SCADA System Implementation Project Grant Proposal for FY2012 SCADA System Implementation Project...

Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Department of Interior Policy and Administration

Denver, Colorado

WaterS MART Water and Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2012

FOA No. R12SF80049

SCADA System Implementation Project

Bridger Valley Water Conservancy District 609 West 3rd Street

(P.O. Box 177) Mountain View, WY 82939

Mr. Ken Fackrell, Manager Phone: 307-782-3210

Fax: 307-782-3210 Cell: 307-780-5106

E-mail: [email protected]

January 17, 2012

mailto:[email protected]

WaterSMART Grant Proposal for FY2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover Page - SF424 Application for Financial Assistance Form Title Page Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................1

I. Technical Proposal and Evaluation Criteria A. Background ....................................................................................................................5

B. Project Description ..................................................................................... , ..................10 C. Evaluation Criteria .......................................................................................................12

D. Environmental Compliance .................................................... : .................................... 16 E. Required Permits or Approvals ....................................................................................17

II. Project Budget A. Funding Plan and Letters of Commitment.. ................................................................. 18 B. Official Resolution .......................................................................................................18

III. Budget Proposal A. Administrative Costs ....................................................................................................19 B. Environmental Compliance Costs ................................................................................20 C. Construction and Installation Costs .............................................................................20 D. Project Cost Summary .................................................................................................23

Appendix A. Official Resolution ...............................................................................................................24 B. Letter of Support ..................................................................................................................26

List of Tables Table ES-1 - WMCP Measures and Ranking ......................................................................2

Table ES-2- Project Cost Summary ...................................................................................3 Table 1- Project Agricultural Shareholders ....................................................................... .5 Table 2- Available Project Water and Shortages ...............................................................8 Table 3- Project Schedule ................................................................................................11 Table 4- Water Savings from Gate Automation ...............................................................12

Table 5- Quantifiable Water Savings ...............................................................................13 Table 6- WMCP Measures and Ranking ..........................................................................15 Table 7- Summary of Project Funding Sources ...............................................................18 Table 8-A- Administrative Cost Breakdown ...................................................................19

Table 8-B- Gate Automation Cost Breakdown ................................................................21 Table 8-C - Stream Measurement Cost Breakdown ..........................................................22 Table 8-D- SCADA System Cost Breakdown .................................................................22 Table 8-E- Data Integration Cost Breakdown ..................................................................23

Table 9- Proposed Budget and Funding Plan ...................................................................23

Bridger Valley Water Conservancy District 1


SCADA System Implementation Project

Executive Summary

Lyman Project

The Lyman Project (Project), constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), develops irrigation, municipal, and industrial water for the Bridger Valley in southwest Wyoming. Project features include Meeks Cabin Dam, constructed from 1966 to 1971, and Stateline Dam constructed from 1977 to 1979. Project water developed at the reservoirs is delivered to the farms and communities through private conveyance facilities.

Water District

The Project is operated and maintained by the Bridger Valley Water Conservancy District (District). The District is governed by a seven member board who serve without salary. The district employs a general manager and two part-time clerks. The clerks perform the secretarial and backup operator functions. The water master and ditch riders are employed by the State of Wyoming and the private ditch companies that receive water from the two Project reservoirs. The District office is located at 609 West 3rd Street in Mountain View Wyoming.

Water Supply

The Project provides supplemental irrigation water to about 41,200 acres of land and culinary water to about 6,000 persons. The Project also provides 1,000 acre-feet of water per year for fish and wildlife conservation purposes. For the ten-year period from 2001 to 2010, Meeks Cabin Reservoir filled 8 of the 10 years (80% of the time) and Stateline Reservoir filled 2 of the 10 years (20% of the time). Historic shortages over this 10-year period averaged about 16% with the worst shortage (75.7%) coming in year 2002.

Water Management and Planning

The District completed a Water Management and Conservation Plan (WMCP) in May 2011. This plan identified fifteen conservation measures that the District intends to implement. The measures to be completed with the proposed Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA) Implementation Project (proposed Project) and their ranking are shown in Table ES-1 below.

Table ES-1 WMCP Measures and Ranking

Measure Rank (of24)

Schedule (FY)

_Q~y~!9.P.!?~-~!~j~!__§~~-~~Y~!~~~~4~~!?.p~g~ _ 1 2012 Utilize canal flow data from State SCADA ""'"t""' 3 2011 Automate outlet gates at Meeks Cabin & Stateline Dams 4 2012



Objective and Need

The District would like to update its current method of water measurement and accounting. The District has no remote operation or flow measurement capability. The District measures the water as it is released from the dams and the State of Wyoming (State) measures the water as it is diverted into each canal. District staff makes daily telephone calls to gather the outflow and elevation data. Inflow to the reservoirs is computed based on the outflow and reservoir level readings. If flow releases from either or both dams need to be adjusted, District staff must drive to the dam to make the change.

Using this method, it is difficult for District staff to timely release and accurately determine the quantity of water to release, where it goes, and when a shareholder's rights have been met. The proposed Project, with real-time flow monitoring and gate control capability, would significantly improve the District's ability to manage its water supply. As the demand for water increases and in light of current Project water shortages, finding and implementing ways to improve water management is critically important to the District.

Scope of Work

The Scope of Work to meet the above objective is divided into four components or tasks: 1. Task 1 - Automate the outlet gates at Meeks Cabin and Stateline Dams 2. Task 2 - Establish communication with existing stream gages above and below reservoirs 3. Task 3 - Develop SCADA system base station at the District offices 4. Task 4 - Integrate all data into District SCADA system and web page

Schedule

The Project would begin upon approval of the grant and be completed by August 30, 2013.

Project Funding

A summary of the proposed budget and funding sources for the Project are shown in Table ES-2.

Table ES-2 Project Cost Summary

Recipient Description In-kind . Cash Reclamation Total Administrative Costs

-··---·-·······················...··-·····················-···················-·-···- ·······································- ........ .. . ·····················-·

Task 1 - Gate Automation

Task 2 - Streamflow Measurement ·-...········-----······· ········--······· ......... ··········-······---·····················-······-····· ······························--···-

.. Ta~·~···~·····~····~g~!\ ... ~.Y~!~~~!~!~?~ .....!~~~-·~ ....~.!?.~!~~~!~g~~!~?~ Environmental Compliance

$9,260 0 ··············································-·····

$18,700

$1,000 0

$1,000 $1,000

$1,000 $10,000 .. ..................... . .....................................~~

0 $1,000

0 $9,260 ······················~-···············-·······

$29,500 $48,200

0 $1,000 . ··········-···-~·····---·-····-······~--·-······· ···············-····-········ .....

$1,250 $3,250

$10,250 $21,250 ·······················-······-······-·

$1,000 $2,000

TOTAL $12,260 $30,700 $42,000 $84,960



Anticipated Benefits

The proposed Project would provide several significant benefits for the Association, the most important being the conservation of Project water. It is anticipated that the project would:

1. Conserve an estimated 3,888 acre-feet of water per year 2. Provide for improved management ofthe District's full41,340 acre-foot water supply 3. Significantly improve the timeliness of water deliveries 4. Help improve communication and reduce conflict among water users 5. Assist the State Department of Fish and Game as well as the Bridger Valley Joint Powers

Board with additional data to more effectively manage their water supply in Stateline Reservoir

6. Assist the State Engineer's Office in meeting its water distribution responsibilities and goals of protecting State water rights

7. Reduce District operation and maintenance costs



I. TECHNICAL PROPOSAL AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

A. Background

Project

The Lyman Project (Project), constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), was authorized as one of the initial participating projects of the Colorado River Storage Project by the act of April 11, 1956 (70 Stat. 105). The primary features of the Project are Meeks Cabin Dam, constructed from 1966 to 1971, and Stateline Dam constructed from 1977 to 1979. The Project is located in southwestern Wyoming; however, much of the drainage area and one storage feature are in Utah, just across the Utah-Wyoming state line. The project regulates the flows of Blacks Fork River and the East Fork of Smiths Fork River for irrigation, municipal and industrial use, fish and wildlife conservation, and recreation. A map of the Project is included as Figure 1.

District

The project is managed by the Bridger Valley Water Conservancy District (District) which was established May 14, 1959. The District is governed by a seven member board who serve without salary. The district employs a general manager and two part-time clerks. The clerks perform the secretarial and backup operator functions. The water distribution is under the direction of river commissioners, one for each river system, employed by the state of Wyoming. These river commissioners regulate the water into canals and individual diversions. Ditch riders who are employed by the private ditch and canal companies administer the distribution of waters within those private ditches and canals. The District office is located at 609 West 3rd Street in Mountain View Wyoming.

Project Benefits

Meeks Cabin Reservoir (32,470 acre-foot capacity) provides supplemental irrigation water to about 32,500 acres of land and Stateline Reservoir (14,000 acre-foot capacity) provides supplemental irrigation water to about 8, 700 acres for a total Project irrigated acreage of about 41,200 acres. Water stored in the two reservoirs is released as needed for irrigation, and distributed through private ditch and canal systems. Stateline Reservoir also provides approximately 1,500 acre-feet per year of municipal and industrial water (M&I) to a population of about 6,000 residing in the towns of Lyman, Mountain View, and surrounding rural areas as well as 1,000 acre-feet for Fish and Wildlife Conservation.

The two reservoirs also enhance recreation and fishing opportunities both in the reservoirs and in the streams below the reservoirs. Recreational facilities at Meeks Cabin Reservoir and Stateline Reservoir are administered by the Forest Service. Although there is no specific reservoir capacity assigned for flood control, the two reservoirs provide incidental flood protection to the lands and communities below the reservoirs.



Water Supply and Demand

Agricultural Water Project lands eligible to receive Project water total 41,200 acres; 32,500 acres under Meeks Cabin Reservoir and 8,700 acres under Stateline Reservoir. There are currently about 225 shareholders who irrigate approximately 33,048 project acres within the Project. Of this total, 177 landowners receive irrigation water from Meeks Cabin Reservoir (25,526 acres), and 59 landowners from Stateline Reservoir (7,522 acres). Eleven landowners receive water from both reservoirs. Approximately 8,152 acres of irrigable Project lands are not currently being irrigated due to shortages of Project water.

Land ownership sizes range from over 802.8 acres to less than 0.5 acres. Table 1 shows land size distribution and number of landowners within each acreage ownership range. As shown in the table, a large majority of landowners (about 77%) own less than 200 acres with over 50% owning less than 100 acres each.

Table 1 ProjectAgricultural Shareholders Project Acres Number of

Irrigated Landowners 801-900

"'''' OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHO"""

701-800 601-700 501-600 401-500

0000000000000000000000'0''0'0''0MO.....O ' '

301-400 201-300 101-200 21-100 0-20

1 4 4 7 3 16 21

···············································-

50 42 77

Total 225

Municipal and Industrial Water Stateline Reservoir provides 1,500 acre-feet per year of Municipal and industrial (M&I) water to a population of about 6,000 residents in the towns of Lyman and Mountain View, Wyoming, and surrounding areas. This water is made available through contracts between the United States and the towns. The town of Lyman has contracts with Reclamation for 1,000 af/yr of water and Mountain View has contracts for 500 af/yr of water. Water is provided at the outlet works of the dam.



Terms of the water delivery for M&I purposes is outlined in an agreement dated May 30, 1978 between the District and the towns of Lyman and Mountain View. This agreement was later amended by a letter dated May 30, 1978. This agreement defines the priorities and methods of delivering water in years when the reservoir fills and in years when the reservoir does not fill. M&I water has priority over water for agricultural purposes.

Fish and Wildlife The Project provides capacity in Stateline Reservoir for fish and wildlife purposes. The last portion of Article 7 (a) (2), of the Amendatory Contract between the United States and the District (Contract No. 14-06-400-3463, dated October 19, 1976) states:

"The annual yield from the 1,000 acre-feet of remaining active reservoir capacity and the 2,000 acre-feet of inactive reservoir capacity are reserved to the United States for recreation and fish and wildlife conservation purposes. The 1,000 acre-feet of active capacity reserved for fish and wildlife conservation and the portion of the 10,838 acre-feet capacity reserved for irrigation use shall have equal priority annually."

This water is managed by the Wyoming Fish and Game Department for use as a conservation pool in the reservoir and to meet in-stream flows below the dam. Water to meet required fish and wildlife flows was delivered 100% of the time during all years of record from 1987 through 2011, even during the extreme drought of 2002.

Water Supply Reliability

For the ten-year period from 2001 to 2010, Meeks Cabin Reservoir filled 8 years, 80% of the time, and Stateline Reservoir filled 2 years, or about 20% of the time. Table 2 provides a summary of the water developed and made available to shareholders by the Project for the historic period from 2001 through 2010. As shown, the Project developed an average of 33,535 acre-feet per year, or about 84% percent of the total 39,400 af/yr right. Shortages averaged about 16% over the 10-year period with the worst shortage (75.7%) coming in 2002.



Table 2 Available Pr~ject Water and Shortages

Full Water Available1

Year Supply Meeks Stateline Total Shortage

(ac-ft) (ac-ft) (ac-ft) (ac-ft) (ac-ft) (%)

2002 ?.?z?.49 ~1;'.?.~ _},?.?.~ .......... ?.294. }Qz?.?.~ .... 75.7

~99?. ?.?z?.49_ ?.?.z?.?.4._ J9z~§?.____ ?.§_,99~ __ 1z?.?.4. ...................... 4.:§ 2004 ......... ... ?.?z?.4.9 ?.4z4?! 4.,~4.9 ~§,n} J!z?9?...... 28.1 2005 ?.?z?49 ?.~z?.?4. 10,282 ;.3.?.,9?.~ ~z?94. 7.3

2006 ?.?z?.49 ?.§z?.7.9 .......... ?.,9!9 }7.,?.§9 ~?.?~9...... 6.4 2007 10.7

2008 . ?.?z?4.9 }7.1?.?.4. ?.,?4.9 .. }J.,~§4. ~?.~?.~ 6.7

2009 ?.?z?49 ?.?.z?.?.4. }9,}§?. .......... }§,99~ ........ 1z??.4. 4.8 2010 39,940 28,693 10,388 39,081 859 2.2

Total 399,400 252,990 92,362 335,352 64,048 160.4 Average 39,940 25,299 9,236 33,535 6,405 16.0

1Water available to meet demands; allocated each year by the Board of Directors in response to projected water supply

Even though there were Project water shortages each year of the ten-year period, the M&I users were offered their full 1,500 af right each year. purposes was delivered 100% of the time, even Agricultural water users received the shortages.

Also, water for required fish and wildlife during the extreme drought year of 2002.

Project Facilities

Project facilities include Meeks Cabin Dam and Reservoir and Stateline Dam and Reservoir. Project water is released from the reservoirs into the two rivers (Blacks Fork and East Fork of Smith's Fork) and is then diverted and carried from the rivers to the farms and communities through private conveyance facilities.

Meeks Cabin Dam and Reservoir Meeks Cabin Dam is a zoned earth and rockfill dam. Located on the Blacks Fork River two miles north of the Wyoming-Utah state border and 22 miles southwest of Fort Bridger, it contains 3,587,000 cubic yards of earthen material. The Dam is 184.5 feet high, with a crest length of 3,162 feet, and a crest width of 30 feet. The spillway includes an uncontrolled concrete overflow crest spillway with a discharge capacity of 6,250 cubic feet per second, and an outlet works with 62" diameter steel pipe in an eight foot diameter conduit gate chamber and a 9.5 foot diameter horseshoe conduit with a discharge capacity of 1,070 cubic feet per second. The Meeks Cabin Reservoir holds 32,470 acre-feet of water, of which 29,480 acre-feet is active capacity. The surface area of the full Reservoir is 473 acres. Water flows north from the Blacks Fork water



shed into Meeks Cabin Reservoir and is released into the Blacks Fork River and a series of canals that distribute water to the project service areas.

Stateline Dam and Reservoir Stateline Dam is a zoned earthfill dam located on the East Fork of Smiths Fork one half mile south of the Wyoming-Utah border in Utah. It contains 1,456,000 cubic yards of earthen material, is 134 feet high, with a crest length of 2,900 feet, and a crest width of 30 feet. The spillway includes an uncontrolled concrete morning glory drop inlet spillway with a 14.5 foot diameter concrete conduit through the dam at the right abutment with a discharge capacity of 5,850 cubic feet per second and an outlet works with 42" diameter steel pipe, a gate chamber, control house, and stilling basin with a discharge capacity of 400 cubic feet per second. Stateline Reservoir contains 14,000 acre-feet of water of which 12,000 acre-feet is active capacity. The surface area of the full Reservoir is 300 acres. Water flows from the East Fork of Smiths Fork into Stateline Reservoir and is released into East Fork of Smiths Fork River and then into individual ditch diversions and a few canals that distribute water to the project service areas.

Private Conveyance Facilities Water that is stored in Meeks Cabin and Stateline Reservoirs is released at the request of Project shareholders according to their flow rights and water shares into private conveyance facilities for delivery to the farms and towns. Private conveyance facilities used to transport Project water from Meeks Cabin Reservoir on Black's Fork include: The Pate; Shirk 1; White, Mansfield, and Robbins; Pine Grove Canal; Cox Henry; Lamb Supply; Blacks Fork Canal, Sheehan 2; Bridger Butte Canal; Taylor-Kilburn; Fort Bridger Canal; Center Ditch; Twin Butte; Uinta No. 3; and Wall Canal. Private conveyance facilities carrying water from Stateline Reservoir on Smiths Fork include: Richardson; Milich Canal; Miller Heidi & Hawkens; Smith's Fork Johnson Creek Branch; Davis & Company; Reder; Willow Creek; Uintah Farm Irrigation; Carter 4; Kidman Wall; Polson; and Horace Lamb.

Associated Facilities Project M&I water developed in Stateline Reservoir is released from the reservoir and delivered through private conveyance facilities to the Bridger Valley Joint Powers Board Treatment Plant where it is further distributed to the towns and county. The treatment plant and private M&I delivery facilities are considered as associated facilities.



,--------------------------

B. Project Description

Objective and Need

Project water is released from the dams at the request of the shareholders. Non-project water entering the reservoirs must be bypassed to meet senior-priority rights. Currently, water (Project and non-Project) is measured by the District as it is released from the dams and the Wyoming State Engineer's Office (State) measures the water as it is diverted into each canal. The District uses both sources of information in determining required releases from the dams. Since the canal companies work directly with the State who manages and controls the distribution of water, the District is often left out of the loop with respect to where the water eventually goes.

Water management decisions by District staff are based on the limited amount of data available from both District and State sources. Due to this lack of timely regulation and accurate information, it is difficult for the District to know when an individual shareholder's rights have been satisfied or when to increase or reduce releases from the dams. The State has recently installed remote monitoring capability at the major canal diversions which helps, but integrating this data into the operation of the project is difficult to do without a SCAD A system.

A SCADA system with real-time flow monitoring and gate control capability would significantly improve the District's ability to manage its water supply. Also, having ready access to the State's database would greatly improve their capability to follow the Project water to the canal in order to ensure shareholders receive their share of Project water. As the demand for water increases and in light of current Project water shortages described in the "Water Supply Reliability" section above, finding and implementing ways to improve water management is critically important to the District.

Scope of Work

Implementing the proposed Project has been divided into the following four tasks.

Task 1 - Automate Outlet Gates at Meeks Cabin and Stateline Reservoirs Currently, both Project dams are equipped such that reservoir elevation and outflow data can be accessed by telephone. District staff makes daily telephone calls at about the same time each day to gather the flow and elevation data. Inflow to the reservoirs is computed based on the outflow and reservoir level readings. If flow releases from either or both dams need to be adjusted based on the readings, District staff must drive to the dam to make the change.

This measure consists of installing the equipment necessary to automate the gates and gather the flow data and transmit capability to the base station located in the District office building. Reclamation has offered to assist the District with automating the outlet gates at Meeks Cabin and Stateline Dams. District staff will work with Reclamation to add the necessary equipment.



Task 2 - Establish Communication with the Existing Stream Gages Above and Below the Reservoirs Flow measurement gages currently exist on the rivers above and below each reservoir (four total gages) but the gages above Stateline Reservoir (State gage) and below Meeks Cabin Dam (USGS gage) need to be rehabilitated and equipped for ·remote monitoring. This task consists of working with the State and the USGS to rehabilitate the gages for remote monitoring. The data from each of these four gages would be integrated into the SCAD A system as part of Task 4.

Task 3- Develop SCADA System Base Station and Web Page at District Offices This measure consists of designing and installing a SCADA system base station and web page at the District offices. The system would include a computer, software, monitor, and cabinet. The web page would display the information gathered by the SCADA system.

Task 4 - Integrate all Data into the District SCADA System This task consists of three components. First, integrate the reservoir data (outflow and elevation readings) gathered in Task 1, the stream gage data gathered in Task 2, and the canal flow data currently available on the State system into the District SCADA system. Second, assist the State with integrating the District data into their SCADA system. Third, develop a District web page to display the information.

Project Schedule

Implementing the Project would follow the schedule shown on Table 3 below:

Table 3 Project Schedule

Task Start Complete .... J?~~.~gn····~~!~ ........................................ M<:ly~Q!.~ ............................................. J~!Y.?9.!~ ....... J?~~~gn ...................... . }~!y~QJ~ ~~!?.~~!.Y}Q!~ Construction March 2013 September 2013



C. Evaluation Criteria

Criterion A: Water Conservation

Subcriterion A.l- Water Conservation

Quantifiable Water Savings The proposed Project consists of two related but separate major components; automating the reservoir outlet gates (Task 1), and developing the SCADA System (Tasks 2 through 4). Each component would contribute to water savings as discussed below.

1 - Reservoir Outlet Gate Automation At the current time, gate changes at Meeks Cabin and Stateline Dams must be made by the operator driving to the dams and manually making the change. Upon completion of the proposed Project, gate changes can be made from the District offices in Mountain View. This capability would allow the District to make changes much more easily and on a more responsive basis to shareholder requests or weather conditions. Typical releases during the irrigation season from both reservoirs average about 112 cfs. Assuming a 10 percent flow reduction (11.2 cfs) for one day per week for a 24-week irrigation season (April15 to October 1), the water savings would be about 538 acre-feet per year as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Water Savings from Date Automation

Reduction Saved Days Water Saved (CFS) (af/day) (days/yr) (af/yr) 11.2 22.4 24 538

2 - SCADA System Development Considering Project water savings only, the full-year allocation of water developed by the project is 39,940 acre-feet per year (See Table 2). The average water developed over the 2001 to 2010 period was 33,535 acre-feet per year, or about 84% of total full-allocation. The District estimates that implementing the proposed Project will conserve a minimum of 10% of the water historically available. Thus quantifiable water savings is estimated at about 3,350 acre-feet per year (10% of 33,535 acre-feet). This additional 3,350 acre-foot of water represents a significant amount of savings for the District. The additional water would be especially valuable during extended drought periods.

Summary Based on the above calculations, total water savings from implementing the proposed Project are estimated at 3,888 af/yr as shownin Table 5. This saved Project water will be stored in Project reservoirs for use by current shareholders to reduce shortages. Utilizing the saved water will reduce shareholder shortages from the current approximately 16% to a more reasonable shortage of about 5% to 8%. It is also expected that the two Project reservoirs would be operated at higher levels and would fill more often. Reservoir operation data post SCADA Project will be correlated and compared to historic operations data to compute actual water savings.



Table 5 Quantifiable Water Savings

Source Amount (af/yr)

M~~~~G~!?~~~~~~tat.~!!P:~_Q~!~~~!~!!!~!~~~(I~~~J)__ ?.?~-scADA System (Tasks 2-4) 3,350 Total 3 888

Improved Water Management Implementing the proposed Project will allow the District to better manage its entire water supply of 41,340 acre-foot water supply. The estimated percentage of water supply better managed is therefore 100% as shown below.

Estimated Amount of Water Better Managed 41,340 af/yr ---------------------------------- = ------ = 100% Average Annual Water Supply 41,340 af/yr

Subcriterion A.2 - Percentage of Total Supply The District's total annual full-allocation water supply is 41,340 acre-feet per year. Historical deliveries have averaged about 33,535 acre-feet per year due to reductions during drought years. The estimated measurable amount of water saved is 3,350 acre-feet per year. This represents an increase in water supply of about 11.6 percent as shown below.

Estimated Amount of Water Conserved 3,888 af/yr = = 11.6%

Average Annual Water Supply 33,535 af/yr

Subcriterion A.3 - Reasonableness of Cost The capital cost of developing this additional water supply for the District is less than 1 percent of the cost of developing a new water supply. As shown below, the estimated construction cost (capital cost) per acre-foot of water from this Project is about $21.85 per acre-foot compared to costs for new water development of about $5,000 per acre-foot. The average life-expectancy of the Project improvements is estimated at 25 years.

Total Project Cost $84,960 ------------------------ = = $21.85 Acre-feet Conserved 3,888 af

The cost per acre-foot of water better managed is estimated to be $2.06 per acre-foot as shown below.

Total Project Cost $84,960 ------------------------------ = = $2.06 Acre-feet Better Managed 41,340 af



Subcriterion B: Energy-Water Nexus Not applicable

Subcriterion B.l -Implementing Renewable Energy Projects Not applicable

Subcriterion B.2 - Increasing Energy efficiency Not applicable

Criterion C: Benefits to Endangered Species

Not applicable. The Project is not expected to have any impact on endangered species. It would, however, enhance fish and wildlife values as described under Criterion D below.

Criterion D: Water marketing

Not applicable. The Project does not propose water marketing as the conserved water would be used by current District shareholders to reduce drought-year shortages and firm up their water supplies.

Criterion E: Other Contributions to Water Supply Sustainability

Wyoming State Engineer's Office The proposed Project would benefit the State in two ways. First, the additional data gathered by the project would be shared with the State (incorporated into their SCADA system) and would therefore assist them in their day-to-day water distribution responsibilities. Second, the new data would help them demonstrate "water use" in their effort to protect their 1922 Colorado River Compact (Compact) rights. As the demand for Colorado River water grows, particularly in the lower basin states, the risk of challenges to the way water is administered under the Compact or challenges to its interpretation has been a concern to Wyoming and other upper basin states. The State has initiated a campaign to quantify water use Wyoming in order to protect these rights. The recently completed State SCADA system is a part of this effort. The proposed Project would help the State demonstrate water use and protect their water rights which in turn protects the water rights for the Project. The State has expressed strong support for the proposed Project and is preparing a letter of support which will be submitted separately.

Fish and Wildlife The Project provides capacity in Stateline Reservoir for fish and wildlife purposes. Fish and wildlife values come from storing the water in the reservoir to create a fishery conservation pool or releasing the water to provide fishery flows in the river below the reservoir. Use of this water is managed by the Wyoming Fish and Game Department.

By Reclamation contract, water for fish and wildlife has the same priority as water for irrigation. The last sentence of Article 7 (a) (2), of the Amendatory Contract between the United States and the District (Contract No. 14-06-400-3463, dated October 19, 1976) states:



"The 1,000 acre-feet of active capacity reserved for fish and wildlife conservation and the portion of the 10,838 acre-feet capacity reserved for irrigation use shall have equal priority annually."

Therefore improving the reliability of the Project water supply has an equal positive impact on water for irrigation and water for fish and wildlife. Also, the real-time monitoring capability of the project will allow Wyoming Fish and Game Department to better manage their water rights in Stateline Reservoir.

Reduce conflict among Parties There have been numerous questions and considerable conflict in recent years among water users, the District, and the State, over the distribution of water. The District feels that much of this conflict would be eliminated with the additional data and improved communication provided by the proposed Project. Upon completion of the project, data would be available to shareholders and other interested public simply by logging onto the internet. More data and better distribution of the data is expected to build trust among the parties and reduce conflict. The additional data would also help the river commissioner better manage the distribution of water which would also help reduce questions and conflict.

Criterion F: Implementation and Results

Subcriterion F.l- Project Planning The District completed the WMCP in May 2011. This plan identified fifteen conservation measures that the District intended to implement within the ensuing five year period. The measures to be completed with the proposed Project and their ranking are shown in Table 6 below.

Table 6 WMCP Measures and Ranking

Measure Rank (of24)

Schedule (FY)

P~Y.~!gppi~~~i~t.~~!\1?~ ~Y~t.~~':t.~~~~!?P<:!B~ Utilize canal flow data from State SCADA '"'"'' ...m

1 3

2012 2011

Automate outlet gates at Meeks Cabin & Stateline Dams 4 2012

As shown in the table, ranking of the three measures are 1, 3, and 4 out of 24. Completing these measures is a high priority for the District and will add significantly to the District's ability to meet their water conservation goals.

Subcriterion F.2- Readiness to Proceed The proposed Project is high on the District's capital improvements and water conservation list, as shown in Table 5. Being a small District with very limited funding capability, cost share funds are necessary to proceed. The District is ready to proceed immediately, however, as soon as the grant is awarded.



Subcriterion F.3 -Performance Measures The Project would considerably improve the flow measurement accuracy throughout the District. The data gathered and SCADA system capability provided by the proposed Project would establish a baseline for future Project operations. Also, data collected would be compared to historic flow data to help monitor performance and benefits of the project. Analyzing the data and estimating benefits would take place on an annual basis at the end of each water year and would be reported to the stockholders at their annual stockholder meeting each year.

Criterion G: Connection to Reclamation Project Activities

The Project was constructed by Reclamation from 1966 to 1979. Project water rights are owned by the United States and managed by the District. Operation and maintenance of the Project is performed by the District under contract with Reclamation.

D. Environmental Compliance

1. Will the project impact the surrounding environment?

The Project consists of installing remote monitoring and automation equipment to existing structures and is not expected to have any long-term effect on the surrounding environment. Minor temporary site disturbance may be required during installation of some of the equipment but all disturbed areas, if there are any, would be restored to their pre-construction condition.

2. Are you aware of any endangered or threatened species in the project area? If so, would they be affected by any activity associated with the Project?

No

3. Are there wetlands inside the project boundary? If so, please estimate how many acres of wetlands there are and describe any impact the project will have on the wetlands.

No

4. When was the water delivery system constructed?

Meeks Cabin Dam was constructed from 1966 to 1971. Stateline Dam was constructed from 1977 to 1979. No distribution facilities were constructed as part of the Project. Many of the private canals that now carry Project water were constructed in the early 1900's when the area was first settled.



5. Will the project result in any modifications or effects to, individual features of an irrigation system (e.g., headgates, canals, or flumes)? If so, state when those features were constructed and describe the nature and timing of any extensive alterations or modifications to those features completed previously.

No

6. Are any buildings, structures, or features in the irrigation district listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places? A cultural resources specialist at your local Reclamation office or the State Historic Preservation Office can assist in answering this question.

No

7. Are there any known archeological sites in the proposed project area?

There are no known archeological sites in the Project area.

8. Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low income or minority populations?·

No

9. Will the project limit access to and ceremonial use of Indian sacred sites or result in other impacts on tribal lands?

No

10. Will the project contribute to the introduction, continued existence, or spread of noxious weeds or non-native invasive species known to occur in the area?

No

E. Required Permits or Approvals

Since all Project features (both dams) are Reclamation facilities, approval would be required from Reclamation prior initiating any construction activity. Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) would be also required; however, compliance is expected to be a Categorical Exclusion Checklist. No other permits or approvals are required for the Project. The District will notify Reclamation of its intent to implement the project and work closely with them during the design and installation process.



II. PROJECT BUDGET

A. Funding Plan and Letters of Commitment

The estimated cost of the Project is $84,960. The District will pay all costs not funded through the WaterSMART program, as shown in Table 7. There is no other Federal or private funding partners for the Project.

Table 7 Summary of Pn~ject Funding Sources

Funding Sources Funding Amount Non-Federal Entities

Bridger Valley Water Conservancy District $42,960 Others 0

Non-Federal Subtotal $42,960

Other Federal Entities Subtotal 0

Requested Reclamation Funding $42,000

Total Project Funding $84,960

Source of Applicant Funding

The District levies annual assessments on its stockholders and uses the money to maintain, improve and expand current operations and facilities. The District will fund the Project using money from its capital improvement program budget. These funds have been budgeted for the fiscal years of 2012 and 2013.

Previously Incurred In-kind Costs

There are no previously incurred in-kind or other expenses that would be included as Project costs.

Letters of Support

A letter of support from the State of Wyoming is included in Appendix B.

B. Official Resolution

The District's Board of Directors adopted a resolution stating they will execute a Cooperative Agreement with Reclamation for implementing the Project and that they will use the funds as identified in this funding plan. This resolution is included in Appendix A.



Ill. BUDGET PROPOSAL

This section of the report describes proposed Project costs under three categories: Administration Costs (Table 8-A), Environmental Compliance Costs, and Construction and Installation Costs (Tables 8-B through 8-E). Total Project costs are shown in Table 9.

A. Administrative Costs

Salaries and Wages

The proposed budget includes estimated time for District employees for the administration and oversight of the Project. This estimated time is for meetings, design reviews, consultation with contractors and stakeholders, site visits, work inspection, required paperwork, reporting to Reclamation (including final report), and other duties involved with the project. Salaries and Wages total $9,260, as itemized in Table 8-A, which is included as a portion of the recipient cost share.

Fringe Benefits

The District uses a 40 percent rate for the calculation of fringe benefits for all listed full time employees. This totals $2,560 and is a portion of the recipient cost share.

Travel

Travel was calculated using the District reimbursement rate of $0.50 per mile. Eight visits to the Project site at 800 miles round-trip totals $404 and is a portion of the recipient cost share.

Equipment, Materials and Supplies

No costs are included for these cost categories.

Table 8-A Administrative Cost Breakdown

Computation Recipient Cost Reclamation TotalBudget Item .. Unit Quantity Share FundingDescription Cost

~~!~~Y.~~~g~~······· $45.00 120 $5,400 $5,400~E~jt!c::.~ ... M~~~g~!....... ................................................................................. ....................................................

Administrative $25.00 40 $1,000 $1,000 Total Salary/Wages $6,400 $6,400

Fringe Benefits 40% $2,560 $2,560 Total Labor $8,960 $8,960

Mileage $0.50 600 $300 $300 TOTAL COSTS $9,260 $9,260



B. Environmental Compliance Costs

This task consists of obtaining the required National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance for the proposed Project. It is anticipated that NEP A compliance can be accomplished with a Categorical Exclusion Checklist at a cost of $2,000. This $2,000 cost is included in the detailed Project cost summary shown in Table 9.

C. Construction & Installation Costs

Construction and installation costs are divided into four categories; one for each of the four tasks. The estimated labor and expense costs for each of these five categories are shown in separate "Cost Breakdown" tables (See Tables 8-B through 8-E).

The District plans to fully contract the work described in this proposal and does not plan to use any in-kind services towards the Project's completion. The District also commits to assume all responsibility for operation and maintenance of the Project once completed.

Task 1 - Automate Outlet Gates

This phase of the project includes installing the equipment at Meeks Cabin and Stateline Dams to automate the gates, gather the flow data, and transmit it to the base station located in the District office building. Total cost is estimated at $48,200 as shown in Table 8-B.



Table 8-B ·~------------------

Task 1 Gate Automation Cost Estimate

Description Quantity Units

Equipment

Solenoid Valves 1 ·---~-~---~ ··--~~·-···········

Gate osition sensor 1

~u 1

ea

ea

?~r~C:ll"ll gc:~g~ ~<?l'l'll"flU n......i...c.,.a.c...t..:..i..o.. :c ...n................. +·············1,~.....................f....................ccLS~........... , $ ?,QQQ . $ ?,QQ9 1 .......................................... +········································· !

Subtotal $ 12!~

~(!~!!.~~----·~·-·-·············· +----~~·+······~--~---!·~ ·············---·· ··~~-·· ··················---············ +--~················~--• Install Solenoid Valves .............:1=.......___+--=LS $ ···-~.QQQ.. Install, pro ram, & test eq 1 LS $

I

. ohydro- Mise parts

~~~n_oi<l_v~---·:·· !Gate position sensor i 1

RTU 1

Stream age communication 1

I

II, rogral'l'l,_~J:~st eq,_u_..ip_t-+---~~---<---=---+--'!:..-....:::!:. btotal

:Stateline Total I 1Task 1 Total 48,2oo Is 1s,1oo s 29,soo

Task 2 - Stream Measurement Gages

Flow measurement gages currently exist on the rivers above and below each reservoir (four total gages) but the gages above Stateline Reservoir (State gage) and below Meeks Cabin Dam (USGS gage) need to be rehabilitated and equipped for remote monitoring. This task consists of working with the State and the USGS to rehabilitate the gages for remote monitoring. The data from each of these four gages would be integrated into the SCADA system as part of Task 4. The cost of implementing this task is estimated at $1,000 as shown in Table 8-C.


0


District staff

Task2Total

Task 2- Streamflow Measurement

Reclama~!ionlDescription · Cost Share Funding!

hr $

1,000 !I

Task 3 - Develop SCAD A System

This measure consists of establishing the SCADA system base station at the District offices. As shown on Table 8-D, the task includes purchase of computer equipment and labor for office setup, computer and software set-up, and training. Integrating the data into the SCADA system is included under Task 4.

Table 8-D ---------·-······--·~··=-----· ''

Description

Task3Total

Task 4 - Data Integration

Task 3- SCADA System Base Station

.. ~0.. --~ $

$ 3,250 l $ 2,000 Is

lama!i~!'J Funding

1,25o I

This task consists of three components. First, integrate the reservoir data (outflow and elevation readings) gathered in Task 1, the stream gage data gathered in Task 2, and the canal flow data currently available on the State system into the District SCADA system. Second, assist the State with integrating the District data into their SCADA system. Third, develop a District web page to display the information. The total cost for this task is $21,250 as shown in Table 8-E.



Task4- Data Integration

Recipient Reclamation!

Units Cost/Unit Total Cost Share Funding

i $ 21,250 $ 10,000 i $ 10,250

D. Project Cost Summary

Total Project costs are summarized in Table 9 below.

Table 9 Proposed Budget and Funding Plan

Computation $ Per Reclamation

Budget Item Description Recipient

Total Cost FundingCostUnit Quantity Share

Administrative Costs

Administrative Costs (Table 8-A) $9,260$9,260 .......................... ·-··························································· ··················-······· .... ··········~···-······· ····················- ..... ············- ............······················ ·······-·-·······

Construction/Installation ··········-······· ··················································································-············

$48,200

Stream Measurement (Table 8-C)

$29,500$18,700Gate Automation (Table 8-B) $1,000$1,000

................................__ ....

$1,250 $3,250

Data Integration (Table 8-E)

$2,000SCADA System (Table 8-D) $21,250$11,000 $10,250

·························-·······

$41,960 $41,000 $82,960Subtotal

...........................·-······· ················-····························-······· ··········-······--·····--·-·-·--·····-······· $2,000$1,000 $1,000Environmental and Regulatory

$84,960$42,000$42,960TOTAL PROJECT COSTS



APPENDIX A

OFFICIAL RESOLUTION


--

RESOLUTION

Resolution No: .2v12- C-j

BRIDGER VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT

APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION WATERSMART GRANT FUNDS

FOR THE

BRIDGER VALLEY SCADA SYSTEM PROJECT

WHEREAS, the Bureau of Reclamation is requesting proposals for "WaterSMART: Water and Energy Efficiency Grants for FY 2012 under Funding Opportunity Announcement No. R12SF80049 to assist Eligible Applicants with their water and energy management and conservation activities; and

WHEREAS, the Bridger Valley Water Conservancy District (District) is an Eligible Applicant by virtue of being the sponsoring entity for the Lyman Project, constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation; and

WHEREAS, the District desires funding to assist in the completion of a significant project titled "Bridger Valley SCADA System Project";

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the District Board of Directors:

1. Has reviewed and approves the filing of the grant proposal herein submitted; and

2. Certifies that the District has sufficient funds, both cash and in-kind contributions, as specified in the Funding Plan portion of the proposal to implement the project, and has adequate financial and technical resources to operate and maintain the project when completed; and

3. Certifies that if selected for a WaterSMART grant, the District will work with Reclamation to execute the proper agreements and meet the objectives and deadlines described in the proposal.

1/-ea.§-:" /J:J~'/'.la9~"'/'P,<uthori~ed Signature Title /

ATIEST:

~&&

----------------------------- ----------------------~


APPENDIXB

LETTER OF SUPPORT



[Letter from State of Wyoming has not been received so will be submitted separately]


SCADA System Implementation Project Grant Proposal for FY2012 SCADA System Implementation Project...

Documents

Transcript of SCADA System Implementation Project Grant Proposal for FY2012 SCADA System Implementation Project...