1. 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

2. 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.“ &

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

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

5. WRAP Process

6. WRAP Interface

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

8. 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

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

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

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

12. Naturalized Flows ?

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

14. 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

15. 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

16. Simple Curve Number Method
Neches Watershed
Data Sources
Location
Results

17. Simple Curve Number Method
Precipitation data obtained from TWDB

18. Texas Satellite

19. Neches Satellite
Woods / Pasture

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

21. 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

22. Blank

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

24. Blank

25. 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

26. Results of Drought Conditions
Identify possible droughts
Drought Zone

27. Results of Drought Conditions
Neches’ reservoir orientation and sizes

28. Results of Drought – All
All reservoirs

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

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

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

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

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

34. Results of Drought – Review
All reservoirs