WSPP283 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0007G9 Dillon, Williams Fork and Wolford Mountain Reservoirs. These differences would overstate the availability of water for release from these reservoirs for meeting the 20,000 acre-foot goal. Rather than continue to investigate and debate the need for further refinements to the model, it was determined that time would be better spent working on what could be dotte to meet the 20,000 acre- foot goal. ' FEASIBILITY OF EXPANDED CROPS ALTERNATIVES From an engineering and economic perspective, the following alternatives could supply the 20,000 acre-feet to the 15-Mile Reach when required during the study period, at reasonable costs: . Alternative 1 a: Green Mountain Reservoir reduced winter power operations. Alternative 1a: Green Mountain Reservoir conjunctive pool operations. Alternative 1a: Preemptive release and water carried over in Green Mountain " Reservoir. . . . Alternative 1 d: Modify CBT West Slope Facilities Operations. Alternative 1e: Denver Water system modified operations. Alternative 1 f: Bypass diversions to storage. Alternative 19: Reduce constraints on CROPS. . . . TheStateMod model calculated that the effects of supplying the 20,000 acre-feet on reservoir storage, reservoir yield, reservoir operations, hydropower generation, water deliveries, channel constraints, and the Check Case Settlement would vary among these alternatives. These effects are briefly summarized in this report and presented in detail in the Technical Memoranda. The results discussed below and in the Technical Memoranda assume that the StateMod model accurately simulated reservoir operations in this study. Some study participants have questioned that assumption. However, the study participants agreed the studies were sufficient for their purpose and to document the results of the study in order to move on to discussing what can realistically be accomplished to meet the 20,000 acre- foot goal. The study showed that the above alternatives were generally able to replace the 20,000 acre-feet release/bypass by diverting to storage under the reservoirs' refill rights. This replacement was generally done within a period of several months. In some cases (e.g. Granby Reservoir) the replacement was not completed for several years. In the case of Granby Reservoir, replacement of the 20,000 acre-feet release/bypass to the 15-Mile Reach was probably delayed because of limited II availability of storable inflow in those years when releases were made. In general, however, replacement of the 20,000 acre-feet by diverting to storage under the reservoirs' refill rights proved to be more efficient, effective, and less cosdy, than some of the measures incorporated into the above alternatives for providing sources of replacement water for the 20,000 acre-feet release/bypass. Because of this, replacement of the 20,000 acre-feet should be done by diverting to storage under the reservoirs' refill rights rather than utilizing some of the specific strategies included in the above alternatives for replacement. One issue that will have to be addressed is that most existing refill rights P:\Data \GEN\CWCB\ 19665\Report Phase 2\FinalReport9.03\Final_CFOPS_Report(9-03).doc 4