WSP09739 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

; ~,"'"-:, ,) n 'j :,) -;.. u,.... . . ..' . Comments: 1.) Review of inflows developed for Ohio Ck. (see section B) showed zero average May and June values for INFL23. As was done for East River inflows (see Section C), Ohio Ck. hydrographs show three plots: "a" plots -- flow factors Phase I WY52-83 flows distributed using "b" plots -- methodology WY 52-90 flows -- extended using Phase I "c" plots -- station (Ohio pattern; WY 52-90 flows -- distributed using core Ck. nr. Gunnison -- 09114000) distribution Plot "c" hydrographs show that distribution of upstream inflows as per core station eliminates the INFL23 zero May and June flow situation. (Core station distribution shifts peak flow month from May to June for INFL20 and 22 as compared to Phase I developed values.) . 2.) Remainder of Upper Gunnison Inflows (above Crystal Dam): A review of the Upper Gunnison inflow (Sections A-E) summary statistics was done to check on the occurrence of intermittent zero values (minimum = 0) and the occurrence of zero average monthly flow values (average = 0). Inspection showed the following: generally, zero average inflows occur on lower elevation, lower yield areas; zero months occur in late fall and winter, with runoff in spring and summer months; . in most cases, intermittent zero flows occur in areas derived from core station difference files. Generally, these intervening areas represent lower elevation, lower water yield areas. For cases where negative values occurred in the core station difference files, upstream core station values were reduced in order to set minimum difference file values to zero. Attached section G includes the main report (without appendices) of the Phase I "Upper Gunnison-Uncompahgre Basin Model Inflow Development" report. This report discusses assumptions, development, and adjustment procedures used in deriving flow values. (Extension of Upper Gunnison inflows for the 1984-1990 period followed procedures as discussed in the Phase I report.) ~~