Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Ji"i' #<~. <br /> <br />almost straight line with very significant envelopment between area sizes of approximately 2,000 <br />square miles and approximately 50 square miles, The envelopment curve could have also been <br />drawn much closer to the data points, producing a much more concave upward shape between <br />2,000 and 50 square miles, The envelopment curve that was drawn attempted to follow the <br />shape ofthe 1921 storm curve below 2,000 square miles while providing a smooth transition to <br />the 1935 storm curve, Note that the envelopment curve is much closer to the shape ofthe 1935 <br />storm curve than to the convex upward shapes of the other storms. Undercutting ofthe 1935 <br />storm curve was a possibility if priority had been put on maintaining the curve shape ofthe other <br />storms. However, the decision was made to not undercut any storm data while still providing as <br />smooth a transition from the other maximum storm data at various area sizes as possible. The <br />resulting curve is concave upward with an inflection point at several hundred square miles. This <br />shape seems to provide the best envelopment curve that envelops all maximum storm data while <br />providing a smooth transition among values at different area sizes. <br /> <br />25. Appendix B. Where are the results ofthe HECI modeling that is described in Task 5 and <br />Task 13? <br /> <br />A W A response to Question 25, <br /> <br />Flow Technologies provided flood modeling analyses and presented results at the second <br />Technical Review Committee meeting. Attached to end ofthis discussion are some ofthe <br />products that Flow Technologies provided at the review. A W A is contacting Flow Technologies <br />to ensure that the products provided are complete since A W A did not retain a complete copy of <br />the Interim Report #2 in the project file. <br /> <br />26, appendix G, Response to NWS Comment 2. Where is the data for the Spring Brook MT <br />storm? <br /> <br />A W A response to Question 26. <br /> <br />The storm information used to compute the total adjusted values was taken primarily from HMR <br />55A. The storm date and rainfall values came from the Storm Depth-Area-Duration table in <br />Appendix B, page 233; the storm dewpoint and maximum dewpoint values were taken from <br />Table 5.1, page 85; the transpositioned maximum dewpoint was determined using Figures 4.10 <br />and 4.11, pages 79 and 80; and the storm location and elevation were taken from Table 2.2, page <br />18, Information in Section 2.4.1.3 was used to develop an understanding of the storm <br />characteristics but no storm data were taken from this discussion. The transposition maximum <br />dewpoint location was determined using DeLorme mapping software and the location reference <br />direction and distance from Table 5.1 (370ESE). Precipitable water values were determined <br />using the Tables in Appendix C ofHMR 55A. The barrier height was determined using the <br />barrier heights for other storms with similar inflow moisture wind direction in Section 4 of the <br />Final Report. <br /> <br />Over the last couple of years, A W A has developed spreadsheets to compute each of the <br />adjustments made during the maximization, transpositioning, elevation adjustment and barrier <br />