WSP12125 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

000442 necessary for the TRF diversion that was speci- fied on input is known. . 7. The program then returns to the subreach where the TRF diversion was specified, subtracts the speci- fied TRF diversion quantity from the total TRF quantity, and proceeds with the normal transit- loss calculations for the remaining subreaches . using the reduced TRF quantity. The computa- tions just described are repeated for each TRF diversion that is specified in the input data. Therefore, in the example, the water commis- sioner would tell thc ditch owner to divert 5 ft3/s each day as requested, but the amount of TRF (at the CCS WWTF) needed to be purchased for each day of the TRF di version would not be known until about 2 days later, after the accounting program had been used to compute the transit losses for that day (see the "Input Data Requirements" section, p. 7). Changes to Account for an Additional Transmountain Return-Flow Source The changes to the program needed to account for TRF'S that enter Fountain Creek via Clover Ditch were quite simple. This TRF quantity is specified during data input, and the program adds the value to the calculated TRF in Fountain Creek at node B . (station 07105800 in fig. 2 and table I). The sum of the two TRF quantities then is a single TRF quantity for the remaining transit-loss computations. Changes to Program Output The accounting-program output was changed considerably as a result of the other program changes just described. Much of the detailed transit-loss infor- mation listed in the original output (table 2) is not listed in the new output (table 3); however, for each day of transit-loss calculations, this detailed informa- tion is written to a separate output file that is archived on a yearly basis. The new output first lists a summary of the input discharge data and then lists the NSF and the TRF diversion (EXCHANGE DNERSION, table 3), if any, at each ditch; the TRF purchase quan- tity (EXCHANGE RELEASE, table 3) also is listed for each TRF diversion. A summary of the NSF and the TRF computations and discharge quantities then is listed for each subreach. The new output also provides a second page of output (table 3) that lists a number of discharge quantities needed by the CCS and the water commissioners in administering the TRF use and reuse program for Fountain Creek. The quantities listed on page 2 of the output (table 3) are calculatcd by the accounting program at the end of a daily run; a detailed explanation of these quantities is available from the agencies. Another program feature added during the 1991-92 changes was a calculation of transit losses as if there had not been any TRF diversions. This calcu- lation provided a means to compare the total amount of TRF delivered to any location for actual TRF diver- sions to the hypothetical case of no TRF diversions. The diversion of TRF generally results in smaller overall transit losses; the comparison calculation provided a means for the CCS to quantify the differ- ences. This comparison also is shown on the second page of the revised program output (table 3). CHANGES TO THE TRANSIT-LOSS ACCOUNTING PROGRAM DURING 1994-95 In 1994, the CCS wanted to incorporate an addi- tional gaging station into the accounting program. In addition, the SECWCD wanted to be able to account for FAP TRF's that arc discharged to Fountain Creek at the CCS WWTF and by the communities of Secu- rity, Widefield, and Fountain (figs. I and 2). The SECWCD also wanted the capability to account for diversion of the FAP TRF's that would be similar to the capability for diversion of the CCS TRF's added as part of the 1991-92 program changes. Lastly, the CCS wanted the capability 10 account for additional diver- sion of TRF's that would not be exchanged for FAP water stored in Pueblo Reservoir. These changes to the accounting program, which were put in operation in April 1995, are described in the following sections. Changes to Incorporate an Additional Streamflow-Gaging Station The additional gaging station on Fountain Creek (station 07105530 in fig. 6) is about 1 mi down- stream from the CCS WWTF. To use this gaging station in the accounting program, an additional subreach, node, and stream segment were created; in ~ I I , 16 DescrIptions of the Program Changes (1989-97) and B User Manual for l!I Transit-Loss Accounting Program Applied to Fountain Creek Between Colorado Springs and the Arkansas River, Colorado