WSP10841 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0004'34. Executive Summary Representation of the release of contract storage pools in existing reservoirs was based on information provided by current operators of EIkhead, Steamboat and Stagecoach reservoirs. Generally speaking, users holding existing contracts for storage water were the only demands allowed to have access to those storage pools. Thus the only demands having access to the existing Elkhead Reservoir were the City of Craig and the Craig generating station. The Craig station was permitted access to supplies from Stagecoach Reservoir only after its Elkhead supplies were exhausted. Existing Stagecoach water supplies not delivered to users outside the boundaries of the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District. Steamboat. Lake supplies were only accessible to the Hayden generating station and then only if the station's Stagecoach supplies were exhausted. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES Definition of Alternatives In defining alternative development projects and corresponding model evaluation scenarios, particular attention was given to the relative priorities of the existing direct flow rights, the proposed instream flow right, existing and future storage rights and future water demands. The structure of the scenarios was chosen to help answer the following fundamental questions: I) is there a sufficient legal and physical supply to meet all future demands?, 2) if there is an insufficient legal supply, can the general Juniper subordination make up the shortages?, and 3) if there is an insufficient physical supply, can reservoir releases (from existing and/or proposed lJrojects) make up the shortages? These questions were addressed by the careful selection of priorities assigned to the proposed instream flow right, to storage in reservoirs and to future demand increments. . Model scenarios were defined to evaluate alternative administrative and/or developmental strategies to meet various demand levels in the basin. Each model scenario evaluated three possible demand levels, the potential 1989 level maximum, and the projected 20 IS and 2040 demand levels. Several administrative strategies were also investigated and included examining the utility of subordination of the Juniper rights to all existing demands and possibly to 2015 and/or 2040 level demands. Scenarios were arranged to facilitate comparison of the strategies of meeting future demands through subordination of the instream flow for endangered fish and meeting future demands by making releases from storage accrued under rights considered senior to the instream flow. The scenarios evaluated using the basin model are described generally in Table S-4. Table S-4 Model Evaluation Scenarios Scenario I - Baseline (No Action) (also as Subordination only) . no new storage facilities . no instream flow for endangered species . same as full subordination of Juniper rights Scenario II - Conversion Only (no subordination) . no new storage facilities . Juniper rights converted to instream flow . no subordination of Juniper rights except to storage in existing reservoirs S-13