| Name: |
Maverick
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 3:01:08 PM
|
URL: APCo Letter to FERC Requesting a Temporary Variance in Winter Rule Curve
|
| Name: |
boataholic
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 3:23:46 PM
|
This looks great, it is a smart move to capture those rains that sometimes come in December. But I'll be darned if I believe they can get the lake up 4+ feet during November unless we have a lot more days like the last two!
|
| Name: |
Maverick
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Noticed Something in Letter
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:07:26 PM
|
On page 3 the 2nd Paragraph it states the following:
Enclosed as Attachments 5, 6 and 7 are emails of concurrence on the Martin drought-based rule curve variance from ADEM, USFWS and ADCNR, respectively.
But then the letter states -- The USACE has indicated that it would likely file comments directly with the Commission.
I hope the Corps does not try to intervene with the Temporary Rule Curve Variance being sought by APCo as it sure makes reasonable sense for APCo to seek such a variance.
Guess we will just have to wait and see.
|
| Name: |
rainbow slough
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:21:09 PM
|
I guess I'm a greater moron than I beleived myself to be, but someone please explain how they plan to get the 7.1' of water needed to "Maintain the winter pool elevation 3 feet higher than normal, at El. 483 instead of El. 480." during the proposed "rule curve variance period from November 20, 2007 to May 1, 2008."
Hasn't that ship sailed? I could understand if the variance were being requested for November 2008 and forward. What is it that I'm missing?
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:37:53 PM
|
It means that they will be holding all the rain that comes instead of letting it 'pass thru' just because the curve says otherwise. There is a LOT of water that passes through every year. Even this spring the lake could have been filled had they held back water instead of letting it go because of the rule curve. As the letter pointed out that there were two events alone that could have nearly filled the lake by themselves if it had been held back.
|
| Name: |
Maverick
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:52:05 PM
|
What I think you are missing is the reduction in downstream flow releases from the lake, whihc can have a siginifcant impact on our lake levels.
Remember back during the period mid July through about late Aug we had very little rain and the lake level remained almost constant. This was because of the reduction in downstream releases out of Martin as the water for the Alabama River was coming from the Coosa Basin and not Lake Martin.
Now the Coosa Basin downstream releases have been reduced as the Corps has reduced the amount of water released from Allatoona and currently Martin is sending the water downstream so the Corps can complete their dredging project in the lower Alabama River below Claiborne Dam.
Also historically the period of Nov through I think Jan is usually higher than average rainfall period. But who knows what will happen this year because of the La Nina off of Chile, we will just have to wait and see.
What it appears APCo is doing is being proactive instead of reactive as the case was in 2007. This winter per their letter they are wanting to: (1) hold back another 3 feet of water and (2) reduce the downstream flow requirements. these two changes should have a impact on our lake levels for next year.
But no matter what we will still need rain.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Good question
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:53:12 PM
|
I suppose they can maybe reduce outflows earlier than normal so they have longer to fill it up? In the fall they would normally lose a lot of the rainafll because they would still be dropping the water levels (i.e., they would need to let out reserved water plus additional flow from rainfall). It seems to me though that even under the current flow rule they could start to refill at least to 480.0 (normal winter pool) right now if they have sufficient rainfall.
Again, maybe the key is starting earlier and going longer at full pool but it doesn't seem to make complete sense to me either. Regardless of the rule they use they will still need enough rainfall. I really hope they get the approval because if they had that 3' last year it would have extended my boating season by at least a month.
|
| Name: |
rainbow slough
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:56:07 PM
|
This is where I get confussed....as far back as February 1, 2007, the level was below "the rule." So what are the measures taken to meet the rule? I always assumed they just closed the gates until the level reached full (490) pool. If that is what they (APCo) do, how did they miss the rain events in the spring?
But that's not the question. My question is how the level is going to reach 483 at all over the next 4 months. I just don't see it happening.
|
| Name: |
LifeIsGood
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 4:58:53 PM
|
Thank God. I have heard that there is a lot of water flowing through the dam, maybe by cutting it back just a bit we can look at some wather with our mud by the endo fo the year.
|
| Name: |
LifeTime Laker
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 6:08:05 PM
|
Since your time stamp is after Mav's I will try a little more. As Mav explained, it is a double approach, altering the rule and less releases. Every year we get more rain than is needed to fill the lake. Even this year. They don't 'just close the gates' and let it fill up. It is filled according to a daily schedule with slight variances allowed for local weather. This year nobody had a crystal ball to see the rain was going to just stop. Therefore those early spring rain events, coupled with winter rains, generated MUCH more water than was needed to meet the curve at the time, so it was passed through. Then in late spring we got NO rain. The rise in the lake is very tightly controlled. It isn't just filled as mother nature delivers, however, that is pretty much what APCO is asking this year. They want to raise it above winter pool now and start the spring filling early, thereby almost guarenteeing a rise to full pool. That is assuming only slightly less rain as we have had the last two years averaged.
Also as Mav pointed out, most of the recent decrease is due to the downstream project that required water. That should not be an issue now and the lake will start rising back to normal, and then hopefully even 3 feet above normal.
|
| Name: |
8hcap
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/23/2007 9:00:16 PM
|
I don't quite understand how you raise the winter pool when the plug is not put back in until January. Leave the dang plug in until the level gets up to 483.
8
|
| Name: |
choppa
-
|
|
| Subject: |
APCo Seeks Temp Rule Curve Var
|
|
Date:
|
10/25/2007 8:59:27 AM
|
Anybody know what the timeline is on the answer from the corp?
|
| Name: |
John C
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Winter Water level to 483
|
|
Date:
|
10/25/2007 12:39:36 PM
|
I was wondering when this news would hit the board. Kudos to the HOBOs and everyone else that has been screaming for this!!
Finally, some good news!
URL: AL Power Wants Higher Winter Level On Lake Martin
|
|
New Post
Search
Lake Pat Cleburne Topics Forum
Reply
»
Texas Lakes
»
Lake Pat Cleburne
Login
|
Home
