Laserfiche WebLink
<br />jSENJ BY: 60R-WCAOS SO <br /> <br />2-17-99 10:56j <br /> <br />970 385 6539 => <br /> <br />303 866 4474j <br /> <br />#6/11 <br /> <br />C. PROBABLE MAXIMUM: FLOOD STUDY AND ROUTING <br /> <br />A study approved February 8, 1985. identified three probable maximum flood (PKF) <br />scenarios. These scenarios are: <br /> <br />1. June rain-on-snowmele with & peak inflow of 76,000 cf. and a lS-day <br />volume of 305,000 acre-feet. <br /> <br />2. Local thunderstorm with a peak inflow of 71.600 cfs anel a 2-day volume of <br />38.400 acre-feet. <br /> <br />3. Fall general storm with a peak inflow of 94.700 cfs and a 5-day volume of <br />186,000 acre-feee. <br /> <br />The most critical flood is the fall general storm PKF. RO\lting of this flooel. <br />assuming the dam did not fail, resulted in the dam being overtopped for 7.5 hours <br />with a Maximum depeh of 1.4 feet. A maximum discharge of 79.200 cfa occurred <br />chrough the outlet structures and over t:he dam. An overtopping depth of 0.2 foot <br />and a total maximum discharge of 59,900 cfs occurred for the flood equal to 90 <br />percent of this PMF. Overtopping for this flood occurred for 2.6 hours. Results of <br />the routing of a flood equal to 70 percent of ehls PKF were a freeboard of 2.8 feet <br />and a maximum spillway discharge of 46.700 cfs. The maximum ouelet wora discharge, <br />which 1s between 2.950 and 3,050 cfs for .11 of ehe routed floods, was 3.000 cfs for <br />chis flood. A flood equal to 50 percene of ehe fall general seorm PKF vas rou~ed ~o <br />determine the mlntmum perceneage flood that would produce flows through ~he spillway <br />which eould cause det:rimental erosion to ehe dovn.treara alope of ehe clam. The <br />maxiDIWD. spillway discharge for thb flood was 37,400 efs. Spillway discharges above <br />about 40.000 cfs would overtop the lefe spillway chute wall upstream of the junccion <br />with the outlet works. This overeopping flow viII cause eros10n of ehe backfill <br />adjacent: eo ehe spillway chute vall and the earth maeerial adjacent to and <br />unde-rneaeh the ouclet works chute and stilling basin. It would also travel alone <br />the ouelee works to the dam slope. Undenainlng of the outlet works chute could <br />eause a dIfferential settlemene of the chute. which could cause backwater that vould <br />come in coneact with the dam slope. Erosion of the downstream dam slope. which <br />occur froll either or boeh of the.e actions, would be detrimental to the safet:y of <br />che dam. <br /> <br />The oeher ewo PKF's also produce spillway discharees 'chat: would overtop the left <br />sp1llway chute wall upstream of t:be outlee vorks junction. A freeboard of only 2.S <br />feet occurs du.ring rO\.lting of the June rain-on-snow PKF. R.outing of the local <br />thunderstorm PKF produces a freeboard of 5.4 feet. <br /> <br />The inundation maps prepared for areas downsereAm of Valleclto Dam were developed <br />using the fall general storm PMr. The re.ervoir .levation was assumed eo be 7665 <br />when the storm began. 'nle high-pre.aure gate outlet works and spillway were \laed to <br />help pass the flood. Using these assumptions, the probable maximum flood would <br />overtop the clam. Therefore the inundation maps prepared using che probable maxtlllWll <br />flood assWled the dam would faU. The lnundation map. are in the Emergency Action <br />Plan section of this SOP. The folloving table give. information on the resulting <br />flood at key loca~lons along the Pine River. <br /> <br />111.3 <br /> <br />Rev1sed 03/94 <br /> <br />