A Critical Look at the Proposed Arkansas River Infrastructure Development

[cannon_fodder]

Regarding Keystone, the start of Tulsa's Arkansas river segment...

The Corp inspects each dam annually, in addition to the staff assigned to the dam and who work IN the dam. Then there is a periodic more details evaluation. I could not find the most recent periodic assessment... but here is what I did find:

Here is a report in Keystone from 2000:

Keystone Dam Safety Inspection Program. The Tulsa District COE performs annual
inspections and 5-year periodic inspections of its federal dams to comply with the federal
mandate for such inspections. The last periodic inspection and report completed for this
project was in November 1996. A synopsis of this inspection was obtained from the Tulsa
District for this report, and the condition of the dam and associated applicable structures is
summarized herewith.
The dam and all of its appurtenant structures remain in very good condition with no
breakdown or displacement observed. The crest remains in good condition with no
significant movements or subsidence identified. The downstream turf is well established
and is providing adequate protection against erosion. The spillway and powerhouse
structures are in overall good condition with no significant change observed in the hairline
cracking within the structures. Moderate deficiencies on the tainter gates were noted during
the structural integrity inspection. Corrosion, ranging from minor to significant, was
observed on the downstream structural members of the gates. Some secondary members on
isolated gates will require metal replacement, and an entire repainting of all the gates will be
necessary to retard further deterioration of their structural integrity. The stilling basin was
sounded and inspected by divers during fiscal year 1995 (FY95) and no significant change
was noted in the condition of the basin. None of the instrumentation data indicates an
unusual condition regarding the safety of the dam.

In Feb. of 2011 they labeled Keystone as "High Risk" and were doing further assessments, but the high risk rating was not so much for the odds of failure, but the results thereof:

Corps of Engineers: Canton Dam is very high safety risk
February 16 – (Oklahoma)
Safety — Six dam projects, including the Canto
Dam and Keystone Dam, in Oklahoma have bee
categorized as a Very High Risk project by
USACE, Tulsa, Oklahoma District. According to
the report released in early February, “Risk is the
measure of the likelihood that a natural event wil
take place, the performance of the infrastructure
during this event, and the consequences of failur
or poor performance — loss of life being of para
mount concern.” USACE says, “Dam or levee
failure is not likely due to completed Interim
Risk Reduction Measures and ongoing surveillance
and monitoring.” None of the dams were
rated Extremely High Risk. Eight of the projects
were designated as having Moderate to High Ris
and 15 were considered Low Risk. A Dam Safet
Modification is underway to address foundation
seepage and potential overtopping at Canton
Dam. That project is scheduled for completion in
2014. USACE is currently completing further
studies on issues at the Keystone Dam and Pine
Creek Dam. USACE officials emphasized there
is no imminent danger of any of the dams collapsing.

The 2012 report focuses on the bridge over Keystone, and addresses no other issues:
http://www.swt.usace.army.mil/Portals/41/docs/library/proj-upd/2012-02.pdf

[cannon_fodder]

MORE interestingly, and I haven't seen anyone else talk about this...

The Keystone Lake project initially included included a "Sand Springs dam" to provide downstream water quality storage and to control flow variations. That is to say, exactly what the new dam is expected to do. The old one was such a failure and death trap, they removed it.

Previous studies examined the removal
of a re-regulation dam on the
Arkansas River, immediately below
Keystone Dam. The dam was designed
to provide downstream water
quality storage and to control flow
variations as a result of hydropower
operations, and constructed as part
of the Keystone Lake project. The
Corps removed the re-regulation dam
in the mid-1980s because the structure
did not perform as expected and
created a life-safety hazard; sixteen
drownings occurred at the dam. This
feasibility study will investigate the
potential of federal responsibility for
reconstruction of the dam.

http://www.swt.usace.army.mil/Portals/41/docs/library/proj-upd/2015_03.pdf

[dsjeffries]

Many people have noted that, and the consensus seemed to be that the original dam was a bad design that caused drownings on the downstream side, much like the existing Zink Lake dam. That's one of the reasons why they've included many "step-downs" in the proposed dams.

But this is now a moot point. Bynum just announced the Sand Springs and Bixby dams have been scrapped, and a third dam in Tulsa has been added, around 49th St S.

[Conan71]

Here’s the TW story:

By JARREL WADE World Staff Writer | 5 comments
The proposal to build low-water dams along the Arkansas River may be getting an overhaul — becoming much more Tulsa-focused.

The initial plan called for three new dams — Sand Springs, south Tulsa/Jenks and Bixby — and an overhaul of Tulsa's Zink Dam. After hearing public comments during meetings in recent weeks, a Tulsa official is now proposing to remove plans for dams in Sand Springs and Bixby. He also plans to propose an additional dam in Tulsa.

Councilor G.T. Bynum, who has led the Arkansas River Infrastructure Task Force, emailed other task force members Wednesday to inform them of his intention to call for the projects to be scaled back at next week's meeting.

"In Tulsa, recurring concerns were raised around the disparity between what Tulsans would pay into a sales tax and what they would get out of it,"

Bynum said in the email to the task force. "There were also concerns about lengthy revenue projections and direct return on investment. The space in

Tulsa between our lakes remains a major concern as well. When people think of 'water in the river' they think of continuous water, not two lakes five miles apart."

The task force's engineering group is looking at the cost of adding a third Tulsa dam, at about 49th Street, which would fill a gap between Tulsa's proposed lakes.

The third dam was proposed after concerns were raised about low water levels between the Zink Dam and the proposed Tulsa/Jenks dam.

While the cost for the four dams in the original plan was priced at about $300 million and aimed for half of Vision 2025's expiring tax, Bynum's new proposal would be about $100 million less.

The cost of a dam at 49th Street, which is being detailed by engineers, would be similar in cost to the Bixby dam. Bynum estimated the overall project cost of his new proposal to simply subtract the cost of the Sand Springs dam at about $100 million.

However, Bynum said he plans to increase the amount budgeted for Arkansas River levee rehabilitation, from $4.2 million to $10 million.

To task force members, Bynum said he would propose the entire region be split into two phases. The first phase would address Zink Dam, 49th Street dam and the South Tulsa/Jenks dam, as well as levee improvements.

A second phase would then look to address a dam in Sand Springs, Bixby and other dam enhancements, Bynum said.

"We need to prove to our citizens that we can build these dams on time and on budget," Bynum said. "And we need to prove that in Tulsa before we can expand our horizons."

Bynum said an engineering report completed this week showed that the intent of the Sand Springs dam — to hold a large pool of water for consistent flow to the downstream dams — would have a negligible effect on increasing water flow downstream.

During public meetings, when Bynum was asked about the need for the Sand Springs dam in the funding proposal, he called the Sand Springs dam "the spigot" to keep water levels high downstream.

"The big number there is that the water has historically flowed at about 1,000 cubic feet per second," Bynum said. "If we add the Sand Springs dam, it would increase that flow of 1,000 cubic feet per second from 88 percent of the time to only 92 percent."

Bynum said the difference just doesn't make enough sense for the cost of the dam. 

The Bixby dam also was removed from the proposal. As previously reported, residents questioned the cost of that dam as being mostly on the shoulders of Tulsa taxpayers.

Last month, Bynum called the Sand Springs and Bixby dams "weaknesses" in the proposal that needed to be addressed.

[Vision 2025]

MORE interestingly, and I haven't seen anyone else talk about this...

The Keystone Lake project initially included included a "Sand Springs dam" to provide downstream water quality storage and to control flow variations. That is to say, exactly what the new dam is expected to do. The old one was such a failure and death trap, they removed it.
http://www.swt.usace.army.mil/Portals/41/docs/library/proj-upd/2015_03.pdf

We have talked about it extensively and continue to do so with the USACE.  That dam and reregulation methodology was identified in the enabling legislation as feature required to satisfy Federal Requirements in the predecessor of and were later in the Clean Water Act.  Critically, those re-regulated flow rates were utilized in the development of the regulatory low flow rates (7Q2) for waste water treatment plant discharge permitting. 

[Bamboo World]

I'm all for having water in the river...this plan puts water in the river, just not significantly in Tulsa. It puts water in the river at Sand Springs and at Jenks and fixes the impound at the pedestrian bridge in Tulsa. The water level from 31st to 61st in Tulsa will mostly stay the same.

Now, someone has posted an idea for another dam at 49th St.  In that case, the water level from 31st to 61st would change.

But the point I was trying to make in my previous post was in general agreement with carltonplace.   Plans for additional dams will create pools of water in specific locations, but most of the river through Tulsa County will remain as it is now:  a relatively dry streambed.

I don't want to see additional dams built anywhere along the reach from Keystone to Bixby.  I might support the repair of the Zink Dam, however.  Maybe...depends on the ballot phrasing...

[heironymouspasparagus]

Many people have noted that, and the consensus seemed to be that the original dam was a bad design that caused drownings on the downstream side, much like the existing Zink Lake dam. That's one of the reasons why they've included many "step-downs" in the proposed dams.

But this is now a moot point. Bynum just announced the Sand Springs and Bixby dams have been scrapped, and a third dam in Tulsa has been added, around 49th St S.

But will it be another drowning machine?  Or will proper design actually be built....?  

[dsjeffries]

But will it be another drowning machine?  Or will proper design actually be built....?

...That's one of the reasons why they've included many "step-downs" in the proposed dams.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Yeah...I see that.  But until the concrete is poured, it's just pictures on paper.


Would be interesting to mix it up a bit with a wide section of long slope (ramp) away from the dam that could provide a kind of slide for rafts, tubes, etc. 

[dsjeffries]

The plan is to have a whitewater section near the pedestrian bridge and Gathering Place, which would be fun!

Here are the plans for Zink Dam.

[Vision 2025]

But will it be another drowning machine?  Or will proper design actually be built....?  

The design team includes engineers who specialize in white water feature design and implementation, they have patented gate technologies for wave tuning, and are responsible for the roller mitigation design which are to be effective until flow reaches otherwise unsafe levels (due to velocity) and all gates are fully down.

[TeeDub]

Is there anyway to NOT have moving parts on this dam?    It just sounds like someone is trying to sell Tulsa a monorail...   The engineers and salesmen get rich, and the city gets stuck with the maintenance nightmare.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I actually like the look of some of the features in that plan - I am going to build a pond...more of a lake, really, so may just gain inspiration from that.

Couple things jump out - sail boats and slips?? (Page 1)  Really?  And for whose benefit would that be?  It's a lead pipe cinch that neither I, nor 98% of the people I know would ever benefit from that - and I'm betting there would be "gated community" written all over the boat area.

Gunite - page 4.  Goes to the whole long term maintenance thing I brought up earlier.  This is a designed in maintenance plan for someone to benefit from - or just let it go for 20 years and then tear it out and make the next big thing....

Geotextile...rubber bladder...moving parts depending on bags.  Always a bad idea.  Another ongoing maintenance expense plan for someone.


Lots of pretty pictures.  Pardon my skepticism about Tulsa's implementation of this type of scheme - the current Zink dam was also the "latest and greatest" at the time.  Have heard for years how "inadequate" it really is...it replaced another low water dam without addressing the hazard concerns.

This alleviates some concerns and raises others.

[Vision 2025]

Lots of pretty pictures.  Pardon my skepticism about Tulsa's implementation of this type of scheme - the current Zink dam was also the "latest and greatest" at the time.  Have heard for years how "inadequate" it really is...it replaced another low water dam without addressing the hazard concerns.

I worked on Zink Dam, don't ever remember it being called latest and greatest, but I was young then...

[heironymouspasparagus]

I worked on Zink Dam, don't ever remember it being called latest and greatest, but I was young then...

That's just the perception I have from the time...the old dam was a little bit downstream, IIRC, and there was always somebody drowning around that thing (not always...just once in a while, but perception is many more than now).  The Zink dam has not been bad - seems like there aren't very many die there, but maybe I have become "deaf" to the events.  Could we be getting smarter around dangerous objects??