Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Hydrology

VIEWS: 56 PAGES: 36

									          Component Studies
        Aquatic Environment (2)



              Hydrology


               Report 3 of 8


    Hydraulic Modeling of River



                January 2009




   Environmental Impact Statement for the
Lower Churchill Hydroelectric Generation Project
            Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                GI 1110- Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                         Final Report January 2008
                                                       -




                        Postscript Note

With reference to Section 4.5 and Appendices D and E of this
report, the original scope of work under this study included
preparation of "animated fly-throughs" of the river by Terrapoint
Canada Inc., as sub-contractor to Hatch Ltd, utilizing the hydraulic
model developed under the study. The animations were mostly
completed by Terrapoint; however, technical difficulties prevented
Terrapoint from completing the animations and it was decided that
it would be more expedient for Hydro to complete this aspect of the
work. Consequently, Hydro purchased the program TeraExplorer
Pro, version 5.1, and Hatch Ltd provided the shapefiles of the river
valley and the applicable Terrapoint electronic files for the
animations. With Hatch's technical assistance, Hydro will complete
the animations.
                                                                                   Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                                                       GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                                                Final Report - January 2008



                                                          Table of Contents

List of Tables
List of Figures
Executive Summary


1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1

2. Bathymetric Surveys............................................................................................................................. 2-1

3. Hydraulic Model Development ............................................................................................................ 3-1
      3.1      HEC-GeoRAS Model ................................................................................................................... 3-1
      3.2      Model Calibration ....................................................................................................................... 3-1
      3.3      During and Post-Construction Modelling..................................................................................... 3-4
4. Applications of the Hydraulic Model ................................................................................................... 4-1
      4.1      Probable Maximum Flood Study ................................................................................................. 4-1
      4.2      Ice Study ..................................................................................................................................... 4-1
      4.3      Dam Break Study ........................................................................................................................ 4-1
      4.4      Environmental Applications ........................................................................................................ 4-1
      4.5      Water Surface Shapefiles for Terrapoint Animations .................................................................... 4-1
5. Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................... 5-1



Appendices
Appendix A - Cross Section Location Maps
Appendix B - Sources of Bathymetric Data
Appendix C - Lower Churchill River Drainage Basin Map
Appendix D - Animation Shapefile Snapshots
Appendix E – Locations of Interest




                                                                                                                        PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page i
                                               Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                   GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                            Final Report - January 2008


List of Tables

Number           Title

Table 3.1        Sources of Calibration Data




                                                                        PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page ii
                                                  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                      GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                               Final Report - January 2008


List of Figures

Number        Title

Figure 3.1    Snapshot of Digital Elevation Model
Figure 3.2    Development of Hydraulic Model Cross Sections
Figure 3.3    Calibration to 2006 Parrott Surveyed Levels
Figure 3.4    Calibration to 2006 LiDAR Surveyed Levels
Figure 3.5    Calibration to 2007 Parrott Surveyed Levels
Figure 3.6    Calibration to Rating Curves (1 of 2)
Figure 3.7    Calibration to Rating Curves (2 of 2)
Figure 3.8    HEC-RAS Water Surface Profile Plot




                                                                          PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page iii
                                                         Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                             GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                      Final Report - January 2008


Executive Summary

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro (Hydro) is undertaking preliminary engineering studies of the development
of the hydroelectric potential of the lower Churchill River at Gull Island and Muskrat Falls. As part of these
feasibility studies, Hatch has developed a digital hydraulic model of the lower Churchill River between the
Churchill Falls tailrace and Goose Bay.

The scope of this work package did not include any specific hydraulic analysis; rather, the objective of the work
was to develop a model to be carried forward into various other work packages, and to answer environmental
and engineering questions regarding the existing and post-project hydraulic regime of the lower Churchill River.

The US Army Corps of Engineers HEC-GeoRAS program was used to model the river. This ArcGIS extension
enables the model to be fully geo-referenced, with model development and post-processing of results occurring
in a GIS environment. Both existing and new bathymetry (in the form of cross sections) were obtained so that
sufficient detail was available to calibrate the model successfully. Over-bank portions of the sections were
obtained by “cutting” sections through the LiDAR-based Digital Elevation Model, leading to a highly detailed
representation of this area.

The model allows prediction of the velocities and water levels throughout the reach, before, during, and after
construction of the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls Projects. The following list includes some of the applications of
the hydraulic model.

•     Ice Study

•     Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) Study

•     Dam Break Study

•     Various environmental studies

•     Production of GIS inundation polygons for use to visually depict the hydraulic changes that would occur as
      a result of the proposed developments




                                                                                  PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page iv
                                                       Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                           GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                    Final Report - January 2008




1.   Introduction
     Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro (Hydro) is undertaking preliminary engineering studies of the
     development of the hydroelectric potential of the lower Churchill River at Gull Island and Muskrat Falls.
     These sites are located downstream 225 km and 285 km respectively from the Upper Churchill
     hydroelectric facility that was developed in the early 1970’s. The total potential capacity at the two sites
     is approximately 2800 MW (megawatts), the Gull Island site being the larger at 2000 MW. In addition to
     the development of these sites, the overall concept includes various potential alternative power
     transmission arrangements involving combinations of AC and DC lines of various capacities.

     In April, 2007, Hydro contracted Hatch Ltd of St. John’s to undertake a program of studies to address
     aspects of this development relating primarily, but not exclusively, to hydrology/hydraulics and
     transmission components. Approximately thirty such studies have been carried out by Hatch and its
     associated subconsultants - RSW of Montreal, Statnett of Oslo, and Transgrid of Winnipeg. The program
     has been managed from Hatch’s office in St. John’s using the company’s project management tools and a
     project services team that has liaised throughout with a similar group in Hydro.

     The study which is the subject of this report pertains to the development of a digital hydraulic model of
     the lower Churchill River between the Churchill Falls tailrace and Goose Bay. The purpose of this
     model is to allow prediction of water levels and velocities at any location on the river, during and after
     construction of the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls Projects. In addition, the model can be used to visually
     depict how the projects will affect the flow and operation of the river.

     In early 2007 as part of the Ice Dynamics Study, a hydraulic model was developed to provide the
     necessary inputs to assess the potential changes to the ice dynamics and thermal regime of the river as a
     result of the projects. Though sufficient calibration was achieved for the purpose of ice modeling, since
     the accuracy of open water modeling is higher than that of ice modeling, it was determined that
     additional bathymetric surveying would be required to produce a detailed open water model for the
     current study. Also as a part of the current work, the hydraulic model was redeveloped within a GIS
     framework using the HEC-GeoRAS extension for ArcGIS.




                                                                              PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 1-1
                                                     Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                         GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                  Final Report - January 2008




2.   Bathymetric Surveys
     In a hydraulic model such as the one developed for this study, the geometry of the river bed (bathymetry)
     is represented by user defined cross sections. Bathymetric surveys are generally conducted by driving a
     boat straight across the river from one bank to the other (i.e., perpendicular to the direction of flow),
     while transmitting sound pulses to the bottom and recording the returns. The depth of water is then
     calculated for each pulse, and a GPS unit records the location of each depth measurement. The geodetic
     elevation of the water surface at each cross section is determined, allowing the cross section to be fully
     geo-referenced.

     The hydraulic model developed for the Ice Dynamics Study was based on the following bathymetric
     surveys.

     •   1975 Hydro survey (Muskrat Falls to Minipi River confluence)

     •   1975 Hydro survey (Lake Winokapau inlet to Churchill Falls tailrace)

     •   1979 Hydro survey (Minipi River confluence to Mouni Rapids)

     •   2006 AMEC survey (various sections between Muskrat Falls and Churchill Falls)

     •   2006 Parrott survey (Goose Bay to Muskrat Falls)

     Cross sections from each of these surveys were combined in the development of the hydraulic model for
     that study; overbank areas were added based on the Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) survey data
     which were collected in 2006. Although the model was calibrated adequately for the purposes of ice
     modeling, additional detail was required to achieve an acceptable level of calibration for open water
     modeling. N. E. Parrott Surveys Ltd. performed bathymetric surveying in July 2007 from downstream of
     the Minipi River confluence (chainage 128 km) to the tailrace of Churchill Falls (chainage 334 km). An
     additional 38 cross sections were added to the model as a result of this survey. In total, 264 cross
     sections were used to define the 334 kilometres of river between the Churchill Falls tailrace and
     Goose Bay. This corresponds to an average distance of 1.3 km between sections.




                                                                            PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 2-1
                                                       Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                           GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                    Final Report - January 2008




3.    Hydraulic Model Development

3.1   HEC-GeoRAS Model
      The HEC-RAS software package used to model the river during the Ice Dynamics Study was developed
      by the US Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Centre. As part of the current study, the
      hydraulic model was re-built within the ESRI ArcGIS program through use of the HEC-GeoRAS
      extension. Computations are still performed within the HEC-RAS framework; this enhancement simply
      geo-referenced the model and provided more detail in the overbank regions, as discussed below.

      A Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was developed by Hydro based on the 2006 LiDAR survey. LiDAR
      data do not penetrate the water surface and hence bathymetric information must be obtained separately.
      Figure 3.1 is a snapshot of the DEM in the region of the Gull Island Dam Site and Gull Lake; a National
      Topographic Service (NTS) water line shapefile is superimposed to provide the outline of the river and
      tributaries. This topographical model of the river valley served the following purposes.

      •   Using the HEC-GeoRAS extension, cross sections were scaled or “cut” from the DEM at existing
          cross section locations. As shown in Figure 3.2, this provided a detailed section extending from the
          existing water surface to above the expected extent of inundation (keeping in mind future uses of the
          model for other studies). These sections were input directly into a HEC-RAS data file, and the
          bathymetric (underwater) portion of each section was then manually added, to produce the final
          section shown in Figure 3.2. Each section was automatically geo-referenced and positioned within
          the GIS layout, which allows for a convenient interchange of information between the GIS and the
          HEC-RAS modeling software.

      •   Just as cross-sections can be automatically read from the DEM in GIS, the HEC-RAS model results
          can also be automatically transferred back into the GIS. These water surface profiles can be used to
          create floodplain mapping based on the contour information contained within the DEM.

      Appendix A contains 1:50,000 scale maps of the lower Churchill River including the location of the
      cross sections defining the model geometry. These sections are overlayed on NTS basemapping.
      Appendix B includes a table describing the source of the bathymetric data of each cross section (e.g.
      2007 Parrott survey).

3.2   Model Calibration
      The purpose of model calibration is to ensure that simulated water levels match observed water levels for
      a range of flows, within an acceptable tolerance. Adequate calibration data consists of a measured water
      level at a known location (referenced to geodetic datum) and an estimate of the flow at the time of the
      measurement. Flow estimates have been based on the average flows at Churchill Falls and Muskrat Falls
      over the course of the survey, and an estimate of the division of lateral inflows between these two
      locations (through the main tributaries). Appendix C includes a figure illustrating the drainage basins of
      the main tributaries of the lower Churchill River.

      Rating curves can also be used to calibrate a hydraulic model. In this case, the water level at a particular
      location is known for a range of flows. Sources of calibration data available for this study are
      summarized in Table 3.1.



                                                                               PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 3-1
Note:
The colours represent the elevation associated with
each 5 m by 5 m pixel. The range of elevation is as
follows (in metres).




                                                                                                   Figure 3.1
                                                                         Snapshot of Digital Elevation Model
                                                                                   Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                      Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                        Page 3-2
                    170
                                     DEM Cross Section
                    160
                                     HECRAS Cross Section (as used in Ice Dynamics Study)

                    150
    Elevation (m)




                    140


                    130


                    120


                    110


                    100
                          0   200   400       600    800      1000       1200    1400     1600      1800     2000
                                                           Station (m)




                    170
                                          HEC-GeoRAS Cross Section
                    160


                    150
Elevation (m)




                    140


                    130


                    120


                    110


                    100
                          0   200   400      600     800      1000       1200   1400      1600     1800     2000
                                                           Station (m)


                                                                                                          Figure 3.2
                                                                   Development of Hydraulic Model Cross Sections
                                                                                          Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                             Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                               Page 3-3
                                                        Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                            GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                     Final Report - January 2008


      Table 3.1
      Sources of Calibration Data
        Calibration Data             Date                  Extent of Water Level Measurements


        LiDAR survey               Sep 2006               Goose Bay to Churchill Falls



        2006 Parrott survey        Jul 2006               Goose Bay to Muskrat Falls



        2007 Parrott survey        Jul 2007               Minipi River confluence to Churchill Falls


                                                          Blackrock Bridge, Muskrat Falls tailwater, Muskrat Falls
        Various rating curves        n/a
                                                          hydrometric station (above falls), Churchill Falls tailwater



      Depending on the accuracy of the water level measurements and flow estimates, different calibration
      sources were used to calibrate different parts of the river reach between Churchill Falls and Goose Bay.
      During calibration, it became evident that the vertical control of the 1975 and 1979 surveys could be
      inaccurate. Hydro confirmed that there was no vertical control in the 1979 survey and that water levels
      had been estimated post-survey using 1:50,000 scale topographic mapping. It is assumed that the 1975
      survey had similar vertical control issues. Due to the inaccuracies associated with the above-noted
      method, it was deemed acceptable to make some vertical adjustments to these sections to improve the
      calibration. The table included in Appendix B makes note of these adjustments. Figures 3.3 through 3.7
      illustrate the calibration to the various surveys and rating curves.

      As shown in the above noted figures, calibration throughout the entire river reach was achieved.
      Despite the collection of additional bathymetric data for this study, there were two localized reaches
      where simulated water levels were slightly lower than expected: just upstream of Minipi rapids (chainage
      135 km to 138 km), and at the outlet of Lake Winokapau (chainage 206 km to 210 km). In total, this
      area represents approximately two percent of the length of the modelled reach.

3.3   During and Post-Construction Modelling
      Once the hydraulic model of the existing river was adequately calibrated, modifications were made to
      the model geometry to represent conditions during and post-construction of the projects. Four separate
      geometry files were developed to simulate the flow at various stages of the project, as follows.
      1. During construction of the Gull Island Project

      2. Post-construction of the Gull Island Project

      3. During construction of the Muskrat Falls Project

      4. Post-construction of the Gull Island and Muskrat Falls Projects

      These modifications included the addition of inline structures (dams and cofferdams), gates, and
      spillways. The operation of the gates could also be specified within the model, such that simulations
      could be carried out for a wide range of scenarios.

                                                                                  PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 3-4
                                                  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                      GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                               Final Report - January 2008


Figure 3.8 is a HEC-RAS output plot illustrating the water surface profile for the pre-project case and post-
construction of Gull Island and Muskrat Falls.




                                                                         PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 3-5
                           2006 Parrott Surveyed Water Levels
                 4
                           HECRAS Simulated Water Levels
                           Thalweg
                 2


                 0
Elevation (m)




                 -2


                 -4


                 -6


                 -8


                -10
                      -5     0          5          10           15       20        25            30            35            40
                                                                 Chainage (km)

                                                                                                                              Figure 3.3
                                                                                            Calibration to 2006 Parrott Surveyed Levels
                                                                                                              Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                 Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                                                   Page 3-6
                70
                          2006 LiDAR Surveyed Water Levels
                          HECRAS Simulated Water Levels
                60
                          Thalweg


                50
Elevation (m)




                40


                30


                20


                10


                 0
                     40    50          60         70         80        90        100            110           120            130
                                                             Chainage (km)

                                                                                                                           Figure 3.4
                                                                                         Calibration to 2006 LiDAR Surveyed Levels
                                                                                                           Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                             Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                                               Page 3-7
                130
                        2007 Parrott Surveyed Water Levels
                        HECRAS Simulated Water Levels
                120
                        Thalweg


                110
Elevation (m)




                100


                90


                80


                70


                60
                  130                  180                     230                      280                           330
                                                             Chainage (km)

                                                                                                                          Figure 3.5
                                                                                        Calibration to 2007 Parrott Surveyed Levels
                                                                                                          Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                             Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                                               Page 3-8
                     5.0
                               Muskrat Falls Tailwater Rating Curve
                     4.5
                               HECRAS Simulated Water Levels

                     4.0
Water Level (m)




                     3.5


                     3.0


                     2.5


                     2.0


                     1.5
                        500    1000         1500     2000       2500       3000        3500        4000        4500
                                                                      3
                                                             Flow (m /s)



                     128
                                  Churchill Falls Tailwater Rating Curve
                     127
                                  HECRAS Simulated Water Levels
                     126
   Water Level (m)




                     125

                     124

                     123

                     122

                     121

                     120
                           0          500          1000          1500          2000            2500            3000
                                                             Flow (m3/s)

                                                                                                             Figure 3.6
                                                                                  Calibration to Rating Curves (1 of 2)
                                                                                             Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                               Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                                 Page 3-9
                     24
                              Muskrat Falls Hydrometric Station Rating Curve
                     22       HECRAS Simulated Water Levels


                     20
Water Level (m)




                     18


                     16


                     14


                     12
                          0   1000        2000       3000       4000        5000        6000        7000        8000
                                                                    3
                                                             Flow (m /s)




                     4.0
                                     Blackrock Bridge Rating Curve
                     3.5
                                     HECRAS Simulated Water Levels

                     3.0
   Water Level (m)




                     2.5

                     2.0

                     1.5

                     1.0

                     0.5

                     0.0
                       1000   1500         2000       2500       3000        3500       4000        4500        5000
                                                                       3
                                                              Flow (m /s)

                                                                                                              Figure 3.7
                                                                                   Calibration to Rating Curves (2 of 2)
                                                                                              Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                                                                                 Page 3-10
                                             Figure 3.8
                   HEC-RAS Water Surface Profile Plot
                             Hydraulic Modeling of River
Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project

                                                 Page 3-11
                                                      Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                          GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                   Final Report - January 2008




4.    Applications of the Hydraulic Model
      No specific hydraulic analyses were completed for the current study; the scope was limited to the
      development and calibration of the hydraulic model. However; the application of the model is far-
      reaching. The model has been used in the execution of other Pre-FEED studies completed by Hatch in
      2007, and was used to answer various environmental and engineering questions. This section
      summarizes some of the applications for which the model has been used. It is expected that the model
      will continue to be a valuable tool for future hydraulic analyses of the lower Churchill River.

4.1   Probable Maximum Flood Study
      The objective of the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) study (GI1140) was to determine the PMF for the
      two projects, and to route the PMF hydrographs through the reservoirs to estimate the spillway design
      capacity required at each site. The HEC-GeoRAS model developed for the current study was used to
      perform this dynamic routing. This is described in detail in the “Probable Maximum Flood and
      Construction Design Flood Study” report.

4.2   Ice Study
      The objective of the Ice Study (GI1070) was to investigate existing ice conditions and to identify and
      suggest mitigative options to address potential concerns related to ice management during and post-
      construction of the projects. Numerical ice modeling was performed to achieve the objectives, and
      conveyance tables derived from the hydraulic model were used as input to these ice models. This
      application of the hydraulic model is more thoroughly described in the “Ice Dynamics Study of the
      Lower Churchill River” report and the engineering “Ice Study” report, both prepared by Hatch in 2007.

4.3   Dam Break Study
      The hydraulic model developed for the current study was used as the starting point for modeling the dam
      breach scenarios for GI1190. Due to the extremely transient nature of dam breach simulations, the
      original model required modification to deal with numerical instabilities as is normally the case for such
      models. None of these modifications significantly changed the conveyance characteristics of the model,
      but added a great deal to its robustness in dealing with rapid changes in discharge. The result was a very
      robust model that while adequately representing the hydraulic characteristics of the study area also
      allows for a wide range of simulations and discharge variations of several orders of magnitude.

4.4   Environmental Applications
      The model was useful in a number of analyses of potential environmental impacts on fish habitat during
      reservoir impoundment and post-construction. The model was used to establish flow, depth and velocity
      conditions upstream and downstream of the reservoirs during these periods. The output was also used
      with heat dynamics modelling to establish the expected water temperatures under those conditions. In
      addition, the output was used to estimate the expected length of the saline wedge intruding upriver from
      Goose Bay as a result of the diminished flow.

4.5   Water Surface Shapefiles for Terrapoint Animations
      In 2006, Hydro commissioned Terrapoint Canada Inc. to perform a LiDAR survey of the river valley. As
      discussed in Section 3, these data were transformed into a digital elevation model, which was used to


                                                                             PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 4-1
                                                  Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                      GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                               Final Report - January 2008


develop the HEC-GeoRAS model. Terrapoint was also tasked by Hatch with preparing animated “fly-
throughs” of the river, which could be used to visually illustrate how the projects will affect the flow and
operation of the river.

As described in Section 3.1, one of the advantages of HEC-GeoRAS is that it allows relatively simple
preparation of floodplain mapping based on the results of the HEC-RAS simulations. For the purpose of
the animated “fly-throughs”, Terrapoint required floodplain mapping for each phase of the project,
including existing conditions, during construction of Gull Island, post-construction of Gull Island, during
construction of Muskrat Falls, and post-construction. The hydraulic model was used to simulate the
average flow throughout the reach for each of these five cases, and shapefiles were developed in ArcGIS
and provided to Terrapoint. Snapshots of these shapefiles are provided in Appendix D.

Terrapoint used these shapefiles in conjunction with the LiDAR DEM, the high resolution digital
photography that was taken during the 2006 LiDAR survey, and three dimensional illustrations of the
proposed structures to produce the “fly-throughs”. A number of key locations were identified by Hydro
and the animations were developed so that these locations would be highlighted and viewed in
additional detail during the animation. A list of these key locations is provided in Appendix E.




                                                                         PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 4-2
                                                    Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                                                        GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                                                 Final Report - January 2008




5.   Conclusions
     The scope of work for this study included the development and calibration of an open water hydraulic
     model that could be used to assess flow conditions in the existing river as well as during and post-
     construction. Though no specific hydraulic analyses were completed under this scope of work, the
     model was and will continue to be used to address questions and concerns related to specific scenarios
     at any stage of construction.

     A hydraulic model was developed in early 2007 for the Ice Dynamics Study; this model was
     redeveloped for the current study and additional bathymetry was incorporated, providing a more
     detailed, geo-referenced model. Re-calibration was performed to ensure the model was properly
     representing the hydraulics throughout the reach.

     To date, the model has been an integral part of the analyses completed for the Ice Study (GI1070), the
     PMF Study (GI1140), the Dam Break Study (GI1190), and various other studies related to the preparation
     of the environmental impact statement.




                                                                           PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page 5-1
             Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                 GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                          Final Report - January 2008




     Appendix A
Cross Section Location Maps




                                    PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page A-1
             Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                 GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                          Final Report - January 2008




     Appendix B
Sources of Bathymetric Data




                                    PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page B-1
                                                             Page 1 of 6


Appendix B - Source of Bathymetry for Model Cross Sections

Chainage (km)     Source/ Notes
          333.6   2007 Parrott 334
          332.7   1975 Section 100
          331.9   1975 Section 101
          330.6   1975 Section 102
          329.9   2007 Parrott 330
          329.3   1975 Section 103
          328.4   2007 Parrott 328
          327.9   1975 Section 104 adj. up 1 m
          326.8   1975 Section 105
          326.0   2007 Parrott 326
          324.0   2007 Parrott 324
          318.8   2007 Parrott 319
          307.7   1975 Section 15
          306.7   1975 Section 16
          305.8   2007 Parrott 306
          305.0   1975 Section 17
          304.0   2007 Parrott 304
          303.9   1975 Section 18
          302.6   1975 Section 19
          301.6   1975 Section 20
          300.4   1975 Section 21
          299.0   1975 Section 22
          298.5   1975 Section 23
          296.4   1975 Section 24
          295.7   1975 Section 25
          292.8   1975 Section 27
          291.7   1975 Section 28
          290.7   1975 Section 29
          288.7   1975 Section 30
          287.9   1975 Section 31
          286.7   1975 Section 32
          285.4   2006 AMEC 285
          284.4   1975 Section 34
          283.0   1975 Section 35
          281.5   Derived section
          280.7   1975 Section 36 adj. down 1 m
          279.6   2006 AMEC 280
          278.4   1975 Section 38 adj. down 2 m
          276.7   1975 Section 39
          275.8   1975 Section 40
          274.8   2006 AMEC 275
          274.1   1975 Section 41
          272.8   1975 Section 42
          271.5   2006 AMEC 271
          265.0   2006 AMEC 265
          260.0   2006 AMEC 260
          250.0   2006 AMEC 250
          240.0   2006 AMEC 240
          231.0   2006 AMEC 230
                                                                             Page 2 of 6


Appendix B - Source of Bathymetry for Model Cross Sections

Chainage (km)     Source/ Notes
          219.8   2007 Parrott 220
          215.2   1979 Section H 74 adj. up 7 m
          215.1   2007 Parrott 215
          214.4   1979 Section H 77 adj. up 7 m
          213.7   1979 Section H 76 adj. up 7 m
          213.0   1979 Section 77 H adj. up 7 m
          212.1   1979 Section 78 H adj. up 7.5 m
          212.0   2007 Parrott 212
          210.4   2007 Parrott 210.5
          210.1   2007 Parrott 210
          208.5   2007 Parrott 209 (assumptions req'd)
          207.1   2007 Parrott 207
          205.5   2007 Parrott 205
          202.4   2006 AMEC 202
          200.0   1979 Section 2 H adj. up 2 m
          199.4   1979 Section 3 H adj. up 2.5 m
          197.9   2007 Parrott 198
          197.4   1979 Section 4 H adj. up 3 m
          195.5   1979 Section 5 H adj. up 3 m
          193.8   2006 AMEC 194
          192.8   2006 AMEC 193
          192.4   1979 Section 7 H adj. up 1.5 m
          190.9   1979 Section 8 H adj. up 4 m
          189.1   2007 Parrott 189
          189.0   1979 Section 9 H adj. up 2 m
          187.9   2007 Parrott 188
          187.5   1979 Section 10 H adj. up 2.5 m
          185.9   1979 Section 11 H adj. up 2 m
          185.0   2007 Parrott 185
          184.4   1979 Section 12 H adj. up 2.1 m
          182.7   1979 Section 13 H adj. up 2 m
          181.4   1979 Section 14 H adj. up 2 m
          180.0   2007 Parrott 180
          178.0   1979 Section 16 H adj. up 3 m
          176.5   2006 AMEC 177
          175.4   2007 Parrott 175
          174.6   1979 Section 18 H adj. up 3 m
          173.2   1979 Section 19 H adj. up 3 m
          171.3   1979 Section 20 H adj. up 3 m
          169.6   2007 PARROTT 170
          168.4   1979 Section 22 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 3 m
          168.0   2007 PARROTT 168
          166.7   1979 Section 23 H adj. up 3.5 m
          165.0   2007 PARROTT 165
          163.5   1979 Section 25 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 0.5 m
          162.0   1979 Section 26 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 2 m
          161.3   2007 PARROTT 162
          160.6   1979 Section 27 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 2 m
          160.0   2007 PARROTT 160
                                                                             Page 3 of 6


Appendix B - Source of Bathymetry for Model Cross Sections

Chainage (km)     Source/ Notes
          158.7   1979 Section 28 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 1.5 m
          158.0   2007 PARROTT 158
          156.7   1979 Section 29 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 4 m
          155.9   1979 Section 30 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 4 m
          154.0   2006 AMEC 154
          152.5   1979 Section 32 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 5.4 m
          151.2   1979 Section 33 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 6 m
          149.2   1979 Section 34 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 6.6 m
          148.9   2007 PARROTT 149
          148.3   1979 Section 35 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 6 m
          148.0   2007 PARROTT 148
          146.7   1979 Section 36 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 7 m
          145.1   1979 Section 37 H (Interpolated elevation) adj. up 8 m
          144.7   2007 PARROTT 145
          143.4   1979 Section 38 H adj. up 10 m
          143.2   2007 PARROTT 143
          141.1   1979 Section 39 H adj. up 9.5 m
          140.3   1979 Section 40 H adj. up 9 m
          140.0   AMEC 140
          139.4   1979 Section 41 H adj. up 9 m
          138.1   2007 PARROTT 138
          137.1   2007 PARROTT 137
          135.1   2007 PARROTT 135
          131.5   2007 PARROTT 131.5 km (Above Minipi Rapids)
          131.1   2007 PARROTT 131.1 (Above Minipi Rapids)
          128.6   1975 Section 28
          128.0   2007 PARROTT 128
          126.9   1975 Section 27
          125.6   1975 Section 26
          125.0   AMEC 125
          124.6   1975 Section 25
          123.3   1975 Section 24
          122.6   1975 Section 23
          120.8   AMEC 121
          120.3   1975 Section 22
          119.7   1975 Section 21
          118.6   1975 Section 20
          117.3   1975 Section 19
          116.4   1975 Section 18
          115.2   1975 Section 17
          114.5   1975 Section 16
          113.8   1975 Section 15
          112.5   AMEC 113
          112.1   1975 Section 12
          111.4   1975 Section 11
          110.7   1975 Section 10
          109.9   1975 Section 9
          109.3   1975 Section 8
          108.5   1975 Section 7
                                                                            Page 4 of 6


Appendix B - Source of Bathymetry for Model Cross Sections

Chainage (km)     Source/ Notes
          107.8   1975 Section 6
          107.2   1975 Section 5
          106.4   1975 Section 4
          105.9   1975 Section 3
          105.5   1975 Section 2
          105.4   AMEC 105
          104.6   1975 Section 1
          104.0   1975 Sta 54+00 upstream of proposed dam site
          103.6   1975 Sta 46+00 upstream of proposed dam site
          103.2   1975 Sta 36+00 upstream of proposed dam site
          103.2   1975 Sta 34+00 upstream of proposed dam site
          102.5   1975 Sta 12+00 upstream of proposed dam site
          102.3   1975 Sta 6+00 upstream of proposed dam site
          102.0   1975 Section - Proposed Gull Dam Site
          101.9   1975 Sta 6+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          101.7   1975 Sta 14+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          101.4   1975 Sta 22+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          101.0   1975 Sta 34+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          100.7   1975 Sta 42+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          100.5   1975 Sta 50+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          100.3   1975 Sta 58+00 downstream of proposed dam site
          100.1   1975 Sta 62+00 downstream of proposed dam site
           99.5   1975 Section 2-1
           98.8   1975 Section 4-3
           97.7   1975 Section 5-5A & 6-5A
           96.7   1975 Section 8-7
           95.3   1975 Section 2
           94.5   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           94.1   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           93.4   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           93.1   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           92.6   AMEC 93
           92.5   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           91.3   1975 Section 5
           91.1   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           90.1   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           90.0   1975 Section 6
           89.3   1975 Section 7
           89.0   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           88.8   Based on 2006 AMEC Gull Lake Bathymetry
           88.4   AMEC 89
           88.1   1975 Section 8
           87.2   1975 Section 9
           86.0   1975 Section 10
           84.6   Derived section to represent inlet to Sandy Island Lake
           83.6   1975 Section 12
           83.0   AMEC 83
           82.0   1975 Section 13
           80.8   1975 Section 14
                                                                                        Page 5 of 6


Appendix B - Source of Bathymetry for Model Cross Sections

Chainage (km)     Source/ Notes
           80.0   AMEC 80
           78.7   1975 Section 16
           75.6   1975 Section 18
           74.9   AMEC 75
           73.5   AMEC 73
           72.0   1975 Section 21
           71.0   1975 Section 22
           69.8   2006 AMEC 70
           69.6   1975 Section 23
           68.0   2006 AMEC 68
           67.2   1975 Section 25
           66.5   1975 Section 26
           65.2   1975 Section 27
           64.4   2006 AMEC 64
           63.2   1975 Section 28
           62.3   1975 Section 29
           61.0   1975 Section 30
           59.6   1975 Section 31
           59.0   1975 Section 32
           57.5   1975 Section 33
           56.2   1975 Section 34
           55.0   1975 Section 35
           53.6   AMEC 54
           53.0   1975 Section 37
           52.0   1975 Section 38
           51.0   1975 Section 39
           50.5   AMEC 50
           49.2   1975 Section 40
           47.9   1975 Section 41
           47.0   1975 Section 42
           44.8   AMEC 45
           43.8   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           43.7   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           43.6   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           43.5   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           43.3   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           43.1   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           42.8   Based on Geoscott Explorations Consultants Contours (1998)
           42.7   Based on Geoscott Exploration Consultants Contours (1998)
           42.0   2006 PARROTT 42
           41.3   2006 PARROTT 41
           40.3   2006 PARROTT 40
           39.5   2006 PARROTT 39
           35.0   2006 PARROTT 35
           33.0   2006 PARROTT 33
           29.8   2006 PARROTT 30
           24.5   2006 PARROTT
           24.2   Based on 2006 PARROTT survey points - upstream of causeway
           24.2   Based on 2006 PARROTT survey points - directly upstream of causeway
                                                                                          Page 6 of 6


Appendix B - Source of Bathymetry for Model Cross Sections

Chainage (km)     Source/ Notes
           24.1   Blackrock Bridge
           24.1   Based on 2006 PARROTT survey points - directly downstream of causeway
           24.1   Based on 2006 PARROTT survey points - downstream of causeway
           23.7   2006 PARROTT
           22.6   2006 PARROTT
           20.0   2006 PARROTT 20
           16.7   2006 PARROTT 17
           15.2   2006 PARROTT 15
           13.3   2006 PARROTT 13
           11.1   2006 PARROTT 11
            9.2   2006 PARROTT 9
            7.0   2006 PARROTT 7
            6.3   2006 PARROTT 6
            5.0   2006 PARROTT 5
            2.8   2006 PARROTT 3
            0.8   2006 PARROTT 1
           -0.2   2006 PARROTT 0
           -1.5   2006 PARROTT -1
           -3.0   2006 PARROTT -2
                    Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                        GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                                 Final Report - January 2008




            Appendix C
Lower Churchill River Drainage Basin Map




                                           PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page C-1
              Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                                  GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                           Final Report - January 2008




      Appendix D
Animation Shapefile Snapshots




                                     PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page D-1
          Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro - Lower Churchill Project
                              GI1110 - Hydraulic Modeling of River
                                       Final Report - January 2008




  Appendix E
Locations of Interest




                                 PRH325967.10064 , Rev. 0, Page E-1
Newfoundland & Labrador Hydro
Lower Churchill Project
WTO GI 1110 –Hydraulic Modeling of the River
Identified Points of Interest to Include in River Animations
October 4, 2007



 Item    Chainage          Area                       Description
  No.      (km)
  01         9        River view from    Create view to simulate the perspective
                        Goose Bay        of someone standing on the north river
                                         bank in HVGB, looking south toward the
                                         river.
  02      20-25?      River view from    Would like to create a view of the river
                      Trans Labrador     as seen when driving on the TLH (a
                      Highway (TLH)      specific perspective point not known at
                                         this time; we will advise when a
                                         particular location is determined).
  03       42-44       Muskrat Falls     Fly around of Muskrat Falls. Objective
                                         is to gain good perspective of the area.
  04        49          Lower Brook      Proximity of flood area to highway is of
                                         interest. Fly up Lower Brook to
                                         approximate point where road crosses
                                         river, turn and fly west along the
                                         tributary paralleling the TLH to show
                                         extent of flooding and proximity to TLH
                                         and return to river at chainage 52 km.
  05       72-74      Edwards Brook      Depart from river centerline at 72 km,
                                         travel along north bank of river and fly
                                         up Edwards Brook to TLH, turn west
                                         and fly back to chainage 74 km.
  06        87          Pinus River      Fly up Pinus River to show flooding
                                         extend. Turn and Fly back down Pinus.
  07     Bank to      Gull Island Camp   Fly around campsite area. Show
        North of 95                      access point from highway (if possible)
                                         and zoom out to show location with
                                         respect to dam location. LCP will check
                                         to see if a generic model of a potential
                                         camp layout is available to be
                                         incorporated.
Item   Chainage         Area                         Description
 No.     (km)
08     101-103       Gull Island       Fly around of Gull Island. Objective is
                                       to gain good perspective of the area.
                                       Include area of switchyard, converter
                                       station. (Coordinate details can be
                                       provided)
09     106-109    Potential area for   Fly over south bank in this area.
                     fish habitat
10       130        Minipi River       Fly up Minipi to falls, turn and fly back
                                       down Minipi.
11      191.5       Cache River        Fly up Cache to show extent of
                                       flooding, turn and fly back down Cache.
12       204        Shoal River        Fly up Shoal to show extent of flooding,
                                       turn and fly back down Shoal.
13     205-209     Mouni Rapids        Fly up rapids, turn and fly down rapids.
       (maybe
       more?)
14     263-265        Fig River        Fly along south bank of Churchill, turn
                                       and fly up Fig to show extent of
                                       flooding, turn and fly back down to
                                       Churchill.
15     272-273     Elizabeth River     Fly up Elizabeth to show extent of
                                       flooding, turn and fly back down
                                       Elizabeth.
16     283-284     Metchin River       Fly up Metchin to show extent of
                                       flooding, turn and fly back down
                                       Metchin.
17     Upstream   Potential area for   This area would not be included in the
        of 334       fish habitat      main fly thru since it is upstream of the
                                       Churchill Falls tailrace and is therefore
                                       considered outside the project
                                       boundary. It is of interest however
                                       because it is a potential area to create
                                       fish habitat. If data is available please
                                       do a fly around of the island located 3.5
                                       to 4.5 km upstream of the 334 km
                                       chainage point.

								
To top