The URL can be used to link to this page

Water Study 1968 - 2010 T:I_SON COMPANY EN 31NEERS t AR HITECTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ENGINEERS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS P.O. BOX 28 . SALINA. KANSAS 67401 . 631 EAS CRAVVFORD AVENUE .... 913 827-0433 15 October 1968 Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners City of Salina, Kansas Gentlemen: In accordance with your authorization we have prepared and present here- with an engineering report covering a comprehensive study and long-range development plan for the municipal water system. The report is entitled the "Sa 1 i na Water Study}1 The study includes a review of the various sources of supply available to the City and a detailed evaluation of the quantity, quality and the economics of acquiring the municipal water supply from each of these sources. Additional analyses are made of the water treatment facilities, storage and the distribution system. Improvement programs required to provide an adequate water supply to a growing community for a period of approximately 40 years are outlined. A time schedule indicating anticipated needs for major improvements is proposed, We would welcome the opportunity to meet with you and with your represen- tatives to discuss features of the study. WILSON & COMPANY Robert E. Crawford, P. E. -nad SALINA. KANSAS . VVICHITA. KANSAS . ALBUQUERQUE. NEVV MEXICO . ATLANTA. GEORGIA I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ITll:j I MAYOR William W. Yost CITY COMMISSIONERS Robert M. Stark Carl R. Rundquist G. N. Waddell Charles W. Casebeer ~1!I.$Jtd [. ~ 1'T 11t'lm!m;;f:i~.. w. 'l::ft CITY MANAGER Norris D. Olson ~ 'Tf Ron Webster, Director of Utilities Harold F. Harper, City Engineer R. S. Fassnacht, Supt. of Water Treatment Plant Lawrence Bengtson, City Attorney Don Harrison, City Clerk 67 -128 OCTOBER 1968 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PREFACE The preparation of an engineering report which encompasses long- range planning requires considerable research, consideration of many known or suspected variables, utilization of experience and, in some instances, an educated estimation of conditions or events which may alter normal patterns of progression. Numerous sources of information have been utilized in the preparation of this report including, but not limited to, municipal records, previous engineering reports and reviews of the same or allied subjects, various publications by State and Federal agencies appropriate to the topics considered, interviews with local, State and Federal agency officials, and applicable and accepted engineering practices. The cooperation of all persons, departments and agencies who were contacted relative to the matters discussed herein was excellent. A number of rather rigid projections have been made relative to population and water use forecasts and construction schedules for purposes of planning and comparisons. It must be recognized that drastically changing conditions, which may directly reflect in one or more of the design parameters, will create the need for a periodic reviews of the programming and possible alterations to the scheduling, particularly in respect to the time of construction of major projects. As discussed in the text, it should be emphasized that there is concern with continued pollution of both ground and surface water supplies. There are certain natural pollution aspects, such as increased chlorides and other salts, that are difficult to control but their magnitudes can be predicted with considerable accuracy. Man-made pollution, whether organic or inorganic, whether derived from domestic, agricultural or industrial pursuits, are extremely variable, Although pollution control procedures are currently being emphasized the long-range effects on water supplies, particularly ground water, are in the early stages of technical review and water management concern. One area receiving increasing attention is the practice of large-scale irrigation of crop land and its effects on the ground water and surface waters which receive the return flow. It may be many years before adequate technical knowledge will be available to assess this factor of water quality. The ultimate requirement for the most advantageous use of water resources will be area or basin management programs, A management district would govern the appropriation of water to various users based upon the satisfaction of numerous criteria including such items as the availability of supply, use, need, and quality control. It is possible that an entire river basin, such as the Kansas River or the Smoky Hill River, may be under the guardianship of a water management district. One step toward this ultimate plan may be the need to establish a district formed for the benefit of the people in that portion of the Smoky Hill River Basin between Salina to Kanopolis Reservoir. This report is actually a summary of the many facets of a compre- hensive study, In order to prevent the report from becoming unweildy and voluminous, much of the work data, calculations, and documen- tation has not been included in the printed text. All data and information used in arriving at the conclusions presented are on file in the offices of Wilson and Company and may be viewed by authorized persons. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMATION SECTION 1 - DEMANDS POPULATION AND LAND USE WATER CONSUMPTION SECTION 2 - SUPPLY SOURCES SURFACE WATER SUPPLY General Considerations Smoky Hill Ri ver GROUND WATER SUPPLY General Considerations DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL SUPPLY Role of Present Sources Required Additional Supply Source of Additional Supply Recommended Plan SECTION 3 - WATER QUALITY AND TREATMENT GENERAL Importance of Water Quality Quality of the Present Supply Water Quality Characteristics Chemical Characteristics Significance of Water Mineralization Treatment Considerations Loca 1 We 11 Fi e 1 ds Smoky Hi 11 Ri ver Kanopolis Reservoir Milford Reservoir SECTION 4 - WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE GENERAL Present System Future System Page 1 4 6 9 16 24 25 26 27 29 29 30 30 31 35 39 41 42 43 45 47 Page SECTION 5 - ECONOMICS GENERAL Development Plans Capital Investment Costs Cost of Operation Summary of Estimated Annual Costs 50 52 53 53 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Decennial Population 1 2 Recorded Births and Deaths 2 3 Population Forecast 3 4 Predicted Water Consumption 5 5 Water Treatment Costs 38 6 Carbon-Chloroform Extract Tests 41 7 Plan A - Estimated Annual Water Consumption in Acre-Feet after 51 8 Plan B and Plan C - Estimated Annual Water Consumption in Acre-Feet after 51 9 Plan D - Estimated Annual Water Consumption in Acre-Feet after 51 10 Cost of Source and Treatment Plan A - Wells and River after 52 11 Cost of Source and Treatment Plan B - Kanopolis Reservoir Supplement after 52 12 Cost of Source and Treatment Plan C - Kanopolis Reservoir Supplement after 52 13 Cost of Source and Treatment Plan D - Milford Reservoir Supplement after 52 14 Estimated Annual Production Costs 53 I I I Plate I I I I III IV I V VI VII I VIII IX I X I I I I I I I I , I I I LIST OF PLATES Page Projected Growth Water Pumpage and Population Projection Annual Water Requirement Surface Supply Source Well Field Development Plan Kanopolis Supply Pipeline Mineral Concentration Versus Flow for Republican and Smoky Hill Rivers after 35 Mineral Concentration Versus Flow for Republican and Smoky Hill Rivers after 35 Chloride Content of Kanopolis Reservoir after 43 Water Distribution System Improvements after 45 after 3 after 4 after 5 after 8 after 19 after 28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SUMMATION GENERAL The purpose of this study is to establish a long-range plan for the enlargement and improvement of the City of Salina municipal water works system. The scope of the study provides for the pro- jection of the water works system requirements for a period of forty years, or to the year 2010. There are many facets which require consideration, Generally the system may be divided into five principal elements. Supply Transmission Treatment Storage Distribution These elements must be considered in terms of volume require- ments; availability of water supply; quality of water supply; quality standards to be provided to the consumer; adequate distribution network and storage facilities to meet the fire protection, domestic, commercial and industrial needs of the community; and overall economics. DEMAND Demands or volume requirements are projected in terms of the total needs of the community. It is estimated that the Salina community will increase in population to 100,000 persons for the design period. The water supply requirements are estimated as follows: 1960-67 Period Design Year 2010 Design Population, persons Maximum Yearly Total, acre-feet Average Yearly Total, acre-feet Average Yearly Total, MGD* Peak Day Demand, MGD* 40,000 5,750 5,370 4.8 13 100,000 25,000 18,000 16 40 *MGD = million gallons per day a SOURCES OF WATER SUPPLY A number of possible sources of water supply were reviewed. Several were dismissed from further consideration because they did not meet criteria of adequacy or quality. It was deter- mined that, with exception of the Milford Reservoir near Junction City, there was no single source capable of furnishing a firm supply adequate to meet the Cityls requirements for the design period. The sources remaining to be considered, in one or more combinations, were: The Smoky Hill River Local Well Supplies in the Smoky Hill River Valley Kanopolis Reservoir Milford Reservoir Of these, the following combinations were reviewed in detail: Local Well Fields and the Smoky Hill River Local Well Fields, Smoky Hill River and Kanopolis Reservoir Local Well Fields, Smoky Hill River and Milford Reservoir It was determined that it is more economical to produce treated water from the local well fields and the Smoky Hill River, even though the water may be of better quality from other sources. Therefore, the most economical selection must include the two local supply sources as primary. The development of the two primary sources must be predicated on the assumption that, at times, water will not be available in the Smoky Hill River and that the total supply must then be obtained from the well fields and/or supplemental sources such as the Kanopolis and Milford Reservoirs. Local Well Fields. The development of the local well fields includes incremental expansion with additional wells northeast of the City and, eventually, wells as far south of the City as southeast of b I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I the community of Assaria. Wells are to be used primarily for temperature control of treated water but must be capable of producing large volumes for short periods of time. Smoky Hill River. It is recommended that the capability of taking water from the river be continued and expanded, including increasing the treatment capability during winter months in order to assure protection of the ground water supply. Kanopolis Reservoir. The availability of a firm water supply from Kanopolis Reservoir is limited to approximately 10,000 acre-feet per year, or approximately 55 percent of the average demand for the design period or 40 percent of the maximum demand for the design year. This volume is available with or without the proposed Kanopolis Irrigation District currently under study, If the City were to acquire storage in Kanopolis the release may be transported to the City via the Smoky Hill River; or a combination of the Irri- gation District North Canal and a City owned pumping facility and pipeline; or a pumping station and a pipeline direct from the reservoir to the City. It is highly questionable whether releases to the river during an extreme drought would ever reach the Salina vicinity unless the Irrigation District was in operation. There is considerable concern that, after a few years of operation of the Irrigation District, low volume flows in the river will not be of suitable quality for domestic water supplies. Therefore, the river is not desirable as a primary transmission device for a firm water requirement. The irrigation canal is available only during the irrigation season. However, volumes equal to the total peak demand may be transported economically during this season. It would be possible to use the river as an auxiliary conveyance during the off-irrigation season with some degree of assurance of retrieving the water. Using a pipeline assures transmission of all the stored supply. c Milford Reservoir. Any volume up to the peak demand of 25,000 acre-feet is available from storage in Milford Reservoir. The State of Kansas has purchased from the Federal Government all volumes stored for municipal and industrial uses and purchases of that storage may be made by the City of Salina. The only method of transporting the stored water to Salina is by means of a pumping station and pipeline. QUALITY The review of the quality of the various water supplies, both from a public health viewpoint and the economics of treatment, indicates that by far the best quality available is that stored in Milford Reservoir. The water obtained from the Smoky Hill River and Kanopolis Reservoir is of comparable quality but it is more highly mineralized than Milford. There is increasing con- cern with the amount of chlorides in Kanopolis Reservoir. How- ever, the level of chlorides is now within tolerable limits. The local ground water supply is highly mineralized and is rather costly to treat; however, an acceptable finished quality can be produced. TREATMENT It is proposed to increase the capacity of the present treatment plant to 20 million gallons per day (mgd). The present treatment plant will be modernized to include a remodeled calcining facility and new sludge disposal facilities. As the demand approaches 20 mgd, initial construction of a second treatment plant is pro- posed in the southern portion of the city near south Ohio and Water Well Road. The second treatment plant will have facilities which will approximately duplicate the expanded present treatment facility. d I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION A long-range master plan for major transmission lines and storage facilities is suggested. The first phase increases the capability of the present system. The second phase will provide adequate service to the expanding eastern and higher elevation areas of the City. The third phase will join the high level areas to the east and the area south of Water Well Road into one high-level system. The master plan is designed to serve as a guideline for providing adequately sized mains in the developing areas of the City. ECONOMICS A review of the cost factors, including capital costs, operating costs, Federal reservoir storage costs, has been made for each of four development plans in accordance with the programmed schedule of improvements. Plan A. Plan B. Local Well Fields and Smoky Hill River Local Well Fields, Smoky Hill River, and Kanopolis Reservoir, using the Kanopolis Irrigation Canal for partial conveyance. Local Well Fields, Smoky Hill River and Kanopolis Reservoir, with direct pipeline conveyance. Local Well Fields, Smoky Hill River and Milford Reservoir, with direct pipeline conveyance. Plan C. Plan D. In terms of ultimate cost to the consumer, the relative order of cost is as listed above with Plan A being the most economical and Plan D the most expensive. Plan A can be developed with an increase of approximately 25 percent in revenue while Plan D would require a 100 percent increase in revenue. e RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the City proceed with a program of initiating development Plan B as detailed in this study. The initial steps would be (1) to enter into an agreement with the Corps of Engineers for 10,000 acre-feet of firm yield from Kanopolis Reservoir. This agreement should be made contingent upon the construction of Kanopolis Irrigation District; (2) indicate to the Bureau of Reclama- tion, Department of Interior that the City wishes to include the capability of transporting 75 cfs in the north irrigation canal of the Kanopolis Irrigation District with initial release to Dry Creek at the end of the north canal 0 In the event that the Irrigation District is not assured by 1975, the City should proceed with either Plan C or Plan D as the conditions warrant at the time. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS Continued vigilance is required to assess the Cityls position in the matter of water rights, for both ground water and surface water. Applications for appropriated rights must be renewed periodically and consideration must be given to developing valid appropriation rights to protect the communities long-range interest. The status of current vested and appropriated rights are such that the City may acquire up to 11,760 acre-feet per year at rates up to 20 million gallons per day. A negotiated adjustment in the water rights for the water to be stored in Kanopolis Reservoir under the Kanopolis Irrigation District Plan appears to be required. At present the District has an application pending for all of the water to be stored in Kanopolis Reservoir. The development of well fields outside the corporate limits of the City brings about the need to provide a legal and satisfactory method of protecting the availability of the ground water supply f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I for municipal use. This protection may take the form of outright purchase of water rights from the land owner, or possibly long- term leases, Consideration must also be given to area-wide pro- tection of the ground water supply, The development of private wells for irrigation purposes, within the proposed municipal well field area, could seriously hamper the use of ground water for municipal supply. It is possible that some form of long-term agreement could be reached with the land owners over all of the prospective ground water supply. In this agreement the use of ground water would be controlled by rates of withdrawal, by main- taining certain levels or volumes, or by other satisfactory means. Additional knowledge of the capability of the ground water supply is required to evaluate properly the effect of withdrawal rates, well spacing, recharge and storage. This knowledge is essential to establish and govern any agreement between the City and the land owners or other governmental agencies. It is recommended that the City authorize a detailed geological survey and computerized study of the ground water system of the Smoky Hill River Valley from Salina to Bridgeport. In the interst of very long-range planning, it is recommended that the City enter into negotiations with the State of Kansas to reserve a portion of the available municipal and industrial water storage in Milford Reservoir. The minimum yield requested should not be less than 10,000 acre-feet. g I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 1 DEMANDS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I POPULATION AND LAND USE Natural population growth occurs when resident births exceed resident deaths; this is termed natural increase, The population may also change because of migration, which is population change other than that accounted for by births and deaths. The population may increase from in-migration or people moving into the community or it may decrease because of people leaving the community which is termed out-migration. A natural decrease in population would occur if the death rate were to exceed the birth rate, an unusual occurrence. Historical Growth. Table 1 shows the growth of Salinals population siAce 1870. Table 1 DECENNIAL POPULATION CITY OF SALINA Year Population Year Population 1870 918 1940 21,018 1880 3,111 1950 26,176 1890 6,149 1960 43,202 1900 6,074 1910 9,688 1965* 38,706 1920 15,085 1966* 39,167 1930 20,155 1967* 38,024 Source: United States Census * Salina County Census A review of Table 1 shows that the population has declined since 1960. This decline may be attributed almost entirely to the closing of Schilling Air Force Base. The annual Saline County Census of population indicates that in 1960 the City1s population reached an all time high of 43,202 and has since declined to the present 38,000. Birth Rates. Information on births and deaths are recorded by place of residence for cities in Kansas, by the Kansas State Department of Health Division of Vital Statistics. Data is available from 1911 at which time the Vital Statistics Law was enacted. Table 2 shows recorded births and deaths by five-year periods since 1950. 1 Table 2 RECORDED BIRTHS AND DEATHS CITY OF SALINA Year Live Births Total Deaths Natural Increase 1950 1955 1960 1965 695 1,287 1,549 825 286 262 346 294 409 1,025 1,203 531 Table 2 has been constructed to show the natural increase. It can be seen from Table 2 that a substantial natural increase in the population occurs from the relatively high number of births. The birth figures in Table 2 are somewhat distorted by the large numbers for 1955 and 1960. This could be attributed to the military personnel, and civilians with service related jobs, who were present in those years before the closing of the Base. A better way of determining the birth trend is to compare local birth trends with those of the state and the nation The number of live births per thousand of the population is the index commonly used for this purpose, "Live births to Kansas residents totaled 36,190 in 1966, a decrease of 7.6% from the 1965 total of 39,178, The decline represents an average of 8,2 fewer births per day and continues the decline in the number of Kansas resident births since the record high of 53,559 was established in 1954 The live birth rate of 16.3 births per 1,000 population was 8,4% below the 1965 rate of 17.8, and is the lowest rate recorded in Kansas since 1940, In comparing the five-year period, 1962-1966, with the previous five-year period, births declined 17.3% while the birth rate decreased 20.1%. Births on the national level also declined from 1965 to 1966. An estimated 3,629,000 live births were registered in the United States in 1966, more than 131,000 below the final 1965 count of 3,760,358 births. The 1966 birth rate of 18,5 per 1,000 population was 4,6% lower than the 1965 rate of 19,4 and continued the downward trend that has been in progress since 1957. The 1966 birth rate for the United States is the lowest since 1940, when the rate was 17,9)" Salinals birth rate remains higher than that for the Nation and State; however, it is declining. The live birth rate in 1950 was 26,6 per one thousand persons and has declined to 21,3 per one thousand persons in 1965, a decrease of 24.8 percent in 15 years, lKansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics 1966, Kansas State Depart- ment of Health Division of Vital Statistics. 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Migration. From 1950 to 1960, 32.3 percent of Saline County.s population was in-migration. This was at a rate of about 3.2 percent per year. The natural increase, births exceeding deaths, was 31 percent for the same period. These two factors are expected to continue to influence the population growth of the City of Salina. Population Projection. The following forecast of Salina1s population is based on Census Bureau projections and on recent studies such as Salinals School Needs Study. Industrialization in the Salina area, such as the development of the airport industrial complex, the Westing- house Plant and others, and the improvement of transportation facilities is expected to bring about a rate of population increase for Salina which will exceed both the State and National average. Population projections, when used in connection with studies of long-range water consumption, should be somewhat more optimistic, than those used for many other types of studies, since many of the facilities designed and constructed as the result of the study are long-life in nature and cannot be readily expanded. With these considerations taken into account, the following population forecast will be used as the basic guide in this report. Table 3 POPULATION FORECAST CITY OF SALINA Year Population 1967 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 38,024 39,100 44,200 49,400 55,600 61,800 70,700 76,650 90,500 100,000 Land Use. The land use requirements to support the projected increase in population are shown on Plate I, Ample allowance has been made for industrial growth. The total area provided for the projected 100,000 persons in 2010 is 21 square miles, or an average density of 7.5 persons per acre. The present population density is 8.2 persons per acre. 3 WATER CONSUMPTION History, Water consumption in Salina has varied over a rather wide range since about 1945, the year which marked the beginning of greatly increased water consumption throughout most of the United States, The total annual pumpage and the average per capita daily pumpage trends for Salina are shown on Plate II. The total annual consumption and per capita daily consumption reached peaks in the drought years of 1952 through 1956 which have not since been equaled or closely approached. The greatest annual consumption occurred in 1954, when all water was being taken from wells, reaching a total of 2.07 billion gallons, The consumption dropped off slightly in 1955 and 1956, not because of less demand, but because of the imposition of usage restrictions prompted by failure of the well field to supply the demand, The City began using water from the Smoky Hill River, to supplement the well field, in 1957. However, 1957 marked the beginning of a period of normal or above-normal rainfall which has continued to the present time, A relatively large water rate increase (approximately 40%) was imposed on 1 June 1959 which has tended to decrease water consumption, Projected Water Consumption, Water consumption now appears to have become more or less stabilized, and at present is on a slightly increas- ing trend which should continue, Consumption records for the period from 1945 to 1959 will be disregarded, because of their great fluctua- tions, in projecting the consumption trend into the future, The greatly expanded use of garbage disposal units, dishwashers, auto- matic washing machines and other items which increase total domestic water consumption, has now reached a plateau, Water consumption trace- able to these items has leveled off and is expected to increase at a much lower rate than during the past 20 years. The increased proportion of urban living and the increase in the general standard of living are expected to continue their contribution to the greater use of water through the period of this study, These factors, combined with an expected increase in demand for water for industrial use, is expected to bring about a gradual increase in the daily per capita consumption of water from the present 121 gpcd to about 161 gpcd by the year 2010. The per capita consumption curve is also shown on Plate II, The per capita daily consumption is an average for the year, When multiplied by the predicted population, the average daily consumption can be determined. This product, when multiplied by 365, will give the predicted average annual consumption, which is the basic figure needed for determining the total annual supply requirement, The design of such items as transmission pipelines, treatment plants, high-service pumping facilities and distribution networks must be based on the requirements of the maximum day, In this report the maximum dayis consumption is assumed to be 2 5 times that of the average day, which is a ratio slightly in excess of the historical ratio for Salina. 4 '-- PROJ fCTfD GROWTH PLATE I L '-- '-- i ' ...:I>" , r ' .' .' j 7)J..i)",,~; ~ ,~l' , ,L ~<: "! t'.' """~," jJ .." j;i'>.. _.~ ...,,_ L_ _ ,', : . , \..~ '\ ''". :'j~"J'~~' t-;:. . C'.',~Hi' '/:~i: .~(>:>" < --: 1 > ' >-~/;!{~rl' ;i/;F:~-::, \},,!, .'J" \ <'';:~::) :~,~" f' i,. ~-=.. ! _ I~'.T'C ~ i.:'~,:~. ......'~~L-:.;"- 'i,~st > ;c;;- ..;~ > ,', :"f'~~ i'" '., j ."." .,..,..,'--J ';~',> i'lr '" ' ,t .?~1 i ,>, , 'l"~ t:~,:, ~..\'~ I::"~ ' .~q( ''''j~L j.,., JJ';'~n";~\~~;'~:~ J;Jf~ .;~ ;;~":i~.. -~~~, '~~ ; : . ['.{ ~'i' ,r:~ C':c L,'f;1~ . ...., ". ~_ ;?>h '" '<,', , y !?:':f';?'::!lx>~'r( ;':'1 ! '\< . ~ i "It ~;'. J (L'; ." ',; ..')c", ',: e.i.:....r'l ','.1.,.' ;!_/. /, ',';, '" ; ';::~ \. Ii ~~y', J' ,iI '.' .' ''':~e~ ' .,' 'j't .... .... i '~, ,uo~') '" I,; -t:f>:,~/,(:!! {j//,:;q;~',; c' ,[,", ,<, ~i \ i':: I .: ~~~ .c:l"'r'/ .;<;" ',' , ,,::>.' ", · L, ~ it:;l; .;C~i~ 0:1 ' " '~,;" / :~,' ii;\'" ,t';i1 ,,':/'; r' '" ,p ~ " I', - ,... _ . ... .., Vi""'" :; ,'. ""', !, , ::'A:('t~t~ :=~s! t:t~4 ,(... ~ i~~~;'" r .' ~ "I ;~~~" ",,:oe," ' , '~f>~~lr;T&~,\,~/:'X~,<}. "0. ' }~JJ: '0 """ 1>;'i1J,A'}!/ '..',17,0 '',.;> {r~jF(" \ Y'.fl? '.,~:;c/j,,; [;,'<1';7':' "',~ 7,C( . ',~:':::;'r:;'7'~:",,(,..T:;). , "';:" >,j\f n "_"", L/ "\',?h, ~", ",~~X", '-'\ ';"'" (>;:'J "" i,;,jJ ~'-' " ,~ .,' ~,Ff:~\;:. , I ' ';- ,h, ,.,; , .. //, . h .. ,} r"",;, , 'if, Jl"::v::\~, L ';\ /<,. ,,'1,,1, ~i '''{',<:/ 1'0"f\"';[~,;p;) If:f':~:2}":'J.>'< , ": "-, J~!' ~~'}' 'J., i ',-_lJ~'./':~, > i'i51' /',~ ;-. &?~/ " >'"J,,"'n- " .i ,," ~~';;.t/<;~;~;;,;;-. ~ ~i,,;;,,~ ..('" "~~'Y-" "l ~".-:~_?:P'-'i1 ,\,j~-;. 'j, !,' <It.I;..)rj' , '~. -',- Jilt. J; "('.jl' "":"v)~ ~$ -, 1,., ,~:...~~:fJ',;s~,>;,!. ".' )', .ii" ",,) \.,1:,> ...,.; ,,~'~',/l .L SAUNA WAlfR STU DY \-- ....... '-- , ~ \- ..... '-- '-- mum,lm SAliNA. KANSAS V~'l ';, 0 N , ?')F...,f.:.;h~"J,...____~~'}'> &:',"."/ .'i""~'<: <\:;....,.[ ,." ~ (('~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ;, '... ~ ( c- ( o o o Q c ~ . It') oti It') l"- N I " ", " ""', IY \ \ ..., , " '\ ',\ \ \\ \ \~~ \\\ ....-\'\ ...J / \ ~ I \ 1\ z ~ \ ~ ~ \ ~) ~ j,Y a. \ (\\ Z \' ~ \ ~ \, ~ < \ ~ \ ~ \ \ < ,~ ) \ /' <\ ( '\< /~/ ~ 1~ < \ ~~ "---~ 1/ (l " " " , , " , ... @ g o oti o 1O N I "- , , , @ O' Ol I It') V Ii') N N \ \ \ \ \ \ w C) < a. ~ ::::> a. @ o Q) I o 8 o l"- I 1 I I I SNOS'tl3d - NOll.'v'..,ndOd @ d <0 @ d Ii') @ c5 v q '<t It') r<) o CJ'l Ii') N o N I 1 I 1 I I '''''v'9 NOIIII~ - 39'v'dV\lnd "''v'nNN'v' o o N I o 1O It') N o o It') I"- I I I I I I )"'v'O / 'd'v'J / '''''v'9 - 39'v'dV\lnd 39'v'C13^'v' 8 o o C"'l ~ V') I"- 8 o N o -: o 10 o o O. Q 10 o L/') N o o N V') o o N o 8 N ~ Ol o Ol Ol L/') <() Ol o co Ol V') I"- Ol C/) II: < w >- o I"- Ol 10 <0 Ol o 10 Ol V') V') Ol o V') Ol L/') v Q! o o o I :iiii5!!: ~ w .... <C .J 0.. ~ ~ ...... -- ~ c::.:: c:a... :iiii5!!: ~ ~ ...c:::c ....... == c:a... ~ c:a... ~ ~ ...c:::c ...... c.= ...c:::c c:a... == == c:a... c::.:: ...... ~ ...c:::c == I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The predicted average annual consumption figures used in this report were obtained in the manner heretofore indicated. These figures are based on normal rainfall and weather conditions and may vary somewhat if the annual period is cool and wet or hot and dry. Therefore, two other sets of predicted figures are taken into consideration; one, the pre- dicted probable minimum consumption and the other, the probable maximum consumption. The average, minimum, and maximum annual consumption curves are shown on Plate III and are tabulated in Table 4. Table 4 shows that a total water production capability of 25,000 acre- feet will be requried by the year 2010. This is the basic design figure used in this report as the firm water supply requirement of Salina. The total volume may be obtained from one source exclusively or from a combination of sources, but any single source, in order to be considered 100 percent reliable, must be capable of supplying the entire volume. The proportions of the total volume normally to be withdrawn from each source are discussed in later sections of this report. Table 4 PREDICTED WATER CONSUMPTION Average Maximum Average Mi ni mum Maximum Da i ly Day An n ua 1 Annual Annual Consump. Consump. Consump. Cons ump. Cons ump. Year Population ~ (mg) (mg) (a-f) (a-f) (a-f) 1967 38,024 129 4.905 10.579 5,494 1970 39,090 129 5,043 12.607 5,647 5,081 6 ,6 50 1975 44,230 133 5.883 14.707 6,586 5,927 8,100 1980 49,371 137 6,764 16.910 7,573 6,816 9,775 1985 55,580 141 7.837 19! 593 8,774 7,897 11 ,600 1990 61,805 145 8.962 22 . 405 10 ,034 9,031 13,750 1995 70,722 149 10.537 26.343 11,798 10,618 16,150 2000 79,630 153 12.183 30.458 13,641 12,277 18,800 2005 90,495 157 14.207 36.425 15,907 14,316 21,650 2010 100,000 161 16.100 40,250 18,000 16,200 25,000 Abbreviations: gpcd - gallons per capita per day. mg - mi 11 ion ga 11 ons a-f - acre feet 5 I 0 .....- - r- ::2!: - 0 N 1...&...1 W I :liE ~ <( 1...&...1 ...I ~ I:L. I ==>> LO f=t 0 0 1...&...1 N ~ I L.LJ (,!) ~ c:( L.LJ 1...&...1 V'l .....- :::::> -...J IIIIIl:C I c:( == 0 z: 0 z: 0 c:( N ----II IIIIIl:C I ==>> ~ ~ LO IIIIIl:C I '" '" r- I 0 '" I '" V'l r- ex: c:( L.LJ >- I ~ 0'\ c:( .- I L.LJ L.LJ 0.. -...J CO -...J c:(c:( CO :::::> oz: I ex: z: 0.. c:( 0 00 '" r- I I LO ...... '" r- I 0 ...... I 0'\ r- ...... I Y:> ~~ ~~ 0'\ r- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. .. .. I LO LO 0 N r- - ~V3A ~3d 133,j 3l:1:>V I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 2 SUPPL Y SOURCES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SURFACE WATER SUPPLY GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Reliability of Supply. An evaluation of the potential use that may be made of a natural water source must, to a large extent, be based on estimation and judgment. The only facts we have are in regard to experiences of the past, whereas the present consideration is with what will happen in the future. The basic data used to study a surface water supply is streamflow measure- ments. The stream gaging stations in the area have been in operation less than 60 years, and during the last 20 years the streamflows have been drastically affected by reservoir installations and by withdrawals for irrigation and other uses. There is only a meager knowledge of the quantities of water used by irrigators in the past, and estimates of future use are even more uncertain. These illustrations of the lack of basic data regarding our water resources are mentioned to emphasize that there must be an element of uncertainty in estimates of available future supply. Judgment is used to make estimates that are as realistic as possible, but safely conservative. For planning a water supply an estimate of the "firm supply" or the "firm yield" of the source is required. A "firm yield" is the "firm supply" amount that can be expected to be available for use during a severe drought. It is neither practical, nor theoretically possible to define or plan a supply with absolute surety. Often the approach used is to design for the worst drought period of record. The most severe and prolonged streamflow drought known to this region was during the period from 1952 through 1956. Statistical analyses have been used to measure the severity of this and other droughts, based on the entire streamflow record. On a probability basis, the 1952 to 1956 drought was equivalent to about a 2 percent chance occurrence for durations of 1 to 4 years; but, for periods shorter than a year, it was not as severe as a 2 percent chance drought. A 2 percent chance drought has been used as a measure of firm supply in these studies. This does not mean that water is not available 2 percent of the time. It does mean, that at any time" there is one chance in 50 that the entire amount desired may not be available and that a reduction of usage may be required for some period of time. The developed ground water supply available to Salina during the 1952 to 1956 drought did not meet the City's demands. Therefore, restric- tions were required to reduce usage. The criteria adopted for future supplies will assure that the City1s demands may be supplied without restrictions at any time during the planning period under similar drought conditions. Reservoir Storage. Reservoirs are constructed on streams to establish a degree of control over the wide fluctuations in natural streamflows by storing water during periods of excess flow for release during 6 low-flow periods. The effectiveness of reservoir control depends on the volume of storage provided and on the manner in which the storage is used, Conservation storage in a reservoir is used for water supply and low- flow augmentation, and may be released gradually over a period of several years. The conservation pool is kept full whenever possible, and is depleted only when demands and reservoir losses (evaporation and seepage) are greater than streamflows into the reservoir, Flood control storage capacity is kept empty as much as possible, so that it will be available for the floods that may occur at almost any time of the year. Stored floodwaters are released over a period of days, a few weeks, or months at controlled rates that are safe for downstream conditions, Transmission, The facilities required to transport water from the source of supply to the point of use are often the determining economic factors in the development of a potential supply source, In many cases there are several possible ways of conveying water from a source. The best method can only be found by an economic analysis and comparison of the costs of installation, operation, maintenance and replacement for each alternative method, If the source is located at a higher level than the point of use, and if the topography is favorable, gravity flow may be considered for the transmission; otherwise pumping will be required, Means of conveyance is provided by a natural stream channel, a man-made canal, a pipeline, or by combinations of these methods. Unavoidable loss of water enroute must be anticipated for each means of conveyance, although the loss from a properly constructed pipeline may be negligible, Open channel flows are susceptible to losses from evaporatation, seepage and transpiration by vegetation, In addition, flows in a natural stream channel are subject to diversion by other water users, Quality, Every available natural source of water is either polluted or contaminated to varying degrees and, therefore, any supply requires some type of treatment. There are considerable differences in the quality characteristics of the potential sources and, especially in the case of surface water, the quality of a particular source may fluctuate widely, The general processes of clarification, purification and softening are required for any of the surface water sources, but features of the treatment facilities and the quantities of chemicals required may be quite different, The differences in treatable quality characteristics are reflected in the operating costs associated with each source. How- ever, some dissolved minerals, such as chlorides, currently cannot be removed by any reasonably economical process, Objectionable quantities of such minerals may limit or, in extreme cases, even prohibit use of water from a particular source, 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Water Rights, The basic water law in Kansas2 is the appropriation doctrine which provides for the establishment and protection of rights to divert water for beneficial use, A water right is limited to specific rates of diversion at a specific location, and the priority of use for all rights from the same source is related to the time of establishment of each right. Compliance with the laws and regulations will not assure the water supply of the City but it is the only means, other than private con- tracts, of protecting investments in water supply facilities. It therefore behooves city officials to maintain familiarity with the laws, to maintain contacts with the administrative agencies concerned with water resources3, and to manage the water supply program in strict accord with these pertinent laws and regulations, Management of Supply. The management of a water supply in its broadest sense includes the exercise of every type of control available over any- thing that affects the value of the supply. The goals of supply manage- ment are to prevent or reduce any and all adverse influences on either water quantity or water quality and to use the supply in the manner most beneficial to the consumers. Sample functions of supply management are the operation of controlled storage reservoirs, the enforcement of water rights and pollution regulations, the selective use of sources, and the monitoring of the quantity and quality of supply sources. Proper manage- ment is difficult unless adequate tools and factual data are available to guide decisions. Wise and effective management of water supply sources is becoming more and more important as the many demands on regional water resources grow, Regional Surface Water Resources, Salina has the good fortune to be located less than 12 miles from three major rivers: the Solomon, Saline and Smoky Hill. See Plate IV. The yearly average total streamflow of these three rivers would provide sufficient water to furnish a municipal supply for 3 to 4 million people" However, the natural flows of these rivers are extremely variable and uncertain. Their combined flow has at times dwindled to a rate that could be entirely consumed by the municipal demand of a city of 15,000 people. The Smoky Hill River, at Salina, has an aver- age yearly flow that could sustain a city of nearly a million people, but the withdrawal of the water required for 3,000 people would have emptied the river on July 10, 1963, The demand for water is almost always at its greatest when the supply is the least. The reason is simply that the same drought conditions that cause reduced streamflows also cause an increased need for water; e,g., to 2Kansas Water Appropriation Act of 1945, as amended in 1957 and 1965. Sections 82a-701 through 82a-725 of Kansas Statutes Annotated. 3Kansas Water Law, prepared by Earl B. Shurtz, Professor of Law, Univer- sity of Kansas, for the Kansas Water Resources Board, 1967. 8 irrigate lawns, to bathe and for cooling. It is therefore obvious that the value of a water supply source depends directly on the amount of water that the source will yield during extreme drought conditions. On this basis, the unregulated streamflows of the rivers in this area have very little value as sole sources of water supply. Storage reservoirs to control the natural streamflows are, of course, the key to utilizing the tremendous potential water resources of these rivers. See Plate IV. Some of the larger reservoirs in this area can reliably furnish 20 to 50 percent of the average flow of the source stream, The same streams without reservoir control would sometimes drop to flows less than one percent of average. SMOKY HILL RIVER Natural Characteristics. The Smoky Hill River forms in eastern Colorado about 270 miles west of Salina and flows generally eastward to Lindsborg, then north to Salina where it turns and flows northeasterly to Junction City. At Junction City the Smoky Hill and Republican Rivers join to form the Kansas River. Two major tributaries, the Saline and Solomon Rivers, enter the Smoky Hill just downstream from Salina. Nearly one-fourth of the area of the State of Kansas drains into the Smoky Hill River, At Salina the drainage area of the Smoky Hill is 8,230 square miles. The streamflow of the Smoky Hill River is generally of good quality west of Russell County. In eastern Ellis County and throughout Russell and parts of Ellsworth Counties the river cuts through the Dakota Formation, which introduces large quantities of dissolved minerals into the stream- flow. During low flow conditions the river water often becomes so salty that it is not fit for ordinary use. One of the most significant contami- nants is the chloride ion because it can only be removed by desalination processes that are, at the present time, exorbitantly costly. As a result of this chemical contamination, there has been little direct use of the river water in the affected reaches. Through McPherson and Saline Counties, low flows are sustained by seepage from alluvial aquifers in the river valleyo This natural drainage of the ground water helps to dilute the upstream flow and to reduce the salt concentration, as well as to augment the quantity of dry weather flows. It is noteworthy, however, that even with this natural improvement of low flows, there was very little direct use of the river water prior to the construction of Kanopolis Reservoir, With the present operation of Kanopolis, the concentration of chlorides in water released from the reservoir varies considerably, but is most often in the range of 150-250 mg/l (milligrams per liter). The additional runoff and base flow between Kanopolis and Salina reduces the most frequent range of chloride concentrations to 100-200 mg/l 0 Reservoir Control. Streamflow of the Smoky Hill at Salina is partially regulated by Kanopolis Reservoir in Ellsworth County and, to a lesser degree, by Cedar Bluff Reservoir in Trego County, Kanopolis Reservoir 9 L "- L L.. L. ~ L "'-- L.. L '-- ~ ....... ~ CII:::: == c:::>> ~ =- ---- ca.. ca.. == ~ ....... ~ ....c::r: ~ CII:::: == ~ ~ >' ",~' ~ ',:~,:j%fP ,i; ,; ~S': ,,:~:{..~~,>I "1~i~~ (oj e:)T ~:: ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~~l.'b. t;~;j +\~'e~**~~)T~~ ;\~ ~': ~ ~ E.: ~ ~ pi: !;( "- - ~ J. 1$) ~j 'ie" '$4' '<:~~~?f'~d~:",: : t ~t: ", ... .... I.V '1,~,.,'"',,.~,I, g j E~~~.;IL~{~': c~ ,. ',: Ii .,;; i,,;'gk?r ~1)l,' ';:~;i~~ / t<v"~::f~..: g 6:~j;;,~;::~j .~Y~\L, h lr;,;:~:"f,~jk _.~...m ",,~, I;::~'~?:J~ \'! '": :::,l < '1.1 ;;." "';' ~;,;'7'~~1 "._'1 r.t:~':~~(~)' f'c_., i" ; ""';'i:j.~ ".."...'.'.":. .' ::;;; 'i, 0/ .~, II) Y""'. .;;Ii \ l """. "":"~ ..i;::: ~Q:l.,!>,,!I.l.]-..~\tv :" I'\:~ ,;',"'",' l (,<,".~' ~:." :;:./ [; >\'.. I~' ~ .~~ .",';-1", rn, ~v~ . 1\' I'" .....1 , ,: ~t "'", I":. .... i\,',! ~T~~~f:',~K'~ ... ~:..@ ~;,,~'. ''',I ,,:-?~ J ~/' "~</<':'1'/~ ' , $, :,...J1~i)~' ~ "m. .';~~~< .,m, !'! ~\ ..~., <f b;~':~ ,'ii". .:i~~,;LJ~L+t,~~. '~1f'j 1, J ~~~ ." !', !,~~L;:--1! t jJI~~<~'~~; G ~ '" ,,' ~.~;; i~+.. .. T' ( I,!;, <, u~,;;:. ~~;If~' ~.;,t~ I~ I ~ -':'l ~ J:~C;;is~":'f',:-,,,,""';~1~~ \/'~ :"J ~. '):1;, !~;.; (( 'L~c~~i;c. /~~~~' =~...' I~~. i . i:ff.;' .Ai i. ~~;!,!,! . .. ife ......cV', ~:4i ~- .' i"'P.>i) <'''~ "I'" /. ;j~}; ~ I jlD' " 'j/ c;./> ~ ;'-"! },'! '\.". ~ .:';"':i~' k ~t' ,j:<' ~~:,F " ,M;,;....';e, "."'.: , "t '-,,,....cc':.. 'Z ~ ....._.:~.,\r; > ,<,' '>t<' , :::J"i:t;: y""', C-"" I,Ji, ": _ \ I. . 'i,y'" ""'.. .. ..~ <;,,;:;, (I ..-,-. ?,,\. ..',..' \ '.'.~ ;,;,;,,!~;.. I ".<" X ~.' y,.,~,:,;'..:.;~;.". ,:'>~. :,;.:c::\!;.):t"\. h ''''., y~ 1.'" ..... ~ i'.)~::;~;~_::r""'~:;' ri~ ~, ~::. I' ,Ii~,~ ;~",i~~"'4""' ,,'~: i :;.'i I' (' '~ ~~- ~"I~~::;;2'::' ,-, ,s:',>' t?'~~"':~ ~ '0,. _if.. : . ' "\ I ~\J~"l ai '\'.... '. . ! ,,- "t. ~.:- ~~: , '..(":ii-'<..", '," r I;..\,:':~ :" I ), :t~1 ~,,',';:"" f i .,~, .ILf" .'. 'p/!}'J<~_Ic', ,+ . 7. \. ~ :~r~'.';F~. r~,~..d-.<..)! :~,~..p.,~i.\,~ ~.~ ::J.~.;.'~(""":'~<.'f..1. '::'::l;~,<_."..,..-g...,,~.... iF:~ , L .~j ,>' '0 ,.'J">~ "~"';"'<'" M; ;: "",oj. ..~,.:..I;\~<. \i\i~';,."::\>.".. (' ~..~ ~ I, '" i <~ . / [: J,;,"!?;<-' 1..1<: r..',,~.r.t.J;..' ,-J~\ ... \';:: u~' r k" '" . "",,'9 1,,<., , - ,"C: C' I,:,;,,, .'. ,;,,-(1), -. . fr:~/r.-".".\T"";:' ~f" :~ U .. l,,:/& \~t \..I'))';;;!;'!/,l"" + . ,i~,rQ..__ I ,,,,,,,t/E !, "~r2!i n ~"'< .' ,',\ ~~ ~~v "':,.. c;",,=>,:..!.ti., '. ;"tt"", ". "'.'.:'" c. ~-~' ~~h.".'.':.: ")~ty" ,,~. a:~..:J>.~\..I};:;, i~ .,,< :)' ., 'i~.... ":-~7,:r ~, ,:s,' :!t- """"',.,. L .~<,'l;"~' 1 .1$,. , ",I:, -""",,;; b:~~":::~:~,~~:,,~'r!{?;;~ . !.: F' ~,t;;:~' "L,"/.:: '''7k'~ .'," ":l..~;~~~~+-I -{4g1f H\~f2~ i" "'[i!i;1" +':";', ' :>~" .... ;~~' .-!_~V:N :';~~ r ~..I ~= ;~.i.~:."i:~ OM ~;~~:~,':',t :;:I:',"~\ l~:~;:: ';~,;~' -~.,.,.'.T~.'.'~ ~ r. o~i/'i;;: +:.';:'.'} '.;" o,~:',: ,?i 4..~\ "" ,:Y.; n'\ ~F: J ': :"'~'4' ( 'Q,.:3" . .\,~.' l7("r- ; ,,; ; ~'~f o:!~ /I#jl ;t~~l ~~.. ,;; -~ J~'~~o; ~.ft", ,~~:'.:,~' ,,~, ~ ;~, (:;~:~"o~ ! "~ ';~r~~; .. ""; ." / :".\/!~;;~:;.;~ :f;;-;;~. =z~ ~~... ~, ,Ji1i~'i\ !"'o ",_;,".; ~\ ^' ",F!~'K~J~~:}~~ 'I:.," ,l ~ i ",.,..-_,: ~__(ij \ ~ '~, -'''~r:~-':;~ trf~~",~~':~,;; "..,.,-..t'C.: rr"I:f,~ ' l_ii27""f~\+-;.-<" r ~.' ;s;: ~ :;or~ ~i~,~' ~;'i~ \{,c/' : .'p";C '.,'AfC:'~ ;'),,' . "", _'. .{d ._...c~'Q/ -.J1 '~,I J'T"~ .-...".j ;Kt, ~ . -"" to';" :.:::'71' ' ;;~.}";;;.'*' /~'~( " . ,;' ,", I / -- ~lh,O '<;f' "/ ',1' f ~) rf~<~/ r~\- """"" . ..:.' ~,,,q~ :,;<Y';'S~ LS';;""/ .f'! I;t;: :~,.::'. (" I"C~;?~ ...~.~~ J) ,~ h, I,A' \' I _ './.{. .~ >\..., W "< \, _ ::.:L- _I "\l:;'jf)".::Z" )""" r ~l.~ /-I~ I I~a"" \ " ,: ,,\;\;. U-i '.' I.;;"':":>:'<s'i' "''''''..f. .i.. 1'9 ~"'~.'~~~~( .~>,., 0 , ~" " :":,::~J};.5i{'i,' l/ /~~ ~:!';;L)I ,L " l(!}~"":;t~i ~e>.,,~~r ~,'~:'~ " ~ ~ h "~:,'J,~,., <:",.....':J/" 3" ~~'c+ "".\ I~ .'<3:)'~')X"\,ftr I ~ I li. , '''"., I ~. :i...:~s:. ~/_ j! ' i ,#_", . ~' ~tJ I~(~ ~Y"' Y.IT ,."~":" \~"(:=>\[;"i:\'~' 'f" :\l., .<......'.. ,,:' ."~' ..,.....~" "J;,-'" ~~;2 "'~~.;;J "'<""'" ;.1.. ',.:"'. .....,r,:.:.. i.: 'f:-,:'~~.r':.,.i '-.~. .' .- \' E IJ ~'! ";~~;o}~; :~' f:- ;: '~, ~ ",'> I ~ _. j _ , ('(' "~';El'f '! II 'y l'" O~' ,. l "'" '><:'~',:;. s '.~ '~'. " ... """'" ~! I; ,lro.. i, /fA ,0: .~. ~~ y '''':1;-'v~~ ~ ,i~;:;., ~;,f "m:;~~..l""g rr~..~;~ ~~--.-~""L~ h - <.J'{ h. \1:, 'L r,') ...:t.'M.-x;:..<r 4''''",~i~;i<r "\ "..,.. /1~, In., tt~...: * I~:' \f' 'lI ~ \.A'i r\ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I is now operated almost entirely for flood control purposes. The present conservation pool of about 48,000 acre-feet is allocated as a sediment reserve. If the planned Kanopolis Irrigation District becomes a reality, the conservation pool will be raised about 29 feet to provide storage allocated for irrigation use and a supplemental supply for municipal and industrial uses. This will reduce the present flood control storage in Kanopolis Reservoir by about 40 percent, Flood control storage in Cedar Bluff Reservoir will partly compensate for the reduced flood control capacity in Kanopolis. Under the Kanopolis Irrigation District Plan, Cedar Bluff Reservoir was planned to irrigate 6,600 acres, furnish 2,000 acre-feet per year to the City of Russell and 4,000 acre-feet per year to a fish hatchery from about 150,000 acre-feet of conservation storage. Under the plan, Kanopolis Reservoir would irrigate 16,500 acres and furnish 12,600 acre-feet per year to the City of Salina from 162,500 acre-feet of conservation storage. Cedar Bluff Reservoir has a relatively minor influence on streamflow of the Smoky Hill at Salina. The operation of Kanopolis Reservoir, however, can have a tremendous influence on the Smoky Hill at Salina, The planned operation of Kanopolis could increase the minimum flow during a drought, which has a 2 percent chance of occurrence, from near zero flow to a rate of approximately 100 cubic feet per second. From the standpoint of a municipal supply, this increases the supply value of the river from only a supplemental supply to a total firm supply for a population of nearly 300,000 people, There are, of course, many other competing users of water along the 80 miles of river channel between Kanopolis Reservoir and Salina, mostly irrigation. Kanopolis Reservoir has a very important effect on the quality of the Smoky Hill supply as well as on its quantity. To some extent the salty, low-flow waters are mixed with and diluted by high-flow and flood-flow waters. Mixing within the reservoir is imperfect because of the tendency of the stored water to become stratified due to differences in density, The reservoir will, however, definitely improve the chemical quality of the river during low-flow periods. Less certain is the effect that more irrigation between Kanopolis and Salina may have on the chemical quality of the river, Initially the operation of the irrigation district will upset the natural distribution of streamflows and their transport of dissolved solids, In the early years of operation, some of the minerals in diverted water will be trapped in the soil to which it is applied. At the same time, some of the minerals in the soil structure of the irrigated lands will be leached out by percolating water, and will eventually appear in the streamflow below the irrigated land, Over a long period of time the flows of water and minerals will tend to restabilize in a changed but balanced flow pattern, All users of the stream must accept their mutual responsibilities for preserving the quality of water in the river. The operation of Kanopolis and the irrigation practices used by irrigators below the reservoir should be carefully managed to prevent any serious deterioration in the quality of Smoky Hill River water, Supply and Demand, Since the completion of Kanopolis Dam in 1948, the Smoky Hill River downstream to Salina has been potentially a controlled and reliable source of water. Four years after completion 10 of the dam, the most severe prolonged drought in our history began. Kanopolis Reservoir was not used to any large extent for supplementing streamflow during the drought, but the drought caused a greatly increased awareness of the value of crop irrigation, and demonstrated vividly the need for supplementing Salinals municipal supply. During and subsequent to the drought, farmers along the river from Kanopolis to Salina filed for surface water appropriation rights that now total 14,500 acre-feet per year. In 1955, Salina applied for a right to divert 8,000 acre-feet per year from the Smoky Hill, and later installed treatment and intake facilities for its use. The present conservation storage in Kanopolis could, if operated for that purpose, furnish with a high degree of assurance much more than the present appropriations by downstream users. There are, however, no formal agreements with the federal government at this time for use of the reservoir to augment downstream water supplies. If the conservation storage in Kanopolis is increased as planned to 162,500 acre-feet, about 76,000 acre-feet per year could be furnished with a 2 percent chance of deficiency, The Kanopolis Irrigation District has applied for an appropriation of 55,000 acre-feet per year, the Districtls estimated maximum demand. When the irrigation district becomes operable, most of the present 10,000 acre-feet per year of surface water rights between Kanopolis and Assaria would probably be abandoned. There are presently about 4,300 acre-feet per year of surface water rights used to irrigate about 3,000 acres between Salina and Assaria. Irrigation from the river will probably not increase much along this reach of the river. Allowing for some 3 to 4 thousand acres privately irrigated from the river between Assaria and Kanopolis, required releases for private water rights below Kanopolis might total 10,000 acre-feet per year. Deducting both private and district irrigation requirements leaves about 11,000 acre-feet per year of firm yield from the reservoir available for other use. At Salina, additional streamflow in the Smoky Hill will be available from surface runoff, ground water seepage and return flow from irrigation operations. Assuming that the efficient capability to divert water from the Smoky Hill can be developed, the question of available streamflow quantities that may be reliably expected can then be considered. Some of the factors that affect the river1s streamflow are subject to city control, others are not, Therefore any evaluation of the surface water supply must be qualified as to specific conditions of reservoir operation and of competing demands on the same supply. The following tabulation indicates the minimum amount of surface water that might be available for use by the City during a severe drought, All of the yield estimates are based on diversions between Kanopolis and Salina to irrigate 23,500 acres of cropland, which is the anticipated maximum development of irrigation. This assumed acreage represents an increase of about 10,800 acres above the present total. 11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I I I I SMOKY HILL SURFACE WATER ESTIMATE OF FUTURE FIRM YIELD AT SALINA Release from Kanopolis for Municipal Supply Conveyance from Kanopolis To Salina Minimum Annual Yield* With Kanopolis Without Kanopolis Irrigation Irrigation District District None Rive r 15,000 a-fly 10,000 a-fly 10 ,000 a-flY River 20,000 a-fly 15,000 a-fly 10,000 a-fly Irrigation Canal 23,000 a-fly 10,000 a-fly Pipeline 25,000 a-fly 20,000 a-fly 20,000 a-fly River 25,000 a-fly 20,000 a-fly 20,000 a-fly Irrigation Can a 1 30,000 a-fly 20,000 a-fly Pipeline 35,000 a-fly 30,000 a-fly * Amount in a-fly (acre-feet per year) delivered to treatment plant. The table indicates that about 5,000 acre-feet per year of additional water would be available at Salina during a drought as a result of operation of the Kanopolis Irrigation District. The additional water would come from greater return flows from irrigation and from a decrease in the competition for natural dry-weather streamflow. The means of conveyance influences both the total amount delivered and the time distribution during the year of the deliveries. Only about 50 percent of the water released to the river can be expected to reach Salina; and this condition requires that most of the releases be made in the off-irrigation season. Reservoir releases conveyed by river would not be effective during several months of the year, but would enhance the supplemental supply value of the river. Conveyance via irrigation canal could be used only during the irrigation season, and a suitable plan for joint use would probably require that peak municipal demands be supplied from another source. Releases could still be made to the river during the off-irrigation season. Two principal advantages of conveyance by pipeline are that the entire amount can be delivered and that the supply rate can be varied to match demand. The availability of a pipeline may be vital if only one source of water is available or if the water demand at the source represents a large portion of the total available supply. A pipeline also protects against possible contamination of the water while enroute. Saline River. The Saline River, as shown on Plate IV, heads in western Kansas near the Sherman-Thomas County line and flows eastward to its junction with the Smoky Hill River a few miles northeast of Salina. The Saline River drains an area of nearly 3,300 square miles and its average flow at Tescott is about 169,000 acre-feet per year. Wilson Reservoir on the Saline near the east border of Russell County, was completed in December 1964. See Plate IV. Storage in the reservoir is planned for 225,000 acre-feet of conservation 12 and 510,000 acre-feet of flood control from 1,917 square miles. The conservation storage has not yet been allocated for any specific use. The Kansas Water Resources Board has estimated that the conservation pool could sustain 54,0~0 acre-feet per year of yield during a 2 percent chance drought. The major impediment to consumptive use of the Saline River is the chemical quality of its streamflow because, in its middle and lower reaches, the river carries highly mineralized water most of the time. One of the most serious chemical contaminants, the chloride ion, is derived primarily from the ground water discharge of the Dakota Formation. More than 100 miles of the Saline River, from eastern Ellis County to Tescott, is bedded in the Dakota Formation. Intensive studies are currently being made of the chemical quality of water impounded in Wilson Reservior as a joint effort of several federal agencies, Pending the results of these studies, tentative conclusions can be drawn on the basis of data and studies published by the U.S. Geological Survey and the Kansas Water Resources Board.* The Water Resources Board has estimated that the Saline River at Tescott carries an average of 150 tons per day of chlorides, During average river flows, this quantity represents a concentration of about 240 ppm (parts per million) or slightly less than the 250 ppm limit recommended in Drinking Water Standards. However, the chloride concentration varies radically; some samples at Tescott have tested more than 1,500 ppm of chlorides. Tests made by the Geological Survey, during the period 1949-1953, indicate that the chloride concentration exceeded 250 ppm more than 80 percent of the time, and that it was greater than 500 ppm during 65 percent of the time. The mineralization of the water is greatest during low-flow periods, when more than half of the streamflow may consist of ground water that has drained into the river. The concentrations of chemicals other than chlorides also frequently exceed desirable limits for drinking water. It is conceivable that the conservation storage in Wilson Reservoir might be used in a manner that would improve the quality of low- flows at Salina, but it is very doubtful that the degree of dilution necessary for municipal use could be achieved during prolonged dry periods, At this time it does not appear likely that the water 4State Water Plan Studies, Part A, Section 8- Solomon-Saline Unit, Kansas Water Resources Board, June 1961. *Chemical Qualit of Surface Waters and Sedimentation in the Saline Rlver Basln, Kansas, Geo oglca Survey Water-Supp y Paper 1651, 1963. Water Resources Data for Kansas, Part 2, Water Quality Records, Geological Survey, annual series. State Water Plan Studies, Part A, Sec. 8, Ibid. A Study of Water Quality Control Needs, Kansas Water Resources Board, September 1967. 13 I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I impounded in the reservoir could be kept below the desired salt- concentration limits during a drought. Finally, the more than 50 miles of pipeline required for direct use of water from the reservoir would result in a transmission cost much greater than the costs of other sources available to the City of Salina. Solomon River. The two forks of the Solomon River form near the Sherman-Thomas County line, then flow generally eastward to their junction in western Mitchell County, The river then flows east and south to its confluence with the Smoky Hill about 12 miles northeast of Salina. The Solomonls total drainage area is 6,835 square miles. With the recent completion of Glen Elder Reservoir in Mitchell County, more than 5,000 square miles of the Solomon basin is controlled by federal reservoirs. Kirwin Reservoir on the North Fork and Webster Reservoir on the South Fork have been in operation since 1955 and 1956 respectively. All three reservoirs are planned primarily for irrigation use and flood control. From Salinals viewpoint, any utilization of the Solomon River for municipal supply is highly unlikely, The development of any firm yield supply would require the use of storage in Glen Elder Reservoir. Conveyance of water to Salina would necessitate either 60 miles of pipeline or the uncertainties of flow transmission through 150 miles of river channel, The only other possible use of the Solomon River would be as a supplemental supply, diverted near Solomon and pumped 12 miles to Salina. The Solomon as a supplemental supply has no advantage over the supplemental supply value of the Smoky Hill at Salina. Republican River. Salinals interest in the Republican River is directed toward Milford Reservoir, which is just a few miles upstream from the river1s mouth and immediately northwest of Junction City. See Plate IV. Despite its remoteness from Salina (40 miles straight- line distance), Milford Reservoir is attractive as a possibility because it constitutes a much larger and much better quality supply than any other source available to Salina, The Republican River drains nearly 25,000 square miles of area in Kansas, Nebraska, and Colorado, Streamflow of the river at Milford has in the past averaged 1,235 cubic feet per second (8~4,000 acre- feet per year). The Bureau of Reclamation has estimated that, if all the water resource developments that have been visualized for the Republican Basin are accomplished, the average flow of the river at Milford might be reduced to about 780 cubic feet per second (565,000 acre-feet per year). Even so, the Kansas Water Resources Board estimates that the Reservoir could sustain 150 to 200 cubic feet per second of yield during a 2 percent chance drought. Milford Reservoir is planned for 300,000 acre-feet of conservation storage and 700,000 acre-feet of flood-control storage. The conservation storage was included in the project at the request of the State of 5State Water Plan Studies, Part A, Section 9, Lower Republican Unit, Kansas Water Resources Board, June 1961. 14 Kansas for future water supply purposes The State provided assurance that repayment of additional costs for the conservation storage would be made to the federal government The conservation storage has not yet been allocated to specific uses Water from the Republican River at Milford is of much better chemical quality than water from the Smoky Hill or its major tributaries, In the Republican, concentrations of chlorides, sulfates and other problem chemicals are consistently within the desired limits for drinking water, The Republican River water would require the same softening and treatment processes used by Salina for Smoky Hill water, but the quantities of chemicals required for softening would be much less for the softer water of the Republican Gypsum Creek, The possibility of a dam and reservoir on Gypsum Creek, about 3 miles south of the town of Gypsum, was considered. The reservoir would receive an estimated average of 15,000 acre- feet per year of runoff from its 130 square mile drainage area, The maximum practical conservation storage would apparently be about 90,000 acre-feet, which should produce approximately 8,000 acre- feet per year of firm yield This amount of conservation storage represents a high degree of development for the site, Detailed studies of the economics of the site might indicate a different degree of development, The proximity of the reservoir site to Gypsum suggests that the inclusion of flood control as a joint purpose of the project should be considered The multiple-purpose development of the site might result in a more economical fulfillment of both purposesc In any case, the unit cost for developing a yield of this magnitude from Gypsum Creek would be quite high compared to other sources. Other Surface Water Sources. Consideration was given to other possible reservoir sites on streams within a 20-mile radius of Salina, Any site further removed than 20 miles would almost certainly be less attractive than the existing federal reservoirs, Other than the major rivers and Gypsum Creek, the only streams large enough to warrant consideration are Mulberry, Spring, Dry and Holland Creeks. There are no practical reservoir sites on any of these streams except in their headwater reaches and, at those locations, the potential yields are too small to be of interest to Salinao Chapman Creek may offer the potential for a reservoir that could provide more than 15,000 acre-feet per year of firm yield, but it is only about 5 miles closer to Salina than Milford Reservoir, 15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I I GROUND WATER SUPPLY GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Firm Yield. The term "firm yield" is often used to indicate the maximum safe rate at which ground water can be withdrawn continuously over a long period of time. It is commonly defined as the rate of recharge less the rate of uncontrolled discharge from the ground water basin. Actually, no single rate can adequately define a limit on withdrawal unless it is related to a specific period of time, Water stored in the aquifer can be withdrawn to increase the yield rate for some period of time depending on the withdrawal rate and on the volume of stored water. Also, in the case of river valley alluvial aquifers, the recharge and discharge rates may change drastically in response to withdrawals and lowering of the water table. Proper evaluation of a ground water supply should include consideration of three important characteristics which determine the potential utility of a source. They are (1) the well production, or the pumping rates that can be achieved by individual wells; (2) the usable aquifer storage, which is the volume of water that can be readily extracted by drawdown of the water table; and (3) recharge to the basin, which is the net inflow to the aquifer from percolation of rainfall and snowmelt, seepage from streams or reservoirs and the migration of adjacent ground water into the well field. Production of Wells. The production rate of individual wells in an aquifer is more an economic factor than it is a measure of the supply available. Obviously, higher production wells permit the development of a given demand rate with fewer wells, and therefore a smaller initial investment. Within practical limits, the total production rate that might be achieved from a well field can vary widely depending on the number of wells, the type of wells installed and their locations relative to each other. The following description of an aquifer1s response to withdrawal by wells is typical of the alluvial aquifers in our river valleys. When a well begins pumping, the water level in the well drops rapidly at first, as water immediately adjacent to the well flows in. With continued pumping a depression of the water table expands outward, form- ing a cone forms, water is supplied to the well by downward perco- lation of water that had been stored in the cone and by radial flow in toward the well that is induced by the sloped water table. Drawdown in the well and enlargement of the depression in the water table continue at a diminishing rate until the cone is dewatered and the lateral flow is nearly in balance with the pumping rate. Continued pumping will then cause only a very gradual drawdown. If pumping is then stopped, water will continue to flow toward the well until the dewatered cone is refilled. Therestored water table may be only slightly below the original level unless pumping has continued for a long time and a very large volume of water has been extracted. If pumping is continued over a very long period of time, and at a 16 rate that exceeds the recharge of water to the area influenced by the well, the water table may be lowered so much that the flow of water into the well can no longer support the pumping rate. Even then the aquiferis supply is not really exhausted, because pumping can continue at a reduced rate or the well can be operated intermittently at an average rate compatible with the flow of water to the well. Considerations of such aquifer functions suggest that well production rates are not a direct measure of the long-term supply value of a ground water source Valuable information can, however, be obtained from test pumping of wellso Careful measurements of the response of the water table during controlled pumping tests can provide data for determining highly important characteristics of the acquifer. These characteristics can then be used to guide studies of the supply potential of the ground water source" Aquifer Storage, The quantity of water stored in an aquifer determines the amount that can be withdrawn in excess of recharge in a given time period, The freedom with which water can move through the aquifer, measured as permeability, is a limitation on the rate of withdrawal. Both characteristics are dependent on the structure of the soil or rock that forms the aquifer, In general, soil or rock structures, with large pore spaces that are freely interconnected, make the best aquifers. The alluvial deposits in local stream valleys vary from coarse gravels that are excellent aquifers to fat clays that are practically impermeable. The entire amount of water stored in an aquifer cannot be drained by lowering the water table because some water adheres tightly to the soil particles or is held by capillary action in small pore spaces in the aquifer, Furthermore, the downward drainage of stored water may be rather slow in alluvial aquifers because of horizontal stratification, with alternating layers of good and poor permeability characteristics, Pumping tests of only a few days duration sometimes result in an under-estimation of the usable stored water because the vertical drainage from the dewatered portion of the aquifer may continue over weeks or months, Most of the alluvial aquifers in local river valleys will eventually yield a quantity of water equivalent to about 15 to 30 percent of the total dewatered volume. Most consolidated rock aquifers in this area will yield a smaller percentage of their volume. Recharge, The recharge of water to a ground water basin is one of the most important elements of the basin1s value as a supply, and unfortunately it is the most difficult element to define accurately. There is no direct method of measuring the different components of recharge. Indirect methods must be applied in the formulation of recharge estimates. The general approach is to account for as many elements in the hydrologic balance of the ground water basin as can be determined by measurements and tests, and then to estimate recharge components on the basis of remaining quantities and effects, In the case of river valley aquifers, observations of the aquifers in their natural state are of limited value because recharge characteristics 17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I may be entirely different after the natural water table is lowered by withdrawals from wells. Under typically natural conditions, the water table in the adjacent alluvium follows the water level in the river quite closely. Ground water discharges into the river, and is replenished by percolation of rainfall and, to a lesser degree, by seepage from the river during high-flow stages. If a well field is developed, and it lowers the average water table below the river bed, the natural discharge of water to the river will cease and a continual seepage from the river into the aquifer will be established. The net effect is recharge of the aquifer at a much higher rate than occurred under natural conditions, Quality. The most common differences in quality between surface water and ground water are (1) ground water is usually clear and does not require clarification for turbidity reduction or removal of suspended matter; (2) ground water quality is not subject to the drastic variations typical of surface waters; (3) ground water may be, but is not always, harder than the directly related surface water sources. An important quality characteristic of ground water is its relatively uniform temperature, Judicious blending of ground water with surface water can reduce the wide fluctuations in temperatures of surface waters to a more acceptable range for the finished mixture. Salina makes use of this practice to control thS changes in temperature of Smoky Hill River water, which varies from 32 F to 800 F. Water Rights. The application of the common law regarding ground water in Kansas was, in many respects, rather confusing and inconsistent prior to 1945. Many court cases were decided on the basis of riparian rights; that is, the ground water was considered a part of the ownership of the overlying land. The Kansas Water Appropriation Act of 1945 applies the same basic appropriation doctrine, with little distinction, equally to surface water and to ground water. No attempt is intended to present a complete critique of the water appropriation statutes, but certain points regarding ground water characteristics and water rights might contribute to an understanding of related control and management problems. First, the statutes take no explicit notice of the interchange that sometimes exists between surface water and ground water sources, and, therefore, the responsibilities of users are not clear. Secondly, the statutes recognize the function of surface water storage reservoirs, but do not account directly for the fact that ground water sources may display the combined characteristics of both stored and flowing water. Therefore, developments that exploit the natural storage function of an aquifer may be subject to uncertainties as to the extent of protection provided by the statutes. This lack of definitiveness in the laws has been a contributing factor toward the common practice of using private contracts between water users and landowners to define their mutual responsibilities. Private contracts are also used to establish any compensation that may be appropriate to the terms of the agreement. 18 Management of Supply, The management of a ground water supply must include the establishment of controls over the ground water source to the extent that such controls can be perfected, The purpose of the controls, which may be a combination of water rights and private agreements, is to obtain a prearranged plan for use of the source under different circumstances; which plan is assented to by all potential users of the source, The degree of control required depends on the ability of the source to supply the demands of all users. Development of such a plan permits all parties involved to plan with confidence for the future development and use of the source. A further requirement for sound management of a ground water supply is a system of measuring devices to furnish accurate information on the performance and condition of the supply at any given time. A surface supply can be monitored satisfactorily with one or two streamflow gages and a gage to indicate reservoir stage, A ground water supply, however, requires a system of gages throughout the aquifer to measure the water in storage. In addition, the production of all wells should be continuously measured and recorded. The data from these measurements can be interpreted into the current status of the supply if accurate knowledge of the aquifer's characteristics is available, The necessary basic knowledge of the aquifer can be obtained from detailed geologic investigations and special tests prior to development of the supply, Studies of the aquifer should include operational analyses that would indicate the likely consequences of actions that might be taken to control use of the ground water source. Such studies can lead to a system of guidelines for operation of the ground water supply in a manner most likely to achieve the goals for which it is intended in the total supply programs of the users. Smoky Hill Valley. Salina's entire water supply was taken from the Smoky Hill IS alluvial aquifer for nearly 75 years, In October of 1956, after three consecutive summers of water supply shortages, Salina began using surface water from the Smoky Hill for the major portion of its supply, During the 1952-1956 drought the City's supply was furnished from 13 wells concentrated in an area of less than one square mile in and around Kenwood and Oakdale Parks, See Plate V. The maximum consumption was 6,370 acre-feet in 1954, and the City's usage averaged 5,940 acre-feet per year during the five year drought, Late in 1956 an intensive exploration was begun to define the ground water supply6 within and adjacent to Salina, The exploration centered on the City's well field but extended over the Smoky Hill Valley from two miles north and east to about four miles south of the wells. It was found that the water table throughout most of the area studied had been affected by the heavy withdrawals made by the City during the drought, The drawdown of the water table was especially pronounced over an area of about seven square miles. 6Water Supply Explorations, City of Salina, May 1957, by Wilson & Company, Engineers & Architects (156-107A). 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I ") I' I I I W~ll FI~lD D~V~lOPMEN~ PlA , FUTuRE WATE,R; TREATMENT PLANT SITE ~ , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The main deficiency in the ground water supply during the drought was the inability to produce water at the high demand rates that occurred during the heat of summer. It is quite likely that higher production rates could have been sustained if the Cityls wells had been dispersed over a larger area. However, future use of the local wells should be managed carefully to prevent the possible movement of highly mineralized water into the well field, After the drought the water table recovered, and has remained at a fairly high level. Ground water withdrawals since the drought have been generally less than half of the pumpage rates required during the drought. In 1957 the well field was extended to the north with the installation of Wells 15 and 16, Ground water in the Smoky Hill Valley alluvium has been studied at various times through the years by state and federal agencies and by private investigators. Two State Geological Survey reports published in 1949* resulted from studies of the Smoky Hill Valley ground water from just below Kanopolis Dam to Junction City. Studies for the proposed Kanopolis Irrigation District were conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation during the 19501s. The Bureauls studies were of the Smoky Hill Valley from Kanopolis Dam to Salina, and were documented in their Definite Plan Report in 1960.* The available data on Smoky Hill Valley ground water suggests that the quality of water downstream from Salina is highly questionable and could become a serious problem if large withdrawals were attempted. Fortunately, there are good indications that a large supply of ground water is available in the Smoky Hill Valley upstream from Salina, and that it is probably superior in quality to the ground water currently used by the City. The general areas of ground water avail- ability are indicated on Plate V, The alluvial aquifer from Cloud Street south about two miles is thinner than at the existing well field, and is apparently less permeable. Beginning about one mile south of Magnolia Road, the aquifer on to the south thickens again and generally is composed of materials similar to those in the existing well field. From one mile south of Magnolia Road, and for 10 miles south to Bridgeport, the alluvium is more than two miles wide and averages about 60 feet in depth. The natural water table is 20-25 *Ground Water Conditions in the Smoky Hill Valley in Saline, Dickinson, and Geary Counties, Kansas by Bruce F. Latta, State Geological Survey of Kansas, Bulletin 84, 1949. Geolo y and Ground Water Resources of a Part by ar es . Wl lams an Stan ey W, Lo man, of Kansas, Bulletin 79, 1949. Definite Plan Report, Kanopolis Unit, Kansas, Volume 1, General Plan of Development; U.S. Department of the Interlor, Bureau of Reclamation, Region 7 - Denver, Colorado, February 1960. Kansas Survey 20 feet below the ground, which results in an aquifer averaging 35 feet in depth over an area of 20 square miles, all within 11 miles of Magnolia Road. For comparison, the aquifer that supplies the City1s existing well field averages about 45 feet in depth over about 7 square miles of effective area, Maximum depths of alluvium in excess of 90 feet have been found both in Salina and in some areas south of the City. Because of the lesser aquifer depth south of Magnolia Road, the production rates of individual wells in that area chould be expected to average about three-fourths of the average production from the existing City wells, if the aquifer materials are the samec Pumping tests have been made on the five wells that supplied Schilling Air Force Base, which are located two miles south of Magnolia Road. Their average production was 780 gallons per minute with about 10 feet of drawdown. Similar tests on the City wells indicate an average production of slightly more than 1,000 gallons per minute with about 14 feet of drawdown. The depths of the Schilling wells are close to the average depth of the alluvium. The drawdown of the water table is a measure of the withdrawal of water from storage in the aquifer. Within a given period of time, the amount of withdrawal from storage that can be achieved by a well field, plus the amount of net recharge during the period, determines the quantity of water the well field can produce. By the end of 1952-1956 drought, drawdown of the water table in the City's well field exceeded 30 feet near the wells, and averaged about 10 feet over the seven square miles of affected area. For an effective porosity of 15 percent, this represents 6,800 acre-feet of water withdrawn from storage. With a reasonable dispersion of wells throughout the aquifer, an average drawdown of 10 feet could be readily achieved in the valley south of Salina. For the same 15 percent porosity, about 19,200 acre-feet of water could be withdrawn from storage in the 20 square miles of aquifer south of the City. The combined usable storage volume of the two well fields would be at least 26,000 acre-feet. The most important sources of recharge to the alluvial aquifers are the downward percolation of a portion of direct rainfall and seepage from surface streams when the water table is below the stream. A minor source of recharge is the migration of ground water down the valley and from the bedrock walls of the valley. Reliable data to guide estimates of recharge rates are scarce, but an analysis of the operation of the Salina well field during the 1952-1956 drought provides some valuable indications of recharge during a severe drought. During the five year drought, the City1s wells pumped 29,700 acre- feet of water. Assuming that the effective porosity of the aquifer might be as high as 30 percent, withdrawal from storage could account for as much as 13,600 acre-feet of the well production. The remaining 16,100 acre-feet, which is an average of 3,200 acre-feet per year, had to come from recharge. The difference between the underflow into the well field and that which migrated downstream was probably 21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I no more than 1,000 acre-feet per year. The amount of rainfall which percolates down to the water table is usually about 10 percent of the annual rainfall on valleys such as the Smoky Hill. This would account for about 750 acre-feet per year of recharge, Deducting underflow and percolation leaves 1,450 acre-feet per year of recharge that must have come from the seepage of the river's streamflow, which is an average rate of about 0 30 cubic feet per second per mile of river channel If the same unit rates are applied to the ten miles of valley aquifer south of Salina, the annual recharge from percolation of rainfall and seepage from the river would be 7,000 acre-feet per year, Adding withdrawal from storage for 10 feet of drawdown over a five year period results in an annual ground water yield of 14,700 acre-feet per year during a drought, There are good reasons to suggest that actual recharge rates to the aquifer south of Salina may be greater than those to the Cityis existing well field, Seepage from the river is probably much less in Salina proper because of sediment deposits upstream from the Western Star Mill dam, Studies by the Bureau of Reclamation7 indicate a very direct and free connection between the river and the aquifer south of Salina Also, the effects of impervious surfaces and deep-rooted trees in the City suggests that percolation from rainfall is probably greater in the agricultural areas to the south, The foregoing analyses give a general indication of the nominal ground water supply but the results do not apply to all possible conditions of operation The potential supply value of an aquifer depends directly on the demands that are imposed on the supply, For example, Salina's supply "failed" during the 1952-1956 drought even though it continued to furnish at least 5,800 acre-feet of water per year and less than one-fourth of the ground water reservoir was depleted. The supply "failed" only in the sense that the peak demand rate exceeded the rate of flow into the wells As the water table is lowered the rate of flow to the wells diminishes but does not actually cease until the entire aquifer has been drained, If an additional firm supply had been available to help meet peak demand rates, the well field could have produced much more water on an annual basis than it did On the other hand, if a supplemental supply had been available to furnish part of the total annual demand, the water table would have been conserved at a higher level and the wells could have maintained a higher production rate during peak demand periods This example is presented as an illustration of the many aspects of a ground water supply and of the different ways that it may be used, Saline Valley, The alluvial aquifer of the Saline Valley joins that of the Smoky Hill just north of Salina, In some areas the Saline Valley aquifer is known to produce large yields of ground water, similar to those achieved in the Smoky Hill Valley, 7Ibido 22 The greatest concern regarding Saline Valley ground water is the mineralization of the water, and especially its chloride content" Many of the existing wells are known to produce water that, although very hard, is free from objectionable concentrations of chloride. However, some of the Saline Valley wells have yielded water with excessive chlorides, and a few wells and test holes have tapped water with extremely high concentrations of chloride and other minerals" In some areas brine has been found in the lower part of the alluvium, probably derived from soluble salts in the bedrock" In its natural state, ground water in the Saline River Valley alluvium drains toward the river, except for short periods when the stream is at high-flow stages, This is the reason that much of the ground water is of better chemical quality than the Saline River streamflow. Existing wells in the Saline Valley are pumped at low or moderate rates, and the wells are not closely spaced" It is very possible that, if high production wells were operated continuously, poor quality water might eventually be drawn into the wells from the river or from the deep salt water sources There is, however, the possibility that high production wells could be used for short, intermittent periods of peak demand, if the long-term withdrawals were limited to low rates. Other Ground Water Sources" Alluvial deposits in the valleys of rivers and creeks are apparently the only ground water sources near Salina that might produce water at the rates required for use by the City. Many wells in the consolidated rock formations provide an ample supply for domestic and general farm use, but their potential yields are too small to be of interest to the City" The alluvial valleys of Mulberry and Dry Creeks will produce moderate yields of ground water but its quality is generally inferior to Smoky Hill Valley ground water. The Solomon River Valley yields ground water so highly mineralized that it is unfit for municipal use .. Terrace deposits, in the Sand Hills area between Solomon and Abilene, yield good quality ground water to wells north of the river valley" Abilene obtains part of its supply from this aquifer, but the heavy drafts required for Salinals use would probably exhaust the supply during drought periods Present knowledge of the potential ground water sources near Salina indicates that the best source is the Smoky Hill Valley alluvial aquifer at and upstream from the City. 23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL SUPPLY ROLE OF PRESENT SOURCES The availability of ground water to Salina will continue to be an important element in the City1s future water supply program. The established practice of mixing ground water with surface water to control the temperature of the finished product will almost certainly be continued regardless of the surface water source. Ground water is used currently for about 30 percent of Salina1s water supply. During the winter months, ground water is now used exclusively because present treatment facilities are not equipped to treat surface water during freezing weather. The annual proportion of ground water use may be reduced in the future by incorporating the capability to treat surface water in the winter, but the demands of the growing city will soon require expansion of the present ground water supply. The local ground water sources can also be very important as firm yield supplies if their use is managed properly. If the well field development is expanded to cover enough of the ground water basin, withdrawals during normal periods will cause only a minor drawdown of the water table. Much of the stored ground water will then be available for use during drought periods when surface water supplies are deficient. The other present source of supply, Smoky Hill surface water, can be diverted, treated and put to use at a lower total cost than any other source of water available to the City. Obviously then, local diversion from the Smoky Hill will continue to be used for as much of Salinals supply as possible, regardless of any other sources that might be developed to augment the supply, It has been previously noted that the river1s streamflow may not be considered as a sole source of supply, However, if the two sources are used together, in a planned and controlled manner, the firm yield of the combined supply can be much greater than the sum of the two supplies considered as single sources. The reason is that, even during severe droughts, the flow in the river is likely to be extremely low for only short periods of time. Ground water can be used for most or all of the supply during such critical periods. Then, for the longer times during the drought when streamflow is sufficient, ground water use can be curtailed to permit resting and recharging of the aquifers. The plan of operation during a drought may limit somewhat the freedom to mix water from the two sources in the proportions normally desired for temperature control. This is not likely to be a serious problem however, because streamflow deficiencies most often occur during summer months when a larger proportion of ground water is desired for cooling. The best plan for development and operation would recognize a compromise between conservation-of- supply purposes and temperature control during a drought. 24 REQUIRED ADDITIONAL SUPPLY Improvement of Present Supplies As Salina grows, demand for water will reqUTre an increasrn~Targer-portion of the Smoky Hill is supply and, concurrently, the demands on the same source by competing water users will be increasing Wise planning will provide for future use of Smoky Hill surface water as efficiently as is practicable To improve use of the river, the existing treatment plant should be modified for winter treatment of surface water and the same capability should be included in future treatment facilities The present diversion works will serve the needs of the existing treatment plant with appropriate modifications to the river intake pumping system The expansion of treatment facilities to use Smoky Hlll surface water and ground water is keyed to the need for additional treatment and distribution facilities" A future treatment plant, located south of the City, will be supplied by its own river diversion works and well fields The need for the south plant and its supply will arise when the growing demand approaches the ultimate development of capacity planned for the existing supply and treatment facilitiesc The asslgnment of an ultimate capacity to the present facilities is influenced by several factors, including the economics of distribution from the plant site, physical site limitations and the safe yield of the ground water supply available to the plant Future use of the present well field is planned to limit average ground water withdrawals to approximately the current rates of usage Then, during an extreme drought, annual withdrawals would be little more than half the rates imposed during the 1952-1956 drought, although the peak dally rates during that drought would be exceeded. This restriction on future use of the present ground water supply is partly prompted by its deterioration in chemical quality as a result of past heavy'usage which has drawn more mineralized water into the well field Other factors that have probably had adverse effects on the qual; ty of the ground water are the urbani zati on of the overlyi ng land and the realignment of the Smoky Hill River Based on present knowledge of the ground water supply, and with due consideration to the economics of treatment and distribution through the existing plant site, it is recommended that the present site be developed to a peak daily capacity of 16 to 20 million gallons per day This determination may be modified or refined on the basis of future detalled ground water studies The treatment and distribution facilities required to develop this capacity are described in other sections of this report Expansion of Present Supplies Efficient surface water diversion for the future treatment plant south of the City can be achieved with a low diversion dam 1n the river channel The best structure would likely be a controlled, collapsible dam to prevent obstruction of flood-flows and excessive sediment deposition in the river channel. 25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Storage behind the dam will permit effective diversions during low- flow periods, will enhance recharge to the adjacent aquifer and will benefit recreational use of the river. One of the reasons for the location of the future plant south of the City is the proximity to additional ground water sources. The potential ground water supply south of the City is estimated to be roughly twice the supply of the present source in the City. Development and use of this supply in conjunction with Smoky Hill surface water will provid~ the additional ground water needed for temperature control and will assure a sufficient firm yield supply for many years in the future. If only enough of the aquifer were developed to provide for necessary temperature control, the firm yield of the combined supply would probably be adequate for predicted demands to the year 1990. Further development of the potential ground water supply could extend the sufficiency of the combined supply to about the year 2000. The preceeding estimates are based on the contingency that the Kanopolis Irrigation District mif~t not be developed, If the planned irrigation district becomes a rea lty, its effect on streamflow conceivably could add another 5 or 10 years to these estimated time periods. Additional Supply. Improvements to and expansion of the present supply, which is a combination of Smoky Hill surface water and ground water, will provide for Salinals normal water usage to the year 2010 and beyond, at a lower cost than any other source available to the City. Furthermore, during a severe drought the expanded supply could, with prudent management, furnish nominally about 15,000 acre-feet of the maximum 25,000 acre-feet per year required for a future city of 100,000 persons. Therefore, the additional supply requirement anticipated for the year 2010 is nominally 10,000 acre- feet per year of firm yield that would be available to back-up the normal supply during a severe drought, SOURCE OF ADDITIONAL SUPPLY Consideration of the possible sources of additional supply for Salina, in the light of the City1s supply needs, leads to elimination of some of the sources as reasonable alternatives on the basis of inadequate yeild or extreme costs of procurement, transmission or treatment. The remaining potential supply sources, which are Kanopolis and Milford Reservoirs, have been thoroughly analyzed and the costs to develop and use each source have been estimated for comparison purposes. Detailed estimates of the cash flow required for each source are presented in Section V. The cost comparisons shown in Section V include costs for improving and expanding the present supply,for development of a supple- mental supply, and for treatment facilities. 26 RECOMMENDED PLAN The need to expand ground water supply may become critical within the next 15 years, For this reason, detailed investigations and initial steps toward securing the supply are appropriate now, Proper development and efficient operation of ground water sources requires a greater knowledge of the Salina aquifers than now available, In recent years techniques have been perfected to study aquifers by means of electric analog models This type of study, if based on accurate geologic data and tests, can extend the knowledge of the ground water supply beyond that which has ever before been attainable. Furthermore, the analog model, used in conjunction with a water table monitoring system, can be an extremely important tool for use in managing the operation of ground water supply in a sound manner c We recommend that a detailed ground water investigation, to include an electric analog model study, be conducted of that part of the Smoky Hill Valley from the north side of Salina to the vicinity of Bridgeport, See Plate V. Records of previous investigations and studies would be used to the maximum extent of their usefulness, but additional drilling and testing will be required, Modification of the existing treatment plant is recommended to permit use of surface water during the winter. This work can be incorporated with other needed plant improvements in a project for the immediate future. The total needs of the plant are described in the treatment section of this report. The first increment of the future treatment plant south of the City may be required for predicted demands by about 1985, The plant will be supplied with surface water by a river intake and pipeline, and with ground water from the four existing Schilling wells plus four new well sin the same general vi ci nity. Based on presumed capaciti es of the wells, a further well field expansion to the south including about nine wells will be required before 1990; and the final expansion, again of some nine wells, will be needed about the year 1995. The plan for well field expansions can be determined more accurately after the recommended ground water investigation The river diversion dam proposed to perfect the use of surface water should properly be installed in conjunction with the river intake, but could be postponed a few years without undue risk. With full development of the potential ground water supply and efficient use of the unregulated Smoky Hill River, Salinals supply should be adequate for predicted demands, at least until 1995. When needed, the next step would be the use of storage in Kanopolis Reservoir for controlled releases to the river to supplement streamflows during drought periods Salina's need for Kanopolis storage to protect its supply may not materialize until well after 1995, possibly 10 or 15 years later, depending upon the fate of the irrigation district and on the supply that is actually realized from ground water sources. Assuming the irrigation district is fully developed as planned, it appears that Salinals need for a Kanopolis supplement would begin about 2005. In this case, the procurement of 10,000 acre-feet per year 27 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I of yield from the reservoir, released to the river, should assure the City1s supply beyond the planning period. If for some reason the planned irrigation district should not be developed, the Kanopolis supplement to Salina1s supply might be required about 1995. The recommended supplement, in this case, is 20,000 acre-feet per year of yield released to the river, which again should assure the Cityls supply needs beyond the planning periodo Any consideration of the future beyond the year 2010 must be highly speculative, but some tentative comments may be in order, Full development of the Kanopolis Irrigation District plus the Cityls use of 10,000 acre-feet per year from the reservoir would commit substantially all of the planned reservoir1s firm yield capability. Unless a transfer of water use could be arranged, the additional supply advantages to be gained by a pipeline to Kanopolis might not justify its cost. The best source for the next increment of supply might then be Milford Reservoir, via pipeline, if sufficient supply were still available in Milford, If not, then a reservoir on Gypsum Creek or Chapman Creek might be an attractive alternative. A distinct possibility in the future is a shared use of both source and transmission facilities, developed and managed on a regional basis. It must be recognized, of course, that changed circumstances such as improved treatment technology, refined conservation techniques or different economic priorities might completely alter the water resources situation 50 years from now. 28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I I KANOPDlIS SUPPlY ;;PI,P~lI FROM KANOPOUS IRRIGATION DISTRICT PLATE VI S 1I A END OF IRRIGATION CANAL. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 3 WATER QUALITY AND TREA TMENT I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I GENERAL The purpose of this section is to evaluate the water quality characteristics and treatment required for the several water supplies available to the city. This section will examine each supply with reference to the water quality characteristics of that supply and their applicability to the needs of the city through the design period, Considerable information is available through official sources regarding water quality from city records, Kansas State Department of Health, the Kansas Water Resources Board, United States Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, United States Public Health Service, Federal Water Pollution Control Administra- tion, and private sources. Numerous excellent references are available from these sources, and this report has abstracted freely from these references when necessary. IMPORTANCE OF WATER QUALITY The municipal water supply to the City of Salina must have a water quality that permits its use for domestic, industrial, fire, irrigation, and commercial uses, It is not practicable for the city to prepare its water supply to be ideally suited for all the purposes for which water is used, but it must be such that with additional specific treatment it can be used for specialized services. The availability of water supplies are more influenced by pollution than by any other factor. The Salina area contains large supplies of water, but these have been or are being polluted to the extent that they are not usable. Extensive ground water and surface water sources in central Kansas are not usable due to natural pollution by salt and gypsum. As the population of the area increases, man- made pollution will provide additional jeopardy to both the ground and surface water supplies in this area, Water supply planning must include projections of the pollution potential of any watershed so that the actual useful life of a supply source can be predicted. QUALITY OF THE PRESENT SUPPLY The existing water supply at Salina from the Smoky Hill River, augmented by the local well field, generally conforms to the Drinking Water Standards established by the United States Public Health Service.8 Certain existing wells in the Salina well field will exceed the limitations andlor recommendations of the Drinking Water Standards in certain constituents. These include chlorides, total dissolved solids, and carbon chloroform extract. In these three categories the local well field water quality must be classified as being of acceptable but poor quality. Consumers will adapt their tastes to a certain quality level and find the water product to be acceptable, when in other areas where better water is available, this water product would be unacceptable. 8public Health Service Drinking Water Standards, 1962, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Public Health Service, Washington, D.C. 29 WATER QUALITY CHARACTERISTICS General. There are several water quality characteristics of interest in considering a potential water supply. The popular concept "is the water safe to drink" is possibly the simplest and most important of these. Water is unsafe for human consumption when (1) it contains toxic pollutants, and (2) it contains bacteriological contamination. Toxics may in some cases be removed by treatment, while bacteriological contamination is assumed to be present in all natural waters, and the water is routinely disinfected by the use of gaseous chlorine. The procedures for this disinfection have been well developed by the water works industry, and are well supervised and controlled by the Kansas State Department of Health, Physical Characteristics of Water, Water supplies must be turbidity- free, odor and taste-free, and of proper temperature range, These requirements can be met in most cases by the existing water treatment plant. Water temperature is an important factor in consumer acceptance. During summer months a maximum water temperature of 75 degrees is desirable, River water may exceed this value during the hottest three months, and requires blending with colder well water, Similarly, the minimum water temperature which is desirable is 50 degrees to avoid excessive moisture condensation. Well water temperatures are almost constant in the range 57-60 degrees, and well water has been blended with river water to maintain the desired high and low temperature limits. Large reservoirs such as Kanopolis and Milford will provide water through pipelines at more moderate temperatures since the water intakes are located below the conservation pool surface of the lake, and blending of such waters will be unnecessary. CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS Surface Water. The chemical quality of surface water in Kansas varies with the streamflow as well as location, Generally, mineral concentrations are highest during periods of low streamflow and dilute during floodflowo Characteristics of smaller streams vary from exceptionally good chemical quality to a few in the state that are more highly mineralized than desirable for common uses, The relative flows contributed by tributaries to the major streams vary from time to time, and the amount and kind of dissolved minerals in larger streams vary accordingly. The above discussion indicates that a summary review can describe the chemical quality of surface water only in a very general manner. A complete evaluation of quality characteristics necessarily includes a detailed study of historic stream records, relating long-term discharge and mineral characteristics at every stream location of concern, as well as the sources of the various mineral contaminants. Such evaluations are generally made prior to the construction of major water resource projects, as in the development of the larger municipal water supply sources, irrigation projects, and large reservoir impoundments. Complete quality evaluations are sometimes restricted, however, as data sufficient to thoroughly describe the chemical quality characteristics are available only at limited stream locations. 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The chemical quality characteristics can be expected to be altered in the future at some stream locations due to changes in natural runoff patterns resulting primarily from construction of the large federal reservoirs. When reservoir storage releases are provided that are large enough to constitute a significant portion of dry- weather streamflows, this will generally result in a lowering of median concentrations in the stream reaches most directly affected. Other changes, resulting in higher concentrations, can be expected as a result of extensive evaporation and transpiration losses introduced with the added irrigation projects. Ground Water. Ground water is generally more highly mineralized than surface water, The type and degree of mineralization depends on the contact of subsurface waters with the various mineral bear- ing formations. Although the mineral characteristics of well water at any particular location generally do not vary significantly, as do surface waters, there is considerable variance in mineral characteristics among different ground water locations. Actual chemical concentrations must be determined individually for any given well, Not only can the mineral characteristics of aquifers and well water vary substantially within relatively small distances, but the characteristics may differ at various well locations within the same aquifer. SIGNIFICANCE OF WATER MINERALIZATION The significance of dissolved mineral constituents depends on the use for which the water is intended. Relationships of the common constituents to drinking waters and public water supplies as presented below are adopted from recommendations used by the Kansas State Department of Health, Water of good enough quality for a public water supply source would generally also be suitable as an industrial source. Some industrial processes, however, do have special water quality requirements. Total Dissolved Solids, The term total dissolved solids, is used to indicate a measure by weight (milligrams per liter) of the mineral matter dissolved in water. The U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards recommend less than 500 mgl1 total solids for drinking and culinary uses. However, if such water is not available an upper limit of 1000 mgll is considered permissible. Most ground and surface waters considered available for Salina fall into this permissible category, and a few ground water wells actually exceed this 1000 mgll upper limit. The mineral content in pounds per million gallons of water can be obtained by multiplying the concentration in mgl1 by the ratio 8.34. Specific Conductance. Specific conductance is a measure of the water's ability to conduct an electric current and, as a result, is an indication of the ionic strength, or mineralization, of any water solution. Specific conductance when multiplied by a factor, 31 which varies from about 0.55 to 0.75, will give an estimate of total dissolved mineral matter. The magnitude of the factor depends on the kind of minerals in the water. Some mineral solutions, such as chloride-rich solutions, are good electrical conductors, while others, such as sulfate-rich solutions, are poor conductors. Use of specific conductance provides an economical means for continuous monitoring of the fluctuating mineral concentrations which are typical of flowing streams. However, to be a reliable indication of individual mineral constituents, it is necessary to correlate conductance with analytical determinations of individual mineral constituents at frequent intervals. pH. pH is a measure of the effective hydrogen ion concentration, On a scale ranging from 0 to 14, a pH of 7 is neutral; values less than 7 are acidic, and those greater than 7 are basico Most natural untreated waters in Kansas are slightly basic. pH values less than 8.2 usually indicate the presence of free carbon dioxide. Chloride. Chloride is present in water as the C1- ion and is one of the principal mineralizing substances present in water in Kansas, It is derived principally by the dissolving action of water on rocks and other geologic deposits containing sodium chloride, Chloride pollution of fresh water may also occur from improper disposal of oil field brines and from high chloride industrial process waste waters. When present in sufficient amounts, chloride imparts a salty taste to the water but otherwise has little or no physiological significance when present in concentrations not offensive to taste. The Drinking Water Standards recommend that chloride be less than 250 mgll, At concentrations of 300 mgll most people can detect a slightly salty taste, and above 500 mgll there is a pronounced taste, Chloride cannot be economically removed from water by currently accepted water treatment processes, Sulfate. Sulfate is present in water as the S04- ion and is of conslderable importance to water users. It is one of the principal mineralizing characteristics of natural waters in Kansas, When present in large amounts, in excess of 250 mgl1, it will impart a bitter taste to the water and may act as a laxative to people not accustomed to drinking it. Sulfate is derived principally from the dissolving action of water on gypsum. Thus, when sulfate is high, calcium is usually high also, The Drinking Water Standards recommend that sulfate be less than 250 mg/1. Sulfate cannot be removed from water economically. Sodium. Sodium is present in water as the Na+ ion. It is not particularly significant physiologically except to persons on a sodium restricted diet. It is important in irrigation water because a high sodium to calcium-magnesium ratio tends to decrease the permeability of the soil and, thus, results in a harmful effect on soil structure. Sodium is not a hardness constituent, In fact, the base exchange or zeolite process of water softening increases the sodium content of water, This process upgrades the water for many domestic uses, but downgrades it for irrigation or for human consumption. 32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Calcium. Calcium is present in water as the Ca++ ion and is a major nardness constituent. When water is heated calcium may precipitate as calcium carbonate or calcium sulfate and produce scaling in hot water heaters and boilers. Calcium is derived principally from the dissolving action of water on limestone and gypsum. It can be removed by common municipal water treatment softening processes, Magnesium, Magnesium is present in water as the Mg++ ion and is a hardness constituent, When present in large amounts (greater than 125 mg/l) magnesium may exert a cathartic effect on people not accustomed to it, particularly if sulfate is also present in large amounts. Magnesium is derived principally by the dissolving action of water on limestone. It can be removed in water treatment softening processes. Potassium. Potassium is present in water as the K+ ion. This substance is not considered to be of significance to humans in amounts normally found in natural waters. Carbonate and Bicarbonate. Carbonate and bicarbonate are present in water as the ions C03- and HCO- and are the primary alkaline substances or alkalinity of the wat~r, When expressed as CaC03 they are termed "alkalinity." Bicarbonate usually constitutes the entire alkalinity of natural waters although carbonate occasionally may be present in significant amounts, particularly in treated waters, Alkalinity may add some taste to water, but otherwise it has little significance to humans. It is removed or altered in the lime-soda ash softening process, Fluoride.. Fluoride is present in water as the F ion, and is an important mineral constituent in drinking water. It is derived naturally by the dissolving action of water on fluoride-bearing minerals in the earth. In high concentrations in drinking water it may produce mottling or discoloration of tooth enamel of children, and in low concentrations it does not afford protection for the prevention of dental caries in children, Actual intake of drinking water, and any mineral constituent such as fluoride is partially dependent on climatic conditions,. In Kansas a concentration of 1,0 mgll F- is considered optimum for public water supplies, and a concentration of 105 mgll F- is the recommended upper limit, Fluoride is added to many public water supplies to provide an optimum con- centration for drinking water, It is added to some 65 community water supplies in Kansas While there are no fluoride removal facilities in use in Kansas, this substance can be removed when necessary as a part of the water treatment process, Nitrate. Nitrate is present in water as the N03 ion. Its presence is considered as evidence of pollution in well water, possibly from nearby decomposed organic matter in the soil, The concentration of nitrate varies widely in Kansas well waters, and only small amounts are present in surface water. Nitrate is important in drinking water because high concentrations may produce cyanosis or methemoglobinemia 33 in infants. Adults and older children are not affected. Nitrate is also important in water to be used for livestock because excessive amounts may be harmful, particularly to young animals, The Drinking Water Standards recommend a limit of 45 mgll as N03 for public water supplies. Nitrate cannot be removed economically, Boron. Boron is not considered to be of significance to humans in the concentrations normally found in natural waters. However, it is important in irrigation water since it may have a harmful effect on some plants when present in concentrations in excess of 1 mg/lo Iron and Magnagese, Iron and magnanese have little significance physiologically" They are undesirable in public water supplies because both will produce staining of laundered fabrics and procelain plumbing fixtures, If present in an appreciable amount, iron gives water a rusty appearance and an unpleasant taste, The U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards recommend that the iron content be less than 0,3 mgll and manganese less than 0.05 mgll, Iron and manganese are readily removed by treatment if the lime-soda method is used, Silica. Silica is not physiologically significant to humans, livestock, or in irrigation waters, However, it forms a hard scale at high temperatures and is undesirable in boiler feed water, Phosphate, In concentrations normally found in water, phosphate has little physiological significance, It does stimulate the growth of algae, which can result in increased water treatment problems. Hardenss and Alkalinity. Hardness in water is caused by the Ca++ ion and the Mg++ ion. The sum of the' two, both expressed as CaC03, is termed the total hardness. The type of hardness is dependent on the alkalinity. If the total hardness is greater than the total alkalinity (both expressed as CaC03), the amount of hardness equivalent to the alkalinity is termed carbonate hardness and the amount of hardness in excess is termed non-carbonate hardness, If the total hardness is less than the total alkalinity, all of the hardness is carbonate hardness, and there is an excess alkalinity, Hardness can be removed by the base-exchange method of softening, and both hardness and alkalinity can be reduced, to'desirable levels for public water supplies by the lime-soda ash methods of softening. To a large extent, hardness is a relative term. Water that would be considered soft in Kansas would likely be considered as hard in New England where natural waters are not highly mineralized. In Kansas, total hardness above 400 mg/l. as CaC03 is considered excessive for public water supplies and less than 100 mgll is considered preferable. Hardness has become less objectionable with the availability and common use of detergents, but municipal softening will usually result in overall community savings, 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TREATMENT CONSIDERATIONS General. Suitable water treatment can render most waters potable, Because of the treatment required by various sources, expense of treatment should govern the selection of the source. Also, the economical use of water treatment chemicals should be practiced. For this reason, all projected lime costs are based on the calcining of calcium carbonate sludge, Records of the existing Salina calcining plant indicate a reduction in lime costs of sixty percent, In addition to lower dollar cost, calcining eliminates the problem of calcium carbonate sludge disposal, Basic water treatment processes at Salina include: Presedimentation to reduce turbidity, Addition of chlorine for disinfection and taste and odor control, Addition of activated carbon to eliminate taste and odor. Addition of alum or activated silica as coagulating aids. Aeration to eliminate iron, manganese and carbon dioxide, Addition of lime andlor soda ash for calcium, magnesium and non-carbonate hardness reduction, Addition of carbon dioxide gas for stabilization of the finished water, Filtration to remove all solids from the finished water. Addition of sodium hexametaphosphate for stabilization. Surface Waters. Surface waters require chlorination, presedimentation, taste and odor removal and stabilization to render them potable, Reservoirs. Reservoirs as a surface water source require less presedimentation for turbidity removal than do rivers, Usually only slight softening is required. A disadvantage of a reservoir as a source is the problem of conveying the water to the treatment facilities. However, the economics of the treatment outweighs the disadvantage, Rivers. Rivers as a source require longer retention for presedimentation, additional softening and stabilization to be of acceptable quality for consumers, Although the problem of moving the water to the treatment plant is less, the use of water from rivers is limited by water rights. Graphs 1 through 7 on Plates VII and VIII represent various ion concentrations at different flow rates, These plates compare water from three different sources, Kanopolis Reservoir, Milford Reservoir 35 and the Smoky Hill River. The curves were prepared from least squares analysis of available data. The solid lines represent actual data, the dashed lines represent extrapolations, Three points are indicated on each curve, these being median flow, average flow and mean flow. The figure for median flow represents a flow rate of which an equal number of data points existed above and below. The figure for average flow is the arithmetical average of all data flow rates. The figure for mean flow represents the flow rate that is the midpoint between the two extremes of data examined. Graph 1 represents calcium ions present in the three sources. At low flows the calcium concentration is practically the same in all three sources 0 At its normally higher flows however, the Republican River would have much less calcium to be removed by softening. Graph 2 is an indication of the chloride concentration in the sources. At low flows the Republican River has a much lower concentration than the other sources, At higher flows, this difference becomes less, Chloride ions in solution do not affect water treatment at these concentrations but at slightly higher concentrations may cause taste problems. Taste from chlorides will not occur in Milford Reservoir, Graph 3 represents the sodium ion concentration of the sources. Sodium is an influencing factor in irrigation. The Republican River is much lower than the Smoky Hill in sodium concentration. Graph 4 indicates the sulfate ion concentration. Sulfate is only considered as an indication of gypsum. Again the Republican River has less than the other sources, Graph 5 indicates the sodium adsorption ratio of the three sources. The higher the sodium adsorption ratio, the less desirable the water for irrigation. Graph 6 represents the total dissolved solids present in the sources. The lower the dissolved solids, the better quality the water will be. Graph 7 is an indication of the total hardness concentration of the sources. Total hardness is important in that it must be removed to provide soft water to customers, The less total hardness, the more economical the treatment. The graphs indicate that the Republican River is better water for both irrigation and human consumption. Water from Milford Reservoir is considerably higher quality than from any other source considered for Salina, 36 I MINERAL CONCENTRATION VER~U~ HOW FOR REPUBliCAN AND ~MOKY HILL RIVER~ I PLATE VII I I , '" '~'''" . ~o CFS , \ , \ \ CURVES 1515 Of OAT A A FOR U~SAS' 0.' 0 OEPT.I " \ CHEMICAl AUL '"' MEDlAR OEHMTIolEHTQF -SSCfS LUO~ATO~Y , , I\. , ,~, ILL'AGlEY 0 ..... :,\G ' "' " , 1\ \ I \ ! , , 1 , MEU' I029C S , .~ SloIOKT ~ILl- fSUI .~ )\ I I 0 I i' I'... " , , AVG . IO~O CF I ~ I'. I . , ...., I~ I,." """ -26 Cf ~eA -326 " REPUBLIC H RIHM / , '. 8ElO'llMI fOROOA'" .~ , . 1--- , I-- ". ., , CURVESPREPlMEDfllOML V515 OF DATA HHN FROM "~A A FOR UHSAS". PART 2. WATER , "' m~iC:~T ANA~Y~ES am SUTE mm~m Of mUM SUIURl !:NGI '"' "'EDIAH ... . QS CfS ~',', ~ M[OIAR "- . EOIAN-26 " R ':-. -, n HILL ~SAll , AVG-IOIlOCFS ~ , ~' KY ~ I '" RGLl ~ . . .':: .... . . . . V . E U clCAN RIVER - J'-.. " " ., , EO MILFORODAM " . I I I . . I I I I I '" '" 'OO 5~R~~~A p~m:E~R~O~"'~ YSIS AfCR ~~miii;i:;~ y!~~~~~~~ , "' " UTE '" '" '" "" ~EOIAH I -soers I '""l:~ -95CfS " "". ~ ---- ,~, "" LAGLT , , ~ " ~'~2 , , . , " ~ , . . . S,oOK HILL' llU -G , . . 'i~ DIAN 255CfS . . . ~-IOijOCF , . . . . . r-' . . REPUBLI ." . - "'~ BELC* ~! FORO .. ~FS ...... , ~ -316CS .......... ~ -., " , HM- o " " '" CUR~ES PREP~ YSIS OF O~H UH~ ~ FOR KA~S~S", PUl , "' '" ~mH~i;t~\ '" ''" MEOI~M " -ll!iCFS , r~::~~~" , '\' ........----___S OKY ~ Ll ~ HI ~ I . , ~, 10.. ILL@ AWLE . ~~o IAN - 26 '" ,,'\: ! , j" 0 "' " i 0. 1 . , , R!'PUBLI AN RI~E ,,- I/~ AVG. IO~O ps BELOW ~ LFOROO , ~E~II _ 1029 CFS , Ih~ i " ~JG . II ~~ ~ -326 " , f'.. , " ..... f'. .. ., , , i I , I I I I I I I I MINERAl CONCENTRATION VERSUS HOW FOR REPUBliCAN AND SMOKY HILL RIVm I PLATE VIII I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I 0 . I flED I~" CURVES l-TSIS -5DCFS OF DAn fA FOR '" "' '~ SUTE LABORA ARY E~GI~EER'"G U \. ~ - " ILL n RIl ET \ - , \ ~ \ \ ~ 0 \ ~ ' "' , . I , HEAR- 1029CS I ~ SMOn RI 'SALIN - " I I I 1', I I , 1 """" ~'Iouorr 0 , , \D_I~N_ 266CFS , , '~ . U . 'I o >:>-~ ~ HE.IN "J16C5 R!:PUlICA RIER__ ~ , BHD Mil OR DA ,. CURVES YSIS OF DATA m. KANSAS" " eo ,1€PT_INT.,U (flU1ICH ANH"S!S STAH DfPlRIHENT Of HEAL '"' LIBORATORY 0 MEDIAN ~EDIAN .95 rFS 0 ~ i ~ I I 0 , ~ "I " '" Iv '- " Op H II "LANGLEY & LIMA 1!EDIAN" 26 CfS'",- i , , , 0>, I ~~I029 AVa-IO OCfS ~'II90 " " ' 0 I MEA -316 , ~ , REPBlIC ;0: V~~ rRf , BEl WMI '~ , , 0 ~ , "" ., ~ 0 ! 0 0 1,000 fLOW.CFS 1.000 FlOW,CFS CURVE 1515 orOA A FOR " "' STUE " RING , EDIA"' ~" , , ~E~~A~F~ ~ [0'AN-26 0> ~ K AVll-U 1'--1"- ,~. ~ ILL fLAN UT ~~~~ MOKY ~I l'SAIMA '" 129C "" '~ I '1~E_A -326 " , I>,., , " RULCANRIVEN_ BE 0 IHeRD Dl~ , " " ., > , , , 0 0 1,000 FlO~, CfS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Ground Waters. Most ground waters have no turbidity and therefore do not require presedimentation. They do however, require aeration for iron, manganese and carbon dioxide removal, A reduction in the carbon dioxide in the water reduces time requirements for softening. A great disadvantage of ground waters as a source is the high hardness content. This high hardness requires complete lime-soda softening with magnesium removal, Recarbonation is required to stabilize the water. Ground waters are more expensive to treat because of increased chemical costs and increased plant facilities requirements. Water Treatment Costs. Table 5, "Water Treatment Costs" indicates the differences in treatment costs for all sources considered in this report. The table is based on actual 1967 treatment costs expanded to meet new criteria. The total cost includes amortization of capital costs, depreciation, power costs, operating costs and chemical costs for each system considered in this report. 37 TABLE 5 WATER TREATMENT COSTS (Based on 1967 Costs) Delivered to Clearwell at Treatment Plant Unit Chemicals Plant Subtotal Power Total Exist. Wells* m 0.0815 0.0316 0.1131 0.007 0.1201 (623) a-f 26.57 10.30 36.87 2.28 39.15 River @ Exist. Plant m 0.0234 0.0316 0.0550 0.0016 0.0566 ( 300 ) a-f 7.62 10.30 17.92 0.52 18.44 New Wells, NE* m 0,0815 0.0316 0.1131 0.009 0.1221 (623) o.-f 26.57 10.30 36.87 2.93 39.80 New Wells, S,** m 0.0535 0.0316 0.0851 0.005 0.0901 (450) a-f 17.75 10.30 28.05 1.63 29.68 River S. m 0.0234 0,0316 0.0550 0.0029 0.0579 (300) a-f 7.62 10.30 17.92 0.95 18.87 Kanopolis, by Pipeline m 0.0254 0.0592 0.0826 0.0120 0.0966 (300) a-f 8.27 19.30 27.57 3.91 31.48 Ka no po 1 is, by Canal m 0.0234 0.0408 0.0638 0.0013 0.0651 (300 ) a-f 7.62 13.30 20.92 0.42 21.34 Milford by Pipeline m 0.0177 0.0500 0.0677 0.0170 0.0847 (234) a-f 5,76 16.30 22.06 5.54 27.60 *Adjusted for construction of new collection main **Increased over Schilling Wells to compensate for continuous use. Abbrevi a ti ons : m = 1000 gallons a-f = acre feet Numbers in ( ) represent total hardness of water supply 38 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LOCAL WELL FIELDS General. Ground waters from the Smoky Hill and Saline river valleys are characterized as variable quality, highly mineralized water sources, Although the water is found in good quantity in the terrace deposits, numerous factors operate to degrade the water from a quality standpoint, and considerable variation can be found from well to well in the same well field area. In general, the waters from the well field north of Salina is of lower average quality than that from the south well field; neither well field is as suitable as any of the surface sources considered in this report from the quality standpoint. Water Quality Factors. Several factors operate to lower the quality of the local wellfields, These may be listed: Recharge rate greatly affects water quality within the well field. During a period of heavy rainfall, ground waters will improve in quality and will be adversely affected during periods of drought. When recharge is due to infiltration from the river, river water quality will affect the ground water quality adversely as compared to rainfall recharge. Underlying geology has great effect on the well field quality. Some wells may be exposed to the Wellington shale from which brine and gypsum may be diffused into the wellwater. Local geology may be extremely variable, and a high quality source may exist close to a high mineralized or unsuitable water. As wells are pumped through the years, a gradual deterioration of quality will normally occur. The same is generally true for an entire well field. The rate at which this deterioration takes place is dependent on the rate of withdrawal. An unused well will increase slowly or not at all, while an overpumped well may become unusable in a relatively short time. The original wells in the Salina well field show substantial increases in hardness, chlorides, sulfates, and organic content, since the initial drilling of these wells. Contamination of these wells by organic pollution also increases as a well field is pumped. The overall cumulative effects of pesticides, herbicides, sewage residues, infiltration from old manure piles, barnyards and pastures, privies and septic tanks, all long since forgotten and obscured by new streets, buildings, and other construction, will provide e the pollution that slowly accumulates in the well field. There is little doubt that a well field located in an urban area will become more unfit for use as a water supply source as time goes on, and finally may become unusable altogether. Quality Data on Existing Well Fields. The present well field yields waters "that have an average total hardness of 623 ppm as calcium carbonate, which is two to three times higher than the average total hardness of the Smoky Hill River at Salina. Sixteen wells in this group range from a low of 508 ppm to a high 732 ppm total hardness. 39 This hardness may be removed by treatment with lime and soda ash, but the water quality is deteriorated by the substitution of sodium for calcium and magnesium noncarbonate hardness, which exceeds 200 ppm, and leaves a sodium residual of about this same amount. Total solids from such treatment is reduced about 200 ppm by reduction of carbonate hardness and alkalinity, and is about twice as high as the total solids resulting from the treated river water. The chlorides concentration is roughly one half, and sulfate concentration about two times the river water supply, In 1963 the presence of odors in Salina water was noticed by residents. These odors were traced to the well water which has been utilized during extreme high and low temperatures for tempering purposes, and a program was undertaken to establish the identity of the odorous substances and the specific wells which contain these substances. The 1962 Drinking Water Standards set a maximum limit of 200 ppb on carbon chloroform extraction of 5000 gallons of water. These tests were performed on six of the active wells, and the results ranged from 113 ppb to 570 ppb. These tests represent a measure of water quality, and are a safeguard against the intrusion of excessive amounts of potentially toxic material into water supplies, The most desirable condition is one in which the water supply delivered to the consumer contains no toxic residues. These residues clearly represent man-made or natural pollution which have not been removed in water treatment, or are materials such as lubricants inadvertently introduced by the water plant or at the well, While the clear definition of toxic levels for these residues has not been established, the maximum allowable concentrations should be set at the lowest possible levels. Analysis of available data indicates that water supplies containing over 200 microgramslliter (ppb) represent an exceptional and unwarranted dosage of the water with toxic chemicals, and so this limitation has been establishedo These tests were performed by Wilson and Company laboratory personnel, and independently by the United States Public Health Service. A modification of the procedure9 was used whi ch permitted a greater recovery of the toxi c residues in the Wilson and Company tests; three of the active wells exceeded the limitations, and three fell below the 200 ppb limitation. The highest values identified the wells contributing to the odor problem, and these are used for emergency service only. The significance of these tests is difficult to assess. It is certain that high values of carbon-chloroform extract, with or without modifications of the test, identify wells that contain some form of organic pollution, and that the levels reached in these six wells are high enough to indicate that these waters show contamination by organic materials which warrants careful study and observation, 9Water and Sewage Works, 110, 422 (Dec. 1963). This method reclaims about 50 percent more organics than the original CCE Test. 40 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE 6 Well Number 12 14 16 6 7 2 CCE, ppb 188 199 113 349 405 571 It is strongly recommended that this test, or its improved version, be made on all wells on some periodic basis to identify and monitor contaminated well supplies, The Schilling well field is not so extensive, nor so well known as the present City well field. These wells were drilled to provide water for the water treatment plant which was operated by Schilling Air Force Base for water supply, The quality is substantially better than the present well field in every characteristic.lU From quality standpoint, these wells are superior to the present well field, and should be used preferentially. Carbon chloroform extracts (CCE) have not been conducted on these wells, and it is recommended that this test be made at the first convenient opportunity for each of the active wells. Costs of treatment of these wells are tabulated in Table 6. In 1967 the unit cost of treatment of well waters in Salina was about 12.2~/1000 gallons, or slightly more than twice the cost of treatment for river water (5.5~/I000 gallons). This difference is less significant, however, when other system costs are added, which boost the total cost to 32-35~/1000 gallons. In summary, the following conclusions can be made: Water from the present city well field represents a supply which is of poor chemical quality and which may be expected to deteriorate further in coming years, Water from the Schilling well field is of higher quality, but is less known than the present well field, both in terms of quality and quantity. Close monitoring of these well supplies should be maintained. SMOKY HILL RIVER General. Salina is currently using water from the Smoky Hill River. There is a marked treatment cost difference between the treatment of the river water and local well water. As a result, as much water as possible is taken from the river. Use of water from the 10Analyses by U.S. Geological Survey, February 1963, 41 Smoky Hill for irrigation purposes during extended drought periods limits the use for domestic consumption by lowering the streamflow to practically zero. When low streamflow occurs, water quality markedly deteriorates and there is insufficient quantity available for domestic use. This requires the use of water from local wells at increased treatment costs. As river water quality becomes poor at low flow, quality improves at increased flows due to rainfall. This fluctuation in quality requires monitoring and subsequent adjustment of treatment. Other disadvantages of river water for use as a source include temperature fluctuations and pollution possibilities from irrigation runoff and water reuse. Water Quality. The Smoky Hill River water contains relatively higher concentrations of chlorides, sulfates and total dissolved solids. These chemical ion concentrations are depicted graphically on Plates VII and VIII. These graphs shown on Plates VII and VIII also indicate the probable fluctuation of concentration due to increased streamflow. Indication is that the concentrations of these minerals will increase with time, ocntinuing to lessen the quality of this river water, due to irrigation, industrial wastes, and increased domestic use. Treatment of water from the Smoky Hill includes presedimentation for turbidity removal, chlorination, softening and stabilization. The increase of chloride and sulfate concentrations in the river water will create increased quality problems as no current acceptable methods are available for their removal. Table 5 indicates the treatment costs for the Smoky Hill River as opposed to other sources considered in this report. Although the chemical treatment costs are the most economical, except for Milford reservoir water, there is insufficient water available for all needs, as discussed in other sections of this report, General Suitability. Water from the Smoky Hill River is generally suitable for irrigation purposes and with adequate treatment for municipal and industrial uses. Increases in mineral content will prohibit the use for domestic purposes, and extensive irrigation upstream may raise the mineral content to prohibitive levels toward the end of the design period. There can be no question, however, that the major portion of Salina's yearly water use must come from this source, regardless of the supplemental sources which may be developed. KANOPOLIS RESERVOIR General. Kanopolis Reservoir is being considered as a source for irrigation waters. Although becoming increasingly turbid and saline, the water will remain suitable for irrigation purposes. Seasonal variations in mineral concentrations and temperature will have little 42 I I I I 1\ I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I adverse effect on irrigated land. These particular character- istics will have adverse effects on treatment practices. Water Quality and Treatment. In order for the City of Salina to use Kanopolis Reservoir as a source for water, means for conveying the water to the treatment facilities must be considered. Two proposed methods for conveying this water have been considered and these additional costs are repre- sented in Table 5. Once the water is available for treat- ment, the treatment would include presedimentation, disinfection, partial softening and stabilization. Treatment costs are indicated in Table 5. Kanopolis Reservoir water has a higher total dissolved solids con- centration than other reservoirs in the state. This concentration is increasing. Part of this solids increase is due to the increasing amount of chloride in the reservoir. Plate IX indicates the increasing chloride concentration projections based on different conservation pools. Increase of the conservation pool would have a beneficial effect on the water quality of Kanopolis reservoir. Studies made by the Kansas City District office of the Corps of Engineers indicate that during the period 1951-1957 a theoretical increase of conservation pool from 49,500 acre-feet to 210,000 acre-feet would lower the concentration of chlorides by a substantial fraction, since it permits better reservoir management to utilize the chloride-free run-off waters to maintain the pool at a higher level. On Plate IX the relatively high chloride levels that will be built up in Kanopolis Reservoir are indicated. During the winter season of each year there is a sharp increase in the chloride concentration in the reservoir, peaking at levels well above the U.S.P.H.S. Drinking Water Standards limit of 250 ppm. During the period of study with an assumed conservation pool of 210,000 acre-feet, the concentration of chlorides approached this limit on one occasion in the spring of 1957. Clearly this proposed increase in conservation pool is essential to the use of Kanopolis reservoir as a suitable water supply, and even with this increase, the quality is marginal during extended drought periods. Without this increase, Kanopolis water does not meet the minimum water quality standards. MILFORD RESERVOIR General. Milford Reservoir would provide an unlimited supply of high quality water to the City of Salina, The reservoir contains some of the best water of all reservoirs in the state. Being a rel ati vely "cl ear water" 1 ake, there is 1 i ttl e turbi di ty in the water compared with Kanopolis Reservoir. The reservoir is large enough that seasonal temperature changes will have little effect on the temperature of the water at lower depths. Therefore, water of a relatively constant temperature would be provided for use. Because of the size and low mineral content, seasonal variations would be less noticeable, requiring little adjustment in the treatment process. 43 As with all remote sources of supply, means for conveying the water from the source to the treatment facilities must be provided. A pipeline from Milford Reservoir to Salina with a pumping station would be this means. Selection of line size and pumps would be such that they would be adequate in size for this design period and the most economical, Looking further into the future beyond the design period, additional booster pumping would provide more water to the City. As the quality of Milford Reservoir is excellent as a potable water source, the water is also excellent for irrigation purposes. The reservoir is large enough for both uses without significant depletion. A great advantage of a pipeline over a river or canal is that no policing is required to ascertain that there is no unauthorized use of the water. Similarly, there would be no depletion from irrigation users or further pollution from water reuse or irrigation runoff. A distinct advantage of using surface water as a source, particularly reservoir water over ground water, is that nature provides some degree of self-purification for all water that has been contaminated or polluted by the introduction of wastes whether from soil drainage, sewage or industries. Although this process of self-purification depends upon the nature and amount of pollutants as well as the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of the water itself, time is the most important factor. Temperature, sunlight, velocity of flow and other complex physical, chemical and biological conditions also influence the rate of self-purification. The larger the reservoir, the more retention time, the more surface area exposed to sunlight and the greater volume to minimize sensitivity to temperature changes, All these enhance the probability of self- purification. Treatment Re1uirements. Water quality data examined and reproduced in part on Pates VII and VIII indicate the critical requirements for treatment, Of the sources considered in this report, water from Milford Reservoir would be the most economical to treat from the standpoint of plant facilities and chemicals required. Overall Suitability. Milford Reservoir water is the best quality of all waters considered in this report for human and plant con- sumptions, and appears to have less tendency to future pollution and contamination. The reservoir will provide the most assured supply during the design period. Savings in treatment costs can be realized by using Milford Reservoir as a source, The reservoir is the most distant from Salina, and would have the highest pumping cost of all sources. 44 I ca:::: X - c::::>> w I ~ ==- .... UV) ca:::: <{ - 0:: I"- ~ 0:: LLJ ...J LD ~ Q. I- LLJ ---- --- (j) ~ LLa: V) Z --- - 0- --- - ca:::: I 1-0 Ot!) Z~ Z ~ I"- >-UJ Ww LD ~ ---II !zl ~ (j) -I.&.. c::::>> I uo Q... 01 a: c::::>> Oi(l) I V) V) wi- <( a.. 2!!: CI...J V) Q:: U) -=z: -,0 It') 2:0 I LD :::.::: I a:'o.. (j) <(U / (j) O!o ~ r ...JiZ >- / ~ J:I<( ~~ c::::>> O'~ 00:: I 0:: <C \ ......- I I.&.. , 2!!: <cv) ~ ~ ......- <( :::) ~ 0 --- - c::::>> I -- LD c...:I I LD , (j) I ~ -...... c::::::a I I - I ca:::: c::::>> I ---II -, === " I 0 c...:I I \ f 0 \ ""...... 0 " ,., UJ ~ ;:t ~ " 00 0:: LD <C <.- ~ (j) ..... 0:: C\J UJ I ,,/ , 0 UJ >- " "/ / -.J Z t!) "- I ::I:O<( \ , U-O:: ~O --- o-:a: ~ I ~ UJ 0:: V) ~~ ,\ U Z " UJUJ~ I -,UI.&.. (Y) I \ OZI LD \ O::OU (j) "- a.. U <( " " I " I Z C\J '" 0 \ LD " -UJ (j) ~ t!) 1 I , <(<C I V) n 0:: 0:: I Z ~O \ 0 Z I-- U . I -.1.LJ..u:t .......... I-- U . ~ I I.&.. Z Z I-- \ I-- 10 01.&.. I.&.. U- UI I <( I-- U 0:: U <( UJ <( <( UJO> 0 OUJ LD I t!)00:: -0 >t!)0 (j) <COUJ 0:: 0 0:: <( 0 0:: ~ V) -.J OLD UJ 0:: LD OozO -.J . V)O ~ 1---00 ::I: I"- UJI--I"- V) C\J U a.. U;:t 0:: V) ;:t I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LD 0 LD 0 LD 0 LD ;:t (Y) (Y) C\J C\J I Wdd 'NOI1VH1N3~NO~ NOI 3aIH01H~/133~-3~~V ONvsnOHl '38V~OlS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 4 WATER DISTRIBUTION AND STORAGE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I GENERAL This section of the report examines the distribution of water from the supply point to the individual users within the City and the storage of water for use during periods of peak domestic consumption and fires. The distribution and storaqe system includes underground and overhead storage, high service pumping stations, arterial mains and distribution mains, valves, hydrants and service. While all of these are important parts of the system, the scope of this study is limited to pumping, storage and arterial mains. At present, Salina has only the existing water treatment facility as its supply point to the system. A second supply point will be added when the new treatment plant proposed for the southern extremity of the City is constructed. Supply points are fixed items; they cannot be moved from place to place as the areas of high water demand shift. Pumping facilities at the supply points can be increased in capacity and delivery pressure, but reliance must be placed on arterial mains and the strategic location of elevated storage and other secondary supply points, such as ground storaqe reservoirs and pumping stations, to assure proper distribution of water to the areas of demand. The arterial pipelines are the "backbone" of a water distribution system. If they are not properly sized and routed, much of the effectiveness of the other portions of the distribution system, no matter how well designed, is 1 os t . In this report, therefore, particular emphasis will be placed on the construction of arterial mains to correct present distribution system deficiencies and on the construction of new arterial mains to serve the areas of future expansion of the City. Storage reservoirs can be considered as secondary distribution system supply points, and are important in equalizing pressures throughout the system and to supply water to local areas in the event of extreme demands. The principal components of Salina1s water distribution system are shown on Plate X. PRESENT SYSTEM Salina1s water distribution system is quite complex. The addition of Schilling Air Base to the system has complicated the operation since the integrated system must be served from only one supply point. Presently, the system is being operated on three levels of pressure. Salina1s water distribution system consists of the following major items: (1) the water treatment plant and high service pumps, (2) underground and elevated storage and (3) a distribution pipeline network serving the entire City, the Municipal Airport and Schilling Manor. 45 Water Treatment Plants. The present water treatment plant and the proposed new plant are discussed in detail elsewhere in the report. In this section they will be considered only as being points of supply to the system. The ultimate treatment capacity of the present plant is proposed to be 20 million gallons per day. The total pumping rate of finished water from the plant, however, should be about 25 mgd in order to accommodate short term peak demands. The excess over the plant production rate would be withdrawn from plant storage. The proposed southern water treatment plant would be designed for a total of 20 mqd, constructed in two or more stages. High service pumping capacity at this south plant should ultimately have a capa- bility of 25 mqd. Water Storage. Present water storage facilities in Salina include the following: Underground - 3.0 MG of the water treatment plant. Elevated, Low Level - 2.15 MG in four tanks serving Salina proper, the Municipal Airport and Schilling Manor. Elevated, High Level - 0.5 MG serving the residential area east of the Smoky Hill River and the cut-off channel. Elevated, High Level - 1.5 MG serving only Westinghouse directly and the airport and Schilling Manor indirectly. The eastern high level supply is stored at an elevation some 50 feet higher than the storage in Salina proper, while the Westinghouse (Camp Phillips) supply is some 60 feet higher than that of Salina proper. Multiple level systems always create additional operating problems and should be held to a minimum. Distribution Network. The weakest part of Salina1s present water system is the serious lack of properly sized arterial mains leading from the plant to the outlying portions of the system. The correction of this deficiency should be given top priority by the City. Larger mains are needed in all directions from the water treatment plant and pumping station. When new mains are built they should be sized and routed to accommodate the proposed 25 mqd maximum flow of water to be delivered by the high service pumps when the treatment plant is expanded to its ultimate capacity. The arterial mains recommended for construction in the low level system of Salina, indicated on Plate X include those which are required to correct present deficiencies as well as those that will be required for future expansion of the City through the study period. The date noted on each pipeline indicates the year by which the respective improvement should be completed. 46 \...- WATfR DISTRIBUTION SYSTfM IMPROVfMfNTS L PLATE X L r> '0r~,,~ .... . ,\,~,~~~",,,,,~,_?,-,,-,,,.,'~."(:"r, .,1_: 1 ,.":~ -~ 1"'13 } "_-\<'~!,"::"'" . , "" ''-' ", " ":~:'~: ,..\;~, !. '. : .,-'" f}~ l'~:~~j: .':~~ I "~'J ti,r; \' ~, ",/~ i': '~',:':~~' 'J \'/i,;:,;.:~S ' . .~" . . ~'~- )~ '~;' ,v" .' , """i:'{'~/" j,r ! t~t':>:};,;~i;:;, " ,- H~=~&l'~J\,,;~\ ;:. '~::,"';'::'-.J i :~:.,". "'"',, ;' ....*Y' 9\.'Q>c.~~~lt,<~.,~...,.. '~~.*"~ ..~ ",<,.~,"':...'.~ ,~' I'''' " n. '. T:"~&~x!7f<'~ I ",Jll,),'! .,", :"^ ~ ..' " ..." ...." ~---T",i::)~\&~ \';~Y/i, ,v r "i.. o ;:;'(;t,'j';,,- i"(~ ~!\~l~~,,,,r~. ":"~{'~J' J~':Y'~"" i',~;~~_:;:".J,. ..~<' . "';~\~'. v...-'.." :1>'~'\'-". '.'..',..;.,~ .-;." ,....;.1>", "f"~'.}.'.:'..' t'=';~'~c;y. .."'., j/ ~~L' S;:" h...., .....Jr1 :.../ i , rz.... " ,... \~ 3~' r-,,\ ' ~ ,- ,c' . /,' ".~"" . ,~' ,f- . '7',~ :~- It 1", ,!.' '.. .€', A.. ~ ,,,-S . :~.,! ~"" ;'f . ..'" ... ~~~ - ,.:'-,,- ~ " ~. .-:."_.....L. I} ~ -~ , _1" . 1~>,. co'. ~ <'''''''''_~ " ,:" ,("~ """'" '.'," , f'~{~" '~,~;:J' "/17< "1'.:~! '-... __ f'"/ :'- ,:..,r.".~' li"'::>;';,\~) , -. '-./'J>,y" -' 't\ J' ~ ,~~/ ri""~_ ,;<'1 \\'.'r..'., .',~ '.1"2/ l~' ~"\' ~,'.'" i'~ . " ~~;\;~(;:~' I,'; )}i!"~m~ d~;" ',,- '!.. f. l' ;';';" j;" l~l::;,: )\;,,' ~V\ ~ ~~ ' _., (~JJ;,1 ~ : I ;<;J)? It~,.'j(:~,-~,~~,~, (, {~J2~';'V( r ;'\')'/': "\i , ,j t 'g:;~ . . ':t.};". :! ,:~'~ ~~ I ;'rt.>~\~?: ':'~7'1:~', ' > ~; .....;.," 'C ,(;l'f. 1. f~],.<)I :. ~:'. /-- . \. u"11}=J ~ " . ~ 1; a';1 'lL ~~.., l ',;; .' i"-.' " 4J!1~~' .!i'\.... ',"" .."' '\;, ;,_,_,." ....' -f;-' y".~ ~, C.':,:::\} ';:",i:;:"/ ~i': 1',:;.:;;..-,:1- '. ;,'... I., ,0. ~ . ~/;/,,:,~:, " r,r(~) r:! ~'/. l' ", {.'~r\ ,.' ": J--'. . ," ",,-S ,',>":--"'.'''.,,, -' :y; ':~,\< ~ 'r ,: .~, \ '-'--' , '\1 'J . .~ ":\;'~~~,""" .'\ ;;~,.-{.' ~: e.~--' _:,1\ ~Ii:'. "~", ;:\ 4 ~i;~ ,i -"'- ""n." ...."., ;; , /.:'\,! ;,,, ". '. '. ~.' I; "'. ", '.. J>::: .., .',," ---"'- - - '. ". : r.. _ _ \- ", '." t~'::~!.~:l Oo~~T(IU"'1. ~IP[L!"[ ,~~ c <~~%<~\:, ~ ;r]'.,':~ ~,:'~ i<' f~}'; ~=;:,~ .,~,,: :: :::::::::.: :::~ , <'. .";' '"..,," .\, I'~:, . " , , ,A '" .,. .,) i,' \' '.d... !, : , "., ,.. " t, - ,C' 'j . :,.~~~ ,\.{( .,' ~,:\.:~'t'r ' " ! C,; ;,.;" \ ,~, ~ <- ,~w 1'-; ~( r~ ~ ,'l? (!(ij .!" - .'('~ .J :'i;iJ '. . ~....",.' /eJ ..l". no ""."" "., ' _~' ~:o >>/;>:~~;, hw:- ~_/':; ._ ~ \ 1-, ' ""'~(,~~; ,i \0: '" " ~,' I'l~ I..~~:;';"~CI .,~ liD ~o. ??f: '. , "'I"':':"'" . ~'\' .. I . ,'...,~""-~-:."; ., r ? ~,..."....'el- ,.'l-r~ -- ," '--, , ""," ,;?:;iT' 'I ,r '. -'~ 'lL^", '>"'- ,J, J!/ . _ m ""'-1 \,' '.n:';~ 1/ ;)): !;N\'; f~\\) j /';/ ~'" I . ---Ji,'. (s';~ '''"J: ;, ~1ij::Q-J~::)),3;".>':~ .,\.\ ,/.- .:,:;.}'..' i~, i~...:...\t> /':15i':' ; ~'~,l(:~ ; / < "~'<:;~~ ~'Y.} , \ d III ~~f:\j,J~' ',"': ~ ,.Ift~.. ~ 1~,~ "~:/-' ~~ .~"'" % J~: 'I,..h[//::\.."..,\: ~ l.::; .<i" ':'<r;.ii' ! '{)'~',.'T'.~.- .Jrtj'- y '. ~\"ll;:",? FJ_, d'",.'~' ;C>.L;? I. J _, ~'",,/r'~lL?'}~ (!...' ,I,t: ;j r+tJ7':VjLi~';,z ,~::'i:.,,<; ~ ( - ,......,~-.. \, ~'t I - '. >; .. '-:,' ,.._,..., :.." '.,'.\ ",J ....'iC.~ SAliNA WATfR STUDY "- ~ '--' '-- "- ,,~: L.. - mom, 1966 '-- SAliNA. KANSAS \.II...-'iLS 0 N \- , . ':C'Mt<.,!,/" !:.~'..;,~..~, ! f ~. ,; "., ~ ': '~ ' x;w ~ <OIi.Xio:') <<KXl ~".. r,."l"Pl'il(; se.....[ ;~ JUO t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I WATfR DISTRIBUTION SYSTfM IMPROVfMfNTS PLATE X ----1l..:...... E~ISTIN(; PIPELINE ~h'~' ,,< ~" .., . . I , , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I FUTURE SYSTEM The facilities deemed to be essential to a complete and workable water distribution system by the year 2010, the end of the period covered by this study, are shown on Plate X. Pumping Stations. It is recommended that the high service pumping capability of the present water treatment plant be increased to a total capacity of 25 mgd when the plant is expanded to its ultimate capacity. An ultimate total of 25 mqd high service pumping capacity is recommended for the proposed southern water treatment plant. A booster pumping station is recommended for inclusion with a proposed 4 million gallon storage reservoir on east Crawford Avenue. This station will transfer water from the existing low-level system to the high-level system east of the Smoky Hill River. Its ultimate pumping capacity should be at least 8 mgd. It may be advisable, prior to the proposed construction of the South Water Treatment Plant, to install a temporary booster station near the Westinqhouse plant to transfer water from the low-level system to the high-level system serving Westinghouse. Storage. There appears to be no need for increasing the underground storage volume at the present water treatment plant. One additional elevated storage tank is recommended for the low-level system. It should be located near St. Johns Military School. The eastern high-level system could be served adequately by the proposed 4 million gallon ground storage reservoir and pumping station on east Crawford Avenue, in combination with the existing 0.5 million gallon Gypsum Hill tank and one additional 0.5 million gallon tank to be located south of the old municipal airport. When the east Crawford Avenue reservoir and pumping station are constructed, the existing Greeley Avenue booster station may be placed on standby service. Underground storage at the proposed southern water treatment plant should be provided in a total amount of 2.0 million gallons. The 1.5 million gallon Camp Phillips reservoir will be continued in service and can be used in conjunction with both the high- and low- level systems. It is proposed to assign one-half of the 2 million gallon storage volume at the new plant and two-thirds of the Camp Phillips storage volume to the high-level system and the remainder to the low-level system, although all could be utilized, if necessary, by either system. Under these conditions, the total high-level storage volume would be 7.0 million gallons distributed as follows: 47 Underground 4.0 mg at the east Crawford Reservoir 1.0 mg at the new water plant Overhead 1.0 mg in one existing and one new elevated tank 1.0 mg in Camp Phillips Reservoir The total storage volume in the low-level system would be 7.15 million gallons, distributed as follows: Underground 3.0 mg at the present water treatment plant 1.0 mg at the new water treatment plant Overhead 2.65 mg in one new and four existing elevated tanks 0.5 mg in Camp Phillips Reservoir. Arterial Mains. The arterial mains indicated on Plate X are adequate for the predicted demand of the year 2010 and perhaps well beyond that time, since they are sized and routed such that additional extensions and connections can be made to them. The schedule of construction indicated on Plate X corresponds with the projected population increase and land use development, Should wide variations from the predicted patterns become evident, the distribution system improvements should be adjusted accordingly. The master plan of system improvements should be reviewed at regular intervals and not less frequent then every five years. One of the more important main requirements is the one on Ohio from Crawford south 4 miles to the "Well Field" Road. Initially, this main will be of great benefit to south and southeast Salina. After the second water treatment plant is constructed, this pipeline will be the principal route for transmitting water from the new plant to the eastern portion of the City, until such time as the proposed southeastern high-level arterial main is required. Most of the other arterial mains proposed for the low-level system will be required as the areas adjacent to them develop as residential or industrial sites. In the eastern high-level area, only the proposed principal feeder mains have been indicated on Plate X. In addition, many smaller arterial and distribution mains will eventually be required. The City should adopt a pattern of installing pipelines at least l2-inch in size along each 1/4-section line, or the equivalent thereof, The eastern expansion area can be served for many years by the present water treatment plant facilities, through the proposed east Crawford Avenue reservoir and pumping station. For a number of additional years, this area can be served by the present plant, as expanded, supplemented by the south water treatment plant. This method of oper- ation can probably continue until time for the first expansion of the south water treatment plant, at which time the proposed southeastern arterial main, proceeding east from the south plant and thence north, is constructed. 48 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Pumping facilities in the new south water treatment plant should be designed to discharge directly to the Camp Phillips reservoir which, is some 60 feet higher than storage in Salina proper. The area served by the Camp Phillips tank and the eastern area (all property of the Smoky Hill River) should be placed on the same storage level. This would reduce the system levels to two, which is the minimum possible when considering the topography of the expanded City. Only arterial mains should be connected to the 24-inch pipeline between the new plant and the Camp Phillips tank, and those mains leading to the low-level system must be equipped with pressure reducing valves, as indicated on Plate X. 49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 5 ECONOMICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I GENERAL The availability and quality of ground water and surface water supplies as required to meet the long-range requirements of the City of Salina have been reviewed. These prospective sources involve considerable variations in costs of acquisition and treatment. It is necessary, therefore, to examine the relative costs of acquiring, transporting and treating each source or combination of sources. The proposed general development plan for water treatment facilities requires a second water treat- ment plant in the southern portion of the City, The new treat- ment plant will provide a second supply source to the distri- bution system and it is common to each of the development plans for water supply sources, The costs of developing the distribu- tion system necessary to serve a growing community are not included. DEVELOPMENT PLANS Four general plans of developing supply sources have been con- sidered for detailed cost analysis. Each plan requires the continued use of local water supplies, i ,e., ground water and the Smoky Hill River, supplemented as necessary by additional surface water supplies. Each plan projects the continued use of well water to blend with surface water supplies to provide minimal variations of temperature of finished water delivered to the system. The blending must be accomplished at each treatment plant and in approximately the same proportion to minimize temperature differentials within the distribution system, A calcining unit has been included in the proposed plant to reclaim lime and to reduce the cost of solids disposal. The four general development plans are as follows: Plan A. Using local well fields and the Smoky Hill River as supply sources, this plan is a continuation and enlargement of the present method of water supply, The existing well field will require expansion and must be capable of producing the entire demand for short periods of time. The schedule of improvements required to meet the projected demand for water service are indicated in the following tabulation, Estimates of cos tare based upon present ~ cos ts , By 1972: Installation of 10 new wells to the northeast of of the City and connecting pipelines to the present water treatment plant, The addition of these wells will bring the total number of usable wells to 25. Estimated cost, $1,690,000. By 1975: Increase the capacity of the present water treat- ment plant to 20 million gallons per day and update present facilities by modernizing the calcining plant and providing a system of solids waste disposal. Estimated cost, $1,500,000. 50 By 1985: Construct new south water treatment plant and expand existing Schilling Well Field. The treatment plant to have an initial capacity of 10 million gallons per day with capability of expansion to 20 or more million gallons per day, Eight new wells and collecting pipelines will be required. A new river intake, pumping station and raw water supply line will be required. Total estimated cost, $3,750,000. By 1990: Construct second increment of south well field; nine additional wells and collecting pipelines< Estimated cost, $1,230,000, By 1995: Construct addition to south water treatment plant, adding a capacity of 10 million gallons per day, Estimated cost, $2,400,000. By 2000: Construct third increment of south well field; nine additional wells and collecting pipelines. Estimated cost, $900,000, Plan Bo Using local well fields, the Smoky Hill River and Kanopolis Reservoir as supply sources, the local well field would be expanded only as required for temperature control of the finished water. The water supply from Kanopolis Reservoir would be used only when the Smoky Hill River fails to meet required demands or quality. The water supply from Kanopolis Reservoir would be delivered through the Kanopolis Irrigation District North Canal to a point southeast of Assaria. See Plate IV. A pumping station and pipeline would be required from the end of the irrigation canal to the two water treatment plants. As an interim measure, the Kanopolis supply could be discharged at the end of the irrigation canal to Dry Creek and thus to the Smoky Hill River where it would be collected by the river intake facilities. The construction schedule for supply and treatment facilities would be the same as for Plan A with exception of the deletion of the additional south wells scheduled in 1990 and in 2000, Additional costs incurred would be the cost of storage and maintenance of storage in Kanopolis Reservoir, For 10,000 acre-feet of firm yield per year the cost of storage is estimated to be $1,500,000. Maintenance cost is estimated at $3,300 per year, The repayment of this amount to the Government must be within a 50 year period, For purpose of these economical comparisons, the repayment is computed as follows, and at an interest rate of 4.625 percent: Contract with Government 1975 No payments for 10 years, until 1985 Payment of interest on total amount and payment of one-half of storage for 20 years, until 2005 Payment of interest and on total storage for 20 years, until 2005 51 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PLAN A - LOCAL WELLS AND SMOKY HILL RIVER ESTIMATED ANNUAL WATER CONSUMPTION IN ACRE FEET EXISTING PLANT SOUTH PLANT YEAR TOTAL WELLS SURFACE WELLS SURFACE MAXIMUM 6650 1995 4655 1970 AVERAGE 5646 1694 3952 MINIMUM 5081 1524 3557 MAXIMUM 8100 2430 5670 1975 AVERAGE 6586 1976 4610 t~INIMUM 5927 1778 4149 MAXIMUM 9775 2933 6842 1980 AVERAGE 7573 2272 5301 MINIMUM 6816 2045 4771 MAXIMUM 11,600 3600 8000 1985 AVERAGE 8774 2632 6142 MINIMUM 7897 2369 5528 MAXIMUM 13,750 2062 4812 2063 4813 1990 AVERAGE 0,034 1505 3512 1505 3512 MIN I MUM 9031 1355 3161 1354 3161 MAXIMUM 6.150 2422 5652 2423 5653 1995 AVERAGE 1.798 1770 4129 1770 4129 MINIMUM 0,618 1593 3716 1593 3716 MAXIMUM n 8,800 2820 6580 2820 6580 2000 AVERAGE n 3 ,641 2046 4774 2046 4775 MINIMUM 12,277 1841 4297 1842 4297 MAXIMUM ?1,650 3504 8177 2990 6978 2005 AVERAGE 15,907 2386 5567 2386 5568 MINIMUM 14,316 2147 5011 2147 5011 MAXIMUM ?5,000 4509 10,522 2990 6978 2010 AVERAGE 8,000 2700 6300 2700 6300 MINIMUM 16,200 2430 5670 2430 5670 50/50 SPLIT BETWEEN OLD PLANT AND NEW PLANT UNTIL 2005 MAX. YR. ONLY 30/70 SPLIT BETWEEN WELL WATER AND RIVER WATER, BOTH PLANTS TABLE 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PLAN B AND PLAN C LOCAL WEll FIELD, SMOKY HILL RIVER & KANOPOlIS ESTIMATED ANNUAL WATER CONSUMPTION IN ACRE FEET EXISTING PLANT SOUTH PLANT YEAR TOTAL WELLS SURFACE WELLS SURFACE MAXIMUM 6650 1995 4655 1970 AVERAGE 5646 1694 3952 MINIMUM 5081 1524 3557 MAXIMUM 8100 2430 5670 1975 AVERAGE 6586 1976 4610 MINIMUM 5927 1778 4149 MAXIMUM 9775 2933 6842 1980 AVERAGE 7573 2272 5301 MINH1UM 6816 2045 4771 MAXIMUM 1 ,600 3600 8000 1985 AVERAGE 8774 2632 6142 MINIMUM 7897 2369 5528 MAXIMUM 39750 2062 4812 1376 5500 1990 AVERAGE 0,034 1505 3512 1003 4014 MINIMUM 9031 1355 3161 903 3612 MAXIMUM 6,150 2422 5653 1615 6460 1995 AVERAGE 1,798 1770 4129 1180 4719 MINIMUM 0,618 1593 3716 1062 4247 MAXIMUM 8,800 2820 6580 1880 7520 2000 AVERAGE 3 ,641 2046 4774 1364 5457 MINIMUM 2 ~277 1841 4297 1228 4911 MAXIMUM '1 ,650 3504 8177 1994 7974 2005 AVERAGE 5,907 2386 5567 1591 6363 MINIMUM 4,316 2147 5011 1432 5726 MAXIMUM '5,000 4509 10,522 1994 7974 2010 AVERAGE 8,000 2700 6300 1800 7200 MINIMUM 6,200 2430 5670 1620 6480 50/50 SPLIT BETWEEN BOTH PLANTS UNTIL 2005 MAX. YR. ONLY 30{70 SPLIT BETWEEN WELL WATER & SURFACE WATER IN OLD PLANT ,20/80 SPLIT BETWEEN WELL WATER & SURFACE WATER IN NEW PLANT TABLE 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I PLAN D LOCAL WELL FIELD, SMOKY HILL RIVER & MILFORD RESERVOIR ESTIMATED ANNUAL WATER CONSUMPTION IN ACRE FEET EXISTING PLANT SOUTH PLANT YEAR TOTAL WELLS SURFACE WELLS SURFACE MAXIMUM 6650 1995 4655 1970 AVERAGE 5646 1694 3952 MINIMUM 5081 1524 3557 MAXIMUM 8100 2430 5670 1975 AVERAGE 6586 1976 4610 MINmUM 5927 1778 4149 MAXIMUM 9775 2933 6842 1980 AVERAGE 7573 2272 5301 MINIMUM 6816 2045 4771 MAXIMUM 11 ,600 3600 8000 1985 AVERAGE 8774 2632 6142 MINIMUM 7897 2369 5528 MAXIMUM 13,750 2062 4812 1376 5500 1990 AVERAGE 10,034 1505 3512 1003 4014 MINIMUM 9031 1355 3161 903 3612 MAXIMUM 1 6 ,150 2422 5653 1615 6460 1995 AVERAGE 11 ,798 1770 4129 1180 4719 MINIMUM 10,618 1593 3716 106? 4247 t~AXI MUM 18,800 2820 6580 1880 7520 2000 AVERAGE 13 ,641 2046 4774 1364 5457 MINIMUM 12,277 1841 4297 1228 4911 MAXIMUM 21,650 3504 8177 1994 7974 2005 AVERAGE 15,907 2386 5567 1591 6363 MINIMUM 14,316 2147 5011 1432 5726 MAXIMUM 25,000 4509 10,526 1994 7974 2010 AVERAGE 18,000 2700 6300 1800 7200 MINIMUM 16,200 2430 5670 1620 6480 1150/50 SPLIT BETWEEN BOTH PLANTS UNTIL 2005 MAX YR. ONLY j30/70 SPLIT BETWEEN WELL WATER & SURFACE WATER IN OLD PLANT 120/80 SPLIT BETWEEN WELL WATER & SURFACE WATER IN NEW PLANT TABLE 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Cityls share of enlarging the Kanopolis Irrigation District Canal to convey 75 cfs (48 mgd) to the end of the North Canal is estimated to be $1,000,000 with an annual maintenance cost of $15,000. The total amount must be paid to the Government within a 50 year period beginning with completion of the project. The interest rate is computed at 4.625 percent. Project com- pletion is estimated for the year 1975. The cost of the pumping station and the pipeline from the irrigation canal to the water treatment plants is estimated at $3,191,000 and is scheduled to be in operation by 1985. It is important to note that delivery of Kanopolis Reservoir water through the Irrigation District Canal can only be made during the irrigation season, approximately 6 months. Any other release of water stored in Kanopolis Reservoir for City use would have to be made at Kanopolis Dam directly into the Smoky Hill River for con- veyance. Since such release would be during non-irrigation periods, a substantial portion of the release should reach the Salina River intake stations. Plan C, Using local well fields, the Smoky Hill River and Kanopolis Reservoir as supply sources, this plan would be similar to Plan B. Instead of using the irrigation canal as a mode of conveyance, the City would construct pretreatment and pumping facilities at Kanopolis Reservoir and a pipeline from the Reservoir directly to the City water treatment plants. See Plate IV. The initial capacity of the pipeline would be 16 million gallons per day, the average daily flow for the design period. The difference between actual demand and the capacity of the pipeline must be supplied from wells. The costs of storage in the Reservoir would be the same as in Plan B. The pipeline to Kanopolis is scheduled for completion by 1985. The pretreatment and pumping facilities and the pipeline are estimated to cost $4,700,000. Plan D. Using local well fields, the Smoky Hill River and Milford Reservoir as supply sources, this plan is similar to Plan C except that water is supplied from the Milford Reservoir. The City would construct pretreatment and pumping facilities at Milford Reservoir and a pipeline between the Reservoir and the City water treatment plants. See Plate IV. These facilities are scheduled for completion by 1985 and are estimated to cost $7,150,000. The storage costs in Milford Reservoir are estimated at $1,000,000 for 10,000 acre-feet and are scheduled for repayment in the same manner as for Kanopolis Reservoir storage in Plan B. Annual main- tenance costs for the Milford Reservoir storage is estimated to be $2,000 per year. CAPITAL INVESTMENT COSTS The capital investment costs of the four development plans are shown in Tables 10, 11, 12, and 13. The rate of interest for munici- pal bond issues has been computed at 5 percent. All bond issuesS2 under $2,000,000 have been projected for a repayment period of 20 years, All bond issues in excess of $2,000,000 have been pro- jected for a repayment period of 30 years, COSTS OF OPERATION The total cost of water acquisition from any particular source must include the cost of operation in addition to the capital expenditures, The costs of operation differ with each supply source and are dependent upon water quality and transmission requirements. The estimated costs of treatment and transmission, based on present day values, have been shown in Table 5. Since it is proposed to continue the practice of using local river water and well water as primary sources of supply and under some plans, supplement with reservoir water, it is necessary to estimate the percentage of water to be obtained from each source, This estimation is shown in tabular form in Tables 7,8 and 9, In computing operating costs, the average annual consumption from each source has been used. During a drought period, extremely heavy demands may force the total yearly operating costs higher but the unit cost will be less than that for the average year and the net income from sales will probably increase, The estimated costs of operation for each plan are shown in Tables 10, 11, 12 and 13, SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED ANNUAL COSTS The following tabulation is a summary of the costs of acquiring, transporting and treating the municipal water supply for each of the various plans, Costs are computed for five year intervals. PERIOD/PLAN 1967 1970-75 1975-80 1980-85 1985-90 1990-95 1995-00 2000-05 2005-10 TABLE 14 ESTIMATED ANNUAL PRODUCTION COSTS Cost Per 1000 Gallons Cost Per Capita ABC DAB C D $0,202 0, 198 $0,198 0.245 0,268 0.225 0.246 0.225 0,326 0,208 0.268 0.192 0,250 0.190 0.230 0.175 0.211 $ 9.50 $0.198 $0.198 0.245 0,245 0.225 0.225 0.347 0.391 0,292 0.328 0,273 0.301 0,252 0,273 0.230 0,251 9.48 $ 9,48 $ 9.48 $ 9.48 12.09 13.25 12.09 12.09 11.37 12.40 11,37 11.37 11.77 17.01 18.10 20.44 11.17 14.36 15.68 17.62 10.58 13.80 15.07 16.60 10.77 13.01 14.23 15.47 10,09 12,18 13.26 14.44 53 I I I I I I I I I- Z we: ~w 1-> <e: ~o I-Z oIJ< (/) w...J U...J e:w 6~ (/)1 lJ...< Oz 1-< (/)...J 00. U I I I I I I I I I I I o '7 10 N o N 10 N o N o N o N 10 o N o o N o 10 C o N 10 o , o o o N o o o N 10 '" '" 10 '" , o '" '" 000 "'0'" ....lD<O 0-'" -0 -<ON o '" , 10 lD '" OLnoa ;;tNOOl -CX)Q)(,Q 0010-0) NI"-O- NC\JtON 10 ";' o lD '" 10100 NO "lDlD "'<0- ....0 -N<O o ";' 10 .... '" 10"'0 ONO NlDlD ctJ~ cD -"' ........0 ON<O '" .... o .... '" N'" 01 "'0 <0<0 10<0 0- o .... 01 N <0 N o a:::~,,, >- 10 ',,," >-w lD<..l'" w->- 0> "'0 W", '" "'* >- 10 -",.,@) >-w . lD<..l '" w->- 0> "'0 ~(\l 100 <0<0 "'''' Il)~ O. ION w O~ Z"'.... ~~ 000 000 000 O~O" 0 010", 10 ~ 1"-. - '" '" "'" w >- " ~ >- >-'" Z -' "'" -' -' W 0..", '0 >- >-Z ffi ~< o X>- '" w z >--' < Z....JCl...J .....WZQ. "''''< W 0..", Cl::UJXW o...ZLLJ:z: o 01 <0 01 ": o '" <0 '" 1000 ....OlD "<00 "'0- "'lD<O "....'" ": o 01 <0 '" "'00 ....OlD ::t l.OhO. ",0- "'lD<O ".....'" ": o 01 <0 '" 100 ....0 "'" "'0 "'lD ". .... '" I' " '" '" " lD '" '" '" "" N 10 <0 '" <0 N lD N '" .... 000 000 000 000 "'00 N"",,, -N >- Z '" < -' -' -' 0.. W '" '" -,,", _Jl.J:': wZ>- '"' :::> 00 :>:20'" >- < :::>0..0 0>< 0 ",W< o o <0 o lD .... 00 OlD "'0 o lD <0 ....'" 00 OlD <00 0- lD<o ....'" o N <0 10 o o '" o lD .... o lD <0 o .... '" <0 '" N 10 "" lD " 10 lD OLOOa O')-co,.... r-: - M_~ ""''''''1''-0) O'l~r--lt) ::tLOMlO 10 " lD "" '" lD '" C'lLnlOCI OO""'Ln::r ,..... 1.O~ CO. en M\OCOf'- (")1"-(\100 :t";:tM::t '" <0 .... '" '" " OIDtnl() Oll"-;:r;;t ::r::t-O MC'lMO I"--CON (Y)::tC\J::t 10 '" '" '" N " N OI.l'lOLn .:.TONk!) IONO.::t ONMO C\J1l")::ttO M(")C\JM '" '" "" <0 N '" N LOOU')O o LOlO CO OOl.OlD LnLO-1O O.::t-IO .::t::t-- o " o " '" '" 00 lD.... "'10 "'.... ....N "10 o '" lD '" 10 '" 100 ....'" ....lD 10<0 - '" "" .... o <0 N N N 0'" 00 N.... "''' "~ '" "'''' '" <0 N o o o o o .... " o ...J < >- C >- , ~ on z 0_ - W >- - < - f5~ ~ 0.. -' OW-V) ......3t~jC,l) 0, UJ ~o::~o:: I- V) UJ UJ (/)->3:> Ox-w- UWCt:::z;o:: 10 10 N lD 01 o 10 '" .... N .... '" 10 .... lD " o N '" <0 .... '" o 01 '" .... '" o 10 10 .... o o 10 N <0 N .... lD 10 o '" '" 10 .... ...J < I, t:> ~ lD :::> V) o o o .... '" lD " '" '" o '" lD 10 " o N '" o lD '" ,.; 0, N o .... '" 0.... 0- '" <C- <0 10 "" lD '" '" ". ,.; 0.... 0.... .... lD- 10 o '" 10 0.... 0'" lD o o ,.; N- '" "~ '" ". '" N lD '" 0('> 00 lD 'N <0- "" <0 .... '" OlD 0,," .... '01 "" ...J < >- o >- ~ ~ CO ZOo. 0< <..l >- " '" ... ...J ~ >- 0.. '" 00 0.. <..l 0'" 00 '" -0 10 - '" "'''' "'.... "'- <00 0.... 0.... "0 ....'" .... - "0 '0 10 - lD OlD 010 '" ,0 10 - .... ON "'''' ....- "'0 <olD -0 OlN 00 "'" 0'" "'" 010 "'10 ....N -N lDO OlIO ....". ON .... 0 <olD -'" <00 ~ t: '" >- " < >- ~ !;;: UJ ...J '" < >- '" "'0 W 0 >-0 < :>0" ...J.... < >- >- V) 00 >-<..l 10 I TABLE I I I I I I I I ~ Z lLI ~ ~lLI zit lLIQ. ~:::> r-VI <(0: lLIO 0:> ~o: ""lLI VI lLIlLI Uo: 0: ::>VI OJ VlO u..Q. 00 Z ~ <( VI~ 01 Um z <( J Q. I I I I I I I I I I I o '7 '" '" o '" '" '" , o 0' o '" o '" , '" o '" c', o '" o '" c o '" '" o , o o o '" o ~ , '" '" '" '" '" , o '" '" 000 ",0'" 1'-<Xl<O 0-'" -0 -<D", o '" , '" <Xl '" QU"lC>O .::rNO()) -000010 00\0-0'1 C\JI'-O- C\JC\ltON '" <Xl o <Xl '" "''''0 -"'0 ",<Xl <Xl "'<D- -1'-0 -"'<D o <Xl , '" I'- '" "''''0 0"'0 "'<Xl <Xl <Xl<D- 1'-1'-0 O~C\l \D '" I'- o I'- '" "'''' -'" "'0 <D<D "'<D 0- o I'- '" '" <D '" o a::: ~.;c >-'" ',<;v >-cu "',-"" cu->- COO 000 CU", Vl C::l':':' >- '" "'" >-CU <OUOO cu- >- COO <0<0 ~'" '" 0 <D<D "'''' "'0 "'''' w C=> ;;O:(I)Cfl ~~ 0000 0000 0000 0000 0'1 OU"J 0 coan,......::t - '" '" 00 << CU >- " ~ I- >- :z: V) ...... 2~~ ~'" >- 0 '" I-- V)ZI- <0 <<=> UJUlX 0 C...JW~U) .J z I- W << Z:EO.....lQ w :z: a... z: Vl << .. IUJWo..~o... 0:: o>cW>c a...ZLLJZLLJ o o <D o <Xl I'- o o <0 o <Xl I'- 00 "'0 <D<D "'0 <Xl "'I'- 00 ,"0 <D<D ,"0 <Xl "'I'- 00 "'0 <D<D "'0 <Xl "'I'- 00 "'0 <D<D '" 0 <Xl "'I'- <Xl 0 "'''' "'- "'<D "'''' "'- o o o o '" '" <Xl :;;i >- o >- , ~ Vl o o <D o <Xl I'- o o <D o <Xl I'- o '" '" o o o '" '" I'- <Xl I'- '" o o '" '" o o o N '" I'- <Xl I'- '" o o '" '" o o o " '" I'- <Xl I'- '" O. o '" '" o o o '" '" I'- <Xl I'- '" o o '" '" '" '" '" '" I'- <Xl I'- '" o ot) '" '" <D N '" '" I'- <Xl I'- '" o o '" o '" '" '" o '" <Xl <D '" '" I'- o <D '" '" '" '" <D '" o '" I'- ot) I'- o N o 00 o 00 o 00 - 00 '" 0 0 - 0 '" '" -- Vl>- :::i~ 000 .J '" >- << OVl z z_ LI..< <0 Ou I- '" '" ::z W% 0 ~O 0::0 U 0- c(- 0:::1- '%1- W Ll..c( (1)< (,!J '" "'<< LLJ- >-- CI:: Q..a: 1--0: 0 -0: -et:: l- n.._ U- en CC CO 0", "'<D 0'" "'<Xl - '" "'''' I'-<D "'''' 0'" "'<Xl -'" '" '" I'-<D "'''' 0'" "'<Xl -'" "'''' I'-<D "'''' 0"" ~g; "'''' I'-<D "'''' 0'" "'<Xl - " "'''' I'-<D "'''' 0'" "'<D - '" "'''' I'-<D "'''' 0'" "'<Xl -<D ""'''' I'- N'" 0'" ot)<Xl -<D "'''' I'- N '" o '" '" I'- o. o ot) '" I'- N o o '" '" '" '" <D <Xl '" I'- '" '" <D <Xl '" I'- o <D I'- I'- o ot{)oo 01-:3"1"- ""'-lOoo ""''''''-.::t 0'l.::t101O .::flON""" '" <0 I'- I'- '" <D I'- I'- Ic:>",,,,,,, COr--MOl ,.....IOMIO MICalO C"')""-M :::t.::tC\J1.O o '" '" <0 I'- <D QU":llOlt) Olr--tO.::t :::t.::t,....OO MOOON "",-oo.::t M::t-lt) I'- <0 '" '" Oll)Ol.O .::tOlO- I.ONOC\ OC\JC\J1,(l C\JU')lOl.O MM-;:t I'- <D '" '" 1.00 LOU"> OlOOl.::r 00;:2'- 1.01.Cl.::t:::t 0;:3"r-- "'''' N o '" 00 <XlI'- "'''' "'I'- I'-N "'''' ""' I'- N o '" "'0 I'- '" I'-<Xl "'<D -ot) "''' '" I'- '" 0'" 00 N I'- "'''' "'''' "'''' z o >- - << OOVl>- ~j~~ ...J OWX...JO::: c( ~WW- b ~ -~~ I- I-G:::::r::a::: . I--U')WI-UJ ~ ~x~5~ (I) uwa::V)Q::: <0 o N '" <Xl '" o <D I'- ot) I'- ot) <Xl o o '" '" '" <D <Xl '" o '" '" I'- o o '" '" <D '" I'- <Xl ot) o '" '" '" I'- -' << >- o >- , ~ Vl <Xl '" <Xl '" '" <Xl 0- 00 I'- '" '" '" ,'" '" - <Xl '" '" '" '" '" 00 o <Xl N , ',,", '" - I'- ...; o '" I'- '" '" I'- '" 0<0 0'" ""' .", <D- <D o <D <Xl 0- 00 I'- '1'- ~- C> '" ",' o or I'- 00 0", <Xl 'N ~- '" I'- '" ..; '" o <D '" o 0", 00' <Xl ' tO~~ '" ",' o <Xl 0'" I'- ,'" <D I'- '" .J << I- o I- z '" 0.. -U >- "- .... '.J =>>- "'V> 00 '" U i;! << '" '" o <Xl 0- '" ,'" '" - '" '" - '" ,"N <DO ",0 1'-'" 1'-'" ",0 00 "'''' ,....~~ NO <0 <Xl <0 "'''' 00 ",<D ON .::t~ c: ,"0 "'<0 1'-'" -N <Xl 0 "'w I'-<D ON 1'-0 <0 <Xl -'" <DO 00 >- "- t;: '" '" >- ~ >- ~ ~ W.J 00 << >- '" 000 W 0 1-0 << ~;;. <<>- >- Vl 00 >- U II I TABLE I I I I I I I I- Z W ~ I-W zi WIl. ~::> t-(/) <(0: Wo 0:> 1-0: o<lW (/) ww Uo: ~(/) 0:J (/)0 u...1l. o~ 1-<( (/)~ 01 Uu Z <( -I 11. I I I I I I I I I I I I o 7 "' '" o '" "' '" , o '" o '" o '" , "' o '" , o o '" o , "' o o '" "' o o o o o '" o o o '" o "' 0> 0> "' 0> , o 0> 0> 000 <")00> f'-R CXl~ ~ 0-0> - 0- -00'" o 0> '" 00 0> Ol.OOO :::tC\lOO'l -COOO(O 001.0-0'1 "'....0 NC\ll.ON '" 00 o 00 0> ","'0 "'0 "0000 "'00- -....0 -"'00 o '? "' .... 0> "'"'0 0"'0 "'0000 0000- ........0 0"'00 "' .... , o .... 0> "'''' 0> "'0 0000 '" 00 0_ o .... 0> '" 00 '" o o::~~ >-'" ,"" ......, OJO"" ..,->- 0>- ",,0 u.<<") <n """ >-'" ',,,, ......, OJO"" ..,->- 0>- ""0 ~'" ",0 00 00 <")<") "'0 "'''' u.< o=> z<n'" o<n OJ- 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0000 0 0'l0100 :::t 101O,.....:::t M -('f')C\.I co '" "" .., ~ ~ .... .... z "'.... "" -' z a:U:::5 3<0.. ....0"" to- Cl)zt- OJ ""=> wV)x 0 C...Jwt-V> -' z ......, '" z:.~O...lO W %Q..Z '" "" "" WUJQ..3;:D.. c: -><:w><: o.ZWZw o o 00 o 00 .... o o 00 o 00 .... 00 0>0 0000 0>0 -00 "'.... 00 0>0 0000 ~o~ 00 "'.... 00 0>0 0000 al 0- -00 "'.... 00 0>0 0000 0>0 -00 "'.... 000 <")'" "'- <")00 "'" '" o o 00 o 00 .... o o o o 00 .... o '" '" o o o '" o 0> '" o o o ",' o ~ o o o '" o 0> '" o o o '" o '" '" '" <") '" '" '" " 00 '" <") '" o o o " '" '" o ~, OJ 00 '" '" .... o 00 '" '" '" '" 00 '" o -' "" .... o .... , OJ => '" o o '" 00 '" '" o o '" 00 '" '" o o '" '" '" '" o o '" '" '" '" o :;; '" '" '" o o '" '" '" '" o o .... '" o <") o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 o 0 .... '" " - -' o 0.. g "" '" o .... u.< z -' .., 0.. '" '" " '" 00 " '" '" " '" 00 " '" 00 '" '" 00 <") "' '" 00 .0 '" '" '" 00 '" '" .... '" o o .., '" "" "" e '" o o '" 00 '" '" " '" 00 " '" '" " '" 00 " '" '" " '" 00 " ~ .... e .... , OJ => 0' '" '" " '" 00 CT 00 00 " '" 00 " '" '" '" <") '" '" '" '" '" <") '" '" o 1.00 LO O)-;:too r---LO;:t .......,....-1'-- Ol;:;rLOr.Q :::TU')C\lO '" '" '" <") '" '" OlDLDln OOf"-MM r--IDMN M\OO'Ja Mr---C") ::1":::tNO'l '" 00 o " '" '" OlClLDO 0'If'-1.01.O ::t:::tr--oo (")0000 I'--COO M;:t-OO '" '" OlnOQ "0'" l.ONON OC\JC\Jt-- NlDlON M (") - 1O " " .... '" '" LnCLnO 01.0010 OO=tCl lnLO:::tU"l O=t,....- "" <") " " .... 00 "'.... "'''' "'.... ....'" "'" "'0 .... '" ....'" "'''' - '" "" 0., 00 "'.... "''' "'''' <") <") z o .... ~ .., 0.. o '" I- -' '" '" -'--' W><...JO::: 3.ww- 3<0 . >- t-D::'::ra:: (l)LUt-W ->:::1(1) x: - 0 LLl wa::(I)O:: ... o I- '" o o o <") 0> <") 00 <") '" '" c. o o 00 o '" o '" '" <") .... .... '" o '" ~ o '" " o ~ u '" '" .... o o '" '" 00 '" .... '" '" o 0> ~> '" .... ~ .... o I- ~ <n '" o '" '" '" <") '" o o <") ;;'; o 00 '" <") 0> .... 00 00 '" '" 00 0> o 0> o 00 0- .... ,'" "'- '" <") '" o '" '" 0.... 0<") '" o o <")' '" - '" '" C~ " C'> '" '" '" 00 00 '" 'N 00- " 00 .... 0> 0'" 0" .... '0> " -' "" .... o I- ~ "" "" '" Z 0.. 0"" -0 I- '- ~.. =>.... o..<n 00 0..0 000 0'" 0> ,<") '" - '" <")0 '" <") 0>'" 000 o co 0'" "'" ....'" ....'" ,,0 , " '" - '" 0.... 00 '" , '" '" - .... 0<") OJ.... ....'" "'0 0", 000 co , on 00- 00 00'" -0> 0> '" 00 ".... 0" "CO 0>0 <")'" ....'" - '" 000 0>", ...." 0'" ....0 00'" -0> 000 ~ t '" >- '- "" I- fil .... ~-' "" "" 1-'" ",,0 .., 0 ....0 "" - 3<'- -," "'.... ....'" 00 ....0 12 I TABLE I I 0 0 0 '7 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 '" 0 - - '" '" 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 '" '" 0 '" '" ": M 0 0 0 Ol en '" 0 00 00 0 0 '" "" "" M M 0 '" 0 0 0 0 , '" 0 0 '" '" - '" '" M M 0 0 o. Ol Ol '" 00 00 0 0 "" "" M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" Ol 0 Ol 0 '" '" - '" '" '" ~ M M , Ol 0 0 "" Ol .0 0 - '" 00 0 '" 0 M 0 "" o. ": M '" '" - '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 '" '" 0 " M ~ - Ol 0 Ol 0 '" '" Ol - " " <Xl Ol 0 " '" 0 '" '" ,~ 0 M ": "" - ~ '" '" "'. Ol Ol '" '" O. "". .-: ' " 0 Ol 0 Ol '" "" "' Ol '" '" "' - '" 0 0 <Xl 0 '" 0 M Ol" <Xl <Xl '" Ol - '" '" "" 0 M M '" " '" ,~ Ol ": Ol - N '" '" '" .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 "" " M '" Ol 0 Ol 0 '" '" <Xl "" M 00 "" <Xl 0 " "" "" 0 '" '" '" 0 M M "" '" M '" 0-, "! - "" '" , .-: Ol. .'" 0 Ol 0 0 '" M '" Ol '" ":? - '" - " 0 0 00 0 '" 0 M M "" N a; <Xl <Xl - 0 '" "" o. M. M '" " " 0> "'. '" - '" '" '" - '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ol 0 '" 0 - Ol "" '" Ol '" '" 0 <0 "'0 0 '" '" '" O. Ol Ol " " "" 0 <Xl 0 '" ""M '" ",. ,'" I- , Ol 0 0 "" '" M 0 00 '" " "' "' - "'0 '" '" <Xl 0 '" " '" "" ;: <Xl 0 "" " "" - Z Ol "" 0 ": '" ~ M - "" "'. "', Ol - '" '" '" L&J - - '" ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' 0 0 "' "' 0 '" '" <Xl I- L&J '" MO Ol N 0 Ol Ol " 0 "' Ol ~ Ol 0 '" ;;; '" Z Ol "" <Xl. '" '" 0, ": '" '" '" 0 "' Ol M M -J 0 0 ,"" 0 0 ;; Ol '" "" M 0 "'''' '" "" Ol '" - 0 0 UJ Q. Ol - N M '" " "" '" "' "'0 M M .., - ~ Q. Ol - '" Ol M - " M M - '" " 00 - - - ",' N - "' I- ::> <( II) 0 '" 0 0 0 '" '" 0 '" UJ 0 0 '" 0 '" 0 '" 0 " ;;; Ol " '" 0 Ol '" 0 Ol Ol 0 '" Ol '" - '" 0 " 0 a: a: , - <Xl ~ '" " O. '" ": 0 0 " Ol ~ "', "" " M '" <Xl. ,0 I- 0 <Xl '" ;; Ol '" "" M 0 '" '" " '" - <Xl <Xl '" Ol 0 Ol '" "" N '" '" " "" CO" "" "" 0 Ol '" > - '" '" '" M M - " " " '" o. Ol o(l a: - N N N - '" UJ UJ '" '" '" 0 0 00 0 0 0 "" M "' U II) <Xl '" 0 " 00"" '" Ol 0 M "" '" UJ "<Xl "'- 0 Ol'" "', "'. <Xl - '" a: 0 ' - a: 00 "'''' ;; " Ol"" "" - '" - <Xl 0 ::> Ol - "" Ol "" N 0 0 "' 0 - - '" '" Ol, " '" ~ O. II) 0 - - - M a: ..... 0 '" "'0 0 '" 0 '" '" 0 Ol Ol'" 0 0 "'0 M "" '" '" "' 0 0 """ 0 ..... ~ NOO<Xl 00 "" 00 "'. =0- <Xl 0", . '" -J '" <Xl"'- '" '" '" N '" '" - ""0 I- "" """"0 "' ;: '" "" N " ~ Ol ON'" Ol. " <Xl "'. II) - - - " 0 I U 0 '" "'''' "" 0 '" '" '" 0 <Xl '" <Xl "" -Ol 0 0 0 0 - 0 " - Ol Z "'0 '" '" "" Ol '" "" - - 0 ",. ,Ol <( "" "'''' Ol " M '" - '" 0 Ol "'''' '" '" Ol '" "" " -J - O- N M M 0- Ol, Q. - - - '" N '" '" 0 ": ": "" - - Ol 0 0 - - - - - ""'" >-'" 000 0 ..."" 1-'" M '" 0 <XlU"" Ol- ", ..,->- M'" '" 0> ""0 " '" '" "'M "'- " '" "".. >- '" '" 0 ....i. 1-'" '" '" <XlU"" M M ..,->- .,; O. 0> ""0 '" '" ~'" - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 .., 0 00 0 0 0 0 "" o=> 0 00 0 0 o. 0 "''''.. >- 0'" Ol 0'" 0 " '" 0 ... <Xl- '" "''''''' M - 0 - M ",. 00. .-: - t;: "" , I- '" 0 0 ~j t;; a: .., ~ .. l- e< -' .., "" 0 ~ "" ~ Q. '"'-' - lit -' Q. - I- - "" >- I- ...: 0 % X I- "" ,..: "" I- '" ... :z "" '" l- e< ~ CO (/)C;; 0 '" ~ -' '" ~ -' - 0 .., '" I- 0 -' "" '" Q. .., 0 I- 0-' XI- 0 -' U -' 0 UJ X ..J a: -' l- e "" l- e - -' .., z '" "" .., "" ~ .., .., ;; "" e ;:: U "" ... I- .., "" I- Z .., I- lo- -,", l- I- ... '"' z '"' ~i 0 e - '" 0 e ,..: "" > e j .. -' ... .., Z I- -' .. >;' % e< I- ~ '" "" .. .., "" I- '" .., I- .., 0 => I- "" I- ~~~~~ g: Q. 0 g: '" - > => '" CO ~ Q. '" I- '" I - I- 0 - - 0 .., '" 0 0 0 0 TABLE 13 Q.ZUJzLL.l '" Q. '" '" U .., e< "''''' '" <!l Q. U I- U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The above costs represent approximately two-thirds of the average total costs of producing finished water ready for delivery to the distribution system. The remaining one-third of the costs are those for distribution system capital improvements, operation of the distribution system, administration, general office and billing. The latter costs are expected to increase in approximately the same proportion as production costs, Therefore, it is estimated that the total annual revenue required for each of the development plans, as compared to present annual revenue, will be in the same proportion as the production costs estimated in Table 14. 54