -·-----· ---.·--~ -~-·--~~·· ----···- 3 5 7 MONTH (OCT.= 1) -----------·- D ENERGY OUTPUT + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY = 360.8 GWh --- -- 9 1 1 FIGURE 5.12 ......... .c 3: (...? '-" >--(...? 0:::: w z w CASE NO. 12 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 45 MW BASE LOAD 70 -.-----~-------.------.-------.------.------lr------~----~------. 60 -+--- 50 ~--~-· -~- 40 I \ /Y I I I ~ I I I I I 0 ENERGY OUTPUT I/\ I I I I !'\ I I I I + BASE LOAD TARGET 30 I ru I I I I \ I I I I <> REF. UTILITY TARGET I I \ I I I I \I I I I ANNUAL ENERGY =375.9GWh I I \ I I I I I 1/ I 20 1 0 -+-------+--- 0 -+-----~------~----+-----~~---4------+-----~-----+------~----4-----~ .3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.13 70 60 50 tR. // r-... ..c 3: 40 C) '-' >-Cl -~ /;? rV et: w 30 z --f---·--- w 20 ----- 10 --~---~----- 0 1 3 CASE NO. 13 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS ® 51 MW, BASED ON LOADING CURVE ~~ ~ -- --',\ ·---·--1-------\ ~ \ ~ ~ --"\ -·-········--· 1- v 5 7 9 MONTH (OCT.= 1) ·- 0 ENERGY OUTPUT - + UTILITYTARGET ANNUAL ENERGY =343.6 GWh ---1 /) v-~ / ~ ·--__i ______ 1 1 FIGURE 5.14 70 60 --- 50 -!-----· """" ..c ~ 40 <-' ......., >-<-' ~ [ ~ 0:: w 30 z --- w 20 -r------- 10 ·-- 0 1 1------ CASE NO. 14 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 51 MW, LOAD CURVE. MIN. SPILL -·--~·----~.w-'--· 1--· r::t. /~ ~ ~ v; ·--· --"'\ ~ ----\\ -----~ \ fJ---_~ ~ -;: -~--.. -------------- I +--· D ENERGY OUTPUT - + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY =364.0GWh ;~' ~v~ '\ ~ 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.15 i .,-... ..c 3 (j '-"' >-(j a:: w z w CASE NO. 15 MONTHLY ENERGY 2 UNITS @ 51 MW BASE LOAD 80 -.-----.-----,------~-----~----~----~----~----~------~----~--~ 70 -+-----+- 60 50 h ~/ ~ I 0 ENERGY OUTPUT 40 I ~/ I I I I "t I I I I + BASE LOAD TARGET T \ I I I I I \ I I I I 0 REF. UTILITY TARGET 30 l ~ I ANNUAL ENERGY = 372.3 GWh 20 10 0 ~-----r----~----~----~----~----~----~----~----~----~----~ 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.16 ~ ..c 70 60 bO ~ 40 (!) ""--/ >-(!) t:t: w z 30 w 20 10 0 - ' / - ---- 1 ---- ---- CASE NO. 16 MONrfHLY ENt~RGY 11 9 MW , LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL -- ------J --- ---- ---t------------· -~------ I ' 3 5 7 MONTH (OCT.= 1) -· 0 ENERGY OUTPUT + UTILITY TARGET ANNUAL ENERGY = 366.4 GWh ·- -------- 9 1 1 FIGURE 5.17 ,...... hi Ld LJ_ .._., _j w (1 _j w y :3 PROJECT CAP A CITY CURVE 1190 1180 1170 r -r--1------~ -·-------.----- " --"-~ ------t' --------L-~--t---------J ----~-----" --·--~-----·--·---·4 ----···-.. ---~---~--- 1160 1150 1 -t--------t------'------1 I I ~----·-- -----~---·-----+---· 1140 -----~ 1130 1120 1110 ------r ----------r -----__,/ ~-T~J--~-r----/+~=[-=-~-------·------~------- 1100 ' // -------+-----+ ~l-----­ ~/ ------·------· ~-------1-------+- 1090 ~...- r--~----·--~-----t----·-.. ·--t---·-----·-J.----- 1 oao -tlf'./::::~ -----j-----r----~-----____ ..__ ----+---------~----------+--------+-------~------- 1 o1o I ---~ ~ i -+--------11-----+----f 1 o a1. o 1 1 o. o 1 1 2. o 114.0 I I 108.12 PROJECT CAPACI1Y (MW) 116.0 118.0 120.0 FIGURE 5.18 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 ......... t:i LtJ 1140 LL '-" z 1130 0 1-~ w 1120 _j w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 1 CASE NO. 1 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 20 MW, BASED ON LOADING CURVE -+--- -~-~-=- ---t I _, -c---- -l-L- 3 5 7 MONTH (OCT.= 1) MAX LA • KE LEVEL- AVE. LAKE LEVEL- MIN. LAKE LEVE L- - 9 1 1 FIGURE 5.19 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 6' w 1140 LL ..._, z 1130 0 ~ Gi 1120 _J w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 CASE NO. 2 MONTHLY I.AKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 20 MW. LOAD CURVE. MIN. SPILL [~ -----~ ..... --___, ~ ---/_ 1: ~--;: lh___ -----< ~-~~----~~ --;:~ ~- ~ - --e-~--~~ r--~ ~~----------~ '~- 1------e--+-----~~ // ~ f-r-.____ "'-..~ -- I ~ -f- • -1------------------··· ~~-~_____.. 1----f-"--~------~---,_ ____ '-------------- -1-------··-T---1------ -t--------------"-·--·- - ··--r-------i----f------·-- I --,: -----v-:-~ / / V'" ------~- // / ~( ----------:-~ pL ~-.......... 1--------··---- / ~ ~--------·~--------- D ~AX. LAKE LEVEL- r-+ AVE. LAKE LEVEL- <> MIN. LAI<E LEVEL-----+ ------ i I 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.20 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 ,...... w w 1140 LL ......, z 11.30 0 f-~ 1120 .....J w 111 0 1100 1090 1080 1070 CASE NO. 3 MONTHLY LAKE IJEVEL 2 UNITS 0 20 MW BASE LOAD + -----+-/A~---t=-=-====w --4-----+--------.....,._-----T--j---:----=-- t-. ' -~ =---]_ ; y~ I -----+--. I ---/ - +-----~ -=-~------=----~ -~--_--~-, ~r---t------ r---:-:.--,__ ---I D I --1 ·-t -+-. --L----t-+ UAX. 'LAKE LEVEL AVE. LAKE LEVEL ----r=~-1-=-lt=--+1 ~I~l ~~r..._IN. LA~KE LEVEL ~ ---.---1 I 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.21 6' ld IJ... ......, z 0 ~ Gi _. w 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 1140 1130 1120 1110 - 1100 1090 CASE NO. 4 MONTHIJY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 25 MW, BASED ON LOADING CURVE -T ~----~-----~----~----~ I -- ---------r--~ '- ---~------t-:~ ------] ---~-·~---- ---------·--~+---· .. ---~ .. ----. ~: ---I - -----r---------,-----,--· ----- -----~-------r~----t----~----+--H---t: :· ~:: =~ 1080 1070 -t-----U . .-<> MIN. LAKE LEVEL 1 J 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.22 f5 ~ .......... z 0 I-~ • .J w CASE NO. 5 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 25 MW, LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL I 1 ~. . -t-----l-----l ..... t ____ _J, 1170 ~+-----r~ ,::-_ _ ·r-c·------· ·-__ ------,---------r· __ , ...... "' . ------ ~/ ____ ,.__ /. 1160 +-------+--------~-"--~--·-·-l-----..Jfl='~ --i-+-- ___ -~-~--_':::~---L----r~---T ---r-7 --t~ ______ L '~-_J___ u~-~-------- /"""'-----+-, I ---w---· 1140 1130 t --+---t----·T'"<-;-·· __ ...,. ___ _ 1120 --+------------l------L ___ ----~------- 1110 +-----~-~--i------- 11 oo T--------1--------r----~---- 1 090 t _ _j ___ ~----------4---- 1080 t·---.. --t---~-----~-----t---1 -----i_ 1 -+: :: ~:: :~ 1 070 --I ~ I I J ~ I MAX. LAKE LEVEL ~..----+------< .. =-~--... -~---+ . 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.23 ,...... ti w 1.1.. .._, z 0 t( ~ w 1190 1180 1170 1160 - 1150 1140 CASE NO. 6 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 25 MW BASE LOAD .-~--r=--0 MAX. LAKE LEVEL ·~ 1 ---+--1 -----+--2}-~, _______ 1_ ___ +-----·----- + ::: ~:: = i /l --___ --~--!--1---~----. I ·---i·--~--1-i ~---.L---1 ·---4-----t----+----~ ------l----- 1130 1120 '~-. 1 I -+-~~~~==: ~~~--=~~-~--~------_--!-----+-- -----~----t--------~t--~--111 0 1100 ·-+·-----t-----·-----~-- ' I I 1090 1080 - 1070 --: -----+ ·--t I ··-+ --__ _j_ --+- ---~-~---- ---+---! ___J 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.24 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 E' w 1140 lL .._ z 1130 0 ~ (ij 1120 _J w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 1 CASE NO. 7 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS C 30 MW. BASED ON LOADING CURVE r -~·-· · -~--l __ t + I o --~---==···-· . -------r--+ :~~--~ ,---<> MAX. LAKE LEVEL AVE. LAKE LEVEL MIN. LAKE LEVEL I """'--, ------~----·t-I .,.. --1-=t=~ ./ -+--/----.. ·--· --·------- -·-t·---t---- 3 ----+----·- ' I -~---t--- 5 7 MONTH (OCT.= 1) / 9 1 1 FIGURE 5.25 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 ,-... w w 1140 -·LL o...J z 1130 0 ~ Gi 1120 _J w 111 0 1100 1090 1080 1070 1 CASE NO. 8 MONTHLY L~KE LEVEL 2 UNITS @ 30 MW, LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL T I I ----r--r-----,-- 0 MAX. LAKE LEVEL -~---· ~· -~ -- ' I ' + AVE. LAKE LEVEL rT---- ·---~----~-~-:-:--;_ '-------=--~-¥-· -------·-·-·--·-,----------·----------------·----4-----+----/ -~------t-----+------~-------· -~ ------------· /i_ ___ t' ·---·----- -~_L _______ t--------·-·-·---------------------' I I I ,/' ----+~" -~--· --·=t=-_---- . I -------r ---r---~,"-' ------r----~---·--- ---t--·T·---· -=---t r r r= 1 I--r----~-- 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.26 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 ,-.. ~ w 1140 -LL '-" z 1130 0 ~ Gj 1120 . _J w 111 0 1100 1090 1080 1070 - CASE NO. 9 MONTHLY LAKE LE\TEIJ 2 UNITS ® 30 MW BASE LOAD ='-=~=-~ ---{-----·---__ _ 0 MAX. LAKE LEVEL ~~~---~----~-t~~t;:,------------~+. ::: :: =~-1----- 1 --------f-I ___ L.L ___ ~·- ·~·---~-----~----~--~-··----!-------~----;~-+--·-+-- ·---·---~------1 ~-----l---~ I -."< --~ · -+--· ···-~ _L_ I "'--~--I -- "<.: • ./ ./ _,___ ----+-··-----rril~,f------+-----. -----+----+-----f --/-+-~ * ---- -----,---- __ ::::.=--~~-• .....-=-·-·- +---~-~---+-------t-----4---+-+-· 1 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.27 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 ,.-... ~ w 1140 LL ........ z 1130 0 ~ (J 1120 _J w 1110 1100 1090 1080 ' 1070 CASE NO. 10 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS @ 45 MW. BASED ON LOADING CURVE -~-- -:_-::-.=.::.--:-lB--. ;;-. .:.::. -:: __ ----1-~----_ _ __ D ~AX. LAKE LEVEL__ ··--_: --~----r-------. ---r-----------· -----·-- ; I I ~ <> MIN. LAKE LEVEL / . ---~,---+---1---~--L_ _ _ _J_____ -_j__ I / / --t---;L--t---- / / / ---+rL---· ___ ,. ___ _ ' .,....,. -~---__ .., ___ _ ----·. ~~-{------+--~ -~y---- ---+--·-~-. I,_.----··-·--- 1 --------1-~ ---+---=-=·· ' ,~ --+------.-...1. ------------"-·-~-- / /,L__ // -+--~'./ -·>--~---- -_----t-----L---~ • • • • .,_,....-+---•-----+--J_ 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.28 1190 1180 I T --- 1170 1160 1150 ,.-.... tJ w 1140 LL. '-' z 1130 0 ~ GJ 1120 - _J w 1110 1100 1090 1080---- 1070 1 J CASE NO. 11 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 45 MW, LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPILL D MAX. LAKE LEVEL + AVE. LAKE LEVEL ----r-~- ------l-', ·---+-~ o MIN. LAKE LEVEL --r ---·--~ ----+ /-+- // / ·--+--"",---+-----·----~-f--_ .. c I ---~--- L __ /-;;r-·-------... -/ --· --+------- -- .. • & • ...-=------+--- 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.29 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 r--. tJ w 1140 LL ...._, z 1130 0 ~ ~ 1120 w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 CASE NO. 12 MONTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS @ 45 MW BASE LOAD I ---r-1 -..,.---1 ----,..-....-----... ---·-+·0 MAX. lAKE LEVEL '+ -~ t ... ___ ,. ___ _ .t~ 'J\~ ·-·· -+-----+------1--.. t--------+---t-------- -----1----,~-----·r--·-t·~----~--------------rl-·-t------t-·-.. , ----r··--t----r----------~--~---- AVE. LAKE LEVEL <> MIN. LAKE LEVEL ____ ---· ----------~---. ----j· ---i ---- ---~-----1---~4~~-~=-~~---··-· ·---~ -~-t·----+--- 1 ::...,... -t- ___ , __ . ___ _ 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.30 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 ,...,. t:i w 1140 IL. '-" z 1130 0 !;{ GJ 1120 ....l w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 CASE NO. 13 110NTHLY LAKE LEv~L 2 UNITS C 51 MW, BASED ON LOADING CURVE I I I 0 J::L t!J----;::~. MAX. LAKE LEVEL :4 ----l~ . . + AVE. LAKE LEVEL // -~,, ~ r--· -~ MIN. LAKE LEVEL --,k-~ -----~--r-... ~~----~~ ' --------/--~ '') ~ +--l ----~ ""' / L~ ~~ / . ~ ~ . H~-_// ___ ,___ // I ------·----------Ll 'l~ / / < ' r--,, I ~ ·-~'"' ---~ r---- ~ \--------r-- /_)., f--· ~~ / ------------- '\\ -"'~V /,v ·--. ---'~ ~ ~< ,....,.-· I 1 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH {OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.31 fi w IJ... '-" z 0 t{ Gj _J lJ...I CASE NO. 14 l\10NTHLY LAKE LEVEL 2 UNITS 0 51 MW. LOAD CURVE. MIN. SPILL 1190 I I I l I 1----, --,-I -·---r----r------t 1180 ..l.fi=· -EP-. I ·--· I 0 MAX. LAKE LEVEL --::::-_:"- 1170 ·--+---·-+-~~ 1160 -+-1 -· 1150 1140 -·~-+------,... ______ _ 1130 11 20 I "',~ -1-- 1110 1100 - + AVE. LAKE LEVEL <> MIN. LAKE LEVEL I 1.L_ -·--+--+---·--+----~::..__---! / / ~~~:---+---~ --; / ~--7--+-----f I / -~--,--·-· -------+-------4- 1 080 -+------'---------~---·---____ L _. _ 1090 1070 I u -l--U----t 1 3 5 7 9 11 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.32 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 -s w 1140 LL. '-" z 1130 0 ...... ~ 1120 _J w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 -i 1 CASE NO. 15 1IONTHLY LAKE LEVEIJ 2 UNITS 0 51 MW BASE LOAD 0 + MAX. LAKE LEVEL , _ AVE. LAKE LEVEL~--- 1 <> MIN. LAKE LEVEL ----~, .. ~~--.... ---· ---......._. ______ .....,____.____.. I \ ------f------<--··--"-1 -- ----r--·--·---·---l--- '----+--- -~--'----------t_-t I I -~ I I I • I ~-~--~--~-t--~ 3 5 7 9 1 1 MONTH (OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.33 1190 1180 1170 1160 1150 -ti w 1140 u... ........ z 1130 0 F ~ 1120 _J w 1110 1100 1090 1080 1070 CASE NO. 16 MON1'HLY LAKE LE\TEI_J 119 MW. LOAD CURVE, MIN. SPlLL 1. ,~~--, _qt= EB--=. ~-----~------0 UAX. LAKE LEVEL ·-·-j·-~. -~~~ __ . + AVE. LAKE LEVEL +J-,_ __ _ <> MIN. LAKE LEVEL I""-----. ·-----" ..... ____ ,_:.~----~.:... ~/ ·:::__-_~~ ----r-----l----r;-;--r----~-----+-1----~ .. ---·· ------r-----1---~~r·----r---L-;-----+----. I I . ___ _j_~~J ____ ---r----~ ~,~--=t--- 1 I ----+1--.J----4- -- -·. 3 5 7 9 ., 1 MONTH {OCT.= 1) FIGURE 5.34