Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br />. <br />,. <br />. <br />. <br />I <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />I <br />. <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />on0377 <br /> <br />4.4 SCENARIO NO.4 IMPACTS <br /> <br /> <br />Under Scenario No.4, the Little Snake River Basin was modeled with only the <br /> <br /> <br />addition of the Three Forks Project to the Water Development Baseline. All reservoirs <br /> <br /> <br />were modeled assuming one-fill operations. The main modeling assumptions used for the <br /> <br />Three Forks Project are discussed in Section 3.2.3 of this report. <br /> <br />As with Scenario No.2, a firm yield study of Three Forks Reservoir was performed. <br /> <br /> <br />An initial industrial demand of 80 d.s. (same as Scenario No.2) was utilized in the <br /> <br /> <br />modeling. This demand was met more than 99 percent of the time, therefore, the results <br /> <br /> <br />of this run were used to determine the impact of Three Forks Reservoir upon the flows <br /> <br />at Lily, Colorado. <br />The Scenario No.4 flows at Lily are presented in Table D.l5. The average annual <br /> <br />flow at Lily for Scenario No.4 was calculated to be 245,000 acre-feet. A comparison <br /> <br />between Scenario No.4 flows and Water Development Baseline flows is presented in <br /> <br />Table 0.16. Average annual flows at Lily for Scenario No.4 are 61,169 acre-feet lower <br /> <br />than the Water Development Baseline flows. Figures 0-26 through 0-30 show the <br /> <br />monthly hydrographs of comparing these modeled runs. <br /> <br />4.5 SCENARIO NO.5 IMPACTS <br /> <br /> <br />Under Scenario No.5, the Little Snake River Basin was modeled with only the <br /> <br /> <br />addition of the Powder Wash Project to the Water Development Baseline. All reservoirs <br /> <br /> <br />were modeled assuming one-fill operations. The main modeling assumptions used for the <br /> <br />42 <br />