U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5052

Prepared in cooperation with the City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams

in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma
Cover.

1. Photograph of a redbud tree near Lake Hefner Dam in Oklahoma City, Okla., 2015. (S. Jerrod Smith, U.S. Geological Survey)

2. Photograph of Lake Overholser Dam in Oklahoma City, Okla., 2013. (Trevor S. Grout, U.S. Geological Survey)

Back cover.

Panoramic photograph of Lake Hefner Dam, 2015. (S. Jerrod Smith, U.S. Geological Survey)

1. 2.
i

Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,

and near Atoka, Oklahoma

By Molly J. Shivers, S. Jerrod Smith, Trevor S. Grout, and Jason M. Lewis

Prepared in cooperation with the City of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5052

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
ii

U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2015

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/.

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials as noted in the text. Permission 

to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Shivers, M.J., Smith, S.J, Grout, T.S., and Lewis, J.M., 2015, Dam-breach analysis and flood-inundation mapping for selected dams in Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2015–5052, 62 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20155052.

ISSN 2328-031X (print)

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

ISBN 978-1-4113-3918-7
iii

Contents

Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Purpose and Scope ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Description of Selected Dams and Lakes.................................................................................................................................................. 1

Atoka Reservoir..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Dolese Youth Park Lake ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Dry Creek Detention Reservoir........................................................................................................................................................... 1

Lake Hefner............................................................................................................................................................................................ 4

Lake Overholser.................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Northeast (Zoo) Lake............................................................................................................................................................................ 4

Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon........................................................................................................................................ 4

Stanley Draper Lake............................................................................................................................................................................. 4

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond .......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Dam-Breach Analysis ................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Model Selection.................................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Data Inputs for Hydraulic Model........................................................................................................................................................ 4

Elevation Data............................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Survey Data................................................................................................................................................................................... 5

Hydraulic Data.............................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Hydrologic Data............................................................................................................................................................................ 5

Model Development ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Cross Sections.............................................................................................................................................................................. 5

Manning’s Roughness Coefficients .......................................................................................................................................... 5

Flow and Boundary Conditions.................................................................................................................................................. 6

Dam-Breach Parameters ........................................................................................................................................................... 6

Calibration and Sensitivity Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 7

Postprocessing of Model Results ............................................................................................................................................. 7

Flood-Inundation Mapping........................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Sources of Uncertainty in Flood-Inundation Maps.................................................................................................................................. 7

Elevation Uncertainties...................................................................................................................................................................... 12

Manning’s Roughness Coefficient Uncertainties.......................................................................................................................... 12

Model Limitations................................................................................................................................................................................ 12

Summary and Conclusions......................................................................................................................................................................... 12

References Cited.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 13

Appendixes [available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2015/5052/]

1. Limitations Regarding Use of Flood-Inundation Maps

2. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Atoka Reservoir dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent probable

maximum flood

3. Map showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Dolese Youth Park Lake dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent

probable maximum flood

4. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Dry Creek Detention Reservoir dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent

probable maximum flood

5. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Lake Hefner dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent

probable maximum flood

6. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Lake Overholser dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent

probable maximum flood

7. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the

75-percent probable maximum flood

8. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the

75-percent probable maximum flood

9. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Northeast (Zoo) Lake dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent

probable maximum flood

10. Map showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage

for the 75-percent probable maximum flood

11. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Stanley Draper Lake dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the 75-percent

probable maximum flood

12. Maps showing inundated areas for the 75-percent probable maximum flood and sunny-day

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond dam-breach model scenarios and time to peak stage for the

75-percent probable maximum flood

Figures

1. Map showing study area and Manning’s roughness coefficients for dam-breach analysis

of a selected dam near Atoka, Oklahoma................................................................................................................................ 2

2. Map showing study area and Manning’s roughness coefficients for dam-breach analysis

of selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma........................................................................................................................3

3. Graph showing a hypothetical cross section derived with light detection and ranging

with and without use of the cross-section-point filter tool in the Hydrologic Engineering

Center River Analysis modeling software ................................................................................................................................6

4. Map showing extents for figures in appendix 2 that show flood-inundation areas

from dam-breach analysis of Atoka Reservoir near Atoka, Oklahoma ...............................................................................8

5. Map showing extents for figures in appendixes 3–12 that show flood-inundation areas

from dam-breach analysis of selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma........................................................................9
iv

Tables

1. Sources of elevation data used in modeling dam-breach scenarios for selected dams in

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla. ...................................................................................................................5

2. U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations used in developing dam-breach models

for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla...............................................................................6

3. Manning’s roughness coefficients for the calibrated models of the North Canadian River for

Lake Overholser in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma .........................................................................................................................6

4. Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System input parameters for

selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.....................................................................................6

5. Values of Cb offset factor, a function of reservoir volume, for the calibrated models of selected

dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla. ....................................................................................................7

6. Values of dam-breach parameters used for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,

and near Atoka, Okla....................................................................................................................................................................7

7. Maximum flood-inundation elevation and time for the 75-percent probable maximum flood

and sunny-day dam-breach scenarios for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,

and near Atoka, Okla..................................................................................................................................................................10

8. Peak water-surface elevation and time to peak for the sensitivity analysis of Manning’s

roughness coefficients for the 75-percent probable maximum flood dam-breach scenarios

for Lake Overholser in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. ................................................................................................................12

Conversion Factors

Inch/Pound to International System of Units

Multiply By To obtain

Length

inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

square mile (mi2

) 259.0 hectare (ha)

square mile (mi2

) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

acre-foot (acre-ft) 1,233 cubic meter (m3

)

acre-foot (acre-ft) 0.001233 cubic hectometer (hm3

) 

Flow rate

cubic foot per second (ft3

/s) 0.02832 cubic meter per second (m3/s)

International System of Units to Inch/Pound

Multiply By To obtain

Length

meter (m) 3.281 foot (ft) 

Volume

cubic meter (m3

) 0.0008107 acre-foot (acre-ft) 

Datum

Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).

Elevation, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical 

datum.

Horizontal coordinate information (U.S. Survey Feet) is referenced to 

the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).

Supplemental Information

A U.S. Survey Foot is defined as 1 meter = 39.37 inches. Dividing

39.37 inches by 12 (12 inches per foot), the resulting conversion

factor is 1 meter = 3.280833333 feet (www.ngs.noaa.gov/faq.shtml).

Abbreviations

DEM digital-elevation model

DTM Digital Terrain Map

EAP emergency action plan

Esri Environmental Systems Research Institute

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

GIS Geographical Information System

GPS Global Positioning System

HEC–RAS Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System

ifsar interferometric synthetic aperture radar

lidar light detection and ranging

OWRB Oklahoma Water Resources Board

PMF probable maximum flood

USGS U.S. Geological Survey
Description of Selected Dams and Lakes 1

Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 

and near Atoka, Oklahoma

By Molly J. Shivers, S. Jerrod Smith, Trevor S. Grout, and Jason M. Lewis

Abstract 

Dams provide beneficial functions such as flood control, 

recreation, and storage of water supplies, but they also entail 

risk; dam breaches and resultant floods can cause substantial 

property damage and loss of life. The State of Oklahoma requires 

each owner of a high-hazard dam, which the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency defines as dams for which failure or improper 

operation probably will cause loss of human life, to develop an 

emergency action plan specific to that dam. Components of an 

emergency action plan are to simulate a flood resulting from a 

possible dam breach and map the resulting downstream floodinundation areas. The resulting flood-inundation maps can provide 

valuable information to city officials, emergency managers, and 

local residents for planning an emergency response if a dam 

breach occurs.

This report presents results of a cooperative study by the U.S. 

Geological Survey and the City of Oklahoma City to model dambreach scenarios at 11 dams controlled and operated by Oklahoma 

City, Okla., and to map the potential flood-inundation areas of 

such dam breaches. To assist the City of Oklahoma City with 

completion of the emergency action plans for the 11 dams, the U.S. 

Geological Survey used light detection and ranging (lidar) elevation 

data (2004), which produced a 2-foot contour elevation map for 

the flood plains around Oklahoma City. A 5-meter Digital Terrain 

Map was used to model the flood plain below Atoka Reservoir in 

southeastern Oklahoma. 

Digital-elevation models, field survey measurements, hydraulic 

data, and hydrologic data (U.S. Geological Survey streamflowgaging stations North Canadian River below Lake Overholser near 

Oklahoma City, Okla. [07241000], and North Canadian River at 

Britton Road at Oklahoma City, Okla. [07241520]), were used as 

inputs for the one-dimensional dynamic (unsteady-flow) models 

using Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System 

(HEC–RAS) software. The modeled flood elevations were exported 

to a geographic information system to produce flood-inundation 

maps. Water-surface profiles were developed for a 75-percent 

probable maximum flood dam-breach scenario and a sunny-day 

dam-breach scenario, as well as for maximum flood-inundation 

elevations and flood-wave arrival times at selected bridge crossings. 

Points of interest such as community-services offices, recreational 

areas, water-treatment plants, and wastewater-treatment plants were 

identified on the flood-inundation maps.

Introduction

Dams have altered the flow of many of the rivers in the Nation 

to provide societal needs such as hydropower, recreation, drinking 

water, irrigation, and flood control (Collier and others, 1996). 

Although dams provide many benefits, they also entail risk. A dam 

breach (failure) can cause rapid downstream flood inundation, 

causing fatalities and catastrophic damage to infrastructure and the 

landscape. Some notable historic dam breaches include St. Francis 

Dam in California, 1928 (Rogers, 2006); Buffalo Creek Dam in 

West Virginia, 1972 (Davies and others, 1972); and Teton Dam in 

Idaho, 1976 (Arthur, 1977).

The Oklahoma Water Resources Board inspects more than 

4,600 dams in Oklahoma every 5 years and conducts more frequent 

inspections of high-hazard dams, which the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency (FEMA) defines as dams for which failure 

or improper operation will cause loss of human life (Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, 1998). The Oklahoma Water 

Resources Board (OWRB) requires the owners of high-hazard 

dams to develop an emergency action plan (EAP) (Oklahoma Water 

Resources Board, 2011) that maps or delineates areas of potential 

flood inundation resulting from a dam breach. Knowledge of the 

flood-wave timing and flood-inundation area caused by a dam 

breach can potentially mitigate loss of life and property damage.

A cooperative study by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

and the City of Oklahoma City was done to simulate dambreach scenarios at high-hazard dams and to map the potentially 

resulting flood-inundation areas. The City of Oklahoma City, 

Okla., owns and operates several dams and reservoirs, but only 

11 dams classified as high hazard were modeled and mapped for 

this report (figs. 1–2). Dam-breach models and flood-inundation 

maps were developed for Atoka Reservoir (fig. 1), Dolese Youth 

Park Lake, Dry Creek Detention Reservoir, Lake Hefner, Lake 

Overholser, Lightning Creek Holding Pond A, Lightning Creek 

Holding Pond C, Northeast (Zoo) Lake, Northwest Oklahoma 

City Sludge Lagoon, Stanley Draper Lake, and Will Rogers Park 

Holding Pond (fig. 2). 

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to document the methods and 

results of hydraulic dam-breach analysis and present resulting 

flood-inundation maps for the affected areas downstream from 11 

high-hazard dams owned and operated by the City of Oklahoma 

City. Two dam-breach models were developed for each for the 

11 selected dams: (1) for a 75-percent probable maximum flood 

scenario, and (2) for a sunny-day scenario. Results presented in this 

report can be used to assist the City of Oklahoma City in identifying 

and mitigating areas at risk if a dam breach occurs. Information 

regarding limitations on use of the flood-inundation maps is 

presented in appendix 1. Appendixes in this report can be accessed 

from the report Index Page (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2015/5052/).

 Results of these analyses also can be used to assist the City 

of Oklahoma City by providing (1) flood-inundation maps, (2) 

hydraulic models, (3) elevation data for the study areas, and (4) 

detailed hydraulic information about reaches in the study areas. The 

75-percent probable maximum flood model scenario is defined as 

an inflow hydrograph of 75 percent of the design flood that equals 

the top of the dam (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2011). 

The sunny-day model scenario is defined as the reservoir at its 

maximum normal operating pool level (Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 2011). 

Description of Selected Dams and Lakes

Characteristics of selected dams were compiled primarily 

from Phase I reports submitted to the OWRB (Oklahoma Water 

Resources Board, 1978a, b, c, 1979a, b, c, d). Additional sources 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2013; City of Oklahoma City, 2014) were 

used to describe the characteristics of Atoka Reservoir and Dolese 

Youth Park Lake.

Atoka Reservoir

Atoka Reservoir is approximately 100 miles (mi) southeast 

of Oklahoma City (fig. 1). The reservoir was constructed in 1959 

by the City of Oklahoma City to serve as a water-supply source 

(U.S. Geological Survey, 2013). The reservoir was impounded by 

an earth-filled dam. The normal pool elevation of this reservoir 

is 590 feet (ft) (North American Vertical Datum of 1988 [NAVD 

881

]), with a maximum pool elevation of 602.5 ft; the lake covers 

approximately 5,477 acres with a storage volume of 123,500 acrefeet (acre-ft) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013). Water from Atoka 

Reservoir is transported into Stanley Draper Lake through a 60-inch 

pipeline (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013).

Dolese Youth Park Lake

Dolese Youth Park Lake is part of a municipal park located in 

the northwestern part of Oklahoma City (fig. 2). This park was once 

a mining site that was donated to the community (City of Oklahoma 

City, 2014). Dolese Youth Park Lake is a 19.68-acre lake that was 

impounded for recreational purposes (City of Oklahoma City, 

2014). The lake is impounded by a concrete and earth-filled dam on 

the northeastern side of the lake. Water flowing through the outlet 

of Dolese Youth Park Lake flows north toward Lake Hefner. 

Dry Creek Detention Reservoir

The Dry Creek Detention Reservoir is in the northwestern part 

of Oklahoma City, east of Lake Hefner (fig. 2). This detention pond 

was built in 1978 with an earth-filled dam section on the northern 

end (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a). Two lateral 

concrete drains divide the reservoir area into three sections and 

carry runoff into a longitudinal concrete drain along the eastern side 

of the detention pond (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a). 

An emergency spillway is located on the northwestern end of the 

earth-filled dam. The Dry Creek Detention Reservoir averages 

1,770 ft in length and 350 ft in width with the top of the dam 

elevation being 1,157 ft (NAVD 88; Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 1978a). Dry Creek Detention Reservoir is dry most of the 

time and serves only as a holding pond during periods of runoff 

(Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a).

1

 Conversions from National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) to 

NAVD 88 were made using an orthometric height conversion tool (National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, 2015).
2 Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma

0 4 8 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

96°40' 96°30' 96°20' 96°10' 96°0' 95°50' 95°40'

34°30'

34°20'

34°10'

Area enlarged

OKLAHOMA

Oklahoma

City

69

271

22

3B

3

48

3

22

48 7D

43

43

199

99

31

48

9 9

7

48A 3

78

31

7

2

22

Atoka

Farris

Lane

Stringtown

Tushka

Flora

Bruno

31B 75

laf15-CSSH00-0684_fig01

SandyCreek

ngt Penni onCreek

Glasses Creek

Caney Creek

Blue River

Little Blue Creek

BellCreek

Little WestBlue Creek

Big Branch

Kansas Creek

R

r

eeder C eek

Johnson Creek

WashitaRiver

Ol C

d hannel

Si mon Creek

Salt Creek

Little Blue River

Fronterhouse Creek

Buzzard Creek

Atoka

Reservoir

Atoka

Reservoir

McGee Creek

Rock Creek

BrierCreek

RayCreek

FobbCreek

Owl Cre ek

KiamichiRiver

North Boggy Creek

Dunford Creek

Chilly Creek

CanyonCreek

CampbellCreek

Potapo C re ek

TenmileCree k

Ingersoll Creek

Cle ar Boggy Creek

Caddo Creek

Buck Creek

Ch ickasaw Creek

C oon Creek

Clear Creek

D elawa reCreek

Harrington Branch

Bois d 'Arc Creek

Spring Creek

Beaverdam

Creek

Davenport Creek

Big Sandy

Creek

Shawnee Creek

Charlie Creek

Mayhew Cre ek

PineCreek

Sand Creek

Goose Creek

Cowpen Creek

Pecan Creek Bee Creek

ElmCreek

Lea der Cree k

B okchitoCreek

CoalC re e k

Cole Creek

Straight Creek

AugustCreek

LongBranch

Tanyard Creek

Crowder Creek

Davis Creek

Wildhorse Creek

Mill Creek

Red River

McGee

Creek

Reservoir

Dumpling Cre ek

Dry

Boggy

Creek

Breadtown

Creek

PONTOTOC

COUNTY

JOHNSTON

COUNTY

MARSHALL

COUNTY BRYAN

COUNTY

CHOCTAW

COUNTY

ATOKA

COUNTY

PUSHMATAHA

COUNTY

COAL

COUNTY

Oklahoma State Plane North Projection, North American Datum, 1983.

Land cover from Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (2011).

Populated places from U.S. Board on Geographic Names (2014).

Highway routes from Oklahoma Department of Transportation (2014).

Oklahoma City incorporated area from U.S. Census Bureau (2014).

Streams from Horizon Systems Corporation (2008) and lakes from Oklahoma Water Resources Board (2014b).

07333010

07334000

07332390

EXPLANATION

Land cover, 2006, and Manning's

 roughness coefficient

Water; 0.034

Developed, open space; 0.045

Developed, urban; 0.18

Barren, crop, pasture, and grassland; 0.048

Forest, scrub/shrub, and wetland; 0.19

U.S. Geological Survey

 streamflow-gaging station

Figure 1. Study area and Manning’s roughness coefficients for dam-breach analysis of a selected dam near Atoka, Oklahoma.
Description of Selected Dams and Lakes 3

Deep For k Creek

£7 7 £7 7

£6 2

7 7

6 2

7 7H

U4

1 3 0

1 5 2

U3 7

6 6

3 7

U9

3

U3 3

UB

U9

U7 7H

U7 4 F

4

U3 7

U7 4

U7 6

U7 4 C

3

U1 0 5

U6 6

7 4

§3 5

§ ̈4 4

§4 0

§4 4

§ ̈2 3 5

§4 4

2 4 0

§ ̈4 0

laf15-CSSH00-0684_fig02

Note: Some streamflow-gaging stations shown on the 

figure were not used in the dam-breach analysis; 

however, the locations of the stations may be 

beneficial in the use of the flood-inundation maps.

#

#

##

#

07229445

07240500

07241520

07159550

07241000

CANADIAN

COUNTY GRADY

COUNTY

MCCLAIN

COUNTY

CLEVELAND

COUNTY

OKLAHOMA

COUNTY

LOGAN

COUNTY

PAYNE

COUNTY

PAYNE

COUNTY

KINGFISHER

COUNTY

Lake Arcadia

Lake

Hefner

Northeast

(Zoo) Lake

Lake

Overholser

Stanley

Draper

Lake

Lake

Thunderbird

Northwest

Oklahoma City

Sludge Lagoon

Will Rogers

Park Holding

Pond

Dry Creek

Detention

Reservoir

Lightning Creek

Holding Pond C

Dolese

Youth

Park Lake

Lightning Creek

Holding Pond A

Gar Creek

Opossum

Creek

P ni Creek

Cox Creek

Fitz gerald Creek

Wildhorse Creek

Coal Creek

Imhoff Creek

Grant Creek

Wolf Creek

Bear Creek

Coon Creek

Ske let onCreek

Blue Creek

B ol ody

R ush Creek

Spring Creek

Fall Creek

Bl uffCreek

So dl ier Creek

RockCreek

Bird Creek

CottonwoodCreek

Chisholm Creek

Hog Creek

Must a ng Creek

Smith Creek

Walnut Creek

Dry

Creek

Lost Creek

Antelope Creek

Lawrie Creek

Little River

Boggy Creek

Pawnee Creek

Choctaw

Creek

Cow Creek

Cowbell Creek

Crutcho Creek

Dave Blue Creek

Silver Creek

Elm Creek

DeerCreek

North Fork Little River

North Fork WalnutCreek

Canad ian Riv er

CimarronRiver

North CanadianRiver

Bluff Creek Canal

Deep Fork Creek

0 4 8 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

97°40'

97°30'

97°20'

35°10' 35°20' 35°30' 35°40' 35°50'

N Oklahoma State Plane North Projection, North American Datum, 1983.

Land cover from Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (2011).

Populated places from U.S. Board on Geographic Names (2014).

Highway routes from Oklahoma Department of Transportation (2014).

Oklahoma City incorporated area from U.S. Census Bureau (2014).

Streams from Horizon Systems Corporation (2008) and lakes from Oklahoma Water Resources Board (2014b).

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

Choctaw

Del City

Jones

Midwest

City

Moore

Norman

"

Mustang

"

Luther

Edmond

The

Village

Nichols

Hills

"

Guthrie

"

Seward

"

Crescent

" " Bethany

Warr Acres

EXPLANATION

Land cover, 2006, and Manning's Oklahoma City incorporated area

 roughness coefficient

Water; 0.034

Developed, open space; 0.045

Developed, urban; 0.18

Barren, crop, pasture, and grassland; 0.048

Forest, scrub/shrub, and wetland; 0.19

U.S. Geolgical Survey

Area enlarged streamflow-gaging station

OKLAHOMA

Figure 2. Study area and Manning’s roughness coefficients for dam-breach analysis of selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
4 Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma

Lake Hefner

Lake Hefner is in Oklahoma County about 8 mi northwest of 

downtown Oklahoma City (fig. 2). Lake Hefner was constructed in 

1947 by the City of Oklahoma City for the main purpose of water 

supply (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013). The lake was formed by 

an earth-filled dam, which is more than 3 mi long with a maximum 

height of 112 ft (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013). The maximum 

storage capacity of this lake is 107,000 acre-ft at an elevation of 

1,209 ft (NAVD 88) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013). The source of 

water for Lake Hefner is water diverted from the North Canadian 

River at Lake Overholser through Bluff Creek Canal and runoff in 

the local drainage basin (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013).

Lake Overholser

Lake Overholser is on the Oklahoma and Canadian County 

line about 8 mi west of downtown Oklahoma City (fig 2). Lake 

Overholser was completed and began storing water in 1917 

(Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979a). In 1923, the dam 

was partly washed out and was rebuilt in 1924 (Oklahoma Water 

Resources Board, 1979a). Lake Overholser is formed by a dam 

flanked by long earth-filled sections. The dam consists of a buttress 

type concrete dam and spillway that is approximately 1,260 ft 

long and 61 ft high with a low earth-filled embankment extending 

3 mi to the west and north (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 

1979a). The outlet of the dam consists of 23 tainter gates and one 

uncontrolled spillway (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979a). 

The maximum storage capacity of Lake Overholser is 17,100 

acre-ft at an elevation of 1,242 ft (NAVD 88; U.S. Geological 

Survey, 2013). A bypass levee separates the North Canadian 

River from the east shore of Lake Overholser and extends 1.75 mi 

northward from the spillway to a concrete rollover dam (Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 1979a). The lake is supplied with water 

from the North Canadian River over the rollover dam (Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 1979a).

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A is in Oklahoma County on 

the south side of Oklahoma City (fig. 2). Lightning Creek Holding 

Pond A was completed in 1977 and is normally dry (Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 1979b). The primary purpose of Lightning 

Creek Holding Pond A is storage of floodwaters during periods 

of heavy rainfall (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979b). 

During periods of heavy rainfall a release gate is opened manually. 

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A consists of a rectangular shaped 

reservoir storage area formed by an earth-filled dam, with the only 

outlet being a concrete conduit. There is no designated spillway, but 

a natural spillway at the southeastern corner allows incoming water 

above an elevation of 1,292 ft (NAVD 88) to bypass the holding 

pond (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979b). Lightning Creek 

Holding Pond A is a relatively small storage pond that is only 18 ft 

above the streambed and has only 541 acre-ft of storage (Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 1979b).

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C is in Oklahoma County 

on the southern side of Oklahoma City (fig. 2). Lightning Creek 

Holding Pond C was completed in 1977 and is normally dry (City 

of Oklahoma City, 2014). The primary purpose of Lightning Creek 

Holding Pond C is temporary storage of floodwaters during periods 

of heavy rainfall (City of Oklahoma City, 2014). Lightning Creek 

Holding Pond C is a relatively small storage pond with a dam that 

has a height of 16 ft above the streambed (City of Oklahoma City, 

2014). The storage capacity of Lightning Creek Holding Pond C 

was calculated to be approximately 187 acre-ft.

Northeast (Zoo) Lake

Northeast (Zoo) Lake is on a tributary to the Deep Fork Creek 

in northeastern Oklahoma City (fig.2). The Northeast (Zoo) Lake 

dam is an earth-filled dam that was built for recreational purposes 

and is approximately 850 ft long with a maximum height of 43 ft 

(Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978b). The spillway of this 

lake is on the eastern abutment of the dam and has an elevation of 

1,098 ft (NAVD 88) (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978b). 

Normal pool levels are maintained by a spillway. The total storage 

from the top of the dam is 800 acre-ft (Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 1978b). 

Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon

The Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon is on a tributary 

to Bluff Creek, north of Lake Hefner, in northwestern Oklahoma 

County (fig. 2). The dam at the Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge 

Lagoon is an earth-filled embankment that was built in 1954 and 

is about 1,265 ft long and 30 ft high (Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 1978c). The maximum storage for the lagoon is 403 acre-ft 

(Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978c). The Northwest 

Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon is used by the City of Oklahoma 

City to recycle and reuse water from the Lake Hefner drinkingwater treatment plant (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978c).

Stanley Draper Lake

Stanley Draper Lake is in Cleveland County about 12 mi 

southeast of downtown Oklahoma City (fig.2). Stanley Draper Lake 

was formed by a compacted earth dam constructed in 1962 for 

the primary purpose of water supply (Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 1979c). The earth-filled embankment is about 6,900 ft long 

and 111 ft high with a 1,000-ft long dike section in the western 

abutment area (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979c). A 

circular intake tower and two 60-inch pipes convey water through a 

conduit and open ditch to a water treatment plant (Oklahoma Water 

Resources Board, 1979c). The top of the dam has an elevation of 

1,201 ft (NAVD 88), and the lake has a maximum storage capacity 

of 148,000 acre-ft of water (U.S. Geological Survey, 2013).

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond is in Oklahoma County 

approximately 4.5 mi northwest of downtown Oklahoma City (fig. 

2). Will Rogers Park Holding Pond was completed in 1967 and is 

normally dry (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979d). During 

periods of heavy rainfall, a release gate is opened manually and 

water flows from this pond into the Deep Fork Creek. The primary 

purpose of Will Rogers Park Holding Pond is temporary storage 

of floodwaters during periods of heavy rainfall in the upper Deep 

Fork Creek area (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979d). The 

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond was formed by an earth-filled dam 

that is approximately 1,050 ft long (Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 1979d). The main spillway is located on a low section of 

the dam and has an elevation of 1,192 ft (NAVD 88; Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 1979d). An additional spillway capacity is 

provided by a paved roadway that crosses the pond at an elevation 

of 1,195 ft (NAVD 88; Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979d). 

Maximum storage capacity is estimated at 323 acre-ft (Oklahoma 

Water Resources Board, 1979d).

Dam-Breach Analysis

Previously collected data used for this analysis included 

streamflow data from USGS streamflow-gaging stations North 

Canadian River below Lake Overholser near Oklahoma City, 

Okla. (07241000), North Canadian River at Britton Road at 

Oklahoma City, Okla. (07241520), Blue River near Connerville, 

Okla. (07332390), and Muddy Boggy Creek near Farris, Okla. 

(07334000). Data from previously collected bathymetric surveys 

of Arcadia Lake, Atoka Reservoir, Lake Hefner, Lake Overholser, 

Lake Thunderbird, and Stanley Draper Lake were used as well as 

previously collected aerial lidar elevation data from 2004 for the 

Oklahoma City area, and 16.4 ft (5 m) Digital Terrain Map (DTM) 

elevation data for the Atoka Reservoir and areas downstream from 

that reservoir. New data used for this analysis included surveying 

data and hydraulic and hydrologic measurements.

Model Selection

The one-dimensional dynamic (unsteady-flow) modeling 

software Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System 

(HEC–RAS; version 4.1) was used to simulate flow of water in 

the study areas (Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2010a). Onedimensional hydraulic analysis, in which the water-surface 

elevation is assumed to be constant over each computational 

cross section, can be performed by using HEC–RAS (Hydrologic 

Engineering Center, 2010a). Given the dynamic nature of a flood 

wave produced by a dam breach, as well as the size and geometry 

of the reservoirs in question, the unsteady-flow water-surface 

profile computation mode was used for all dam-breach scenarios. In 

unsteady-flow mode, HEC–RAS is capable of simulating subcritical 

as well as supercritical flows, both of which are commonly 

encountered in dam-breach analyses (Hydrologic Engineering 

Center, 2010a). For most of the modeled reaches, the flow was 

subcritical, with the velocity of flow being slower than the speed 

that a wave would propagate; however, supercritical flow—flow 

with velocity faster than the wave propagation speed—is likely to 

occur near the location of a dam breach.

Data Inputs for Hydraulic Model

Development of accurate hydraulic models requires accurate 

elevation data to define the hydraulic conditions from which flood 

elevations can be computed. Development of accurate floodinundation maps requires high-resolution elevation data of known 

accuracy. More accurate elevation data can be used to produce 

more accurate flood-inundation maps (Horritt and Bates, 2001). 

Field surveys produce the most accurate elevation data but can be 

time-consuming and expensive to collect over large areas. Light 

detection and ranging (lidar) is an airborne laser-profiling system 

that rapidly produces closely spaced elevation data points that 

define the heights of the ground surface (bare earth) and aboveground features such as vegetation, bridges, and buildings (Barlow 

and others, 2008). The ground data points are computer-processed 

to generate a bare-earth digital-elevation model (DEM) that 

represents the surface of the Earth without above-ground features. 

Bare-earth DEMs are useful for hydraulic modeling over large 

areas.

Elevation Data

Land-surface elevations were determined from a DEM created 

from the most detailed data sources available for the study areas 

(table 1). These data sources included aerial-based lidar surveys, 

aerial-based interferometric synthetic aperture radar (ifsar) surveys, 

aerial-based stereo photogrammetric surveys, and watercraft-based 

sonar bathymetric surveys. The lidar surveys were conducted in 

2004 for about 752 square miles (mi2

) in Oklahoma City, Okla. 

(City of Oklahoma City, 2004), and in 2007 for about 138 mi2 

during leaf-off, snow-free conditions near Norman, Okla. (City of 

Norman, 2007). The resulting bare-earth lidar DEMs each had a 

horizontal resolution of 2 ft. Vertical accuracy of the lidar survey 

points was 0.6 ft. An ifsar survey was conducted downstream 

from Atoka Reservoir in Atoka County during leaf-off conditions 

from February 26, 2007, to March 22, 2007, for about 222 mi2

 in 

Atoka and Choctaw Counties, Okla. (Intermap Technologies, Inc., 

2014). The resulting ifsar DEM had a horizontal resolution of 16.4 

ft (5 m). Vertical accuracy of the ifsar survey points was less than 

6.6 ft (2 m). For other terrestrial areas, mostly in rural settings, 

National Elevation Dataset elevation data from aerial-based stereo 

photogrammetric surveys were obtained as a DEM (U.S. Geological 

Survey, 2014). The USGS DEM had a horizontal resolution of 32.8 

ft (10 m). The USGS DEM vertical accuracy of survey control 

points was less than 9.8 ft (3 m; Gesch and others, 2014).

Sonar bathymetric surveys were available as survey points and 

interpreted elevation contours for Arcadia Lake, Atoka Reservoir, 

Lake Hefner, Lake Overholser, Lake Thunderbird, and Stanley 

Draper Lake (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2014a). The 
Dam-Breach Analysis 5

Table 1. Sources of elevation data used in modeling dam-breach scenarios for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.

[ft, feet; m, meters; lidar, light detection and ranging elevation data; DEM, digital elevation model; ifsar, interferometric synthetic aperture radar survey; 

--, unknown or not applicable]

Source of elevation data Scope

Acquisition 

date

Publication 

date

Collection 

method Data type

Horizontal 

resolution

(ft)

Vertical 

accuracy

(ft)

Contour 

interval

(ft)

Terrestrial

City of Oklahoma City (2004); 

Smith Roberts Baldischwiler, 

LLC (2006)

Urban and rural Oklahoma 

City, Okla.

2004 2004 Aerial lidar DEM and 

contours

2 0.6 2

City of Norman (2007) Rural Norman, Okla. 2007 2007 Aerial lidar DEM and 

contours

2 0.6 2

Intermap Technologies (2014) Atoka and 

Choctaw 

Counties, Okla.

2007 2014 Aerial ifsar Raster 16.4 (5 m) 6.6 (2 m) 1

5

U.S. Geological Survey (2014) Oklahoma 1960s 2014 Aerial stereophotographyRaster 32.8 (10 m) 9.8 (3 m) 1

10

Bathymetric

Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board (2007; 2014a)

Arcadia Lake 2007 2007 Sonar Contours 5 1.32 5

Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board (2014a)

Atoka Reservoir 2001 2001 Sonar Contours 5 -- 5

Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board (2014a)

Lake Hefner 2011 2011 Sonar Contours 5 -- 5

Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board (2014a)

Lake Overholser 2010 2010 Sonar Contours 5 -- 2

Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board (2014a)

Lake Thunderbird 2001 2001 Sonar Contours 20 -- 5

Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board (2014a)

Stanley Draper Lake 2001 2001 Sonar Contours -- -- 5

1

Contours derived from raster data as part of this investigation.

vertical accuracy of the sonar bathymetric survey of Arcadia Lake 

was 1.32 ft (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2007). Though 

vertical accuracy was not specified for the other bathymetric 

surveys, the vertical accuracies for the other bathymetric surveys 

were likely similar to the Arcadia Lake survey because identical 

methods were used. An interpolated DEM was created for each 

lake by using elevation contour data and the Environmental 

Systems Research Institute (Esri) ArcGIS Topo to Raster tool 

(Environmental Systems Research Institute, 2015). 

For modeled reaches where the use of multiple elevation data 

sources was necessary, a composite DEM was developed at the 

data resolution of the most detailed data source. Data of greater 

resolution and accuracy were given preference where available; 

other data sources were resampled and interpolated to match the 

most detailed and accurate data source. The components of the 

composite DEM were projected, if necessary, to Oklahoma State 

Plane North projection (for data near Oklahoma City, Okla.) or 

Oklahoma State Plane South projection (for data near Atoka, 

Okla.). Horizontal units of the DEM were given in U.S. Survey 

Feet referenced to North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83), and 

vertical units were referenced to North American Vertical Datum 

of 1988 (NAVD 88) with orthometric heights given in U.S. Survey 

Feet at a precision of 0.01 ft. 

Survey Data

Additional elevation data were collected by use of a U.S. 

survey-grade kinematic Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver. 

A Trimble Pathfinder ProXH receiver was used, providing 

subcentimeter accuracy for elevation measurements (Trimble 

Navigation Limited, 2003). These additional elevation data were 

collected to verify locations and elevations of bridge crossings. 

Survey data were used to assist in placing bridges spatially in the 

HEC–RAS models. 

The Pathfinder ProXH GPS data were collected by using 

the GEOID03 model and were postprocessed by using Trimble 

Geomatics Office software (Trimble Navigation Limited, 2005). 

The survey data were referenced to the National Geodetic Survey’s 

network of Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) 

network (National Geodetic Survey, 2011).

Hydraulic Data

Bridges and channel roughness have substantial effects on the 

hydraulic properties of streams. Manning’s roughness coefficients, 

values used to describe a channel roughness or resistance to flow 

(Arcement and Schneider, 1989), were determined for the study 

areas using methods from Rendon and others (2012), which are 

described later in this report. Bridge dimensions including width, 

length, pier diameter, pier location, bridge surface to low chord 

(which is the lowest point of the bridge deck), and bridge surface 

to land surface were measured at all locations in the study areas by 

using an engineer-type steel tape. Photographs were taken at each 

bridge site in multiple directions to document conditions and to 

provide a visual check for cross sections in the model.

Hydrologic Data

A model was required for each dam-breach scenario: (1) a 

dam breach during 75 percent of the probable maximum flood (75 

percent PMF), and (2) a dam breach during normal-flow conditions 

without precipitation (sunny day). Both of these scenarios have 

been established by the OWRB as requirements for dam-breach 

studies (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2011).

Streamflow and water-level data from USGS streamflowgaging stations were used as hydrologic inputs or to verify 

hydrologic inputs for the HEC–RAS models (table 2). Streamflow 

data collected at USGS streamflow-gaging stations North 

Canadian River below Lake Overholser near Oklahoma City, 

Okla. (07241000), and North Canadian River at Britton Road 

at Oklahoma City, Okla. (07241520), were used as hydrologic 

inputs for the HEC–RAS model to help quantify the sunny-day 

dam-breach scenario for the Lake Overholser models. Streamflow 

data from the Blue River near Connerville, Okla. (07332390), 

streamflow-gaging station were used to estimate model inflows, and 

data from the Muddy Boggy Creek near Farris, Okla. (07334000), 

streamflow-gaging station were used to verify flood elevations for 

the Atoka Reservoir models (table 2).

Previous studies such as the Phase I reports submitted to the 

OWRB were used to quantify the 75-percent PMF flow rates for 

all the dams except Dolese Youth Park Lake and Atoka Reservoir 

(Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a, b, c, 1979a, b, c, d). For 

Dolese Youth Park Lake, a reference site (Lightning Creek Holding 

Pond C) was selected, and a drainage area ratio method was used to 

calculate the 75-percent PMF flow values. The ratio of the drainage 

areas (0.38) was multiplied by the 75-percent PMF hydrograph 

for Lightning Creek Holding Pond C (Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, 1979c). For Atoka Reservoir, a selected reference site (Blue 

River near Connerville, Okla., 07332390) was used to calculate the 

PMF flow rates. The contributing drainage area for Blue River near 

Connerville, Okla. (07332390), is 162 mi2

 (U.S. Geological Survey, 

2013) compared with 171 mi2 (U.S. Geological Survey, 2015) 

for Atoka Reservoir. The potential peak discharge was estimated 

for Atoka Reservoir from an eastern Oklahoma peak discharge 

envelope curve developed by Tortorelli and McCabe (2001). This 

estimated potential discharge value was then incorporated into a 

reference hydrograph from the Blue River near Connerville, Okla. 

(07332390), streamflow-gaging station. No local inflows from 

tributaries were assumed for any of the modeled reaches for the 

75-percent PMF and the sunny-day dam-breach scenarios.

Model Development

Development of an unsteady-flow HEC–RAS model requires 

four major types of data: (1) cross-section elevation data, (2) 

Manning’s roughness coefficients, (3) bridge geometry, and (4) 

flow and boundary conditions. These datasets and HEC–GeoRAS 

(Hydraulic Engineering Center, 2011), a graphical interface 

program between ArcGIS and HEC–RAS, were used to develop the 

input files for the HEC–RAS models. Data from previous hydraulic 

and hydrologic studies and field surveys were also incorporated into 

the HEC–RAS models.

Cross Sections

The HEC–RAS software requires cross sections for watersurface computations. Cross sections were delineated across the 

flood plains and were placed at intervals approximated by using the 

Samuels (1989) method (selected cross sections are shown in apps. 

2–12). Each cross section ideally is perpendicular to streamflow 

at the main channel, intersects the main channel only once, and 

does not intersect another cross section (Hydrologic Engineering 

Center, 2010b); keeping the cross sections perfectly perpendicular 

to elevation contours and streamflow at the main channel was not 

possible at some locations. Elevation data along cross sections were 

extracted as point elevations from the DEM and were formatted for 

use in HEC–RAS models by using HEC–GeoRAS. 

The HEC–RAS software allows only 500 elevation points per 

cross section; thus, the cross-section-points filter tool of the HEC–

RAS software (Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2010a) was used to 

resample both the lidar-derived and the interpolated cross sections 

down to fewer than 500 points. Use of the cross-section-points filter 

tool preserved the general shape of a hypothetical cross section as 

it filtered the number of points (fig. 3). A 10-elevation-point buffer 

was used to account for ineffective flow areas and for any levees 

defined in the model that might be added after the cross-sectionpoints filter tool was used.

Manning’s Roughness Coefficients

In the HEC–RAS software, values of Manning’s roughness 

coefficient, which is related to the friction created by the roughness 

of the channel, can be varied horizontally across any given cross 

section. Manning’s roughness coefficient values were determined 

similar to methods described by Barnes (1967), Arcement and 

Schneider (1989), and Coon (1998). Derived Manning’s roughness 

coefficient values were determined by the following techniques 

(1) the 2006 National Land Cover Dataset (Multi-Resolution Land 

Characteristics Consortium, 2011) was retrieved for the study 

areas (figs. 1–2), and (2) because HEC–RAS can handle only 20 

Manning’s roughness coefficient values per cross section, the 

downloaded land-cover data were grouped and reclassified into five 
6 Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma

Table 2. U.S. Geological Survey streamflow-gaging stations used in developing dam-breach models for selected dams in Oklahoma City, 

Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.

Station 

number Station name Elevation(feet) Period of record Purpose

07241000 North Canadian River below Lake Overholser near Oklahoma 

City, Okla.

1,195.14 1952–68, 1969–present (2014) Calibration

07241520 North Canadian River at Britton Road at Oklahoma City, Okla. 1,109.84 1988–present (2014) Calibration

07332390 Blue River near Connervile, Okla. 892.22 1976–present (2014) Reference station

07334000 Muddy Boggy Creek near Farris, Okla. 439.84 1937–present (2014) Verification

970

980

990

1,000

1,010

1,020

1,030

Elevation, in feet above the North American Vertical Datum of 1988

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000

Distance, in feet

Lidar derived cross section without use of point filter

Lidar derived cross section with use of point filter

EXPLANATION

Figure 3. A hypothetical cross section derived with light detection and ranging (lidar) with and without use of the cross-section-point filter tool in 

the Hydrologic Engineering Center River Analysis (HEC–RAS) modeling software (Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2010a).

simplified land cover classes (figs. 1–2, table 3). The Manning’s 

roughness coefficients were then altered when flows from the Lake 

Overholser sunny-day modeled scenario were calibrated based 

on USGS streamflow data at the North Canadian River below 

Lake Overholser near Oklahoma City, Okla. (07241000), and 

North Canadian River at Britton Road at Oklahoma City, Okla. 

(07241520), streamflow-gaging stations (table 3). The calibrated 

Manning’s roughness coefficients were used in all dam-breach 

models. The mean channel Manning’s roughness coefficient value 

was 0.034, and the overland Manning’s roughness coefficient values 

ranged from 0.045 to 0.19 for all the models. 

Flow and Boundary Conditions

Initial flow values, input hydrographs, and downstream 

boundary conditions must be set in a HEC–RAS model. The 

initial flow values used as the flow-rate input for sunny-day 

dam-breach scenarios are listed in table 4. The initial flow for 

the Lake Overholser dam breach 75 percent PMF model was set 

to 800 cubic feet per second (ft3

/s), which is less than the 2-year 

peak flow and the approximate 5 percent probability of flow 

exceedance recorded at the USGS streamflow-gaging station 

North Canadian River below Lake Overholser near Oklahoma 

Table 3. Manning’s roughness coefficients for the calibrated models of the North Canadian River for Lake Overholser in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Land use 

code Name Land use class

Calibrated Manning’s

roughness coefficent

Initial Manning’s 

roughness coefficent

11 Open water 1 0.034 0.030

21 Developed open space 2 0.045 0.035

22 Developed low intensity 3 0.180 0.100

23 Developed medium intensity 3 0.180 0.100

24 Developed high intensity 3 0.180 0.100

31 Barren land 4 0.048 0.040

41 Deciduous forest 5 0.190 0.150

42 Evergreen forest 5 0.190 0.150

52 Scrub/shrub 5 0.190 0.150

71 Grassland 4 0.048 0.040

81 Pasture 4 0.048 0.040

82 Cultivated crop land 4 0.048 0.040

95 Wetland 5 0.190 0.150

Table 4. Hydrologic Engineering Centers River Analysis System (HEC-RAS) input parameters for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma,

and near Atoka, Okla.

Model identifier Initial flow values upstream 

boundary condition

Hydrograph 

source

Friction slope downstream 

boundary condition

Atoka Reservoir 300 Blue River near Connerville1 0.000010

Dolese Youth Park Lake 200 Drainage area ratio method2 0.000060

Dry Creek Detention Reservoir 35 Phase I report3 0.000100

Lake Hefner 1,500 Phase I report3 0.000040

Lake Overholser 800 Phase I report3 0.000400

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A 50 Phase I report3 0.000800

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C 50 Phase I report3 0.000800

Northeast (Zoo) Lake 300 Phase I report3 0.000230

Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon 250 Phase I report3 0.000900

Stanley Draper Lake 600 Phase I report3 0.002000

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond 200 Phase I report3 0.001000

1

Extreme peak from Tortorelli and McCabe (2001) combined with Blue River near Connerville, Okla., reference hydrograph.

2

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C flow values multiplied by drainage area ratio.

3

Phase I reports (Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a, b, c, 1979a, b, c, d).

City, Okla. (07241000; fig. 2) (Lewis and Esralew, 2009). The 

800-ft3

/s initial flow value also was used as the flow-rate input 

for the sunny-day dam-breach scenario. The initial flow for the 

Atoka Reservoir dam-breach model was set to 300 ft3

/s, which 

is less than the 2-year peak flow and the approximate 30 percent 

probability of flow exceedance recorded at the USGS streamflowgaging station Muddy Boggy Creek near Farris, Okla. (07334000; 

fig. 1) (Lewis and Esralew, 2009). The 300-ft3

/s initial flow value 

also was used as the flow-rate input for the sunny-day dam-breach 

scenario. The input hydrograph for the 75-percent PMF for most of 

the individual models was obtained from previous reports such as 

the Phase I dam breach inspection reports submitted to the OWRB 

(Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a, b, c, 1979a, b, c, d). The 

downstream boundary conditions for each modeled reach are also 

listed in table 4. 

Dam-Breach Parameters

The 75-percent PMF dam-breach scenario was modeled as 

an overtopping dam failure whereas the sunny-day scenario was 

modeled as a piping failure. An estimate of the dam-breach bottom 

width and time of full failure for use in the selected dam-breach 
Sources of Uncertainty in Flood-Inundation Maps 7

models was obtained by using two different dam-breach-sizing 

equations: 

(1) Von Thun and Gillette (1990)

B = 2.5hw+Cb (1)

where B is the average dam-breach-bottom width, in 

meters;

hw is the volume of water above the dam-breach invert 

at time of failure, in cubic meters; and

Cb is an offset factor that is a function of reservoir 

volume (table 5); and

(2) Froehlich (2008)

(2)

where B is the average dam-breach-bottom width, in feet;

K is an overtopping multiplier with 1.3 being used 

for overtopping and 1.0 being used for a piping 

failure;

Vw is the volume of water above the dam-breach invert 

at time of failure, in acre-feet; and

Hb is the height of the dam breach, in feet.

For each of those dam-breach-width determination equations 

there is a corresponding time of failure equation:

(1) Von Thun and Gillette (1990)

For highly erodible dams (3)

For erosion-resistant dams (4)

where t is the time to full failure, in hours;

B is the average dam-breach-bottom width, in meters; 

and

hw is the volume of water above the dam-breach invert 

at time of failure, in cubic meters; and

(2) Froehlich (2008)

0.32 0.04 8.239 B KV H = w b

/(4 61) w t B h = +

/(4 ) w t B h =

Table 5. Values of Cb offset factor, a function of reservoir volume (Von 

Thun and Gillette, 1990), for the calibrated models of selected dams in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.

[<, less than; >, greater than]

Size of reservoir 

(cubic meters)

Cb

(meters)

<1.23*106 6.1

1.23*106

-6.17*106 18.3

6.17*106

-1.23*107 42.7

>1.23*107 54.9

2 3.664 * w

b

V

t

gH = (5)

where t is the time to full failure, in hours;

Vw is the volume of water stored above the bottom of 

the breach, in acre-feet;

g is the gravitational acceleration = 32.2 feet per 

second squared (ft/sec2); and 

Hb is the height of the dam breach, in feet.

A summary of the resultant dam-breach parameters for 

each of these respective equations is listed in table 6. Each set of 

resultant dam-breach parameters was evaluated at the dam-breach 

location for the resulting flow hydrograph, with the selected model 

parameters for each of the dams yielding a conservative estimate 

of the dam breach. Most selected dam-breach parameters were 

within the range of the VonThun and Gillette (1990) and Froehlich 

(2008) methods except Dry Creek Detention Reservoir, Lightning 

Creek Holding Pond A, and Will Rogers Park Holding Pond (table 

6). The selected dam-breach parameters at these dams were altered 

to improve model stability. The Atoka Reservoir dam-breach 

parameters were estimated using the guidelines from the BOSS 

DAMBRK user’s manual (BOSS, 1999). 

Calibration and Sensitivity Analysis

The Lake Overholser model was the only model with suitable 

downstream streamflow-gaging station data to use for calibration. 

The Lake Overholser model was calibrated by using available data 

from USGS streamflow-gaging station North Canadian River below 

Lake Overholser near Oklahoma City, Okla. (07241000; fig. 2), 

and North Canadian River at Britton Road at Oklahoma City, Okla. 

(07241520; fig. 2). Measured channel cross sections from discharge 

measurements made during the same year as the lidar data were 

incorporated into the model at the gaged locations. Steady-state 

simulations were run at the 2-, 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year 

recurrence intervals and compared to measured stage-discharge 

relations at the streamflow-gaging stations. Manning’s roughness 

coefficients were then adjusted (table 3) until there was agreement 

between the measured stage-discharge relations and the calibrated 

model. These calibrated Manning’s roughness coefficients were 

used for all models. 

A sensitivity analysis was performed on the different dambreach parameters (dam-breach-bottom width and time to full 

failure), as described in the “Dam-Breach Parameters” section of 

this report, as well as on the Manning’s roughness coefficients. 

Because of the topography of this area (flat cross sections with 

relatively steep sides), percent change in total inundated area was 

not used as the determinant in the Manning’s roughness coefficient 

sensitivity analysis. For example, the percent difference in floodinundated area between the 75-percent PMF dam-breach scenario 

and the sunny-day dam-breach scenario is 22.4 percent for the 

North Canadian basin downstream from Lake Overholser. For the 

Manning’s roughness coefficient sensitivity analysis, the time to 

peak and peak stage at each of the bridges were determined. 

Table 6. Values of dam-breach parameters used for selected dams in 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla. 

[ft, feet; hr, hours; values in bold type are outside the range of breach parameters 

computed by methods described in Von Thun and Gillette (1990) and Froehlich 

(2008)]

Parameter estimation 

equation

Dam-breachbottom width 

(ft)

Time to full 

failure 

(hr)

Atoka Reservoir

BOSS DAMBRK user’s manual (1999) 0.5 to 4 times 

dam height

0.5–4.0

Selected model parameter 52.5 1.8

Dolese Youth Park Lake

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 62.5 0.5

Froehlich (2008) 48.8 0.3

Selected model parameter 55.6 0.4

Dry Creek Detention Reservoir

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 205.5 0.9

Froehlich (2008) 520.4 2.6

Selected model parameter 120.0 0.5

Lake Hefner

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 385.6 1.1

Froehlich (2008) 520.4 2.6

Selected model parameter 453.0 1.9

Lake Overholser

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 245.9 1.9

Froehlich (2008) 334.4 4.3

Selected model parameter 291.0 3.4

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 63.7 0.7

Froehlich (2008) 80.3 0.7

Selected model parameter 72.0 0.9

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 51.0 0.7

Froehlich (2008) 64.6 0.7

Selected model parameter 57.8 0.7

Northeast (Zoo) Lake

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 125.0 0.5

Froehlich (2008) 105.6 0.4

Selected model parameter 115.0 0.5

Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 96.1 0.5

Froehlich (2008) 83.7 0.4

Selected model parameter 89.9 0.5

Stanley Draper Lake

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 425.1 1.1

Froehlich (2008) 580.7 2.5

Selected model parameter 503.0 1.6

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond

Von Thun and Gillette (1990) 75.0 0.7

Froehlich (2008) 69.1 2.4

Selected model parameter 28.5 1.0

Postprocessing of Model Results

After each of the models was finalized, the results were imported 

into a Geographic Information System (GIS) by using HEC–

GeoRAS (Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2011), a set of utilities 

for postprocessing HEC–RAS model outputs in Esri ArcGIS. Lidarderived and 5-m DTM cross sections were used to generate the floodinundation maps. Areas where unmodeled tributaries join the modeled 

area were adjusted to account for backwater to the confluences to 

match the elevation contour lines equal to the water-surface elevation 

at the cross section nearest to each confluence.

Flood-Inundation Mapping

Water-surface profiles for the 75-percent PMF and sunny-day 

dam-breach scenarios were developed for all of the HEC–RAS 

models. Because of the size of the study areas, the maps of floodinundation areas were subdivided into map tiles at a 1:16,000 

scale for Dolese Youth Park Lake, Dry Creek Detention Reservoir, 

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A, Lightning Creek Holding Pond C, 

Northeast (Zoo) Lake, Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon, 

and Will Rogers Park Holding Pond; 1:24,000 scale for Lake 

Overholser and Stanley Draper Lake; and a 1:32,000 scale for Atoka 

Reservoir and Lake Hefner (figs. 4–5). Map tiles showing model 

cross sections, modeled bridges (including culverts), postprocessed 

for the 75-percent PMF and sunny-day inundated areas, and times 

to peak stage at bridges for the 75-percent PMF are presented in 

appendixes 2–12. Maximum flood-inundation elevations and times 

to peak stage for each bridge for the 75-percent PMF and sunny-day 

dam-breach scenarios are listed in table 7. 

Points of interest such as government and community buildings, 

public works facilities, schools, hospitals, hotels, places of worship, 

and other locations where people frequently gather were mapped 

using Google Earth and are shown for reference on the inundation 

maps (apps. 2–12). Only selected points of interest are shown on the 

inundation maps. Parks, which are commonly found in low-lying, 

flood-prone areas, also are shown for reference on the inundation 

maps (apps. 2–12). 

Sources of Uncertainty in Flood-Inundation 

Maps

The uncertainty associated with flood-inundation maps may be 

introduced by errors in elevation or hydraulic data or in the modeling 

system used to create the flood-inundation map. Data necessary to 

quantify these errors are seldom available; thus, stringent qualityassurance methods are vital for hydraulic modeling. The potentially 

flooded areas, limits of flooding, and flood-wave traveltimes are 

approximate and should be used only as guidelines for management 

decisions. Actual areas inundated will depend on the particular 

dam-failure mechanism and preexisting flood conditions and may 

differ from the areas shown on the maps (Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 2007). For this reason, isolated inundation areas (those 

disconnected from the main inundation area) were included on the 

inundation maps. 
8 Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma

laf15-CSSH00-0684_fig04

Area enlarged

OKLAHOMA

96°10'

96°0'

95°50'

34°0' 34°10' 34°20' 34°30' 34°40'

0 4 8 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

N EXPLANATION

Study area map-panel scale

1:32,000

U.S. Geological Survey

 streamflow-gaging station

07333010

07334000

69

75

3B

3

131

43

70E

70

7

109

22

31

43

Atoka

Reservoir

Atoka

Reservoir

Chippewa Creek

Roc Ck

reek

Sugar Creek

Ra yCre ek

Keel Creek

SaltCreek

Brushy

Creek

Whitegrass Cree k

Breadtown Creek

Little Caney Creek

Lick Creek

North Boggy Creek

CaddoCreek

PointerCreek

Muddy BoggyCreek

Potapo Creek

Chilly

Creek

Campbell Creek

L

mi es ot ne Creek

Clear Creek

K ni gCreek

Cold Springs Creek

I ngersollCreek

McGee Creek

Mail Rider Creek

Tenmile Creek

Nolleytuby Creek

Chickasaw Cree

Delawa

k

re Creek

DavisCreek

P rairi eCreek

MillCreek

Buck Creek

Harrington Branch

FivemileCreek

Boisd'Arc C reek

Coal Creek

Davenp ort Creek

Bea verdam Creek

Shawnee Creek

Mayhew Creek

Sand

Cre ek

CowpenCreek

Pine Creek

S andyCreek

Beck Creek

Bokchit o Creek

Straight Creek

Cle ar Boggy

Creek

August Creek

Tanyard Creek

LongBranch

BakerBranch

Caney Creek

FronterhouseCreek

McGee

Creek

Reservoir

Owl

Creek

Dunford Creek

Brier

Creek

2-4

2-1

2-2

2-3

2-5

2-6

2-7

2-8

2-9

Farris

Lane

Bruno

Flora

Stringtown

BRYAN

COUNTY

CHOCTAW

COUNTY

PUSHMATAHA

COUNTY

PITTSBURG

COUNTY

COAL

COUNTY

ATOKA

COUNTY

Oklahoma State Plane North Projection, North American Datum, 1983.

Land cover from Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (2011).

Populated places from U.S. Board on Geographic Names (2014).

Highway routes from Oklahoma Department of Transportation (2014).

Oklahoma City incorporated area from U.S. Census Bureau (2014).

Streams from Horizon Systems Corporation (2008) and lakes from Oklahoma Water Resources Board (2014b).

Figure 4. Extents for figures in appendix 2 that show flood-inundation areas from dam-breach analysis of Atoka Reservoir near Atoka, Oklahoma.
Dam-Breach Analysis 9

Oklahoma State Plane North Projection, North American Datum, 1983.

Land cover from Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium (2011).

Populated places from U.S. Board on Geographic Names (2014).

Highway routes from Oklahoma Department of Transportation (2014).

Oklahoma City incorporated area from U.S. Census Bureau (2014).

Streams from Horizon Systems Corporation (2008) and lakes from Oklahoma Water Resources Board (2014b).

8-1

7-1 8-2

7-2

12-1

9-2

9-1 12-3

3-1

12-2

10-1

4-1

4-2

9-3

9-4

9-5

6-1

6-2

6-3

6-9

6-8

6-7

6-6

6-4

11-2 11-1 11-3

11-4

11-5

11-6

11-7

11-8

6-5

5-1

5-2

5-3

5-4

5-5

5-6

EXPLANATION

Oklahoma City

 incorporated area

Study area map-panel scale

1:16,000

1:24,000

1:32,000

U.S. Geological Survey

 streamflow-gaging station

Gar Creek

Opossum

Creek

PinCreek

Cox Creek

Fitz gerald Creek

Wildhorse Creek

Coal Creek

Imhoff Creek

Grant Creek

Wolf Creek

Bear Creek

Coon Creek

Ske let onCreek

Blue Creek

B ol ody

R ush Creek

Spring Creek

Fall Creek

So dl ier Creek

RockCreek

Bird Creek

CottonwoodCreek

Chisholm Creek

Hog Creek

Must a ng Creek

Smith Creek

Walnut Creek

Dry

Creek

Lost Creek

Antelope Creek

Lawrie Creek

Little River

Boggy Creek

Pawnee Creek

Choctaw

Creek

Cow Creek

Cowbell Creek

Crutcho Creek

Dave Blue Creek

Silver Creek

Elm Creek

DeerCreek

North Fork Little River

North Fork WalnutCreek

Canad ian Riv er

Cimarr on River

North Canadian River

Lake Arcadia

Lake

Hefner

Northeast

(Zoo) Lake

Lake

Overholser

Stanley

Draper

Lake

Lake

Thunderbird

Northwest

Oklahoma City

Sludge Lagoon

Will Rogers

Park Holding

Pond

Dry Creek

Detention

Reservoir

Lightning Creek

Holding Pond C

Dolese

Youth

Park Lake

Lightning Creek

Holding Pond A

Bluff Creek Canal

Deep Fork Creek

Deep For k Creek

PAYNE

COUNTY

PAYNE

COUNTY

KINGFISHER

COUNTY

LOGAN

COUNTY

CANADIAN

COUNTY GRADY

COUNTY

MCCLAIN

COUNTY

OKLAHOMA

COUNTY

CLEVELAND

COUNTY

Edmond

Seward

Norman

Moore

Mustang

Midwest

City

Del City

Choctaw

Jones

Luther

Bethany

Warr Acres

Nichols

Hills

The

Village

Guthrie

Crescent

97°40'

97°30'

97°20'

35°10' 35°20' 35°30' 35°40' 35°50'

0 4 8 12 MILES

0 4 8 12 KILOMETERS

N

£ 77

£6 2

77

62

4

U130

152

37

66

U9

3

33

U9

74F

U4

37

74

U76

74C

3

66

U74

§ ̈35

§44

40

44

234

44

§240

40

37

77 77H 77H

UV105

laf15-CSSH00-0684_fig05

07229445

07240500

07241520

07159550

07241000

Area enlarged

OKLAHOMA

Figure 5. Extents for figures in appendixes 2–12 that show flood-inundation areas from dam-breach analysis of selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
10 Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma

Table 7. Maximum flood-inundation elevation and time for 75 percent probable maximum flood (PMF) and sunny-day dam-breach 

scenarios for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.—Continued

[ft, feet; hh:mm, hours and minutes; >, greater than]

Bridge 

name

Cross-section 

index number1

75 percent 

PMF stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

75 percent PMF

Sunny-day 

stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

sunny day

Atoka Reservoir

U.S. Highway 69 467,765 577.93 02:00 540.67 04:20

Railroad Bridge 467,408 569.14 02:05 540.40 04:25

Tellico Road 465,753 561.33 03:05 539.00 04:35

Half Bank Road 390,315 527.21 22:40 503.15 29:25

McGee Creek Road 363,544 510.57 26:40 484.37 46:45

Private Bridge 325,870 494.68 29:35 471.60 62:30

State Highway 3 315,258 488.67 30:05 469.07 68:00

Unnamed Road 202,604 449.53 61:40 442.58 2>96:00

Dolese Youth Park Lake

Meridian Avenue 30,650 1,272.72 03:06 1,266.29 00:30

Meridian Avenue 29,677 1,272.72 03:06 1,245.46 00:30

60th Street 28,835 1,242.43 03:06 1,240.43 00:35

Northwest Expressway 25,532 1,212.74 04:31 1,210.85 00:40

Dry Creek Detention Reservoir

Quail Creek Road 75,271 1,144.29 00:25 1,142.58 00:35

122nd Street 73,465 1,137.16 00:30 1,134.37 01:00

Fairway Culvert 72,722 1,133.55 00:35 1,132.78 01:25

Quail Creek Golf Course Bridge 71,754 1,124.66 00:40 1,119.57 01:25

Twisted Oak Road 71,428 1,124.59 00:40 1,118.34 01:30

Quail Creek Golf Course Bridge 71,036 1,125.74 00:50 1,117.01 01:30

Quail Creek Golf Course Bridge 70,090 1,113.48 00:55 1,109.26 01:35

Quail Creek Golf Course Bridge 68,730 1,104.62 01:05 1,100.39 01:40

Quail Creek Golf Course Bridge 68,412 1,104.10 01:05 1,099.32 01:40

Lake Hefner Parkway 66,650 1,094.36 01:05 1,090.30 01:40

John Kilpatrick Turnpike and ramp 66,157 1,091.03 01:10 1,086.80 01:40

150th Street 52,795 1,066.66 01:50 1,058.90 03:35

164th Street 44,906 1,055.67 03:20 1,051.77 05:05

Lake Hefner

122nd Street 70,333 1,127.92 01:55 1,125.18 01:45

Val Verde Drive 65,910 1,117.15 02:00 1,114.69 01:55

John Kilpatrick Turnpike 61,574 1,108.77 02:00 1,107.59 01:55

Gaillardia Golf Course Bridge 59,586 1,098.97 02:10 1,096.66 02:05

150th Street 54,487 1,089.81 02:15 1,088.08 02:10

164th Street 46,617 1,077.59 02:30 1,075.45 02:25

178th Street 36,991 1,061.41 02:50 1,059.32 02:40

Covell Road 18,373 1,052.96 04:40 1,048.49 04:50

Portland Avenue 13,819 1,052.85 04:40 1,048.33 04:55

Sorghum Mill Road 10,691 1,052.76 04:40 1,048.22 04:55

Waterloo Road 3199,517 1,037.94 404:50 51,034.94 05:05

Charter Oak Road 175,745 1,032.36 05:10 1,029.66 05:30

Pennsylvania Avenue 161,985 1,025.27 405:20 51,019.27 06:20

Western Avenue 150,196 1,024.17 05:35 1,017.82 06:30

Seward Road 125,517 1,006.70 06:10 1,000.04 07:05

Eastern Road 109,214 998.38 06:30 991.74 08:10

Phillips/Academy Road 97,761 993.44 06:40 986.58 08:25

Industrial Road 63,843 973.54 06:55 968.43 08:45

5th Street 42,879 963.11 307:55 960.09 10:35

State Highway 33 41,934 971.04 08:20 962.13 11:40

College Avenue 39,760 970.50 08:20 961.31 11:40

Railroad Bridge 20,062 969.25 08:20 959.55 11:45

Sooner Road 18,531 969.21 08:20 959.41 11:45

Table 7. Maximum flood-inundation elevation and time for the 75-percent probable maximum flood (PMF) and sunny-day dam-breach scenarios for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.

[ft, feet; hh:mm, hours and minutes; >, greater than]

Bridge 

name

Cross-section 

index number1

75 percent 

PMF stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

75 percent PMF

Sunny-day 

stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

sunny day

Lake Overholser

Northwest 10th Street 244,632 1,242.66 02:40 1,220.45 04:00

Railroad Bridge 238,434 1,237.01 03:00 1,216.19 04:40

West Reno Avenue 236,457 1,236.95 03:00 1,214.66 04:50

Interstate 40 234,581 1,234.14 03:20 1,214.80 04:50

Council Road 227,339 1,227.11 03:30 1,209.21 05:40

MacArthur Boulevard 212,772 1,220.58 05:20 1,198.08 08:00

Meridian Avenue 207,372 1,216.45 06:00 1,187.45 08:30

Portland Avenue 201,929 1,213.53 06:40 1,184.19 08:40

Interstate 44 198,172 1,211.58 06:50 1,181.46 08:40

May Avenue 195,843 1,208.93 07:10 1,176.45 09:10

Agnew Avenue 192,611 1,205.57 07:40 1,175.56 09:20

Pennsylvania Avenue 190,486 1,202.93 08:10 1,174.75 09:20

Exchange Avenue 187,305 1,199.76 08:40 1,173.27 09:30

Railroad Bridge 186,166 1,198.77 08:50 1,172.65 09:30

Western Avenue 184,218 1,197.88 09:00 1,171.48 10:20

Walker Avenue 181,102 1,196.53 09:00 1,167.29 10:40

Robinson Avenue 179,596 1,195.07 09:10 1,166.78 10:50

Shields Boulevard 178,887 1,194.17 09:10 1,166.57 10:50

15th Street 177,841 1,190.79 09:20 1,166.32 11:00

Pipe Bridge 177,031 1,190.55 09:20 1,165.87 11:00

Railroad Bridge 175,206 1,188.12 09:30 1,165.45 11:00

Lincoln Boulevard 174,374 1,186.91 09:40 1,165.27 11:00

Interstate 35 170,982 1,185.24 09:40 1,164.20 11:30

Eastern Avenue 166,217 1,183.51 09:50 1,163.34 11:30

Reno Avenue 164,115 1,179.97 09:50 1,161.50 11:40

Interstate 40 eastbound 162,502 1,176.97 09:50 1,160.25 11:40

Interstate 40 westbound 161,683 1,176.64 09:50 1,159.65 11:40

Railroad Bridge 159,387 1,172.83 11:00 1,158.16 11:50

4th Street 158,701 1,172.38 11:00 1,157.64 12:00

10th Street 154,380 1,170.36 11:20 1,154.97 12:20

23rd Street 146,741 1,167.72 11:30 1,151.18 15:20

36th Street 141,291 1,163.32 12:20 1,150.18 16:50

Midwest Boulevard 126,973 1,154.90 12:50 1,143.39 21:20

63rd Street 118,105 1,149.45 13:20 1,136.74 24:50

Britton Road 102,658 1,145.66 13:30 1,128.51 27:30

Hefner Road 92,737 1,137.44 14:10 1,123.66 29:40

122nd Street 79,090 1,130.94 14:50 1,118.00 30:20

Hiwassee Road 57,889 1,125.90 15:10 1,108.66 33:20

Britton Road 36,801 1,110.49 16:10 1,098.17 34:50

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A

Broadway Avenue 45,492 1,282.48 00:45 1,280.31 01:05

Walker Avenue 40,777 1,269.13 01:00 1,266.91 01:15

Trafalgar Drive 39,950 1,266.31 01:05 1,265.07 01:20

Shartel Avenue 39,249 1,263.28 01:10 1,262.15 01:25

89th Street 36,805 1,254.04 01:25 1,253.11 01:35

Western Avenue 35,132 1,250.24 01:30 1,248.65 01:45

84th Street 33,548 1,246.18 01:30 1,243.34 01:55

Western Avenue 30,856 1,237.78 01:40 1,231.67 02:00

Interstate 240 Service Road 28,671 1,233.87 02:00 1,225.63 02:15

67th Street 25,830 1,225.84 02:10 1,216.34 02:20

59th Street 22,493 1,210.82 02:20 1,204.33 02:25

Walker Avenue 20,380 1,208.07 02:20 1,201.00 02:30
Dam-Breach Analysis 11

Table 7. Maximum flood-inundation elevation and time for 75 percent probable maximum flood (PMF) and sunny-day dam-breach 

scenarios for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.—Continued

[ft, feet; hh:mm, hours and minutes; >, greater than]

Bridge 

name

Cross-section 

index number1

75 percent 

PMF stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

75 percent PMF

Sunny-day 

stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

sunny day

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A—Continued

51st Street 18,419 1,205.24 02:25 1,198.55 02:35

Sage Avenue 17,291 1,203.44 02:25 1,195.83 02:40

Unnamed Road 16,949 1,202.16 02:25 1,195.70 02:40

44th Street 15,406 1,200.50 02:30 1,194.47 02:40

Santa Fe Avenue 14,842 1,199.43 02:30 1,193.67 02:40

Draper Park Bridge 14,118 1,197.29 02:35 1,190.82 02:45

Santa Fe Avenue 13,560 1,196.22 02:35 1,188.53 02:50

Grand Boulevard 12,090 1,194.88 02:35 1,187.06 02:55

29th Street 9,418 1,190.45 02:45 1,184.01 03:00

28th Street 8,998 1,189.22 02:45 1,183.07 03:00

27th Street 8,485 1,188.11 02:45 1,181.85 03:00

25th Street 7,480 1,181.47 02:50 1,179.60 03:00

23rd Street 6,633 1,185.46 02:50 1,177.07 03:05

18th Street 3,945 1,175.14 02:55 1,169.79 03:05

15th Street 2,934 1,168.03 02:55 1,162.67 03:05

Foot Bridge 2,623 1,166.19 02:55 1,160.56 03:10

Lightning Creek Holding Pond C

81st Street 33,441 1,250.59 00:35 1,249.30 00:35

81st Street 31,523 1,241.50 00:45 1,239.96 00:45

Western Avenue 30,856 1,237.78 00:45 1,233.88 00:45

Interstate 240 Service Road 28,671 1,233.72 00:55 1,226.31 00:50

67th Street 25,830 1,225.82 01:05 1,216.99 00:55

59th Street 22,493 1,210.78 01:15 1,204.74 01:00

Walker Avenue 20,380 1,208.04 01:20 1,201.37 01:10

51st Street 18,419 1,205.22 01:20 1,198.86 01:10

Sage Avenue 17,291 1,203.40 01:20 1,196.09 01:15

Unnamed Road 16,949 1,202.14 01:25 1,195.96 01:15

44th Street 15,406 1,200.49 01:25 1,194.73 01:20

Santa Fe Avenue 14,842 1,199.42 01:25 1,193.93 01:20

Draper Park Bridge 14,118 1,197.30 01:30 1,190.95 01:20

Santa Fe Avenue 13,560 1,196.21 01:30 1,188.61 01:25

Grand Boulevard 12,090 1,194.88 01:35 1,187.07 01:30

29th Street 9,418 1,190.45 01:40 1,184.00 01:35

28th Street 8,998 1,189.23 01:40 1,183.06 01:35

27th Street 8,485 1,188.11 01:40 1,181.84 01:35

25th Street 7,480 1,187.48 01:40 1,179.54 01:40

23rd Street 6,633 1,185.46 01:40 1,177.00 01:40

18th Street 3,945 1,175.14 01:45 1,169.73 01:45

15th Street 2,934 1,168.03 01:45 1,162.63 01:45

Foot Bridge 2,623 1,166.20 01:45 1,160.50 01:45

Northeast (Zoo) Lake

Remington Place 69,823 1,091.21 00:30 1,081.12 00:35

Interstate 35 66,293 1,072.45 01:00 1,055.78 00:45

Bryant Avenue 65,846 1,066.69 01:05 1,051.35 00:50

63rd Street 64,614 1,063.62 01:10 1,047.63 00:55

Wilshire Boulevard 57,251 1,057.17 01:45 1,038.08 01:30

Britton Road 49,336 1,041.07 02:25 1,025.33 02:00

Hefner Road 39,157 1,031.53 03:15 1,016.83 02:55

Sooner Road 34,883 1,027.97 03:35 1,014.91 03:20

122nd Street 31,317 1,025.78 04:25 1,013.97 03:45

Interstate 44 26,411 1,024.35 04:35 1,011.55 04:25

Memorial Road 22,741 1,018.47 05:30 1,009.46 05:45

Table 7. Maximum flood-inundation elevation and time for the 75-percent probable maximum flood (PMF) and sunny-day dam-breach scenarios for selected dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Okla.—Continued

[ft, feet; hh:mm, hours and minutes; >, greater than]

Bridge 

name

Cross-section 

index number1

75 percent 

PMF stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

75 percent PMF

Sunny-day 

stage 

(ft)

Time to peak 

stage (hh:mm) 

sunny day

Northwest Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon

Pony Road 72,013 1,138.52 00:25 1,136.50 00:20

122nd Street 69,604 1,112.71 00:25 1,112.00 00:25

Val Verde Drive 65,910 1,093.42 00:40 1,090.59 00:40

John Kilpatrick Turnpike 61,574 1,075.18 00:50 1,073.26 00:45

Gaillardia Golf Course Bridge 59,586 1,070.37 00:55 1,068.58 00:55

150th Street 54,487 1,060.53 01:20 1,059.28 01:05

164th Street 46,617 1,052.37 01:40 1,051.79 01:40

Stanley Draper Lake

149th Street 80,925 1,126.43 01:40 1,123.14 01:35

164th Street 73,132 1,112.10 01:50 1,107.60 01:50

179th Street 66,889 1,105.84 01:55 1,101.50 01:55

Franklin Road 57,654 1,087.97 02:10 1,084.63 02:25

Alameda Street 30,123 1,065.79 03:10 1,062.50 03:10

Will Rogers Park Holding Pond

Unnamed Road 117,115 1,198.86 01:30 1,181.71 01:00

Drexel Boulevard 116,131 1,198.55 01:30 1,178.95 01:00

May Avenue 114,524 1,198.42 01:30 1,175.76 01:05

Venice Boulevard 113,189 1,191.57 02:05 1,166.96 01:05

36th Street 112,664 1,173.67 02:25 1,161.69 01:05

Interstate 44 110,441 1,164.35 02:50 1,154.57 01:10

Youngs Boulevard 107,973 1,161.35 04:30 1,145.52 01:10

Pennsylvania Avenue 106,262 1,147.27 04:35 1,140.04 01:15

Interstate 44 105,561 1,142.20 04:35 1,136.81 01:20

Hemingway Drive 103,130 1,139.46 06:10 1,135.01 01:25

Interstate 44 Ramp 102,777 1,140.08 06:10 1,134.66 01:25

Northwest Expressway 102,130 1,140.75 06:10 1,134.83 01:25

Belle Isle Boulevard 101,695 1,144.40 06:15 1,134.15 01:25

Classen Boulevard 98,278 1,141.51 06:20 1,126.97 01:35

Western Avenue 96,555 1,124.12 06:25 1,110.67 01:35

Interstate 44 95,965 1,111.14 06:30 1,106.09 01:40

Interstate 44 Ramp 91,134 1,110.90 06:35 1,089.41 02:05

Interstate 235 90,723 1,110.86 06:35 1,089.24 02:05

Lincoln Boulevard Southbound 86,547 1,105.05 07:20 1,081.44 02:25

Lincoln Boulevard Northbound 86,398 1,083.18 08:45 1,074.70 02:25

Unnamed Road 82,401 1,082.20 08:45 1,068.85 02:35

Kelly Avenue 81,622 1,082.20 08:45 1,067.25 02:45

Grand Boulevard 77,565 1,082.02 08:45 1,064.14 02:55

Martin Luther King Avenue 75,220 1,060.53 08:45 1,055.32 03:05

Interstate 35 68,845 1,054.97 09:00 1,046.13 03:25

Bryant Avenue 68,398 1,065.38 09:05 1,048.13 03:25

63rd Street 67,165 1,045.04 09:10 1,040.60 03:30

Wilshire Boulevard 59,800 1,037.52 09:30 1,030.12 03:50

1

Bridges are not identified by cross-section index number, but the equivalent cross-section index number is shown.

2

Time to peak stage was not yet reached at the maximum allowable model simulation period of 96 hours.

3

Cross-section index number increases because Lake Hefner was modeled as two separate reaches with different indexing systems.

4

Time was interpolated from times at upstream and downstream bridges.

5

Stage was interpolated from stages at upstream and downstream bridges.
12 Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma

Elevation Uncertainties

Elevation data composed the primary dataset for creating 

water-surface and inundation maps. The elevation data for most of 

this study were obtained by using lidar techniques with accuracy 

less than 1 ft (table 1). The elevation data (16.4 ft DEM) for the 

Atoka models were obtained by using ifsar techniques with an 

accuracy of 6.6 ft (table 1) because more accurate lidar data were 

unavailable. Use of lower accuracy ifsar data is more acceptable 

in the Atoka study area because this area contains greater terrain 

slopes than the Oklahoma City study area, especially in the 

upstream sections. For a terrain slope of about 2 percent, which is 

typical for the flood plain of the Atoka models, a 1-inch difference 

in elevation yields about a 4-ft difference in horizontal distance of 

inundated area. However, in extremely flat terrain, relatively large 

errors in water-surface extent can occur from a small error in watersurface elevation. For a river reach with a relatively low terrain 

slope of 0.1 percent, a 1-inch difference in elevation can yield 

about an 80-ft difference in horizontal distance of inundated area. 

Therefore, determining the extents of flooding with a high degree 

of accuracy is especially difficult in areas of low relief (Bales and 

Wagner, 2009). 

Manning’s Roughness Coefficient Uncertainties

Manning’s roughness coefficients can affect not only the 

extent of a flood-inundation area but also the timing of a flood peak. 

Although the Manning’s roughness coefficients used in this study 

were supported by the calibrated Lake Overholser models, changes 

in the flood-plain hydraulics over time may decrease accuracy 

of the data described in this report. A sensitivity analysis was 

conducted for the 75-percent PMF scenario of the Lake Overholser 

models. In this sensitivity analysis, the Manning’s roughness 

coefficient values were tested at 0.9 and 1.1 times the modeled 

values. These changes in the Manning’s roughness coefficients 

produced changes in the peak water-surface elevations and the 

timing of the flood peaks. Table 8 shows the changes in peak 

water-surface elevation and time to peak at each bridge for the PMF 

sensitivity models.

Model Limitations

 Another major cause of uncertainty in HEC–RAS hydraulic 

models is the one-dimensional assumption that the water-surface 

elevation is constant across each computational node (cross 

section). In an extremely flat flood plain, such as much of the study 

area around Oklahoma City, the one-dimensional assumption may 

not be valid. For example, although the flow in the main stream 

in question may be at a certain elevation, other streams that are 

intersected by the given cross section may not be at the same watersurface elevation. Two-dimensional models can be used to account 

for this type of error (Horritt and Bates, 2001). 

Table 8. Peak water-surface elevation and time to peak for the sensitivity analysis of Manning’s roughness coefficients for the 75-percent 

probable maximum flood (PMF) dam-breach scenarios for Lake Overholser in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 

[ID, identifier; ft, feet; hh:mm, hours and minutes]

Bridge name Cross-section 

index number1

PMF stage 

(ft)

PMF stage 

(hh:mm)

0.9 Manning’s 

stage (ft)

0.9 Manning’s 

stage (hh:mm)

1.1 Manning’s 

stage (ft)

1.1 Manning’s 

stage (hh:mm)

Northwest 10th Street 244,632 1,242.66 02:40 1,241.81 02:30 1,243.42 02:40

Railroad Bridge 238,434 1,237.01 03:00 1,236.50 02:50 1,238.93 03:10

West Reno Avenue 236,457 1,236.95 03:00 1,236.75 02:50 1,237.28 03:10

Interstate 40 234,581 1,234.14 03:20 1,233.49 03:05 1,234.83 03:45

Council Road 227,339 1,227.11 03:30 1,227.01 03:10 1,227.38 04:10

MacArthur Boulevard 212,772 1,220.58 05:20 1,219.81 04:35 1,221.31 05:30

Meridian Avenue 207,372 1,216.45 06:00 1,215.65 05:05 1,217.26 06:15

Portland Avenue 201,929 1,213.53 06:40 1,212.66 05:40 1,214.36 06:50

Interstate 44 198,172 1,211.58 06:50 1,210.84 05:55 1,212.30 07:10

May Avenue 195,843 1,208.93 07:10 1,208.15 06:15 1,209.72 07:45

Agnew Avenue 192,611 1,205.57 07:40 1,204.94 06:45 1,206.27 08:15

Pennsylvania Avenue 190,486 1,202.93 08:10 1,202.07 07:10 1,203.80 08:45

Exchange Avenue 187,305 1,199.76 08:40 1,198.87 07:35 1,200.67 09:15

Railroad Bridge 186,166 1,198.77 08:50 1,197.99 07:45 1,199.59 09:20

Western Avenue 184,218 1,197.88 09:00 1,197.12 07:50 1,198.71 09:30

Walker Avenue 181,102 1,196.53 09:00 1,195.67 07:55 1,197.45 09:35

Robinson Avenue 179,596 1,195.07 09:10 1,194.15 08:00 1,196.09 09:40

Shields Boulevard 178,887 1,194.17 09:10 1,193.36 08:00 1,195.25 09:40

15th Street 177,841 1,190.79 09:20 1,190.05 08:10 1,191.59 09:50

Pipe Bridge 177,031 1,190.55 09:20 1,189.88 08:10 1,191.30 09:50

Railroad Bridge 175,206 1,188.12 09:30 1,187.47 08:20 1,188.90 10:53

Lincoln Boulevard 174,374 1,186.91 09:40 1,186.14 08:30 1,187.83 10:10

Interstate 35 170,982 1,185.24 09:40 1,184.81 08:30 1,186.15 10:15

Eastern Avenue 166,217 1,183.51 09:50 1,182.88 08:40 1,184.15 10:25

Reno Avenue 164,115 1,179.97 09:50 1,179.44 08:45 1,180.53 10:30

Interstate 40 eastbound 162,502 1,176.97 09:50 1,176.73 08:45 1,177.30 10:30

Interstate 40 westbound 161,683 1,176.64 09:50 1,176.57 08:45 1,176.73 10:30

Railroad Bridge 159,387 1,172.83 11:00 1,172.32 09:50 1,173.38 11:20

4th Street 158,701 1,172.38 11:00 1,171.87 09:55 1,172.93 11:30

10th Street 154,380 1,170.36 11:20 1,169.99 10:15 1,170.83 11:40

23rd Street 146,741 1,167.72 11:30 1,167.76 10:25 1,167.81 11:55

36th Street 141,291 1,163.32 12:20 1,162.60 11:05 1,164.04 12:35

Midwest Boulevard 126,973 1,154.90 12:50 1,154.48 11:35 1,155.40 13:15

63rd Street 118,105 1,149.45 13:20 1,148.91 12:05 1,149.99 13:40

Britton Road 102,658 1,145.66 13:30 1,145.64 12:10 1,145.70 13:55

Hefner Road 92,737 1,137.44 14:10 1,136.91 12:50 1,137.94 14:45

122nd Street 79,090 1,130.94 14:50 1,130.20 13:30 1,131.67 15:20

Hiwassee Road 57,889 1,125.90 15:10 1,125.12 13:50 1,126.63 15:45

Britton Road 36,801 1,110.49 16:10 1,109.91 14:35 1,111.07 16:40

1

Bridges are not identified by cross-section index number, but the equivalent cross-section index number is shown.

Summary and Conclusions

This report presents results of a cooperative study by the City 

of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) to model dam-breach scenarios at 11 selected classified 

high-hazard dams around the Oklahoma City, and Atoka, Okla., 

areas and to map the potentially resulting flood-inundation areas. 

All of the dams listed in this report are classified by the State of 

Oklahoma as high-hazard dams and therefore need to have floodinundation maps modeled as part of the emergency action plans 

required by the Oklahoma Water Resources Board.

For this report, flood profiles for a 75-percent probable 

maximum flood (PMF) dam breach and a sunny-day dam breach 

were computed for the stream reach downstream from selected 

dams in Oklahoma City, Okla., and Atoka Reservoir, Okla., by 

means of a one-dimensional dynamic (unsteady-flow) model using 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center’s 

River Analysis System (HEC–RAS) software. Development of 

accurate hydraulic models requires accurate land-surface elevation 

data. Light detection and ranging (lidar) data were used to develop 

a high-resolution digital-elevation model and a 2-foot contour 

elevation map for the flood plains below selected high-hazard 

dams in Oklahoma City (collected in 2004) and near Norman 

(collected in 2007). A 16.4-ft (5 m) digital terrain map was used 

for the flood plain below Atoka Reservoir. Additional survey data 

were collected by use of a U.S. survey-grade real-time kinematic 

Global Positioning System receiver. Field measurements of bridge 

dimensions were determined at all locations in the study areas. 

Streamflow and water-level data from USGS streamflow-gaging 

stations North Canadian River below Lake Overholser near 

Oklahoma City, Okla. (07241000), and North Canadian River at 

Britton Road at Oklahoma City, Okla. (07241520), were used as 

hydrologic inputs for the model to help quantify the sunny-day 

dam-breach scenario. 

The resulting flood-inundation maps were generated by HEC–

GeoRAS (the ArcGIS Topo to Raster tool by the Environmental 

Systems Research Institute, Inc.) and imported into a geographic 

information system to delineate areas flooded in each flood 

scenario. Points of interest such as community-services offices, 

recreational areas, water-treatment plants, and wastewater-treatment 

plants were identified on the maps in case a dam breach occurs at 

one of the selected high-hazard dams.

Uncertainty may be introduced into flood-inundation 

maps with regards to the accuracy of the elevation, hydraulic, 

and hydrologic data and the modeling system used. Even 

with uncertainties, the produced dam-breach models and 

flood-inundation maps can provide city managers, emergency 

management personnel, and residents of Oklahoma City, and 

residents downstream from Atoka Reservoir with vital information 

for flood-response activities if a dam breach occurs.
References Cited 13

References Cited

Arcement, G.J., and Schneider V.R., 1989, Guide for selecting 

Manning’s roughness coefficients for natural channels and 

flood plains: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2339 

[variously paged].

Arthur, H.G., 1977, Teton Dam failure—The evaluation of 

dam safety: New York, Engineering Foundation Conference 

Proceedings, American Society of Civil Engineers, p. 61–71.

Bales, J.D., and Wagner, C.R., 2009, Sources of uncertainty in flood 

inundation maps: Journal of Flood Risk Management, v. 2, p. 

139–147.

Barlow, R.A., Nardi, M.R., and Reyes, Betzaida, 2008, Use of 

light detection and ranging (LiDAR) to obtain high-resolution 

elevation data for Sussex County, Delaware: U.S. Geological 

Survey Fact Sheet 2008–3088, 6 p.

Barnes, H.H., 1967, Roughness characteristics of natural channels: 

U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 1849 [variously 

paged].

BOSS, 1999, BOSS DAMBRK—User’s manual: Madison, Wis., 

BOSS International, p. 250.

City of Norman, 2007, Lidar-derived bare-earth digital elevation 

model and accuracy report — Merrick & Company: Prepared for 

the City of Norman, Oklahoma.

City of Oklahoma City, 2004, Lidar-derived bare-earth digital 

elevation model — Sanborn Colorado LLC: Prepared for the City 

of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

City of Oklahoma City, 2014, Parks and recreation, accessed 

March, 6, 2015, at https://www.okc.gov/parks/index.html.

Collier, Michael, Webb, R.H., and Schmidt, J.C., 1996, Dams 

and rivers—Primer on the downstream effects of dams: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1126, 94 p.

Coon, W.F., 1998, Estimation of roughness coefficients of natural 

stream channels with vegetated banks: U.S Geological Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 2441 [variously paged].

Davies, W.E., Bailey, J.F., and Kelly, D.B, 1972, West Virginia’s 

Buffalo Creek flood—A study of the hydrology and engineering 

geology: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 667, 32 p.

Environmental Systems Research Institute, 2015, ArcGIS resource 

center—Topo to raster (spatial analyst): ArcGIS 10.1, accessed 

January 26, 2015, at http:// http://resources.arcgis.com/en/help/

main/10.1/index.html#//009z0000006s000000.

Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1998, Federal guidelines 

for dam safety: U.S Department of Homeland Security Federal 

Emergency Management Agency [variously paged].

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 2007, Chapter VI, 

Emergency action plans in Engineering guidelines for the 

evaluation of hydropower projects, emergency action plans: 

Emergency Guidelines, accessed April 1, 2011, at http://www.

ferc.gov/industries/hydropower/safety/guidelines/eng-guide/

chap6.pdf.

Froehlich, D.C., 2008, Embankment dam breach parameters and 

their uncertainties: Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v. 134, no. 

12, p. 1708–1720.

Gesch, D.B., Oimoen, M.J., and Evans, G.A., 2014, Accuracy 

assessment of the U.S. Geological Survey National Elevation 

Dataset, and comparison with other large-area elevation 

datasets—SRTM and ASTER: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2014–1008, 10 p., accessed August 19, 2014, at http://

dx.doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141008.

Horizon Systems Corporation, 2008, National Hydrography Dataset 

plus version 1 (NHDPlus): accessed November 13, 2008, at 

http://www.horizon-systems.com/nhdplus/.

Horritt, M.S., and Bates, P.D., 2001, Effects of spatial resolution on 

a raster based model of flood flow: Journal of Hydrology, v. 253, 

p. 239–249.

Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2010a, HEC–RAS River Analysis 

System user’s manual, version 4.1: Davis, Calif., accessed April 

1, 2011, at ftp://ftp.usace.army.mil/pub/iwr-hec-web/software/

ras/documentation/HEC-RAS_4.1_Users_Manual.pdf [variously 

paged].

Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2010b, HEC–RAS River Analysis 

System hydraulic reference manual, version 4.1: Davis, Calif., 

accessed April 1, 2011, at http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/

software/hec-ras/documents/HEC-RAS_4.1_Reference_Manual.

pdf [variously paged].

Hydrologic Engineering Center, 2011, HEC–GeoRAS GIS tools 

for support of HEC–RAS using ArcGIS, version 4.3.93: Davis, 

Calif., accessed April 1, 2011, at http://www.hec.usace.army.mil/

software/hec-ras/documents/HEC-GeoRAS_43_Users_Manual.

pdf [variously paged].

Intermap Technologies, 2014, NEXTMap Web Store—NEXTMap 

5-meter digital terrain model: accessed June 20, 2014, at https://

store.intermap.com/MapShop.aspx?GeoLocation=World

Lewis, J.M., and Esralew, R.A., 2009, Statistical summaries of 

streamflow in and near Oklahoma through 2007: U.S. Geological 

Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009–5135, p. 456–459.

Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, 2011, National 

Land Cover Database 2006 (NLCD 2006): National Land Cover 

Database, accessed December 1, 2011, at http://www.mrlc.gov/

nlcd2006.php.

National Geodetic Survey, 2011, Continuously Operating Reference 

Station (CORS): National Geodetic Survey, accessed April 1, 

2011, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS/.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2015, 

Orthometric Height Conversion, accessed December 1, 2014, at 

http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/VERTCON/vert_con.prl.

Oklahoma Department of Transportation, 2014, Maps ArcView 

SHP files: Highway information, accessed December 15, 2014, at 

http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/maps/shp/index.htm.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978a, Phase I inspection report 

Dry Creek Detention Dam and Spillway: National Dam Safety 

Report, Inventory No. OK 11061, 164 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978b, Phase I inspection report 

Northeast Lake Dam and Spillway: National Dam Safety Report, 

Inventory No. OK 02424, 112 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1978c, Phase I inspection report 

NW Oklahoma City Sludge Lagoon Dam No. 1: National Dam 

Safety Report, Inventory No. OK 11051, 58 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979a, Phase I inspection 

report Overholser Lake Dam and Spillway: National Dam Safety 

Report, Inventory No. OK 02537, 166 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979b, Phase I inspection report 

Lightning Creek Holding Pond A: National Dam Safety Report, 

Inventory No. OK 11070, 132 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979c, Phase I inspection report 

Stanley Draper Lake: National Dam Safety Report, Inventory 

No. OK 02580, 85 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 1979d, Phase I inspection report 

Will Rogers Park Dam: National Dam Safety Report, Inventory 

No. OK 11069, 121 p.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2007, Hydrographic survey 

of Arcadia Lake: Oklahoma Water Resources Board, accessed 

August 19, 2013, at http://www.owrb.ok.gov/studies/reports/

reports_pdf/ArcadiaHydrographicSurvey.pdf.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2011, Hydrologic and hydraulic 

guidelines for dams in Oklahoma: Oklahoma Water Resources 

Board, p. 12–20.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2014a, Bathymetric lake 

studies: Oklahoma Water Resources Board, accessed August 19, 

2014, at http://www.owrb.ok.gov/maps/pmg/owrbdata_Bathy.

html.

Oklahoma Water Resources Board, 2014b, Data & Maps—Surface 

Water: Oklahoma Water Resources Board, accessed August 19, 

2014, at http://www.owrb.ok.gov/maps/PMG/owrbdata_SW.html.

Rendon, S.H., Ashworth, C.E., and Smith, S.J., 2012, Dam-breach 

analysis and flood-inundation mapping for Lakes Ellsworth and 

Lawtonka near Lawton, Oklahoma: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2012–5026, 56 p.

Rogers, D.J., 2006, Lessons learned from the St. Francis Dam 

failure: Geo-Strata, v. 6, issue 2, p. 14–17.

Samuels, P.G., 1989, Backwater lengths in rivers: Proceedings of 

the Institution of Civil Engineers, part 2, v. 87, p. 571–582.

Smith Roberts Baldischwiler, LLC, 2006, LIDAR — Statistical 

analysis for City of Oklahoma City: Oklahoma City, Okla., 8 p.

Tortorelli, R.L., and McCabe, L.P., 2001, Flood frequency 

estimates and documented and potential extreme peak 

discharges in Oklahoma: U.S. Geological Survey WaterResources Investigations Report 2001–4152, 59 p.

Trimble Navigation Limited, 2003, Trimble R7/R8 GPS receiver 

user guide, version 1.00, revision A: Sunnyvale, Calif., Trimble 

Navigation Limited, 216 p.

Trimble Navigation Limited, 2005, Trimble Geomatics Office, 

version 1.63, build 10: Sunnyvale, Calif., Trimble Navigation 

Limited [variously paged].

U.S. Board on Geographic Names, 2014, Geographic Names 

Information System (GNIS): U.S. Board on Geographic Names, 

accessed December 15, 2014, at http://geonames.usgs.gov/

domestic/.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2014, TIGER/Line Shapefiles and TIGER/

Line Files: U.S. Census Bureau, accessed December 15, 2014, 

at http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2013, National Agriculture 

Imagery Program imagery, accessed June 1, 2011, at http://

www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&to

pic=nai.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2013, USGS water data for the Nation: 

National Water Information System (NWISWeb), accessed June 

18, 2014, at http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2014, National Elevation Dataset: U.S. 

Geological Survey, accessed on December 15, 2014 at http://

ned.usgs.gov/.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2015, Welcome to Streamstats, 

Oklahoma, accessed January 2, 2015, at http://water.usgs.gov/

osw/streamstats/oklahoma.html.

Von Thun, J.L., and Gillette, D.R., 1990, Guidance on breach 

parameters: Denver, Colo., Internal Memorandum, U.S. 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, p. 17.
Publishing support provided by

Lafayette Publishing Service Center
ISBN 978-1-4113-3918-7

9 7 81411 3391 8 7

ISSN 2328-031X (print)

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20155052

Shivers and others—Dam-Breach Analysis and Flood-Inundation Mapping for Selected Dams in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and near Atoka, Oklahoma—SIR 2015–5052