xml version 1.0
xml-stylesheet type textxsl href daitss_report_xhtml.xsl
REPORT xsi:schemaLocation 'http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitss2Report.xsd' xmlns:xsi 'http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance' xmlns 'http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss'
DISSEMINATION IEID 'E20081001_AAAAAS' PACKAGE 'UF00001234_00001' INGEST_TIME '2008-10-01T16:00:19-04:00'
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT 'UF' PROJECT 'UFDC'
REQUEST_EVENTS TITLE Disseminate Event
REQUEST_EVENT NAME 'disseminate request placed' TIME '2017-03-09T14:50:20-05:00' NOTE 'request id: 310147; E20081001_AAAAAS' AGENT 'UF73'
finished' '2017-03-09T15:06:15-05:00' '' 'SYSTEM'
FILE SIZE '47395' DFID 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQB' ORIGIN 'DEPOSITOR' PATH 'sip-files00002.jp2'
MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM 'MD5' 2e89d262f051e3cc3be3a3168f99e779
EVENT '2017-03-09T14:54:32-05:00' OUTCOME 'success'
'52567' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQC' 'sip-files00002.jpg'
'18769' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQD' 'sip-files00002.pdf'
'74702' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQD-norm-0' 'ARCHIVE' 'aip-filesF20081001_AAALQD-norm-0.pdf'
'12333' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQE' 'sip-files00002.pro'
'18227' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQF' 'sip-files00002.QC.jpg'
'834684' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQG' 'sip-files00002.tif'
'642' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQH' 'sip-files00002.txt'
'5720' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQI' 'sip-files00002thm.jpg'
'44550' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQJ' 'sip-files00003.jp2'
'43793' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQK' 'sip-files00003.jpg'
'18215' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQL' 'sip-files00003.pdf'
'8895' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQM' 'sip-files00003.pro'
'14607' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQN' 'sip-files00003.QC.jpg'
'872324' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQO' 'sip-files00003.tif'
'521' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQP' 'sip-files00003.txt'
'4912' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQQ' 'sip-files00003thm.jpg'
'111503' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQR' 'sip-files00004.jp2'
'102551' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQS' 'sip-files00004.jpg'
'46036' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQT' 'sip-files00004.pdf'
'31922' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQU' 'sip-files00004.pro'
'33213' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQV' 'sip-files00004.QC.jpg'
'861300' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQW' 'sip-files00004.tif'
'1436' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQX' 'sip-files00004.txt'
'9129' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQY' 'sip-files00004thm.jpg'
'14063' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALQZ' 'sip-files00005.jp2'
'17982' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRA' 'sip-files00005.jpg'
'7384' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRB' 'sip-files00005.pdf'
'4197' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRC' 'sip-files00005.pro'
'6024' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRD' 'sip-files00005.QC.jpg'
'846672' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRE' 'sip-files00005.tif'
'255' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRF' 'sip-files00005.txt'
'2164' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRG' 'sip-files00005thm.jpg'
'105846' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRH' 'sip-files00006.jp2'
'107485' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRI' 'sip-files00006.jpg'
'41608' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRJ' 'sip-files00006.pdf'
'101296' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRK' 'sip-files00006.pro'
'37467' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRL' 'sip-files00006.QC.jpg'
'841408' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRM' 'sip-files00006.tif'
'4034' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRN' 'sip-files00006.txt'
'9138' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRO' 'sip-files00006thm.jpg'
'160214' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRP' 'sip-files00007.jp2'
'143095' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRQ' 'sip-files00007.jpg'
'65853' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRR' 'sip-files00007.pdf'
'35577' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRR-norm-0' 'aip-filesF20081001_AAALRR-norm-0.pdf'
'99354' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRS' 'sip-files00007.pro'
'47070' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRT' 'sip-files00007.QC.jpg'
'878008' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRU' 'sip-files00007.tif'
'4303' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRV' 'sip-files00007.txt'
WARNING CODE 'Daitss::Anomaly' Invalid character
'11478' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRW' 'sip-files00007thm.jpg'
'80126' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRX' 'sip-files00008.jp2'
'68706' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRY' 'sip-files00008.jpg'
'33876' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALRZ' 'sip-files00008.pdf'
'42392' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSA' 'sip-files00008.pro'
'22844' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSB' 'sip-files00008.QC.jpg'
'890784' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSC' 'sip-files00008.tif'
'1887' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSD' 'sip-files00008.txt'
'6145' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSE' 'sip-files00008thm.jpg'
'191144' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSF' 'sip-files00010.jp2'
'173224' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSG' 'sip-files00010.jpg'
'80202' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSH' 'sip-files00010.pdf'
'62757' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSI' 'sip-files00010.pro'
'54493' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSJ' 'sip-files00010.QC.jpg'
'880444' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSK' 'sip-files00010.tif'
'2594' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSL' 'sip-files00010.txt'
'13022' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSM' 'sip-files00010thm.jpg'
'205437' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSN' 'sip-files00011.jp2'
'185499' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSO' 'sip-files00011.jpg'
'88239' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSP' 'sip-files00011.pdf'
'67500' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSQ' 'sip-files00011.pro'
'56102' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSR' 'sip-files00011.QC.jpg'
'901448' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSS' 'sip-files00011.tif'
'2688' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALST' 'sip-files00011.txt'
'13166' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSU' 'sip-files00011thm.jpg'
'121161' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSV' 'sip-files00012.jp2'
'113432' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSW' 'sip-files00012.jpg'
'51943' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSX' 'sip-files00012.pdf'
'15188' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSY' 'sip-files00012.pro'
'38458' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALSZ' 'sip-files00012.QC.jpg'
'862180' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTA' 'sip-files00012.tif'
'781' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTB' 'sip-files00012.txt'
'11055' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTC' 'sip-files00012thm.jpg'
'200320' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTD' 'sip-files00013.jp2'
'176206' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTE' 'sip-files00013.jpg'
'84908' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTF' 'sip-files00013.pdf'
'66775' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTG' 'sip-files00013.pro'
'55464' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTH' 'sip-files00013.QC.jpg'
'897180' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTI' 'sip-files00013.tif'
'2679' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTJ' 'sip-files00013.txt'
'13416' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTK' 'sip-files00013thm.jpg'
'145970' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTL' 'sip-files00014.jp2'
'120297' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTM' 'sip-files00014.jpg'
'63422' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTN' 'sip-files00014.pdf'
'15994' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTO' 'sip-files00014.pro'
'40787' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTP' 'sip-files00014.QC.jpg'
'861592' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTQ' 'sip-files00014.tif'
'677' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTR' 'sip-files00014.txt'
'11757' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTS' 'sip-files00014thm.jpg'
'188239' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTT' 'sip-files00015.jp2'
'166952' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTU' 'sip-files00015.jpg'
'77613' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTV' 'sip-files00015.pdf'
'69610' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTW' 'sip-files00015.pro'
'52321' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTX' 'sip-files00015.QC.jpg'
'893780' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTY' 'sip-files00015.tif'
'2767' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALTZ' 'sip-files00015.txt'
'12638' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUA' 'sip-files00015thm.jpg'
'156666' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUB' 'sip-files00016.jp2'
'106409' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUC' 'sip-files00016.jpg'
'66013' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUD' 'sip-files00016.pdf'
'6546' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUE' 'sip-files00016.pro'
'29663' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUF' 'sip-files00016.QC.jpg'
'871972' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUG' 'sip-files00016.tif'
'312' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUH' 'sip-files00016.txt'
'8472' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUI' 'sip-files00016thm.jpg'
'144342' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUJ' 'sip-files00017.jp2'
'138258' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUK' 'sip-files00017.jpg'
'61632' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUL' 'sip-files00017.pdf'
'18702' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUM' 'sip-files00017.pro'
'46136' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUN' 'sip-files00017.QC.jpg'
'862172' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUO' 'sip-files00017.tif'
'1261' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUP' 'sip-files00017.txt'
'12737' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUQ' 'sip-files00017thm.jpg'
'171665' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUR' 'sip-files00018.jp2'
'154812' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUS' 'sip-files00018.jpg'
'72422' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUT' 'sip-files00018.pdf'
'60734' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUU' 'sip-files00018.pro'
'49039' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUV' 'sip-files00018.QC.jpg'
'879104' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUW' 'sip-files00018.tif'
'2468' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUX' 'sip-files00018.txt'
'12203' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUY' 'sip-files00018thm.jpg'
'173356' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALUZ' 'sip-files00019.jp2'
'158135' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVA' 'sip-files00019.jpg'
'72431' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVB' 'sip-files00019.pdf'
'64069' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVC' 'sip-files00019.pro'
'50228' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVD' 'sip-files00019.QC.jpg'
'899300' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVE' 'sip-files00019.tif'
'2758' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVF' 'sip-files00019.txt'
'12976' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVG' 'sip-files00019thm.jpg'
'179715' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVH' 'sip-files00020.jp2'
'161834' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVI' 'sip-files00020.jpg'
'77202' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVJ' 'sip-files00020.pdf'
'63530' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVK' 'sip-files00020.pro'
'51826' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVL' 'sip-files00020.QC.jpg'
'881356' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVM' 'sip-files00020.tif'
'2889' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVN' 'sip-files00020.txt'
'12163' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVO' 'sip-files00020thm.jpg'
'139150' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVP' 'sip-files00021.jp2'
'143444' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVQ' 'sip-files00021.jpg'
'60427' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVR' 'sip-files00021.pdf'
'30362' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVS' 'sip-files00021.pro'
'46938' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVT' 'sip-files00021.QC.jpg'
'871052' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVU' 'sip-files00021.tif'
'1199' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVV' 'sip-files00021.txt'
'11870' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVW' 'sip-files00021thm.jpg'
'113186' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVX' 'sip-files00022.jp2'
'113622' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVY' 'sip-files00022.jpg'
'45594' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALVZ' 'sip-files00022.pdf'
'7179' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWA' 'sip-files00022.pro'
'41441' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWB' 'sip-files00022.QC.jpg'
'857584' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWC' 'sip-files00022.tif'
'303' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWD' 'sip-files00022.txt'
'13023' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWE' 'sip-files00022thm.jpg'
'73843' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWF' 'sip-files00023.jp2'
'39104' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWG' 'sip-files00023.jpg'
'31144' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWH' 'sip-files00023.pdf'
'32705' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWI' 'sip-files00023.pro'
'12942' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWJ' 'sip-files00023.QC.jpg'
'888916' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWK' 'sip-files00023.tif'
'1644' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWL' 'sip-files00023.txt'
'4037' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWM' 'sip-files00023thm.jpg'
'216352' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWN' 'sip-files00024.jp2'
'196564' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWO' 'sip-files00024.jpg'
'90591' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWP' 'sip-files00024.pdf'
'75083' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWQ' 'sip-files00024.pro'
'59964' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWR' 'sip-files00024.QC.jpg'
'893424' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWS' 'sip-files00024.tif'
'2955' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWT' 'sip-files00024.txt'
'14009' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWU' 'sip-files00024thm.jpg'
'167884' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWV' 'sip-files00025.jp2'
'153988' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWW' 'sip-files00025.jpg'
'69289' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWX' 'sip-files00025.pdf'
'62686' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWY' 'sip-files00025.pro'
'50150' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALWZ' 'sip-files00025.QC.jpg'
'901892' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXA' 'sip-files00025.tif'
'2524' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXB' 'sip-files00025.txt'
'12216' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXC' 'sip-files00025thm.jpg'
'99937' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXD' 'sip-files00026.jp2'
'95317' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXE' 'sip-files00026.jpg'
'40893' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXF' 'sip-files00026.pdf'
'25744' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXG' 'sip-files00026.pro'
'31616' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXH' 'sip-files00026.QC.jpg'
'864032' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXI' 'sip-files00026.tif'
'1459' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXJ' 'sip-files00026.txt'
'9227' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXK' 'sip-files00026thm.jpg'
'192175' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXL' 'sip-files00027.jp2'
'175858' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXM' 'sip-files00027.jpg'
'79524' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXN' 'sip-files00027.pdf'
'69620' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXO' 'sip-files00027.pro'
'55269' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXP' 'sip-files00027.QC.jpg'
'900256' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXQ' 'sip-files00027.tif'
'2786' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXR' 'sip-files00027.txt'
'12954' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXS' 'sip-files00027thm.jpg'
'182578' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXT' 'sip-files00028.jp2'
'169937' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXU' 'sip-files00028.jpg'
'75284' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXV' 'sip-files00028.pdf'
'63360' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXW' 'sip-files00028.pro'
'52903' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXX' 'sip-files00028.QC.jpg'
'882364' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXY' 'sip-files00028.tif'
'2576' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALXZ' 'sip-files00028.txt'
'12844' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYA' 'sip-files00028thm.jpg'
'197609' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYB' 'sip-files00029.jp2'
'178462' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYC' 'sip-files00029.jpg'
'80697' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYD' 'sip-files00029.pdf'
'72475' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYE' 'sip-files00029.pro'
'55971' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYF' 'sip-files00029.QC.jpg'
'912680' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYG' 'sip-files00029.tif'
'2920' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYH' 'sip-files00029.txt'
'13224' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYI' 'sip-files00029thm.jpg'
'906495' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYJ' 'sip-files00030.jp2'
'105091' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYK' 'sip-files00030.jpg'
'468253' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYL' 'sip-files00030.pdf'
'17019' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYM' 'sip-files00030.pro'
'36572' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYN' 'sip-files00030.QC.jpg'
'7275956' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYO' 'sip-files00030.tif'
'909' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYP' 'sip-files00030.txt'
'11337' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYQ' 'sip-files00030thm.jpg'
'113291' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYR' 'sip-files00031.jp2'
'111220' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYS' 'sip-files00031.jpg'
'45252' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYT' 'sip-files00031.pdf'
'13792' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYU' 'sip-files00031.pro'
'40542' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYV' 'sip-files00031.QC.jpg'
'875584' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYW' 'sip-files00031.tif'
'601' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYX' 'sip-files00031.txt'
'12222' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYY' 'sip-files00031thm.jpg'
'113336' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALYZ' 'sip-files00032.jp2'
'112419' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZA' 'sip-files00032.jpg'
'46418' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZB' 'sip-files00032.pdf'
'7550' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZC' 'sip-files00032.pro'
'39065' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZD' 'sip-files00032.QC.jpg'
'862556' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZE' 'sip-files00032.tif'
'306' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZF' 'sip-files00032.txt'
'11884' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZG' 'sip-files00032thm.jpg'
'113050' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZH' 'sip-files00033.jp2'
'113387' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZI' 'sip-files00033.jpg'
'45430' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZJ' 'sip-files00033.pdf'
'17383' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZK' 'sip-files00033.pro'
'40404' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZL' 'sip-files00033.QC.jpg'
'863072' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZM' 'sip-files00033.tif'
'1401' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZN' 'sip-files00033.txt'
'11969' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZO' 'sip-files00033thm.jpg'
'182572' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZP' 'sip-files00034.jp2'
'170249' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZQ' 'sip-files00034.jpg'
'74648' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZR' 'sip-files00034.pdf'
'63453' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZS' 'sip-files00034.pro'
'53147' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZT' 'sip-files00034.QC.jpg'
'883436' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZU' 'sip-files00034.tif'
'2587' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZV' 'sip-files00034.txt'
'13093' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZW' 'sip-files00034thm.jpg'
'178313' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZX' 'sip-files00035.jp2'
'155864' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZY' 'sip-files00035.jpg'
'74801' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAALZZ' 'sip-files00035.pdf'
'30273' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAA' 'sip-files00035.pro'
'48741' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAB' 'sip-files00035.QC.jpg'
'896624' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAC' 'sip-files00035.tif'
'1187' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAD' 'sip-files00035.txt'
'12585' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAE' 'sip-files00035thm.jpg'
'193360' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAF' 'sip-files00036.jp2'
'179764' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAG' 'sip-files00036.jpg'
'79259' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAH' 'sip-files00036.pdf'
'67973' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAI' 'sip-files00036.pro'
'55650' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAJ' 'sip-files00036.QC.jpg'
'880948' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAK' 'sip-files00036.tif'
'2714' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAL' 'sip-files00036.txt'
'13512' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAM' 'sip-files00036thm.jpg'
'928159' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAN' 'sip-files00037.jp2'
'111807' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAO' 'sip-files00037.jpg'
'520736' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAP' 'sip-files00037.pdf'
'16255' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAQ' 'sip-files00037.pro'
'37303' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAR' 'sip-files00037.QC.jpg'
'7449720' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAS' 'sip-files00037.tif'
'1064' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAT' 'sip-files00037.txt'
'11538' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAU' 'sip-files00037thm.jpg'
'128714' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAV' 'sip-files00038.jp2'
'123985' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAW' 'sip-files00038.jpg'
'52243' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAX' 'sip-files00038.pdf'
'19052' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAY' 'sip-files00038.pro'
'43509' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMAZ' 'sip-files00038.QC.jpg'
'863460' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBA' 'sip-files00038.tif'
'1275' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBB' 'sip-files00038.txt'
'12542' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBC' 'sip-files00038thm.jpg'
'876860' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBD' 'sip-files00039.jp2'
'106430' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBE' 'sip-files00039.jpg'
'462614' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBF' 'sip-files00039.pdf'
'17325' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBG' 'sip-files00039.pro'
'37105' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBH' 'sip-files00039.QC.jpg'
'7039652' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBI' 'sip-files00039.tif'
'1348' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBJ' 'sip-files00039.txt'
'12043' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBK' 'sip-files00039thm.jpg'
'122905' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBL' 'sip-files00040.jp2'
'118380' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBM' 'sip-files00040.jpg'
'50047' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBN' 'sip-files00040.pdf'
'18394' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBO' 'sip-files00040.pro'
'40914' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBP' 'sip-files00040.QC.jpg'
'861228' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBQ' 'sip-files00040.tif'
'883' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBR' 'sip-files00040.txt'
'12232' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBS' 'sip-files00040thm.jpg'
'178268' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBT' 'sip-files00041.jp2'
'162369' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBU' 'sip-files00041.jpg'
'72502' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBV' 'sip-files00041.pdf'
'61043' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBW' 'sip-files00041.pro'
'51324' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBX' 'sip-files00041.QC.jpg'
'896836' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBY' 'sip-files00041.tif'
'2439' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMBZ' 'sip-files00041.txt'
'12561' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCA' 'sip-files00041thm.jpg'
'69010' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCB' 'sip-files00042.jp2'
'42413' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCC' 'sip-files00042.jpg'
'29456' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCD' 'sip-files00042.pdf'
'533' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCE' 'sip-files00042.pro'
'14031' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCF' 'sip-files00042.QC.jpg'
'851652' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCG' 'sip-files00042.tif'
'58' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCH' 'sip-files00042.txt'
'4201' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCI' 'sip-files00042thm.jpg'
'95895' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCJ' 'sip-files00043.jp2'
'86968' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCK' 'sip-files00043.jpg'
'39458' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCL' 'sip-files00043.pdf'
'30361' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCM' 'sip-files00043.pro'
'30009' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCN' 'sip-files00043.QC.jpg'
'890220' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCO' 'sip-files00043.tif'
'1337' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCP' 'sip-files00043.txt'
'8195' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCQ' 'sip-files00043thm.jpg'
'107775' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCR' 'sip-files00044.jp2'
'106516' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCS' 'sip-files00044.jpg'
'43353' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCT' 'sip-files00044.pdf'
'15629' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCU' 'sip-files00044.pro'
'38913' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCV' 'sip-files00044.QC.jpg'
'858644' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCW' 'sip-files00044.tif'
'724' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCX' 'sip-files00044.txt'
'11473' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCY' 'sip-files00044thm.jpg'
'91028' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMCZ' 'sip-files00045.jp2'
'44507' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDA' 'sip-files00045.jpg'
'39187' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDB' 'sip-files00045.pdf'
'2173' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDC' 'sip-files00045.pro'
'13574' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDD' 'sip-files00045.QC.jpg'
'843336' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDE' 'sip-files00045.tif'
'90' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDF' 'sip-files00045.txt'
'3698' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDG' 'sip-files00045thm.jpg'
'152538' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDH' 'sip-files00046.jp2'
'143404' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDI' 'sip-files00046.jpg'
'63095' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDJ' 'sip-files00046.pdf'
'60481' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDK' 'sip-files00046.pro'
'46992' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDL' 'sip-files00046.QC.jpg'
'860632' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDM' 'sip-files00046.tif'
'2650' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDN' 'sip-files00046.txt'
'11766' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDO' 'sip-files00046thm.jpg'
'168456' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDP' 'sip-files00047.jp2'
'134748' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDQ' 'sip-files00047.jpg'
'79447' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDR' 'sip-files00047.pdf'
'43379' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDS' 'sip-files00047.pro'
'42397' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDT' 'sip-files00047.QC.jpg'
'897712' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDU' 'sip-files00047.tif'
'1960' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDV' 'sip-files00047.txt'
'11043' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDW' 'sip-files00047thm.jpg'
'186154' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDX' 'sip-files00048.jp2'
'168569' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDY' 'sip-files00048.jpg'
'75695' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMDZ' 'sip-files00048.pdf'
'64945' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEA' 'sip-files00048.pro'
'54359' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEB' 'sip-files00048.QC.jpg'
'883232' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEC' 'sip-files00048.tif'
'2647' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMED' 'sip-files00048.txt'
'13253' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEE' 'sip-files00048thm.jpg'
'193424' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEF' 'sip-files00049.jp2'
'178496' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEG' 'sip-files00049.jpg'
'79612' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEH' 'sip-files00049.pdf'
'69283' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEI' 'sip-files00049.pro'
'56307' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEJ' 'sip-files00049.QC.jpg'
'898932' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEK' 'sip-files00049.tif'
'2729' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEL' 'sip-files00049.txt'
'13375' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEM' 'sip-files00049thm.jpg'
'103160' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEN' 'sip-files00050.jp2'
'46872' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEO' 'sip-files00050.jpg'
'46833' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEP' 'sip-files00050.pdf'
'18221' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEQ' 'sip-files00050.pro'
'15746' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMER' 'sip-files00050.QC.jpg'
'842348' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMES' 'sip-files00050.tif'
'1298' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMET' 'sip-files00050.txt'
'5146' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEU' 'sip-files00050thm.jpg'
'196389' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEV' 'sip-files00051.jp2'
'173689' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEW' 'sip-files00051.jpg'
'80545' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEX' 'sip-files00051.pdf'
'68660' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEY' 'sip-files00051.pro'
'54108' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMEZ' 'sip-files00051.QC.jpg'
'917636' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFA' 'sip-files00051.tif'
'2709' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFB' 'sip-files00051.txt'
'13193' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFC' 'sip-files00051thm.jpg'
'192872' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFD' 'sip-files00052.jp2'
'177556' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFE' 'sip-files00052.jpg'
'78883' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFF' 'sip-files00052.pdf'
'68056' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFG' 'sip-files00052.pro'
'56081' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFH' 'sip-files00052.QC.jpg'
'883480' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFI' 'sip-files00052.tif'
'2731' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFJ' 'sip-files00052.txt'
'13385' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFK' 'sip-files00052thm.jpg'
'121946' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFL' 'sip-files00053.jp2'
'117077' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFM' 'sip-files00053.jpg'
'49412' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFN' 'sip-files00053.pdf'
'13356' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFO' 'sip-files00053.pro'
'39385' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFP' 'sip-files00053.QC.jpg'
'865284' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFQ' 'sip-files00053.tif'
'764' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFR' 'sip-files00053.txt'
'11608' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFS' 'sip-files00053thm.jpg'
'133767' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFT' 'sip-files00054.jp2'
'125204' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFU' 'sip-files00054.jpg'
'56118' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFV' 'sip-files00054.pdf'
'16468' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFW' 'sip-files00054.pro'
'41837' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFX' 'sip-files00054.QC.jpg'
'865244' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFY' 'sip-files00054.tif'
'1231' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMFZ' 'sip-files00054.txt'
'12157' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGA' 'sip-files00054thm.jpg'
'199647' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGB' 'sip-files00055.jp2'
'184132' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGC' 'sip-files00055.jpg'
'83049' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGD' 'sip-files00055.pdf'
'71822' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGE' 'sip-files00055.pro'
'57528' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGF' 'sip-files00055.QC.jpg'
'901620' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGG' 'sip-files00055.tif'
'2852' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGH' 'sip-files00055.txt'
'13302' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGI' 'sip-files00055thm.jpg'
'200211' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGJ' 'sip-files00056.jp2'
'189471' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGK' 'sip-files00056.jpg'
'84019' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGL' 'sip-files00056.pdf'
'70417' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGM' 'sip-files00056.pro'
'59456' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGN' 'sip-files00056.QC.jpg'
'864244' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGO' 'sip-files00056.tif'
'2815' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGP' 'sip-files00056.txt'
'14022' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGQ' 'sip-files00056thm.jpg'
'148915' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGR' 'sip-files00057.jp2'
'133802' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGS' 'sip-files00057.jpg'
'61318' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGT' 'sip-files00057.pdf'
'31389' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGU' 'sip-files00057.pro'
'43534' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGV' 'sip-files00057.QC.jpg'
'899180' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGW' 'sip-files00057.tif'
'1297' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGX' 'sip-files00057.txt'
'11306' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGY' 'sip-files00057thm.jpg'
'185635' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMGZ' 'sip-files00058.jp2'
'169706' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHA' 'sip-files00058.jpg'
'76096' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHB' 'sip-files00058.pdf'
'67775' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHC' 'sip-files00058.pro'
'53188' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHD' 'sip-files00058.QC.jpg'
'882252' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHE' 'sip-files00058.tif'
'2820' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHF' 'sip-files00058.txt'
'12975' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHG' 'sip-files00058thm.jpg'
'148991' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHH' 'sip-files00059.jp2'
'139450' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHI' 'sip-files00059.jpg'
'61028' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHJ' 'sip-files00059.pdf'
'30709' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHK' 'sip-files00059.pro'
'45289' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHL' 'sip-files00059.QC.jpg'
'862636' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHM' 'sip-files00059.tif'
'1406' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHN' 'sip-files00059.txt'
'12516' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHO' 'sip-files00059thm.jpg'
'190505' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHP' 'sip-files00060.jp2'
'181761' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHQ' 'sip-files00060.jpg'
'78245' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHR' 'sip-files00060.pdf'
'66881' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHS' 'sip-files00060.pro'
'56658' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHT' 'sip-files00060.QC.jpg'
'863556' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHU' 'sip-files00060.tif'
'2734' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHV' 'sip-files00060.txt'
'13945' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHW' 'sip-files00060thm.jpg'
'198864' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHX' 'sip-files00061.jp2'
'190118' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHY' 'sip-files00061.jpg'
'82551' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMHZ' 'sip-files00061.pdf'
'71213' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIA' 'sip-files00061.pro'
'60063' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIB' 'sip-files00061.QC.jpg'
'882340' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIC' 'sip-files00061.tif'
'14171' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIE' 'sip-files00061thm.jpg'
'87406' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIF' 'sip-files00062.jp2'
'46439' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIG' 'sip-files00062.jpg'
'35726' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIH' 'sip-files00062.pdf'
'52633' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMII' 'sip-files00062.pro'
'14989' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIJ' 'sip-files00062.QC.jpg'
'882688' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIK' 'sip-files00062.tif'
'3326' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIL' 'sip-files00062.txt'
'4619' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIM' 'sip-files00062thm.jpg'
'135121' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIN' 'sip-files00063.jp2'
'122076' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIO' 'sip-files00063.jpg'
'55424' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIP' 'sip-files00063.pdf'
'48218' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIQ' 'sip-files00063.pro'
'41435' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIR' 'sip-files00063.QC.jpg'
'880804' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIS' 'sip-files00063.tif'
'2170' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIT' 'sip-files00063.txt'
'10795' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIU' 'sip-files00063thm.jpg'
'194427' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIV' 'sip-files00064.jp2'
'185920' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIW' 'sip-files00064.jpg'
'80100' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIX' 'sip-files00064.pdf'
'68571' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIY' 'sip-files00064.pro'
'59163' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMIZ' 'sip-files00064.QC.jpg'
'864332' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJA' 'sip-files00064.tif'
'2743' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJB' 'sip-files00064.txt'
'14227' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJC' 'sip-files00064thm.jpg'
'186272' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJD' 'sip-files00065.jp2'
'169277' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJE' 'sip-files00065.jpg'
'76125' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJF' 'sip-files00065.pdf'
'66270' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJG' 'sip-files00065.pro'
'54306' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJH' 'sip-files00065.QC.jpg'
'897300' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJI' 'sip-files00065.tif'
'2637' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJJ' 'sip-files00065.txt'
'13165' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJK' 'sip-files00065thm.jpg'
'203266' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJL' 'sip-files00066.jp2'
'192622' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJM' 'sip-files00066.jpg'
'83167' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJN' 'sip-files00066.pdf'
'71173' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJO' 'sip-files00066.pro'
'61385' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJP' 'sip-files00066.QC.jpg'
'865684' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJQ' 'sip-files00066.tif'
'2814' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJR' 'sip-files00066.txt'
'14286' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJS' 'sip-files00066thm.jpg'
'198582' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJT' 'sip-files00067.jp2'
'183467' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJU' 'sip-files00067.jpg'
'81477' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJV' 'sip-files00067.pdf'
'71577' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJW' 'sip-files00067.pro'
'59167' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJX' 'sip-files00067.QC.jpg'
'879840' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJY' 'sip-files00067.tif'
'2818' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMJZ' 'sip-files00067.txt'
'14175' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKA' 'sip-files00067thm.jpg'
'187903' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKB' 'sip-files00068.jp2'
'177785' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKC' 'sip-files00068.jpg'
'77113' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKD' 'sip-files00068.pdf'
'66253' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKE' 'sip-files00068.pro'
'55657' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKF' 'sip-files00068.QC.jpg'
'862220' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKG' 'sip-files00068.tif'
'2633' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKH' 'sip-files00068.txt'
'13600' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKI' 'sip-files00068thm.jpg'
'129698' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKJ' 'sip-files00069.jp2'
'115971' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKK' 'sip-files00069.jpg'
'53120' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKL' 'sip-files00069.pdf'
'55733' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKM' 'sip-files00069.pro'
'38290' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKN' 'sip-files00069.QC.jpg'
'864944' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKO' 'sip-files00069.tif'
'2655' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKP' 'sip-files00069.txt'
'11037' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKQ' 'sip-files00069thm.jpg'
'76071' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKR' 'sip-files00070.jp2'
'72374' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKS' 'sip-files00070.jpg'
'32326' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKT' 'sip-files00070.pdf'
'31935' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKU' 'sip-files00070.pro'
'22674' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKV' 'sip-files00070.QC.jpg'
'842888' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKW' 'sip-files00070.tif'
'1542' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKX' 'sip-files00070.txt'
'6626' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKY' 'sip-files00070thm.jpg'
'153168' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMKZ' 'sip-filescopyright.jp2'
'103670' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLA' 'sip-filescopyright.jpg'
'71620' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLB' 'sip-filescopyright.pdf'
'35669' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLC' 'sip-filescopyright.pro'
'35083' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLD' 'sip-filescopyright.QC.jpg'
'1069752' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLE' 'sip-filescopyright.tif'
'1329' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLF' 'sip-filescopyright.txt'
'10085' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLG' 'sip-filescopyrightthm.jpg'
'5493008' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLH' 'sip-filesUF00001234.pdf'
'122669' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLI' 'sip-filesUF00001234_00001.mets'
TargetNamespace.1: Expecting namespace 'http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/', but the target namespace of the schema document is 'http://digital.uflib.ufl.edu/metadata/ufdc2/'.
BROKEN_LINK schema http://www.loc.gov/standards/xlink.xsd
TargetNamespace.1: Expecting namespace 'http://www.uflib.ufl.edu/digital/metadata/ufdc2/', but the target namespace of the schema document is 'http://digital.uflib.ufl.edu/metadata/ufdc2/'.
'172087' 'info:fdaE20081001_AAAAASfileF20081001_AAAMLL' 'sip-filesUF00001234_00001.xml'
STATE OF FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF CONSERVATION DIVISION OF GEOLOGY FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Robert O. Vernon, Director REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS NO. 47 HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OF AREA B FLOOD CONTROL PLAN ON URBANIZATION OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA By F. A. Kohout and J. H. Hartwell U. S. Geological Survey Prepared by the UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY in cooperation with the CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT and the DIVISION OF GEOLOGY 1967
FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF SCONSERVATION CLAUDE R. KIRK, JR. Governor TOM ADAMS EARL FAIRCLOTH Secretary of State Attorney General BROWARD WILLIAMS FRED O. DICKINSON, JR. Treasurer Comptroller FLOYD T. CHRISTIAN DOYLE CONNER Superintendent of Public Instruction Commissioner of Agriculture W. RANDOLPH HODGES Director ii
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TJlorida geologiccat Su rve Tallahassee May 24, 1967 Honorable Claude R. Kirk, Jr., Chairman State Board of Conservation Tallahassee, Florida Dear Governor Kirk: The Division of Geology, of the State Board of Conservation, is publishing as Report of Investigations No. 47, a report prepared by F. A. Kohout and J. H. Hartwell entitled "Hydrologic Effects of Area B Flood Control Plan on Urbanization of Dade County, Florida." The rapidly expanding megalopolis of South Florida requires that detailed knowledge be developed on the geology and hydrology of this area. This knowledge must be directed particularly to the extent and depth of flooding following unusual rainfall, and must recognize the economics of the cost of developing additional properties for real estate developments that cover surface zoning for human utilization. This report seeks to provide these answers and when the metropolitan areas along the Coast must be expanded to the west, all the way to the fence formed by the conservation levees, engineering and planning personnel will have available the required design data. Respectfully yours, Robert O. Vernon Director and State Geologist iii
Completed manuscript received May 24, 1967 Printed for the Florida Geological Survey By The St. Petersburg Printing Co., Inc. St. Petersburg, Florida 1967 iv
CONTENTS Abstract .......... ......................................................... ................................................. 1 Introduction .............................................................................................. ............................. 2 General hydrologic situation and overall flood-control plan ......................................... 4 Area B plan ..................................................................................... ............................... 6 Details of the Area B plan ................................................................................................ 9 Rainfall intensity related to flooding ............................. ................ 11 Quantitative estimates of previous investigations ............................................... ....... 15 Acknowledgments ..................................................................................... ........................ 16 Future water needs and availability ................................... .......... ....................... 16 Geologic and hydrologic environment ................................................................................ 20 Present and future land-surface altitude ............................................. ....................... 22 Transmissibility of the aquifer ....................... .......................................................... 25 Effect of flood-control project on ground-water level .................................................. 25 Ground-water fluctuations .............................................................................................. 25 Comparison of high-water periods .......................... ............................................ 27 Comparison of low-water periods ............................ ...................................... 27 Canal discharges .................................................................................................................... 32 Stages and discharges in the Miami Canal ........................................................... 32 Contributions to flow in the Miami River from Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A ........................................................ 37 Total surface-water outflow from Area A .................................................................. 39 Evaluation of the Area B flood control plan .......................................... ........................... 42 W ater-level maps .................................................................................................................. 43 Analog study ..................................................................................... ............................... 46 Boundary conditions ........................................................................................................ 47 Results of the analog study .................................................................................................. 50 Borrow canals without isolating control dams ............................................................ 50 Borrow canals with isolating control dams ............................. ............................... 52 Comparison of the analog models ................................................................................ 55 Summary .............................................................................................. .................................. 56 References .......................................................................................................................... ....... 60 V
ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1 Physiographic provinces in Southern Florida ...................................... ........... .3 2 Canal and levee system of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project in Southeastern Florida ......................................................... 5 3 Intake of pumping station S-7 which has a capacity of 2,490 cubic feet per second under design conditions .................................................................. 7 4 One of the 131Â½-inch impellers at pump station S-7 .......................................... .7 5 Major features of existing and proposed canal and levee system in the M iam i area .............................. .......... ...... ............ ..................................... 8 6 Accumulation of rainfall in 1947, 1959, and 1960 ............................................ 12 7 Rainfall for September 1960 following the passage of Hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence in the Miami area .............................................. 13 8 Estimated water use between the years 1930 and 1995 for Dade County and the Florida K eys ..................................................................................................... 17 9 Primary and secondary canal system in 1964 and locations of recording observation wells related to the investigation, in the Miami area .................... 21 10 Generalized altitude of land surface in Area B ................................................ .22 11 Altitude of bed rock in Area B .......................... .. ....................... 23 12 Assumed altitude of compacted land surface in Area B after 100 percent loss of black-muck soils above +3 feet msl and 50 percent compaction of muck soils below +3 feet msl ................................ ........... .24 13 Monthly trend of water-level fluctuations in selected wells related to rainfall, 1940-63 .................................................................................................. 26 14 High-stage water levels in the Miami area October 11-12, 1947. Canal C-100 did not exist and C-1 was not improved in 1947 ............................................ 28 15 Highest water-table altitude in the Miami area in September 1960 after passage of Hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence. Canal C-100 did not exist and C-1 was not improved in 1960 ............................................ 29 16 Record low stage of water table prior to installation of control dams in the Miami area, May and June 1945. Canal C-100 did not exist and Cwas not im proved in 1945 .............................................................................. 30 17 Low stage of the water table in the Miami area in May 1962 and extent of salt-water encroachment .............................................................................. 31 18 Monthly mean discharge in the Miami Canal at Hialeah (Sta. H) and N.W .36th Street (Sta. I) 1940-1963 .................................................................. 33 19 Locations of gaging stations and drainage areas of major canals in the M iam i area ................................................................................................................ 35 20 Daily stage and discharge in Miami Canal, 1961-63 ................................................ 36 21 Discharge contributions to the Miami River at Brickell Avenue fron Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A ............................................................ 38 22 Monthly runoff for the six canals draining Areas A and B ................................ 41 23 Water levels in feet above (+) or below (-) existing land surface during September 1960, subsequent to passage of Hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence .......................................................................................... 44 vi
ILLUSTRATIONS-Continued 24 Water levels of September 1960 in feet above (+) or below (-) assumed compacted land surface .................................................................... ........... 45 25 Electric analog model of Area B with no dams in the borrow canals for L-30, L-31, and L-33 ............................................................................................ 48 26 Theoretical relations, from Manning's formula, between hydraulic gradient, discharge, and depth for a canal 125 feet wide of rectangular and trapezoidal cross section .............................. .................................................. 50 27 Electric analog model of Area B with control dams that isolate the borrow canals for L-30, L-31, and L-33 from the intake side of the pumps ........ 54 TABLES Table Page 1 Proposed discharge capacity of Area B pump stations ...................................... 10 2 Landfill requirements and elevations -FHA requirements .................................... 11 3 Time-regressive rainfall comparison for hurricane years 1947 and 1960 ............... 14 4 Comparison of annual-mean discharges in the Miami Canal at N.W. 36th Street with the 24-year median, 1940-63 .......................................................... 34 5 Key to letter designations in Figure 19 for recording stage and discharge gaging stations in canals in the Miami area .............................................. 37 6 Underseepage for the boundary condition of no control dams in the levee borrow canals .......................................................................... ................... .53 vii
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OF AREA B FLOOD CONTROL PLAN ON URBANIZATION OF DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA By F. A. Kohout and J. H. Hartwell ABSTRACT Swampy low land (Area B) that fringes the Everglades west of Metropolitan Miami, Florida (Area A) probably will be urbanized in the future. Area B will be protected from flooding by huge pumps that will pump water westward from Area B over a levee system into Conservation Area 3B. The total capacity of the pumps will be about 13,400 cubic feet per second which is sufficient to lower water levels 2 inches per day in the 203 square miles of Area B. As this capacity is about equal to the highest gravity-flow discharge to the ocean through existing canals of the Miami area, a great potential will exist, not only for control of floods, but also for beneficial control and management of a major segment of the water resources in southeastern Florida. An evaluation of flow in the Miami River during a low-water period indicates that Conservation Area 3B contributes 33 percent of the total discharge, Area B 26 percent, and Area A 41 percent. After implementation of the Area B plan, contributions from Area A will continue to flow seaward, whereas contributions from Area B and Conservation Area 3B, which now unavoidably are wasted to the ocean in a high-water period will be pumped westward into storage in the conservation area. A steady-state electric-analog study was made for the 1961 Area B plan. Maps _the results showed that the water-level pattern would be radically changed if water-control dams were installed to isolate the levee borrow canal from the intakesot the pump stations. Witout the con-odams, the lowest steady-state water levels would occur at the western side of Area B and underseepage from Conservation Area 3B would be maximum. However, if dams were installed, the highest water levels would occur at the western side of Area B and underseepage would be minimized. Partial openings of the control dams probably would produce advantageous compromise solutions between the two-modeled extremes. Estimates of population growth indicate that water use in the Miami area may amount to 1.4 billion gallons per day in 1995. This water use is equivalent to 2,170 cfs (cubic feet per second), almost twice the yearly mean discharge of 1,280 cfs that flowed into the ocean from six major Miami area canals during the dry period June 1962 to May 1963. A rate 1
2 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY of 1.4 bgd for a year's time is equivalent to the total surface runoff (about 10.5 inches of water) from an area extending 28 miles westward from the coast and 100 miles southward from Lake Okeechobee into Everglades National Park. As other coastal cities and Everglades National Park will require a share of water from this same area, improved watermanagement techniques are needed to insure a continuing supply of fresh water for southeastern Florida. In consideration of continually growing water needs, the Area B plan should be conceived as a water conservation as well as a flood control plan. INTRODUCTION In the near future, Miami and its urrunding communities are expected to grow ar beynd their present limits. to the present time Miami's development has been restricted largely to a broad ridge of ligh and called the Atlantic CoastaLdge, figure 1, because of the relative afety of this high land from floodin Standing only 8 to 15 feet above mean sea level, the ridge is high only by Florida standards. Nevertheless, it has been of paramount importance to development of communities along the eastern coast of Florida, and were it not for the presence of the ridge, Miami probably would not be what it is today. In contrast, the area inland from the ridge has not been developed simply because it is low and subiect o perennial flooding. At this time, however, the coastal ridge is largely developed and much of the future expansion of the urban areas will have to be in the lowlands west of the ridge. Theprotection from flooding in these lowlands is a difficult problem, but agenies and land developers are making studies and devising plans ermit urb zat wlands. The possible influence of these _pln on thef Ft,,re w-ate-04r rsocf thi Mi m rais the subject of this report. The basic problem is how to make this lowland area safe from floodsor atet as safe as possible with techniques, construction methods, and conc of hydrology now available to the planners. The technical hydrologic problem is whether the proposed plans will accomplish tieir hydirologicaims to the satisfaction of all agencies involved and the citizens -wha-vilL inhabitth area Many agencies and their offices are involved. These include: Officials of the City of Miami and Dade County, who have the civil responsibility for the protection of residents living within their boundaries; the U.S. Corps of Engineers, which is concerned with the planning and construction of protective facilities; the Central and Southern Florida Flood
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 3 LAKE . I OKEECHOBEE * 41.0k. ..... BISCA YNE --7 o 02o o o . . MILES M' Figure 1. Physiographic provinces in southern Florida. Control District (C&SFFCD), which has the responsibility for operating the facilities built by the Corps of Engineers; and the Federal Housing Authority which has the authority to underwrite much of the money that will be used to build private dwellings in the lowland area. Because of the concern of the Federal Housing Authority the basic question should 19I -4~G L FLRDA 0so0( 0 10 2 30 O MILES A Fiue1 Pyigapi rvicsi suhr Foia Coto Dsrc (&FC),wihha h esosbliyfroprtn th fciitesbultbyth Corso ngnes ndteFdra osn Auhriywhc aste uhriytoudewie uh fte oeyta wil e sd o uldprvaedwllns n h lowlnd rea Becus o thecocen o te edealHosin Athrit te asi qesionshul
4 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY perhaps be restated-will the present plans make the lowland area sufficiently safe from flooding to be a good financial risk for banks and other lending institutions and for the Federal Housing Authority to guarantee the housing loans? In other words, will water-control facilities constructed on the basis of the present plan give sufficient assurance of protection from flood waters so that residents may get long range credit at reasonable cost on their investments in the lowland area? The Corps of Engineers and the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District have devised a plan known as the Area B Flood Control Plan to make the lowland area suitable for housing development. The plan calls for an integrated system of land fills, drainage canals, and large capacity pumps to control the flood hazard. It also would be part of the overall flood-control plan for southeastern Florida. Before describing the Area B plan further a brief review of the overall hydrologic situation in southern Florida and the overall flood-control plan seems to he pertinent. GENERAL HYDROLOGIC SITUATION AND OVERALL FLOOD-CONTROL PLAN The outstanding features of southern Florida which bear on the flood hazard are moderately high preciitation, ow land-surface altitude and relief, highly permeable soils and rocks and resence of the sea. result mainly from short periods of heavy rainfall in rainy years, but the floods o not necessarily coincide with years of Freatest annual rainfall. Factors that lead up to flood conditions include l hovy hIridup fiaiTiall over several months durin whic the drainage system has sufficient time to rmalize ater levels; this followed by intense rainfall usually associated with a hurricane. A companion problem is maintning sufficiently high fresh-water levels and runoff to keep salt-water encroachment at a minimum. The relief of the land is so low that during periods of draught and high tides, particularly those associated with storms, the sea may have a higher head than fresh water and as a result salt water invades inland along waterways and contaminates both surface and ground-water supplies. Thus the concepts that are applied must bothminimize flood hazards a hold ack the s water. The original drainage system of the area from Lake Okeechobee to the south and east coasts was incapable of preventing flooding in the hurricane years of 1947 and 1948. It had to be improved to permit farming and cities to prosper. A plan called the Central and Southern Florida .1
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 5 Flood Control Project was formulated by the Congress of the United States and the State of Florida. The overall flood-control plan is designed to protect the developed, and potentially developable, urban, industrial and agricultural land on the east, south, and west sides of Lake Okeechobee. For,planning purposes this region has been divided into three types of areas-agricultural, conservation, and urban-industrial, shown in figure 2. Everglades NaLAKE OKEECHOBEE S-4 -3 r WEST " PALM S-5 BEACH -FORT o i 0 LAUDERDALE EXPLANATION -_ Pump kttllun and number Conol and numbet Levew and numitf | Figure 2. Canal and levee system of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control project, in southeastern Florida.
6 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY tional Park is under development by the U.S. National Park Service for recreational purposes. The agricultural areas fringe the southern part of Lake Okeechobee, and the urban areas are along the coast; between them lie the conservation areas which are perennially flooded lands used for storing water. The agricultural and urban areas are not flooded as frequently as the conservation areas, because they are on slightly higher ground than the lowlands. However, the ground is not so high that it is not subject to floods occasionally, and it must be protected by levees and drainage canals. After each nae ater s rai as rapidly as possibleby a svstenimof canals and pumping stations. Conservation Areas 1, 2, 3A , ian tif areargeenough to accept excess flood waters pumped from agricultural and urban areas. In plan, this stored water will be available for release during dry seasons to help keep high water levels in the canals and adjacent lands. These water levels must be kept high enough during the dry season-first, to prevent oxidation and burning of black muck agricultural soils, and second, to prevent the enroachment of salt water the enct of lt a ithe canals and through the rock in coastal areas. The flow in the canals is provided by drainage from ground water in storage adjacent to the canals and by gravity drainage and pumping stations which supply water from the conservation areas to the agricultural and coastal areas. In the agricultural areas south of Lake Okeechobee, individual farmers pump water from diked fields into the primary canal system; the large pumps, figures 3 and 4, of the flood control system, in turn pump the water southward to the conservation areas or northward to Lake Okeechobee. Some of the pumping stations pump as much as 5,000 cfs, the equivalent of the flow of many small rivers (for example as a comparison, the largest flow under flood conditions in the Miami River at Hialeah in October 1947 was only 4,060 cfs (cubic feet per second)). The encroachment of salt water is also in part contained by salinity-control dams and locks near the coast which minimize the escape of fresh water to the sea and prevent the movement of salt water up the canals at times of low flows. AREA B PLAN Where does Area B fit into this overall picture? It is part of the land set aside for urban-industrial development but its use was held back because of construction problems presented by flood hazards. Area B is the lowland between the ridge occupied by Miami, designated as Area A, and the lowland storage reservoir designated as Conservation Area 3-B, shown in figures 2 and 5. Area B includes about 203 square
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 7 'J+IÂ·. Â• -'Â·U --A Figure 3. Intake of pumping stations S-7 which has a capacity of 2,490 cubic feet per second under design conditions. Figure 4. One of the 131%-inch impellers at pump station S-7.
8 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY C// HOLLYWOOD 4J BROWARD C 9 2 as. DADE s o 2 0 A EPA E CC " us I E E 0 . sw as MIAMI 4 EXPLANATION r36 ..--Transmilsibllity, in million Sc aSCEl woanv per day per foot GS: U.S. Geologcal Survey C4 dTrant seibleity CE: U.S. Corps of Enginner 'S. Canal and number SContlrol dom Pump sttllan and number 0 2 4 mles Figure 5. Major features of existing and proposed canal and levee systeml in the Miami area. miles. It is drained by canals which carry water from the conservation areas through Miami to the sea. In its barest form, the Area B plan calls for building up the land-surface elevation by rock-fill dug from canals. The canals would serve as conduits for dewatering Area B during the
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS NO. 47 9 rainy season by pumping the water westward into conservation area 3-B, and by gravity drainage toward the sea through Area A. Flood water from Area B, once it was in the conservation area, would be handled as part of the water resources of the overall plan for flood control and drainage in southeastern Florida. The plan calls for filling about 45 percent of Area B to an elevation of 5 feet above msl and 40 percent to an elevation of 4 feet above msl (mean sea level). The balance of 15 percent would be in canals and borrow lagoons. The problem with which this report is concerned then is this: From a consideration of hydrologic factors of flooding, drainage and salt-water encroachment is the Area B plan adequate to provide the protectioln needed for its development? Additionally, water control in Area B will strongly influence the future water resources of the Miami area generally, and as a partial evaluation of this influence, the following main topics are considered in this report: 1. Operation of the Area B plan as pioposed in 1961. 2. Future water requirements of the Miami area. 3. A summary of past hydrologic extremes in the Miami area and effects on the hydrology caused by works of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project that were in operation prior to 1962. 4. The results of steady-state electrical analog studies of the Area B plan. The evaluation of the Area B plan contained in these pages was made at the request of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District (C&SFFCD). General supervision was provided by C. S. Conover, Tallahassee, lDistrict Chief of the Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey. DETAILS OF THE AREA B PLAN Detailed description of the Area B plan is given in the survey review report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1961). Major constructional features of the plan are shown in figure 5. Four pump stations S-200 to S-203 will discharge water westward into Conservation Area 3B at the rates shown in table 1. The design pumping heads would vary from 8.1 to 8.7 feet for the four stations. Existing pump station S-9 (fig. 5) has a capacity of about 2,900 cfs; its discharge is directed westward into Conservation Area 3A through the borrow canal of Levee 67 (fig. 2). Existing large canals in 1964 are
10 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TABLE 1.-PROPOSED DISCHARGE CAPACITY OF AREA B PUMP STATIONS. (U. S. CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 1961, p. A-11 AND A-16). D)riIgn lrada i'umnpilng Numlnbr (ft aliove n11*1) Unit enipcity Tutal capacity 1,1tit n of unit. in cls ill cf Intake Disclharg 5.l>o 3 3.0 11.1 980 2.940 -'201 3 3.0 11.1 870 2,610 5 202 4 3.0 11.5 980 3.920 4.2t:1 .3.0 11.7 9810 1.920 shown in figure 5. New large primary canals referred to as "feeder canals" by the Corps of Engineers are proposed to deliver water to stations S-202 and S-203. Because of anticipated high seepage of water eastward from Conservation Area 3B through permeable limestone underlying Levees :30 and 33, seepage-reduction levees will be constructed approximately 3,000 feet westward from the existing levees (fig. 5). The seepagereduction levees are flared near the pump outlet to permit the discharged water to spread more rapidly into the conservation area. Borrow canals located on the westward side of the seepage-reduction levees will aid in transmitting the water away from the pump stations. The water level in Conservation Area 3B during flood conditions is expected to be about 11 feet above msl; the maximum observed head on the discharge side of S-9 during pumping was 11.62 feet on October 13, 1963. The pump discharge capacities in Table 1 are based on design water levels of 3 feet above msl at the intake side of each pumping station and 11.1 to 11.7 feet at the discharge side. Electrical analog studies presented later tend to indicate that because of the water-level gradient required to move water through the major feeder canals, an intake water level ranging from msl to 1 foot above msl may be more realistic under full capacity pumping. The pumping capacity for all pumps is designed to remove about 2 inches of water per day from the 203 square miles of Area B. Table 2, which gives proposed land-fill requirements, is quoted from the U.S. Corps of Engineers Survey Review Report (1961, table 6, page 16): The survey review report gives the following percentage breakdown for final land-surface elevations: "For the average size subdivision lot in a typical new development block, this would amount to 15 percent of the area being devoted to canals and borrow lagoons, 45 percent filled to elevation 5 feet on the average, and 40 percent to elevation 4 feet." .1
REPonT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 11 TABLE 2.-LAND-FILL REQUIREMENTS AND ELEVATIONSFIIA REQUIREMENTS. Minimum flood As~uedvl eotrrt pondilni Portion of nrac frcquenoy fill elevation (yeor) (ft) Above 5.0. floor E:lcvition of flitnih ground lIne (all dwc lliings) ................... ....... I in 50 level 6.0 Crdtown of lrrect ............. ... ......... .... ..... ...... ........ .. 1 I 0n I5,0 2-1-lr. drainage Strcot n, swnlie or ditches................................... .. ... ....... fo.llowi.. l g d .in. 4.0 10 yrter oturi Fronl. side. and rieq ired 15.foot unalbleo rear y d.tld ...... ...... .. 1 in 10 5.0 lr ainlt dler (mostly furthor lack yards) ........................................ 4.0 The design rainfall for the Area B plan is 12.79 inches on the first day and a total of 17.22 inches for 5 days. Prior to this storm the water level for Area B is assumed to be +3 ft. msl. Under the specifications of Table 2 and the previous quotation and taking account of the storage space available as surface water (100 percent storage coefficient) and as ground water (17 percent storage coefficient, assumed), the water level after the first day of the design storm is calculated at +5 ft. msl (U.S. Corps of Engineers, 1961, table 6). The plan visualizes lowering water levels from elevation 5 feet to 4 feet by the end of the fifth day with 2 inches per day being removed by pumpage to the west and one inch per day being removed by gravity drainage to the ocean through Area A canals. RAINFALL INTENSITY RELATED TO FLOODING Rainfall averages 59 inches per year, three-quarters of which falls in the Mly tal nvember rainy season. f primary concern are the periods of heavy rainfall that produce oodin. Maximum flood damae occurred in 1947 and I8, an exesive flooding occurred in 1960. The followin comarison shows intensity anc distribution of rainfall during teyearian impoant factor in producing flood conditions. The annual rainfall in 1959 exceeded tat of 1947Ã½Tand 1960 by about 10 and 20 inches, respectively, shown in figure 6. In contrast, flooding was minimal in 1959 compared to the other years, in spite of the fact that many low-lying areas were urbanized by 1959. ors le o flood eavy buildup of rainfall over several months during which the drainage system has insufficient time to normaize water levels, and 2) this buildup followed by intense rainfall, usually associated with a hurricane.
12 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY MIAMI WEATHER HIALEAH BUREAU (AIRPORT) WEATHER STATION 100 90 1959---------1959I _I I I 80 1947-1947S70 --19601960 -60 ---.------. / ------/ ---S60-----Z 50 -n, 40 4 .. 30 P I VI < 20 .. . -J 5 0io__ __ --___ 111 _0 __ _ _ _ "-i __-F-I JFMAMJ JASOND JFMAMJ JASOND MONTH MONTH Figure 6. Accumulation of rainfall in 1947, 1959, and 1960. The passage of Hurricane Donna and two weeks later tropical storm Florence in September 1960 produced the highest single month rainfall in recent times. The isohyetal map of figure 7, adapted from an unpublished report of the C&SFFCD, shows that rainfall over Area B ranged from less than 16 inches in the northwest corner to greater than 28 inches in the southeast corner. Improvements in the drainage system between 1947 and 1960 result in more rapid lowering of water levels between rains. A time-regressive comparison of rainfall for the two years indirectly indicates the effect of these improvements. The average of all stations (Table 3) shows that the rainfall in 1960 slightly exceeded that of 1947 for three months (including the highest month) before maximum flood conditions. In contrast, the high-water maps (p. 28 and 29) show that maximum water levels in Area B were about 3 feet lower in 1960 than in 1947. As antecedent rainfall for the two years is comparable, the relatively lower
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 13 HOLLYWOOD BROWAR T C9 DADE / COUNTY / , I C7 AiRE AREA A MIAMI J L 0 EXPLANATION S-2Shows toOtl troi for SIohyst September, 1960. Inltrvol 2 inches. C /OO C? C Conal and nuer ain n Coatrol dom c Pump station and number Not: Daot from C & SFFCD (unpublished rport) 0 2 4 ed4en Figure 7, Rainfall for September 1960 following the passage of Hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence in the Miami area. maximum water level in 1960 undoubtedly relates to improvement of the flood-control system between 1947 and 1960.
Ã½-1 TABLE 3.-TIME.REGRESSIVE RAINFALL COMPARISON FOR HURRICANE YEARS 1947 AND 1960 Accumulated rainfall antecedent to and including the maximum month Maximum month 4 months 3 months 2 monnths Annual Oct. Sept. Location 1987 1960 1917 1960 1917 1960 1917 1960 1917 1960 Fort Laudcrdale 59.75 36.77 46.10 29,19 37.25 23.59 21.55 16,07 102.36 60.48 Hialeah 43.38 37.17 33.54 32,01 28.59 28.02 17.73 20.48 78.25 68.81 Homestead 52.02 55.95 38.40 42,43 26.33 28.53 15.96 19.04 91.07 82.12 Kendall 30.40 44.12 19.11 37.56 15.14 32.87 6.83 27.84 67.10 69.93 Miami Airport 45.62 40.13 32.11 33.82 25.45 28.55 14.85 21.40 78.39 70.26 Miami Beach 37.05 30.81 30.40 27.38 21.48 21.08 15.18 16.02 67.50 55.67 W Pennsuco 40.98 35.32 30.37 29.00 24.62 22.25 16.29 16.31 72.28 62.53 Pennsuco 4 NW 38.42 37.93 30.43 30.28 23.35 23.45 14.74 17.97 70.39 66.37 Tamiami Canal 47.13 48.74 36.56 40.20 29.50 31.93 18.96 22.36 76.38 76.14 Tamiami Trail @ 40-Mile Bend 48.89 50.46 36.33 41.60 29.98 28.94 18.42 19.05 82.76 73.91 Average of all stations 44.36 41.74 33.34 33.35 26.47 26.92 16.01 19.95 78.95 68.62
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 15 QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATES OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS The U. S. Corps of Engineers (1953) performed 11 pumping tests to determine the permeability of materials underlying various, parts of southern Florida. Based on several of these tests the range of underseepage beneath Levees 30 and 33 was computed at 1,380 to 1,600 cfs per mile of levee for a 10-foot head differential. Stallman (1956) described the effects on the water resources of the area and, based on analog and numerical-analysis studies, estimated the underseepage at 970 cfs per mile of levee for a 10-foot head differential under laminar flow conditions in a homogeneous aquifer. Based on measured pickup in a one-mile reach of the L-30 borrow canal near S-201 (fig. 5), Klein and Sherwood (1961) computed underseepage at 540 cfs per mile for a 10-foot head differential between the ponded conservation area and the borrow canal. The U. S. Corps of Engineers (1961, p. 17) estimated that total underseepage would amount to 3,300 cfs, under a 6-foot head differential (11-5 ft) after occurrence of the design storm. Dividing this discharge figure by 24 miles (the approximate length of levee bordering Area B), the estimated underseepage would be about 140 cfs per mile. With the addition of the seepage-reduction levees the estimated underseepage would be 2,400 cfs or about 100 cfs per mile. Thus, the estimated underseepage has been revised downward from a maximum of 1,600 cfs per mile to. a minimum of 100 cfs per mile based on additional studies and changes in the flood-control plan. Calculations to be presented later for conditions that appear representative indicate that the underseepage will be somewhat higher than the minimum estimate of 100 cfs per mile. Water requirements for preventing salt-water encroachment during the dry season have received consideration in several reports. Based on measurements of canal discharge, Sherwood and Leach (1962) estimated that during extreme drought 50 cfs would be needed to maintain a water level of 2.75 feet above msl at the control dam in the Snapper Creek Canal (C-2, fig. 5). Outseepage from the canal into the aquifer near the coastline is a necessary part of preventing salt-water encroachment into the aquifer at depth. Leach and Sherwood (1963) in a similar study for the Snake Creek Canal (C-9, fig. 5) estimated that 36 cfs would be required to maintain a water level of 2.7 feet above msl at the control dam in that canal. These estimates were based on measured canal discharges. A water level of 2.5 feet will prevent salt-water encroachment in the Biscayne aquifer. Assuming that an average of 40 cfs per canal would be required to maintain a water level of 2.5 feet above msl, a total of about 300 cfs would adequately maintain heads at the coastal control dams in the eight major canals of Dade County.
16 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thanks arc extended to William V. Storch and Robert L. Taylor of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District and F. D. R. Park and Marvin J. Brooks of the Dade County Water Control office for discussions related to this report. The writers' colleagues A. L. Higer, Howard Klein, C. B. Sherwood, and S. D. Leach provided helpful counsel during the investigation. The manuscript received the benefit of critical review by C. S. Conover, R. W. Pride, K. A. MacKichan, C. A. Appel, and Leo A. Ileindl. FUTURE WATER NEEDS AND AVAILABILITY Although the primary function of the Area B plan would be flood control, its implementation also would result in conservation of water. Calculations are made in this section to demonstrate the magnitude of future water needs vs. availability and to point out the importance of the Area B plan as a water-conservation measure. In figure S, estimates for water use by the Dade County Development D)tpartment (1962, sec. 30, p. 15-16) are plotted to the year 1995. Agricultural pumpage is expected to decline because of urbanization but industrial and municipal pumpage will rise greatly. Per capita daily water use is expected to increase from about 145 gallons in 1960 to 220 gallons in 1995. The rise in population from about 1,000,000 in 1960 to 4.0(X),HK) in 1995 will cause total water use to increase from about 230 mgd ( million gallons per day) (345 efs) to about 1.4 bgd (billion gallons per day) (2,170 cfs). Approximating the annual rainfall at 60 inches (a depth of 5 feet), the total water use of 1.4 bgd for a year is equivalent to the total rainfall over an area of about 500 square miles. As a comparison, the mainland area south of the Dade-Broward County line in the map of figure 5 amounts to about 500 square miles. However, as the total rainfall is not available for use, water will have to be imported from adjacent areas to supply the populace of 1995. The following equation represents the balance between recharge by rainfall, discharge, and water storage in a drainage area: Recharge [rainfall] = Discharge [surface-water discharge + ground water discharge + evapotranspiration + domestic pumpage] + [change in storage.] For purposes of discussion, several elements in the equation can be eliminated from consideration because they are not likely to change in the future:
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 17 YEAR 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 10,000 ---I I 10,000 W1000 1 000 0 ) -z / 0 0 0 z St100 1 00 S^-~ ---/ -~----10 Figure 8. Estimated water use per day between the years 1930 and 1995 for Dade County and the Florida Keys. I. Rainfall cannot be expected to change significantly in the future. 2. Due to the nature of ground-water movement and the necessity for maintaining fresh-water heads to prevent salt-water encroachment, ground-water discharge cannot be changed greatly from its present magnitude. 3. Evapotranspiration is occurring now and will occur in the future at about the same rate; i.e. the future water problems of the Miami area probably will be solved by storing water in the conservation areas; only under very adverse conditions during drought
18 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY would water levels be lowered sufficiently below ground surface to reduce evapotranspirative losses. 4. Long-term storage in the Miami area (i.e. average water levels) are not expected to change significantly and this parameter will average out to zero in the future. In the above recharge-discharge equation only domestic pumpage and surface runoff can be considered as changeable. As domestic pumpage will increase six-fold, the most readily available method for maintaining the balance of the system is by prudent management of surface waters: by reducing surface-water discharge to the ocean and/or by increasing surface-water inflow to the Miami area. A volumetric computation that balances the domestic pumpage of 1995 against surface ninoff is instructive. Langbein (Parker, et al., 1955, fig. 149) found that surface-water discharge from the Everglades Unit averaged 9.54 inches during the years 1940-46 when precipitation averaged 50.1 inches. Thus, 19 percent of precipitation could be assigned to surface runolf. The average annual precipitation for the Everglades and Southeastern Coast as determined by the U. S. Weather Bureau is about 55 inches. Using Langbein's percentage, 10.5 inches of this would represent average surface-water discharge. If the total water use of 1.4 billion gallons per day in 1995 were derived entirely by diversion of average surfacewater flow to the Miami well fields, consider the area over which previously excess surface runoff would have to be collected. (Annual surface-water discharge) X (Area) = Annual pumpage (10.5 inches/yr) X (Area) = 1.4 X 10Â° gal/day X 365 days/yr 12 inches/ft 7.48 gal/cu. ft. Area = 7.85 X 1010 sq. ft. = 2,820 sq. miles. Such an area (about 28 miles wide and 100 miles long) would extend from the east coast to the southern end of L-67 and from the middle of Lake Okeechobee on the north into Everglades National Park on the south. (See fig. 2.) All of the annual surface runoff (10.5 inches) would have to be collected from this large area so that Miami might use the water once and then dump it in the ocean. On this basis there would be no surface runoff left, above the needs of Miami, to supply replenishment water for West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and other coastal cities, or Everglades National Park. Because water is a reuseable resource, the situation will not be as bleak as indicated by this volumetric computation. However, it is clear that the various factors in the hydrologic cycle must be studied carefully so that enlightened water management can insure a continuing supply of fresh water for southeastern Florida. IF
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 19 In the above computation a tacit assumption was madethat all surface runoff would be funneled to Miami and after consumption by the populace, the water would be processed by municipal-sewage plants and thence dumped into the ocean. This would represent a total dissipation, i.e. total consumption of fresh water which is not occurring at the present time. Of about 1,000,000 total population in 1960, sewagetreatment plants served about 420,000; the effluent from a population of only 250,000 was pumped directly to Biscayne Bay or to the Gulf Stream (Dade County Development Dept., 1962, sec. 29, p. 5-13). Therefore, in 1960 only one-fourth of the population was served by sewage-treatment plants that dumped the effluent into the ocean; the remaining three-fourths were served by sewage-treatment plants or by individual septic tanks that discharged the effluent into fresh-water canals or into the Biscayne aquifer. The following quotation gives background on the present status of sewage disposal (Dade County Development Dept., 1962, sec. 29, p. 1-2): "Shortly after World War II a local Miami firebrand named Philip Wylie (creator of Crunch and Des) authored an article in a national magazine calling Miami a 'Polluted Paradise.' "Little could be said against the author's contentions for Miami had reached a shocking state in pollution of its formerly-blue Biscayne Bay. "For then the waters were turgid brown and even the twice-daily flushing action of ocean tides could hardly save marine life from extinction in the central bay area or dilute the bacteria-laden waters that poured out of the mouth of the Miami River. "All the raw, untreated sanitary sewage of the complete downtown area was merely collected through mains and then poured into the river and bay through open outfalls. "Outright warnings by health authorities and incessant campaigns by Miami newspapers, finally aroused the citizenry and major action was taken. "Today, the downtown area of Biscayne Bay has noticeably changed color as years of sanitary sedimentation washed away by the never ceasing tides. "Also, the City of Miami, for its major downtown and bayfront areas, is serviced by a complete collection and treatment facility which discharges a clear effluent far offshore into the world's largest moving body of waterthe Gulf Stream. At present, much of the inland residential areas are unsewered."
20 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Because sea water contains 35 times as much dissolved solids a;s sewage, it is much cheaper to purify and sanitize sewage water than to remove the salts from sea water (Wolman, 1961, p. 123). Therefore, it is doubtful that salt-water conversion plants will ever be economically justified in a high-rainfall region such as Miami. However, all surfacewater outflow from southeastern Florida cannot be stopped and funneled to Miami as conjectured by the previous computation. In the year 1995 (or eventually) it appears that some planned reuse of water will be essential if water shortages are to be avoided. Possibly half of the 1.4 billion gallons per day of water that will be required in 1995 (or eventually) could be saved for reuse by adequately planned sewagetreatment systems. In flood-prone areas, such as Area B, the septic-tank system would not be workable and municipal sewage-treatment plants would be required. However, consideration should be given to planned reuse of the water by recharging highly purified sewage-plant effluent into Area B canals. Subsequent discharge into Conservation Area 3B through the flood-control pumps would permit time for bacterial degradation and for the benefits of aquifer filtration to make the water estheticallv reusable. In consideration of the magnitude of future water needs, the Area B plan should be conceived as a water-conservation as well as a flood-control plan. GEOLOGIC AND HYDROLOGIC ENVIRONMENT Although the levee system prevents surface-water outflow from Conservation Area 3B, underseepage and direct rainfall overpower the present gravity drainage system, figure 9, and the land in Area B remains swampy or partly inundated during much of the year. Figure 9 shows both primary and secondary canals, but the secondary canals will be omitted henceforth. Unusual shapes of water-level contours in later illustrations will be clarified by referring to the complete drainage system in figure 9. The Biscayne aquifer is an important hydrologic unit that underlies southeastern Florida. It is a highly permeable water-table aquifer consisting of solution-riddled limestone and calcareous sandstone and fairly numerous layers of unconsolidated sand. Municipal and private water supplies are derived almost exclusively from wells drilled into the aquifer. The aquifer thickens toward the coast from about 50 feet at the levee system on the west side of Area B to 90 feet on the east side, and to as much as 200 feet near the coast. Oolitic limestone crops out over much of the coastal ridge (Area A). In Area B, a surficial blanket of peat and organic marl 3 to 4 feet thick is underlain by dense lowpermeability limestone having a thickness of about 3 feet. Highly .1
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS NO. 47 21 R. 39 E. R, 40 E. R. 41 E. R. 42 E. cS9/ ss SN1HOLLYWOOD 00 -IBROWARD I372COUNTY DADE G 9 CGOUNT 970 S 6966 S972 G973 -C L MIAMI 978 it r Ci I ( ~t* S observaGion wells related to h invesiganion, in l Miani area. Control dom Pump station an4 number Figure 9. Primary and secondary canal system in 1964 and locations of recording permeable limestone underlies this sequence from about -3 feet msl to the base of the aquifer.
22 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PRESENT AND FUTURE LAND-SURFACE ALTITUDE The ultimate altitude of land surface in Area B will be fixed by landfill requirements which will be based upon a compromise of hydraulic and physical factors. The physical factors are outlined here. 59 5 HOLLYWOOD L BROWAR C OUNTY DA0E OUNTY -8 REA B AREA A C4 ,M'IAMI SEXPLANATION -Contour nltervl, I tool. /Bl*^Wh' C -n*or Dotum is mon seao C/ ~3 Conoal and number 3 Control dam E& Pump slotion and numbr 0 2 4 mlle Figure 10. Generalized altitude of land surface in Area B.
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 23 Peat, black-muck, and organic-marl soils occur at the surface over most of Area B; the altitude of present land surface is given by the generalized map of figure 10, compiled from maps of the U. S. DepartS9 HOLLYWOOD LAJ BROWAR C 9 DADE CO I C SAREA A MIAMI EXPLANATION U5---Showm oltitude of bedrock B) edr 0 Cmf rfoce. ontO r inteV0 w I foot. Daotm is mean C/0 s oo e r levtl. C3 C Co7 and number uzCo CMnW dam \ I --4 Pwmp tation and number Figure 11. Altitude of bed rock in Area B.
24 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY C // s9 HOLLYWOOD l L --"1 BROWAR G COC 9 DADE CO T 2.5 8 C8 C7 AREA A 25 4 MIAMI " EXPLANATION S Shows assumed allutude of land surfoce after SToporophic Conour compaction. Conlour intervol, 0.5 ond I fool. C/0 Datum is mean sea levd Cj C2 Canal and number 1 }clÃ½ Control dam -& Pump station and number 0 2 4 miles Figure 12. Assumed altitude of compacted land surface in Area B after 100 percent loss of black-muck soils above +3 feet msl and 50 percent compaction of muck soils below +3 feet msl. ment of Agriculture, Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District, and the U. S. Corps of Engineers. The altitude of the underlying bed-
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 25 rock surface has been determined by the Corps of Engineers as shown in figure 11. Upon exposure to air after the Area B plan is operational, the organic soils are expected to oxidize and the resulting soil loss is assumed at 100 percent from land surface to an altitude of +3 feet msl and 50 percent below 3 feet (Corps of Engineers, 1961, p. 16). The planned water level in Area B is +3 feet msl. Below +3 feet msl integration of organic soils with solid materials during land-filling will provide minimum exposure to air and this is expected to reduce oxidative loss to 50 percent. Based on the assumptions, a map of the compacted land surface has been compiled, (see figure 12). The altitudes shown in this map would be the base from which solid-material fill requirements could be estimated. TRANSMISSIBILITY OF THE AQUIFER The coefficient of transmissibility (T) is a measure of the ability of the aquifer to transmit water. It is defined as the rate of flow of water in gallons per day through a vertical strip of the aquifer one-foot wide extending the full saturated height of the aquifer under a unit hydraulic gradient (Ferris, et al., 1962, p. 73). The coefficient of transmissibility has been determined at the sites shown in figure 5. The Corps of Engineers performed a number of determinations along Levees L-30 and L-33 in connection with Area B under-seepage studies. These are identified by "C.E."; determinations by the Geological Survey are identified "G.S." Near S-201 (fig. 5) independent determinations by the two agencies by different methods gave comparable results (Klein and Sherwood, 1961, p. 18). Although the density of the determinations does not warrant contouring to portray the areal variation, a region of high transmissibility occurs near Levees 30 and 31, along the western and southern boundaries of Area B. Northward and eastward the transmissibility decreases to about 4,000,000 gpd/ft near the eastern boundary of Area B. EFFECT OF FLOOD CONTROL PROJECT ON GROUND-WATER LEVEL GROUND-WATER FLUCTUATIONS The adjustment of ground-water levels to drainage activities and water-control measures is shown in figure 13. The water-level peaks or lows (i.e. points of water-level reversal) in recording wells S-18, G-10, and G-72 have been selected to typify the range in fluctuation and are plotted against annual rainfall (see locations fig. 9). The decrease in
26 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1940 1945 1950 1955. 196 . t 0 75 MIAMI AIRPORT 10-.----------------------------.-.-.-'-. SWELL SIB-LAND SURFACE 3 WELL G 10 ..... LAND SURFACE .... .............. ..... ... ..... ...... ... ......... u 0 ____ ............... .. WELL G 12 Figure 13. Monthly trend of water-level fluctuations in selected wells related to rainfall, 1940-63. amplitude of the envelope formed by connecting the yearly peaks is the result of improvement of the drainage system over the years. For example, the highest water level after the hurricanes of September 1960 is 2 to 3 feet lower than those of hurricane years 1947 and 1948 despite equivalent rainfall conditions in 1960. The distribution of rainfall during the year has been mentioned previously as a factor in flooding. Thus, in well S-18 two individual water-level peaks at about 4 feet in 1959 correspond with two widely spaced heavy rains. Though total rainfall in 1959 was greater than in 1960, the drainage system adequately lowered or normalized water levels between the heavy rains so that the second rainfall period produced minimal flooding in 1959. In addition to improved ability of the flood-control works to lower flood peaks, the generally rising line of the annual low-water minimum
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS NO. 47 27 in well S-18 indicates that progress is being made in controlling over drainage and consequently in maintaining water levels at desirable levels. However, the water level at S-18 fell to one foot above msl in May 1962. This head is insufficient to prevent salt-water encroachment. In May 1962 Conservation Area 3B in the vicinity of well G-968 (fig. 9) was dry. Ground-water level at G-968 was 2.0 feet above mean sea level, only about 0.2 foot higher than that at well G-72 (fig. 13). Thus, after four years of above average rainfall (1957-60) there was not enough surface water stored in Conservation Area 3B to carry through the dry year of 1961 and into 1962. This points up the need for water conservation. The problems of the future are not how fast the flood water can be eliminated, but rather how the flood water can be saved for future use. The Area B plan will be an instrument of water conservation. After implementation, part of the water which now is wasted to the ocean in a hurricane year such as 1960, will be pumped westward into Conservation Area 3B. COMPARISON OF HIGH-WATER PERIODS The highest ground-water levels prior to inception of the Flood Control Project occurred in 1947. These levels are duplicated on the general base map of this report, figure 14 (adapted from Schroeder, Klein, and Hoy, 1958, fig. 16). Water level over most of Area B was 9 to 10 feet above msl about 3 to 5 feet above land surface. Figure 15 shows the highest altitude of the water table in September 1960. The increase in secondary-canal networks associated with urbanization of Area A, and enlargement of the major canals improved total drainage capability so that water levels in Area B ranged from 5 to 8 feet above msl, 2 to 3 feet lower than those of 1947. The dense network of secondary canals adjacent to the upper reaches of canals C-7 and C-8 reduced water levels to 4 to 5 feet in 1960, compared to 7 to 8 feet in 1947. In contrast, water levels in the vicinity of canals C-1 and C-100 in south Dade County were slightly higher in 1960 than in 1947 which correlates with relatively higher rainfall in 1960 (Kendall and Homestead stations, table 3). Canal C-100 was not in existence in 1960 and C-1 has been greatly improved since that time. It is unlikely that the high heads of 1960 in the south Dade region will ever occur again. COMPARISON OF LOW-WATER PERIODS Salinity-control dams were not installed in most of the canals until 1946. Lowest water levels of record occurred in May and June 1945, figure 16 (adapted and expanded from Parker, et. al., 1955, fig. 45).
28 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY s9 HOLLY WOOD0 L1 DADE COUNTY j G8 -^w, um s lho n a' d of oiber ---RE A B A " \0 // EXPL"TION S aotltitude of wler S oble. Contour inervol, I Si.Tabl, C~oar fWol. Datum is meon C3Cmal and lumber 1 M Control dam SPump lotion and number Not*: Adapted fromrn Schroeder, itinh and Hoy. S6 Figure 14. High-stage water levels in the Miami area October 11-12, 1947. Canal C-100 did not exist and C-1 was not improved in 1947. The water table in Area B ranged from 0.5 to 1.5 feet above msl. Localized mounds persisted in the more populated regions near the shore and possibly give evidence of septic-tank recharge.
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 29 c// "1fi " "T'"-I ?LLYw0or ' DADE _CONTY" / AE BL, R E oj 9/ 70 C4 I S~ EXPLANATION SShows oltitude of wtoer -50-toble. Dashed where app=r foter-Tible Cntour imate. Contour interval, 0.5 / and I toot. Datum is mea C2 sea level. f C Canal and number 0 U4Q\I. Control dam 0 N0 Pump stotion and number 0 2 4 miles Figure 15. Highest water-table altitude in the Miami area in September 1960 after passage of Hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence. Canal C-100 did not exist and C-1 was not improved in 1960. The lowest water levels of recent times occurred in May 1962 following drought conditions of 1961-62 (figure 17, adapted from Sherwood and Klein, 1963, fig. 9). The water table in Area B ranged from
30 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Ci/ S9 HOLLYWOOD LU .1 ---I-.OL---. BROWAR COUDADE COUNTY -0 --'-'-Shows attitude of water 0 5table. Contour interval, SW tw-Bbla COnia, 0.5 foot. Doatum is C/OO meaoon sea level. C --' = Conol and number j Control dam S-J Pump station and .number Note: Adapted and expanded from Parker, et. al., 0 2 4 n mles Figure 16. Record low stage of water table prior to installation of control dams in the Miami area, May and June 1945. Canal C-100 did not exist and C-1 was not improved in 1945. 1.0 to 2.5 feet above msl. No surface water was impounded in Conservation Area 3B at that time, but the major canals were draining n.
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 31 C// s9 SHOLLYWOOD LU SI 1 BROWARD OUNTY C9 DADE COUNTY 1.5 I zo G7 o ~-I MIA lM A RA 4\ R . L , h-r EXPLANATION S S----hows oltitude of woter tarble. contour intert l, |\0 ) " -0.5 foot. Datum is mean se level. Â•C/0O -vVv Area of soltwoler encaroch? C ment. SConol and number \ Control dom ImI (Pump station and number Note: Adopted from Sherwood and Klein.1963 0 2 4 miles Figure 17. Low stage of the water table in the Miami area in May 1962 and extent of salt-water encroachment. ground water from storage west of the levee system and conveying it downstream to the salinity-control dams. Heads of about one foot were maintained on the upstream side of the dams. Comparison of
32 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY figures 16 and 17 shows the expansion of the cone of depression of the Miami well field near Canal C-6 (Miami Canal) between 1945 and 1962. Pumpage increased from 40 to 80 mgd during this period. The cone of depression along Canal C-2 surrounds the Alexander Orr well field, which did not exist in 1945. CANAL DISCHARGES The discharge in several canals was studied to evaluate surfacewater discharge characteristic from Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A. A background for the study period (Jan. 1960 to Dec. 1963) is provided by the monthly-mean discharge in the Miami Canal from 1940 to 1963, figure 18. The geographic dividing point between the "Miami River" (downstream) and the "Miami Canal" (upstream) is located approximately 4 miles inland from Biscayne Bay, figure 19. Maximum discharge usually occurs in October at the culmination of the rainy season; minimum discharge of less than about 100 cfs, generally occurs in May of each year. The difference in magnitude of the discharges during the wet periods of 1947 and 1960 attest to the improvement of control works, and the construction of the levee system during that interval. Although rainfall in 1960 was about comparable to 1947 (table 3) the maximum monthly mean flow was 1,270 cfs in 1960 as compared with 3,600 cfs in 1947. This results from a combination of factors: (1) as noted previously, maximum water levels in Area B were 2 to 3 feet lower in 1960 than in 1947; (2) the levee system prevented direct surfacewater flow from the Everglades from reaching Area B; (3) the improved canal system permitted more rapid runoff from Areas A and B and this minimized surfaceand ground-water impoundment prior to the hurricane rains. In table 4, annual-mean discharges (1940-63) are compared with the 24-year median discharge of 530 cfs. Below average flows generally persisted during the 1960-63 study period. The above average flows in 1960 are attributable to record, antecedent rainfall in 1959 and to the heavy rains of tropical storms Donna and Florence in 1960.. STAGES AND DISCHARGES IN THE MIAMI CANAL The Miami Canal (C-6) is the largest canal that transects Area B. Continuous recordings of stage and discharge are available at Stations F, G, I, and J since 1961 (see locations in figure 19 and key to stations
-I 4000 1500 --MEDIAN DISCHARGE 530 CFS (1940-63) S5000 --" .. 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 953 95 5 195 1957 158 1959 1960 196 1962 1963 w;N W
34 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY TABLE 4.-COMPARISON OF ANNUAL-MEAN DISCHARGES IN THE MIAMI CANAL AT N.W. 36th STREET WITH THE 24-YEAR MEDIAN, 1940-63. Calendar Annual mean Percent of year discharge (cfs) median 1940 710 134 1941 828 156 1942 753 142 1943 317 60 1944 312 59 1945 383 72 1946 630 119 1947 1.412 266 1948 1.178 222 194-9 795 150 1950 426 80 1951 395 75 1952 544 103 1953 1130 157 1954 909 172 1955 (28 118 1956 260 49 1957 551 104 1958 802 151 1959 707 133 1960 815 159 1961 291 55 1962 157 30 1963 117 28 in table 5.) The daily discharges for the years 1961-63 are plotted in figure 20. This data provides the basis for separating the contributions to flow in the Miami Canal from Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A. The flow characteristics at the four gaging stations on the Miami Canal are influenced, depending on location, by ground-water inflov, control-dam operation, well-field pumpage, and tidal flow. At Broken Dam (F) the flow is primarily from underseepage from Conservation Area 3B. The underseepage produces a rather steady, slowly changing flow pattern. The effect of the operation of the control dam at N.W. 36th Street is usually reflected along the entire reach of the 4;
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 35 A C // S9 .f. -------...IL LOLLY WOO I I--L-'I" t. BROWARD COUNTY '-DADE 3 COUNTY S32 C7 ". AREA B RE. A A H C4 L * EXPLANATION 1. Pump station and number Note: Locations keyed by litter ---7` rino able divide Figure 19. Locations of gaging stations and drainage areas of major canalse in the 0 co o,,o,.2 lollor Miami area. canal. Control changes produce the largest fluctuations in stage and Noate: Lacalions keyed by 1Mtter 8 to toble 5. ) 0 2 4 milem Figure 19. Locations of gaging stations and drainage areas of major canals in the Miami area. canal. Control changes produce the largest fluctuations in stage and discharge at N.W. 36th Street because the gaging station is located only 100 feet upstream from the control dam. For example, on March
II44 I ' Az ..-, J I 1 In 0-0 nfur IMIAM/ CAfVAtJ -t IJ~L WI a' *l l L IIlÂ· n r~~ iÂ·nY 7 "W .j 1fwoa L
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 37 TABLE 5.-KEY TO LETTER DESIGNATIONS IN FIGURE 19 FOR RECORDING STAGE AND DISCHARGE GAGING STATIONS IN CANALS OF THE MIAMI AREA. A. South New River Canal at S-9, near Davla, Fla. II. Snake Creek Canal at N.W. 67th Ave., near Hiialanh, Fla. C. Snake Crock Canal at S.29, at North Miami Beach, Fla. 1). Little River Canal at 5.27, at Miami, Fla. E. Bircayne Canal at S-28, at Miami, Fla. F. Minmi Canal at Broken Dam, near Miami, Fla. G. Miami Canal at Palmetto Dy-pass. near Hialeah, Fla. 1I. Miami Canal at water plant, Ilnaloah, Fla. I. Miami Canal at N.W. 36lh Street, Miami, Fla. J. Miami River at Hrickoll Ave., Miami, Fla. K. Taminain Canal at State Highway 27, near Coral Gables, Fla. L. Taminill Canal near Coral Gables, Fla. M. Coral Gables Canal at Tamiami Canal, near Coral Gables, Fla. N. Coral Gables Canal near South Miami, Fla. 0. Snapper Creek Canal near Coral Gables, Fla. P. Snapper Creek Canal at S.22, near South Miami, Fla. 8, 1961 (fig. 20) the control was changed from fully open to nearly closed. This produced a sharp rise in stage at N.W. 36th Street and an accompanying drop in discharge. The drop in stage and discharge at Broken Dam was caused by the closing of two controls (S-32 and S-32A) in the levee-borrow canal at the same time. During the period March 22-28, controls S-32 and S-32A were opened. This produced an increase in discharge at Palmetto By-pass and N.W. 36th Street with only a slight increase in stage (fig. 20). The flows are usually larger at Palmetto By-pass than at N.W. 36th Street because water leaves the canal between the two stations to recharge the aquifer adjacent to the well field (near station I, fig. 19). Pumpage from the well field varies between 70 and 125 cfs. The stage at Brickell Avenue is not perceptibly affected by control operation because tidal fluctuation in Biscayne Bay is the over-riding influence. However, the discharge at Brickell Avenue reflects control operation to some extent. The marked drop in discharge on March 9, 1961 is an example. CONTRIBUTIONS TO FLOW IN THE MIAMI RIVER FROM CONSERVATION AREA 3B, AREA B, AND AREA A The drainage areas in figure 19 show that runoff from Area B is contributed primarily to the Miami River system (C-4 and C-6). Part of the flow from the Tamiami Canal (C-4) is diverted into the
38 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Snapper Creek Canal (C-2) and Coral Gables Canal (C-3). With adjustments for these diversions, the flow of the Miami River was separated into contributions from Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A, shown in figure 21. 2000 EXPLANATION Flow contributed from Aroe A Flow contributed from Area B -"-_ Sep_ See ge from Conservotion Area 38 1000 500 o0 4'r'M'a'.M'J'J'A'S'O'N'oJ'MA'M'J''a'J'A'sIo' M'c|/ r J'A'S'dO d N dljf IIJYS 1960 1961 1962 1963 Figure 21. Discharge contributions to the Miami River at Brickell Avenue from Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A. The upper plotted line for Conservation Area 3B is the base line above which the contribution of Area B is plotted. Similarly the upper plotted line for Area B is the base line above which the contribution or loss of Area A is plotted. The significance of the diagram can be illustrated by the following examples. In March 1962, the flow of the Miami River into Area A at its western boundary was greater than the flow out of Area A into Biscayne Bay. The net loss of water from the Miami River in the reach adjacent to Area A is shown by the dip of the Area A hydrograph below the hydrograph for Area B. High easterly winds in early March coincided with high tides and the wind-driven salt water of Biscayne Bay flooded inland into storage in the aquifer. The monthly mean discharge at the Brickell Avenue gaging stations (station J in fig. 19) was 30 cfs landward (upstream). In contrast, summation of inflow and outflow in April and May 1963 (fig. 21) again showed that water was lost from the Miami River
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 39 in the Area A reach, but in this case the monthly mean discharge at the Brickell Avenue gaging station was positive or seaward (fig. 20). Except for the above two instances, the Miami River invariably gained (picked up) water from the three areas. The relative vertical distance between the individual curves is a measure of the contribution from each area. Several runoff characteristics can be identified in figure 21. The underseepage from water stored in Conservation Area 3B is perennial and supplies a base flow of fresh water that is tapped by downstream users. However, in spring 1962 the conservation area was dry and the base flow was contributed entirely by ground-water underflow. The pickup in the Miami Canal was only about 100 cfs from Conservation Area 3B, 100 cfs from Area B, and practically none from Area A. The relative difference in percentage of flows in wet and dry seasons reflects the rapid drainage of Area A. During the dry months only a small flow accrues from Area A. Conversely, during wet periods runoff from Area A is proportionately large. Because of this rapid runoff in Area A and the necessity for maintaining low water levels in the lowlands of Area B after development, the need for additional storage of water in the conservation area in dry periods is thus evident. The total flow in the Miami River contributed by Conservation Area 3B, Area B, and Area A was 520,000 acre-feet or about 725 cfs during the period June 1962 to May 1963 (fig. 21). The Conservation Area seepage comprised 33 percent of this total, Area B 26 percent, and Area A 41 percent. TOTAL SURFACE-WATER OUTFLOW FROM AREA A Area A drains to Biscayne Bay via six major canals and by direct ground-water flow along the shoreline.1 Discharge has been measured continuously near the mouth of each canal as follows: Snapper Creek Canal (C-2), gage P since December 1959 Coral Gables Canal (C-3), gage N since February 1961 Miami River Canal (C-6), gage J since February 1961 Little River Canal (C-7), gage E since February 1959 Biscayne Canal (C-8), gage D since April 1962 Snake Creek Canal (C-9), gage C since January 1959 The briefness of complete record limits the analysis to that period after April 1962. Therefore, the following runoff evaluation for all Area A canals is for only one year-from June 1962 to May 1963. 'Canals C-1 and C-100 (fig. 5) were under construction in 1963-64 and are not included in the analysis.
40 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Drainage areas for each of the six canals (fig. 19) are estimated from ground-water level divides (figs. 14 and 15) and other knowledge of the hydrology of the Miami area. The number in the bar column at the left of figure 22 gives the percentage of the total drainage area assignable to each of the six canals. All other factors being the same, equal rainfall over the total drainage area would produce runoff in proportion to the size of each drainage area. Thus, the monthly mean runoff in the Miami River should be about 43 percent of the total, while runoff from other canals should be similarly proportioned. In figure 22, the monthly mean runoff from each canal is plotted as a bar graph following the same canal sequence shown by the drainage-area bar at the left. The dashed lines are for guidance in comparing month-to-month values. The internal numbers on the runoff bars are the percentages of total monthly runoff for the individual canals. Analysis of the shift of these discharge percentages for the various canals can be used for evaluation and adjustment of water-management practices. During high-water periods, when the control dams are open, the runoff percentage should compare favorably with drainage-area percentage for each canal. During the dry season, when control dams theoretically should be closed to prevent loss of fresh water, the runoff percentage of the uncontrolled canals should increase while that of the controlled canals should decrease. Canals, other than the Miami Canal, are controlled near their mouths in Area A. The control dams in the Miami River system (C-6 and C-4) are located more than 6 miles from shore. As the Miami River system is only partly controlled it can be used as a rough comparator for evaluation of discharge in the controlled canals. During the relatively high-water period June through September 1962, the discharge from the Miami River averaged about 45 percent of the total comparing closely with the 43 percent estimated for the drainage area. During the dry season, the percentage of total discharge for the Miami River increased to a maximum of 76 percent in March 1963 (fig. 22). This increase is a consequence of the uncontrolled condition of the Miami Canal. In April and May 1963 at a time of very little rainfall, the percentage runoff of the Miami Canal decreased, but that of the Snake Creek Canal rose considerably from a theoretical 24 percent to 45 percent in April and 46 percent in May. Gate openings in the Snake Creek Canal increased the discharge during this period and caused the shift in percentage. As a further comparison,
2500 V aoo rI a NUMBER INDICATES PERCENT OF TOTAL -c DRAINAGE AREA NUMBER INDICATES PERCENT SE FIG. 19 S. , S OF TOTAL DISCHARGE z i-t)-C 2000t SSNAPPER CREEK I 2 1s CANAL a' 4 CORAL GABLES i 5 0z CANAL -// SR-) 6 -U7 LITTLE RIVER S t n E J AKE CREEK M CANAL o IC-i N 14 . 9 c JNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DCC JAN F-S MAR APR MAY 1962 1963 0 JUNE JUL AU SET OT NV DE JA FE MA AP MA 1962 196
42 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY the runoff percentage for the Snapper Creek Canal gradually decreased to zero in April and May 1963. Thus, analysis of the shift of discharge percentages can be used as a tool for evaluation and adjustment of water-management practices. For example, the previous comparisons show that dry-season discharge from the Snake Creek, Biscayne, and Little River Canals is proportionately large compared to the size of their drainage areas. Examination of the operating criteria for the control dams might lead to improved water management in these canals. The total discharge from all canals in the Miami area was 929,000 acre feet during the period June 1962 to May 1963. This is equivalent to a yearly mean surface-water runoff of 1,280 cfs. Based on sizes of drainage areas and on the percentage contributions to the Miami River system (see previous section), it is estimated that about 50 percent of this total discharge (about 600 cfs) can be attributed to contributions from Conservation Area 3B and Area B. After implementation of the Area B plan, division of flow will tend to occur along the boundary between Area B and Area A. Contributions from Area A will flow seaward, whereas contributions from Area B and Conservation Area 3B will be pumped westward. Thus, even in a dry period (such as the analysis period 1962-63) the Area B plan will have considerable potential for conservation of fresh water. In order to fully capitalize on this potential, consideration should be given to supplementary installation of small pumps (100 to 400 cfs capacity) at both the levee-side and the eastern side of Area B. For intermediate-to-low water levels in the conservation area, such pumps would permit ideal flexibility of water control. At intermediate water levels in the conservation area, underseepage could be recycled back to the conservation area at the same time that water could be released eastward into Area A for prevention of salt-water encroachment. When the conservation area is dry the east-side pumps would assist in maintaining adequate fresh-water head near the coast by pumping water seaward from Area-B canals into Area-A canals. EVALUATION OF THE AREA B FLOOD-CONTROL PLAN Coincident with the creation of useable land for urban expansion, the flood-control plan for Area B has many features which can be utilized for improvement of the water-resources position of southeastern Florida. Steady-state electrical analog studies were made to provide insight on the vast changes in hydrology that will come about through implementation of the plan. The land-fill requirements in
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 43 Area B will be arrived at as a compromise of the economics of raising the level of the land ($1,000 to $1,500 for raising an acre of land one foot) and of the cost of the pumping system needed to protect the housing developments with lowered fill requirements. This section will be devoted to an appraisal of the plan in the light of past observations of water level. The conditions of September 1960 after hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence passed through the area are selected as the basis for the appraisal. The conditions that occurred then are immutable facts under the present semi-improved drainage system, and success of the plan must come from improvements over this recent base condition. WATER LEVEL MAPS The water-level contours of September 1960 (fig. 15) were superimposed on the contours of present land surface (fig. 10) to obtain the water-level map of figure 23. The water levels ranged from about 1 foot below land surface at the eastern side of Area B to more than 3 feet above land surface at the western side. The volume of water in storage above land surface amounted to about 8.6 billion cubic feet. Consider the height to which land surface would have to be raised if this observed above-land volume of water were to be stored below land surface in the pore spaces of earth fill. Assuming that no lakes or canals were dug, approximately 5 feet of earth fill with an estimated porosity of 20 percent would have to be placed at the contour representing a water depth of +1 foot (fig. 23), 10 feet would have to be placed at the +2-foot contour, and 15 feet at the +3-foot contour in order that the water table would not rise above land surface under rainfall conditions similar to those of 1960. Verification of this idea can be recognized in southern Dade County in the high-water contour maps of 1947 and 1960 (figs. 14 and 15). Because land surface is generally quite high in this area and because canals C-1 and C-100 did not exist in these years, the water table rose to more than 10 feet above sea level. Obviously, in Area B land-filling alone, without pumping, would be prohibitively expensive and economically infeasible. A water-level map of the distance between the assumed compacted land surface (fig. 12) and the water surface during September 1960 is shown in figure 24. If sufficient water could be removed by pumping or by gravity drainage to hold the water level at the same altitude as that of 1960, (a recently observed level) this map would represent the minimum thickness of landfill that would be required after all peat and
44 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY I---------------------------------------------$9 HOLLYWOOD Ij BROWARC S CISC 9 -DADE ~D Q 314-RE -" ---"-**(+), -Ao SEA.PL AREA AAO Ito 2 ,;n -jR ^I .... . -0001 e L 010y, 4" 'W EXPLANATION S CO C: r Control dam Pump stotion ad number Figure 23. Water levels in feet above (+) or below (-) existing land surface during September 1960, subsequent to passage of Hurricane Donna and tropical storm Florence. black muck had disappeared by oxidation according to the assumed compaction formula of the Corps of Engineers. (See section entitled Present and Future Land Surface Altitude.) The volume of water that
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 45 C// s9 HOLLYWOOD LLJ BROWAR ,,C 9.E DADE *I "*:. AREA A MIAMI w d tt o hI c o d on t 0he p osso ofr,'n;c tfon cubi ottonf et ifll C /0 below 3\' r.. I. 0 2 4 mWlfe Figure 24. Water levels of September 1960, in feet above (+) or below (-) assumed compacted land surface. would have to be removed to hold the water level at the 1960 level would be that amount which could not be stored in the pore spaces of the land fill -about eight-tenths of 8.6 or 6.9 billion cubic feet. If all
46 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY this water were necessarily pumped at the proposed total pumping rate of 13,400 cfs, 6 days would be required to remove the excess water assuming return flow by underseepage from the conservation area at zero. The above computations tend to be academic because, after implementation of the plan, pre-storm water management probably will prevent the water from rising to the levels of 1960. The main purpose of this discussion is to demonstrate that the water levels must be low enough prior to the occurrence of the design storm (12.79 inches) to provide sufficient capacity for water storage in the sediments (20 percent porosity) and in the canals and farther backyards (100 percent storage), see table 2. The Corps of Engineers has proposed that this storage capacity be provided by reducing fill requirements to 4 feet above msl in the farther backyards (table 2). At the point where the water rises above ground surface, 100 percent storage of water will occur and further water-level rise will relate inch for inch to the amount of rainfall that exceeds the capacity of the pump system to remove it. Thus, by permitting temporary above-ground storage of water in part of the subdivision lots, the water-level rise will be minimized to a calculated level of 5 feet above msl. The pump system, supplemented by gravity drainage to the ocean, is designed to lower water levels from 5 feet to 4 feet above msl within 5 days after the design storm. The Federal Housing Authority, however, indicates that FHA backing of home loans probably would not be forthcoming for homes where water was to be temporarily stored in the farther backyards. The Area B plan is complex and great changes in the hydrology of the Miami area will result from its full implementation. The analog models presented later give insight on future water levels in Area B. Because of this insight, the present design may be altered. Obviously, new analog studies are required to assess each new design. ANALOG STUDY The laminar flow of ground water through a porous medium under a hydraulic-head differential is analogous to the flow of electrical current through a conductive medium under electrical potential (voltage) difference. The correspondence between the basic laws and the continuity relationships of liquid and of electrical flow has lead to the development of several types of analog models for solving complex boundary problems (Skibitzke, 1960; Stallman, 1961; Brown, 1962; Rovinove, 1962; Walton and Prickett, 1963). The equipment used in this study provides steady-state solutions to hydrologic problems. The known boundary conditions of hydraulic head and flow are simulated by applying D.C. voltage and current to elec-
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 47 trically conductive graphite paper. Impermeable boundaries are modeled by cutting the paper; hyper-conductive boundaries such as streams or canals are usually modeled by silver paint applied to the surface of the paper. As hydraulic-head loss is observed when water moves through a canal, the highly-conductive paint (with no voltage loss) does not represent the hydraulic gradient in the canal realistically. An improvization was made in the present analog study by using resistor chains tapped into the paper at equivalent distances of about one mile. The resistor chain served as a partial short-circuit of the conductive paper and qualitative information on head distribution in Area B during pumping was provided. BOUNDARY CONDITIONS Many assumptions are involved in setting up the analog model for Area B. The boundary conditions in particular represent a combination of past observations and visualization of possible future parameters of the water-control system. Though the results of the analog are considered no more than qualitative, they give realistic insight of head distributions that would result from the present plans. The applicability of the results of the analog-model study is affected by the following assumptions shown in figure 25: 1. The head in Conservation Area 3B, west of the seepage-reduction levees, was modeled at 10 feet above msl for convenience. This head is about 1.6 feet lower than the highest observed head on the discharge side of S-9, but the relative head differentials shown by the model may be adjusted to a higher base if desired. Plans (Corps of Engineers, 1963) for the area west of L-31 indicate that water in this area will not be controlled during the rainy season but will be at a level of about 8.5 feet. Near the end of the rainy season in November, the water level in this area will be lowered to 5.8 feet by pumping to permit agricultural activities. The observed water level was 8.7 feet at well G 596 in September 1960 (fig. 9 and fig. 15) and the head at L-31 is modeled at 8.5 feet. 2. A fixed hydraulic boundary of 4 feet above msl extends along the eastern side of Area B from the South New River Canal (C-11), (fig. 25) to the vicinity of C-3 and then gradually rises to 7 feet, westward along the southern edge of Area B. Referring to the high-water map of September 1960 (fig. 15), heads of 4 to 5 feet occurred along the eastern side of Area B; the 4-foot boundary was selected as realistic for the future on the basis of these observations. Heads of 8 to 9 feet above msl occurred along the southern edge of Area B after hurricane Donna. However, the improvement of Canal C-1 and the new construction of
48 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ..... ,, _ .. ... " ----------------....... ..A .a ,, Fay \ \ o -, t m a .-C SA / ** 2 ancur . ml "o 1a n L 0 a* 000 L-o-1 ondL-------S r r 'oft ,m EXPLAN eTlON a /r a "t -Â°ig"..e., f t Bi a B -,. i IM o ft OF %Alto y... e.. ", Figure 25. Electric analog model of Area B with no dams in the borrow canals for L-30, L-31, and L.33. C-100 can be expected to reduce maximum water levels in the future; the southern fixed boundary has been adjusted to assumed levels (4 to 7 feet) that appear realistic for rainfall conditions similar to those of September 1960. 3. Dams (proposed by this report) are positioned in the feeder canals approximately at the boundary between Area A and Area B (fig. 2.5). It is believed that such control dams will almost necessarily be a requisite of the flood-control plan to facilitate water control in both wet and dry periods. The design discharge of the larger pump stations (3,900 cfs) is nearly as great as the highest gravity-flow discharge observed in any of the existing canals (4,060 cfs, Miami Canal at Hialeah, October 13, 1947). Therefore, it is doubtful that the position of the water-level divide separating westward flow to Area-B pumps and eastward flow to B.cayne Bay can be predicted. In consideration of the large discharge capacity in Area B, it would be possible for some of the flood waters of Area A to move inland into Area B and thus delay the
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 49 dewatering of Area B. Studies in the Snake Creek Canal (Kohout and Leach, 1964, p. 22) show that salt water can move a mile in four hours under density gradient alone. To avoid any possibility that salt water might move inland along the bottom of the canal at high tide and come under the influence of the Area-B pumps, the control dams are believed essential and are programmed into the model at arbitrary positions along the east side of Area B (fig. 25). 4. A dense, branching network of quaternary, tertiary, and secondary canals will discharge water into the feeder (primary) canals of Area B. Thus, the water-level gradients required for water to move through the feeder canals to the pump stations will be one of the major controls of head distribution throughout Area B. Although no size has been assigned specifically, the feeder canals will be large, probably comparable to the Miami Canal. The following set of data for a measurement of maximum discharge in the Miami Canal at Hialeah on October 13, 1947 illustrates the magnitude of gradient that may be encountered in the Area-B feeder canals during pumping. Width: 107 ft. Area of cross section: 1,320 sq. ft. Average depth: 12.3 ft. Discharge: 4,060 cfs Cage height at Hialeah: 7.22 ft. Gage height at N.W. 36th Street: 4.33 ft. Distance between stations: 2.05 miles Gradient: 1.4 ft./mile The coefficient of roughness (n) in Manning's formula is computed at 0.035 from the above data. The Corps of Engineers (1961, p. A-12) have indicated that a coefficient of roughness of 0.035 will be used for designing all canals. Using this coefficient in Manning's formula, a graph relating depth, gradient per mile, and discharge for a canal 125 feet wide has been prepared, figure 26. The width of 125 feet has been arbitrarily selected as a practical width for a large feeder canal. The dashed curves are for a canal of rectangular cross section; the solid curves are for a canal of trapezoidal cross section. The discharge contemplated for two of the pump stations (S-202 and S-203, table 1) is 3,900 cfs. Figure 26 shows that in a canal 20 feet deep and 125 feet wide a discharge of 3,900 cfs would produce a gradient of 0.19 ft per mile in a canal of rectangular cross section and 0.52 ft per mile in a canal of trapezoidal cross section. Assuming that a water level of 4.0 ft at the eastern side of Area B is a correct appraisal for future flood conditions, the hydraulic gradient consistent
50 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Mannings formula: I Assume: * 11 | I\Chonn l width -IR ft 1IVi \7 ^ -\\ _ __ \_ n * .033 I \I N .. 0 01 02 03 04 05 06 0.7 08 0.9 10 I. WATER-LEVEL GRADIENT, FEET PER MILE Figure 26. Theoretical relations, from Manning's formula, between hydraulic gradient, discharge, and depth for a canal 125 feet wide of rectangular and trapezoidal cross sections. with a discharge of 3,900 cfs in a feeder canal 10 miles long, would drop the head at the intake side of the pump to about 2.1 ft above msl for a rectangular canal and 1.2 ft below msl for a trapezoidal canal. Thus, a head near mean sea level at the intake side of the pump appears to be realistic for full-capacity pumping after the plan is implemented. RESULTS OF THE ANALOG STUDY Two boundary conditions are modeled: (1) In figure 25 the levee borrow canals are free to discharge water directly to the intake side of the pump: (2) In figure 27, control dams are installed to isolate the borrow canals from the pump intake. BORROW CANALS WITHOUT ISOLATING CONTROL DAMS In figure 25, the head at the intake side of all pumping stations is assumed to be 0.0 feet msl. Underseepage beneath the levee would be
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 51 picked up by the borrow canals and water-level gradient toward the pump stations would divide about half way between stations. This gradient in the borrow canal could not be modeled adequately and the head throughout the canal was fixed at 0.0 msl. Maximum underseepage would occur with this method of operation but in those parts of the area where seepage-reduction levees are planned, the total underseepage would be minimized. This is shown by the two schematic inset profiles pointing to the north end of L-33 and L-30 (fig. 25). In areas where seepage reduction levees are constructed (profile B), the 10-foot head differential would be spread across a distance of 3,000 feet compared to about 150 feet for profile A. If no ponding occurs between the levees, the flow of water through the aquifer would be reduced in proportion to the relative reduction of water-level gradient (profile A to profile B). Before seepage reduction (S-R) levees were contemplated, Klein and Sherwood (1961, p. 22) computed the total underseepage for a tenfoot head differential across L-30 near S-201 at 540 cfs per mile-432 cfs by underflow through the permeable aquifer and 108 cfs through the levee itself. This quantity is based on a transmissibility of 3.6 x 100 gpd/ft. The transmissibility at the north end of L-33 is about 6.0 x 100 gpd/ft (fig. 5) and a ten-foot head differential there would result in a relatively higher underflow by a factor of about 2 times that near S-201. As a comparison with the computed underflow of 432 cfs per mile by Klein and Sherwood (1961, p. 21), the following computation indicates the magnitude of horizontal laminar flow through the permeable part of the aquifer for a 10-foot head differential across the 3,000-foot distance intervening between the S-R levee and L-30; the black muck and dense limestone will contribute a negligible amount of horizontal flow: Q = TIL where: Q is the flow rate in gpd, T is the transmissibility in gpd/ft, I is the hydraulic gradient in feet per foot, and L is the length of section, in feet, through which the quantity Q flows. Q = 3,600,000 gpd/ft x 10 ft x 5,280 ft/mile 3000 ft = 63.4 mgd per mile = 95 cfs/mile Thus, the S-R levees can be expected to reduce underflow from 432 to 95 cfs per mile, a factor of about four. The calculation assumes that water will not be ponded between the two levees. During periods of heavy rainfall some ponding probably will take place. A reasonable situation might be considered where the total head differential of 10
52 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY feet is equally divided: 5 feet across the S-R levee and 5 feet across L-30. Using the graph and computing technique of Klein and Sherwood (1961, p. 21) for this 5-foot ponded condition, the underflow would be doubled to 127 mgd/mile or 190 cfs/mile, and seepage directly through the levee materials would be 54 cfs, a total of 244 cfs/mile. Ponding between the S-R and main levees during the design storm is realistic and can be included in calculations for the entire levee system, as follows: The previous calculation indicates that the effect of ponding with a 5-foot head differential will increase the underflow beneath L-30 from 95 cfs/mile to 190 cfs/mile, a factor of two. Thus, increasing the computed quantities of underflow by a factor of two in those parts of the levee system where seepage-reduction levees are contemplated should yield a useful evaluation of the effect of 5. feet of ponding between the levees. The calculations apply to boundary conditions as set up for the analog model of figure 25. The distribution of transmissibilities in figure 5 indicates about 6 to 7 mgd/ft along the northern part of L-33 and 3 to 4 mgd/ft near S-200 and S-201. The transmissibility along the southern part of L-30 and along L-31 is assumed to be 8 mgd/ft. The effect of the S-R levee is assumed to be nil for one quarter mile on either side of a pump station. Table 6 summarizes the computations. Based upon hypothetical, but realistic parameters, the total underseepage is computed at about 13,000 cfs for the full western side of Area B. Under the conditions set up in the analog model of figure 25, pump capacity of this amount would be necessary to produce and maintain the steady-state distribution of water levels. By the simple expedient of isolating the borrow canal south of S-203 with a control dam, 5,000 to 6,000 cfs would be removed from the total underseepage figure (table 6). The final steady-state distribution of heads (fig. 25) indicates that maximum dewatering would occur at the western side of Area B if control dams were not placed in the levee-borrow canals to isolate them from the intake sides of the pumps. Consistent with the fixed boundary at the eastern side, no dewatering would occur there under the conditions imposed in the model. As resistor elements are the same size, this implies that the modeled canals are also uniform in size. The measured voltage at the resistor contact points indicates the water-level response of such canals to the imposed boundary conditions. BORROW CANALS WITH ISOLATING CONTROL DAMS The analog model of figure 27 shows the steady-state head distribution that would result if control dams were installed to isolate the
TABLE 6.-UNDERSEEPAGE FOR THE BOUNDARY CONDITION OF NO CONTROL DAMS IN THE LEVEE BORROW CANALS. Seepage through levee materials (Klein and Sherwood, Underflow 1961, p. 22.) Assumed average Length Q Q for 5 ft head transmissibility Q = TIL of reach in reach differential Q Location (fig. 25) (mgd/ft) (cfs/mile) (miles) (cs) (cfe/mile) in reach Total North end of Area B to , mi. north of S-200 5 132 3.0 7921 54 162 954 % mile north to 1 mile south of S.200 4 465 0.5 232 54 27 259 14 mile south of S.200 to 1 mile north of S-201 4 105 0.5 1051 54 27 132 14 mile south of S-201 to 14 mile southwest of S.201 3.6 418 0.5 209 54 27 236 14 mile southwest to 1 mile southwest of S-201 3.6 95 0.75 1421 54 40 182 1 mile southwest of S-201 to bend in levee 5 132 3.0 7921 54 162 954 Bend in levee to % mile north of S-202 6 188 3.0 1,1281 54 162 1,290 %1 mile north to 1% mile south of S-202 7 813 0.5 406 54 27 433 %, mile south of S.202 to 3% mile north of S-203 8 211 3.5 1,4771 54 189 1,666 % mile north to 4 mile south of S.203 8 930 0.5 465 54 27 492 14 mile south of 8.203 to bend in levee 8 930 1.0 930 54 54 984 Bend in levee to south end of Area B 8 898 5.5 4,939 54 297 5,236 TOTALS ..22.25 11,617 1,201 12,818 1 Includes multiplication by a factor of 2 to adjust for the effect of 5 feet of ponding between seepage-reduction and main levee, see text. C0
54 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ----'-----'--------------, A40 i o -,,. ,evee-borrow canals from the intake of the pump stations. The fixed intake f the pump. A head of 0.0 ms was assigned to S-202. The exeption of S-202, fixed at 00 msl, the heads (i.e. voltages) at the 0-.4 co-'^x M--------------------------------*-y 0Am 00.Cml, a" Â«a'< ' \ boun Paaries. Figure 27. Electric analog model of Area B with control dams that isolate the borrow canals for L-30, L.31, and L-33 from the intake side of the pumps. levee-borrow canals from the intake of the pump stations. The fixed boundaries and other conditions are the same as those of the previous model. The isolation provided by the control dams permitted adjustment of current withdrawal at the pump-station terminus of the resistor chains. Pump station S-202 with a capacity of 3,900 cfs and a relatively small drainage area will produce the lowest head at the intake of the pump. A head of 0.0 msl was assigned to S-202. The measured current withdrawal at all other stations was proportioned relative to the current withdrawal at S-202, so that the design discharge (table 1) of all pump stations was duplicated in the model. With the exception of S-202, fixed at 0.0 msl, the heads (i.e. voltages) at the other pump-station intakes and along the lengths of the canal were free to adjust to the flow of water (i.e. current) from the fixed external boundaries. The model shows that the heads at the pump-station intakes (other than S-202) will be above 1.1 feet msl and in the case of S-203 the
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 55 intake head will be 3 feet above msl. The drainage area of S-203 is somewhat larger than other stations, and the branching canal is exposed to higher heads along the external boundaries. The alinement of the contours in the southern part of Area B (fig. 27) indicates that water in the upper reach of the S-203 feeder canal would not flow to the S-203 pump station but would flow through the interconnecting secondary and tertiary canals to the S-202 feeder canal. A variety of changes as follows would alter the situation: 1. Increasing the capacity of the S-203 pump station to give an intake head of about 0.0 msl thus lowering the head in the S-203 canal relative to the S-202 canal. 2. Increasing the size of the S-203 canal relative to the S-202 canal. However, because the intake head at S-203 (2.99) is higher than the upstream head of S-202 (2.21), a shift of heads could be accomplished only by reducing the size of the S-202 canal. Verification of this can be obtained by analysis of figure 26. 3. Retaining earthen plugs to separate the secondary and tertiary canals of the feeder-canal systems. Because of the high permeability of the aquifer this measure may not be effective in all cases. As the drainage areas for the pump stations will be controlled to some extent by ground-water divides between feeder canals, topographic divides (i.e., the earth plugs) may not be completely reliable indicators of flow division between two canal systems. The discharge, gradient, and size of a canal are dependent variables as indicated by the graph of figure 26, which only holds for a canal 125 feet wide. Selection of pump-station discharge, for example, leaves the size and gradient of the canal interdependent until one or the other remaining parameters has been designated. Thus, although the relative current withdrawals have been proportioned to the pump-station discharge in the analog model (fig. 27), the discharges have not been fixed. The three parameters (discharge, size, and gradient) could be varied in almost an infinite combination to give results similar to those of the steady-state model of figure 27. More sophisticated transientstate resistor-capacitor analog models that require special funding are needed to restrict these variables to an optimum combination. COMPARISON OF THE ANALOG MODELS Comparison of figures 25 and 27 shows that installation of control dams in the levee-borrow canals will radically change the steady-state distribution of water levels. Without control dams (fig. 25), the lowest water levels and greatest drawdowns will occur at the western side
56 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY of Area B, but underseepage will be maximum. With isolating control dams (fig. 27), highest water levels and smallest drawdown will occur at the western side of Area B. The quantity of underseepage directly recycled by the pumps will be greatly minimized for the latter method of development in comparison to the former. This is indicated by the spread of the 10-foot head differential over several miles (fig. 27) compared to the spread over only 3,000 feet between S-R and main levees (fig. 25). However, the eastward bulge of contours between pump stations (e.g., S-201 to S-202, fig. 27) indicates that there will be some sacrifice in ability of the pump system to lower water levels in the western part of Area B if isolating control dams are installed. Thus, depending on finalized plans of construction and of the method of operation (i.e. whether controls are open or closed), the land-fill requirements could have a maximum variance of about 8 feet in the western part of Area B. Partial openings of the dams probably would produce advantageous compromise solutions between the two modeled extremes. The Area B plan has evolved and changed with time. Each additional study has brought to light new evidence and a step-by-step process of revision has taken place. The analog study should be considered qualitative because several assumptions necessary for modeling with the simple equipment available will not be fulfilled under field conditions. Nevertheless, the models of figures 25 and 27 are helpful in visualizing the possible problems and the difference in approaches or conditions. For example, both models indicate that the close spacing of pump stations S-200 and S-201 will dewater the small triangle of land between the S-200, 201 feeder canals much more efficiently than other parts of Area B. Relocation of the S-201 pump station southward toward S-202 would result in better equalization of the drawdowns throughout the area between the S-200 and S-202 feeder canals. New analog studies are required to assess the effect of such changes. SUMMARY Up to the present time urban development in southeastern Florida has been primarily along a fairly broad coastal ridge of moderately high land that extends inland 10 to 20 miles from the shore. Westward from this ridge the land becomes progressively more flooded in the lowlands of the Everglades. The high land of the coastal ridge has largely been developed and much of the future expansion of urban areas will have to take place
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 57 in the lowlands west of Miami. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District have devised a plan known as the Area B Flood Control Plan to make part of these lowlands suitable for housing development. Large perennially flooded tracts in the Everglades have been surrounded by levees to form water-conservation areas. The marginal lowland (elevations from 4 to 7 feet above msl) that lies between these conservation areas to the west and to the coastal ridge to the east has been designated Area B by the Corps of Engineers. The Area B Plan calls for an integrated system of land fills, drainage canals, and large-capacity pumps to control the flood hazard. After development, huge pumps with a total capacity of 13,400 cfs are proposed to dewater Area B during the rainy season, by pumping water westward over the levee system into Conservation Area 3-B. The ultimate altitude of the land surface for urban development in Area B will be arrived at as a compromise of the economics of land filling ($1,000 to $1,500 per acre foot) and of the cost of a pumping system needed to protect the housing developments under lower fill requirements. The basic problem is how to make this lowland area safe from floods or at least as safe as possible with techniques, construction methods and concepts of hydrology now available so that the development home sites will be sufficiently safe from flooding to be a good fnancial risk for banks and other lending institutions, and for the Federal Housing Authority to guarantee the housing loans. The plan is complicated by the fact that highly permeable limestone underlies the area and that the underseepage beneath the levee may be large enough under certain circumstances to be equal to the full capacity of the pumping system. This report has gathered together basic hydrologic facts that have been accumulated over a period of more than twenty years so that the effect on water levels caused by works of the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control Project constructed between 1949 and 1962 might be evaluated. These facts show that levee construction and improvements in the drainage system caused water levels in Area B to be 2 to 3 feet lower in 1960, a hurricane year, than in 1947, also a hurricane year, despite comparable rainfall accumulation for the two years. Under drought conditions higher fresh-water levels were maintained behind salinity-control dams in 1962, a very dry year, than in 1945, a dry year before control dams were installed. However, Conservation Area 3-B was dry in 1962 and sufficient water could not be delivered downstream to maintain fresh-water heads. Water levels upstream
58 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY from salinity-control dams were about 1 foot above msl in the dry spring months of 1962. Such low water levels are insufficient to prevent saltwater intrusion into the underlying limestone. Further evaluation of the Area B Plan as proposed by the Corps of Engineers Survey Review Report of 1961 was accomplished through the use of steady-state electrical analog models. Two boundary conditions-with and without water-control dams to isolate the levee borrow canals from the pump-station intakes were modeled. Without control dams the lowest water levels will occur at the western side of Area B and underseepage from Conservation Area 3-B will be maximum, controlled by an estimated 10-foot head differential across the 3,000foot distance intervening between seepage-reduction and main levees. Arithmetic calculations for this boundary condition indicate that the underseepage for a total head differential of 10 feet would amount to about 13,000 cfs if water is ponded to a depth of 5 feet between the seepage-reduction and main levees during heavy rainfall. Thus for this assumed worst expected condition almost the full capacity of the planned pumping system would be required to recycle the underseepage back to the conservation area on a steady-state basis. If dams were installed to isolate the levee borrow canals from the intake of the pump station, the underseepage would be minimized because of the spread of the 10-foot head differential over several miles compared to the spread over only 3,000 feet between the seepage-reduction and main levees. However, highest water levels would occur at the western side of Area B and this would require higher fill requirements in that area. Compromise solutions between the two modeled extremes could be obtained by partial openings of the isolating control dams. The designed discharge of the larger pump stations (3,900 cfs) is nearly as great as the highest gravity flow discharge observed in any of the existing canals (4,060 cfs, Miami Canal at Hialeah, October 13, 1947). In consideration of the large discharge capacity in Area B it would be possible for some of the flood waters of the presently urbanized Area A to move inland into Area B and thus delay the dewatering of Area B. Also there would be a possibility that salt water might move inland along the bottom of the canal at high tide and come under the influence of the Area B pumps. Therefore control dams are believed to be essential to fix the point of hydraulic separation between flow toward the ocean and inland flow toward the Area B pumps. It appears that the boundary between Area A and Area B is a logical location for these control dams and that the best position
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 59 for the dams is in the main feeder canals approximately at this boundary. In this way water control will be facilitated in both wet and dry periods. Proper operation of the control dams will cause a division of flow so that contributions to the canal from Area A will flow seaward, whereas contributions from Area B will be pumped westward. Thus water which now unavoidably is wasted to the ocean by seaward flow in a high-water period will be pumped westward into storage in the conservation area. The Area B Plan will have considerable potential for conservation of fresh water and in order to fully capitalize on this potential consideration should be given to supplementary installation of small pumps (100 to 400 cfs capacity) at both the levee side and the eastern side of Area B. Such pumps would permit ideal flexibility of water control. At intermediate water levels in the conservation area, underseepage could be re-cycled back to the conservation area at moderate rates at the same time that water could be released eastward into Area A for prevention of salt encroachment. When the conservation area is dry and no water is available directly from the conservation area, the proposed east-side pumps would assist in maintaining adequate fresh-water heads near the coast by pumping water seaward from Area B canals over the proposed control dams into Area A canals. The estimated increase in population from about 1,000,000 in 1960 to 4,000,000 in 1995 is expected to cause water use in the Miami area to increase from 230 mgd (345 cfs) to 1.4 bgd (2,170 cfs). This rate of water use for a year's time would be equal to a volume of water about 10.5 inches deep covering an area of about 2,800 square miles, or an area extending 28 miles inland from the coast and 100 miles southward from Lake Okeechobee to Everglades National Park. This volume of water is almost one-fifth of the average rainfall over the area and is equal to the average surface runoff from this area. As Fort Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, other coastal cities, agricultural interests, and Everglades National Park will require a share of this water, it becomes apparent that increasing water needs will eventually approach the availability of fresh water in the hydrologic system. In consideration of these continually growing water needs, the Area B plan should be conceived not only as a flood-control plan but also as an important factor for beneficial control and management of all water resources in southeastern Florida.
60 FLORIDA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY REFERENCES Brown. Russell H. 1962 Progress in ground-water studies with the electrical-analog model: Jour. Am. Water Works Assoc., v. 54, no. 8, p. 943-958. C&SFFCD 1960 Report on flood conditions in the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District in September 1960: mimeographed report 26 p. Dude County Development Department 1962 Revised edition. Economic survey of Metropolitan Miami: Miami, Florida. Ferguson, G. E. (see Parker, G. G.) Hoy, Nevin D. (see Schroeder, Melvin C.) Klein, Howard (see Schroeder, Melvin C. and Sherwood, C. B.) 1961 (and Sherwood, C. B.) Hydrologic conditions in the vicinity of Levee 30, northern Dade County, Florida: Fla. Geol. Survey Rept. Inv. 24, pt. 1, 24 p. Kohout, F. A. 1964 (and Leach, S. D.) Salt-water movement caused by control-dam operation in the Snake Creek Canal, Miami, Florida: Fla. Geol. Survey Rept. Inv. 24, pt. 4, 49 p. Leach, S. D. (also see Sherwood, C. B.) 1963 (and Sherwood, C. B.) Hydrologic studies in the Snake Creek Canal area, Dade County, Florida: Fla. Geol. Survey Rept. Inv. 24, pt. 3, 33 p. Love, S. K. (see Parker, G. G.) Parker. G. G. 1955 (and Ferguson, G. E., Love, S. K., and others) Water resources of southeastern Florida, with special reference to the geology and ground water of the Miami area: U. S. Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 1255. Prickett, T. A. (see Walton, W. C.) Robinove, Charles J. 1962 Ground-water studies and analog models: U. S. Geol. Survey Circular 468, 12 p. Schroeder, Melvin C. 1958 (and Klein, Howard, and Hoy, Nevin D.) Biscayne aquifer of Dade and Broward Counties, Florida: Fla. Geol. Survey Rept. Inv. 17, 56 p. Sherwood, C. B. (see Leach, S. D.) 1963 (and Klein, Howard) Surfaceand ground-water relation in a highly permeable environment: Internat. Assoc. Sci. Hydrol., Symp. Surface Waters, Pub. 63, p. 454-468. 1962 (and Leach, S. D.) Hydrologic studies in the Snapper Creek Canal area, Dade County, Florida: Fla. Geol. Survey Rept. Inv. 24, pt. 2, 32 p. Skibitzke, H. E. 1960 Electronic computers as an aid to the analysis of hydrologic problems: Internal Assoc. Sci. Hydrol., Comm. Subter. Waters Pub. 52, p. 347-358.
REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS No. 47 61 Stallman, Robert W. 1956 Preliminary findings on ground-water conditions relative to Area B flood-control plans, Miami, Florida: U. S. Geol. Survey open-file report, 29 p. 1961 From geologic data to aquifer analog models: Am. Geol. Inst., v. 7, no. 7, p. 8-11. Walton, W. C. 1963 (and Prickett, T. A.) Hydrogeologic electric analog computers: Jour. Hydraulics Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., v. 89, no. HY6, Proc. Paper 3695, p. 67-91. Wolman, Abel 1961 Impact of desalinization on the water economy: Jour. Am. Water Works Assoc., v. 53, no. 2, p. 119-124. U. S. Corps of Engineers 1953 Partial definite project report, Central and Southern Florida project, for flood control and other purposes: Part 1, Supplement 7, U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville, Florida. 1958 Survey-review report on Central and Southern Florida project, greater Miami area (Area B): U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville, Florida. 1961 Survey-review report on Central and Southern Florida project, greater Miami area, (Area B): U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville, Florida. 1963 Survey-review report on Central and Southern Florida project, southwest Dade County: U. S. Army Engineer District, Jacksonville, Florida.
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EDL8X86N7_1DE04P INGEST_TIME 2017-04-19T19:20:57Z PACKAGE UF00001234_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC