Water Rights Analysis Package A Front-end Look at the WRAP Model Center for Research in Water Resources Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Clark Siler 26 Apr 2007 Hydrology Class Presentation University of Texas at Austin

Water Rights Analysis Package (WRAP) Created by Dr. Ralph Wurbs of the Texas Water Resources Institute at Texas A&M Used by TCEQ (and others) with Water Availability Modeling (WAM) system Digital management of water rights WRAP is a computer program that digitally manages water rights. This replaces the older method of tracing lines on maps to determine various relationships and properties of water rights. To show the results of the WRAP program’s output files in ArcGIS, the WRAP Display tool was created. This program was used by the TCEQ for many purposes until changes associated with the most current version of WRAP introduced inconsistent results. Namely, the spacing and distribution of information in the output file changed enough such that the WRAP Display tool could not “find” the correct information. “The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) uses WRAP in its Texas Wate r Availability Modeling (WAM) system to evaluate and approve surface water right permits in Texas.“ http://twri.tamu.edu/news/2006-02-08/ & http://www.tceq.state.tx.us/permitting/water_supply/water_rights/wam.html

Presentation Outline General WRAP Overview Obtaining Naturalized Flows Benefits and drawbacks Obtaining Naturalized Flows Analytical vs. simple approach Conclusion

General WRAP Overview What is WRAP? Benefits and Drawbacks Overview of WRAP process Benefits and Drawbacks

WRAP Process

WRAP Interface

General WRAP Overview What is WRAP? Benefits and Drawbacks Overview of WRAP process Benefits and Drawbacks

Benefits Robust simulation model Relatively fast processing time Standard model for Texas Relatively fast processing time Processes faster than WEAP TCEQ water rights process as a regulatory layer Does what it is supposed to do

Drawbacks Tedious user interface and requirements Not well suited for non-Texas applications Based on antiquated programming environment Produces large, cryptic files

Presentation Outline General WRAP Overview Obtaining Naturalized Flows Benefits and drawbacks Obtaining Naturalized Flows Analytical vs. simple approach Conclusion

Obtaining Naturalized Flows What are naturalized flows? Analytical vs. simple approach Analytical: WRAP Simple: Curve Number Comparison

Naturalized Flows ?

Obtaining Naturalized Flows What are naturalized flows? Analytical vs. simple approach Analytical: WRAP Simple: Curve Number Comparison

Analytical (WRAP) Method Internal WRAP equation NF naturalized flow GF gaged flow D water supply diversions upstream RF return flow upstream EP reservoir evaporation minus precipitation DS change in storage in upstream reservoirs NF = GF + SDi – SRFi + SEPi + SDSi EP DS D RF GF NF

Simple Curve Number Method Process Calculated CN as a function of historical rainfall against calculated naturalized flow V runoff volume (naturalized flow) P historical precipitation S storage CN curve number (calculated) CN

Simple Curve Number Method Neches Watershed Data Sources Location Results

Simple Curve Number Method Precipitation data obtained from TWDB

Texas Satellite

Neches Satellite Woods / Pasture

Presentation Outline General WRAP Overview Obtaining Naturalized Flows Benefits and drawbacks Obtaining Naturalized Flows Analytical vs. simple approach Conclusion

Conclusion WRAP is a useful but picky modeling tool Curve Number simplifications for estimating naturalized flow are limited State hydrologists may benefit from a more user-friendly WRAP Hydrology Class Presentation University of Texas at Austin Hydrology Class Presentation University of Texas at Austin

Blank

Personal Information Clark Siler Graduate Student University of Texas at Austin Geospatial Hydrology Water Resources CRWR BS – Brigham Young University Civil Engineering clarksiler@mail.utexas.edu Nov 2006

Blank

Presentation Outline General WRAP Overview Obtaining Naturalized Flows Benefits and drawbacks Obtaining Naturalized Flows Analytical vs. simple approach Results of Drought Conditions Reservoirs’ reactions to drought Conclusion

Results of Drought Conditions Identify possible droughts Drought Zone

Results of Drought Conditions Neches’ reservoir orientation and sizes

Results of Drought – All All reservoirs

Results of Drought – Largest Sam Rayburn Reservoir – 2,898,200 ac-ft

Results of Drought – Large Lake Palestine – 411,840 ac-ft B A Steinhagen Lake – 94,250 ac-ft Lake Tyler – 87,100 ac-ft

Results of Drought – Medium Lake Athens – 32,840 ac-ft Lake Jacksonville – 30,500 ac-ft Lake Striker – 26,960 ac-ft

Results of Drought – Small Lake Kurth – 16,200 ac-ft Pinkston Reservoir – 7,380 ac-ft

Results of Drought – Smallest Lake Nacogdoches – 21 ac-ft

Results of Drought – Review All reservoirs