My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CRDSS_Task1_19-2_ConsensusProject
CWCB
>
Decision Support Systems
>
DayForward
>
CRDSS_Task1_19-2_ConsensusProject
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2011 10:18:47 AM
Creation date
5/30/2008 3:55:07 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Decision Support Systems
Title
CRDSS Task 1.19-2 - User Involvement - The Process of Reaching Consensus in California Water Management
Description
This memorandum and the Consensus Project: Performance Measures Report (WRMI 1994) and the South Florida Water District Technical Integration: Regulation, Permitting, Planning and Operations Report (WRMI 1993) are designed to introduce the participants in the CRDSS development process to similar efforts underway in California and Florida.
Decision Support - Doc Type
Task Memorandum
Date
1/9/1995
DSS Category
DMI Utilities
DSS
Colorado River
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Contract/PO #
C153658, C153727, C153752
Grant Type
Non-Reimbursable
Bill Number
SB92-87, HB93-1273, SB94-029, HB95-1155, SB96-153, HB97-008
Prepared By
Riverside Technology inc.
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
The most important determinant in the design of management tools is the kind of output required to <br />make management decisions. For example, if the law states that water managers must account for the <br />effects of decisions on water quality, economics, and endangered species, a manager must have some <br />way to evaluate the impacts of those effects. <br />Through preliminary discussions with water users and environmental group leaders, literature review and <br />consultation with work groups and consultants, WRMI developed displays (charts, tables, graphs, check <br />lists, etc.) to reflect one or more of the multiple attributes needed to evaluate system performance. These <br />displays are called performance measures. Performance measures present information that is designed to <br />allow multidimensional comparative analysis of alternative water management regimes. They provide a <br />basis for choices to be made between two or more possible regimes, using either a long or short time <br />horizon. Thus, performance measures compare the long-term implications of various environmental <br />standards, facilities, or rule curve proposals. Similarly, they can compare alternative near-term operating <br />strategies, based upon current and projected conditions. Vital to the design of management tools, the <br />development of performance measures is the first task of the project. <br />To develop the working document, Consensus Project: Performance Measures Report , WRMI and NHI <br />first created an electronic slide show with numerous examples of possible performance measures. The <br />slide show was then presented to PAC and TAC members, as well as other individual water users to <br />generate feedback on the types of measures best suited for analysis of various management options. The <br />culmination of these preliminary interviews are documented in the performance measures working paper, <br />which is currently under review by the PAC and TAC. The working document contains a set of <br />measures that either portray water system performance or could act as surrogates for water system <br />performance from environmental, water user, and other perspectives. The document does not develop <br />consensus around specific performance measures, but presents a full range of possible measures. The <br />performance measures are divided into four categories: <br />Planning Performance Measures <br />? <br />Operations Performance Measures <br />? <br />Permitting Performance Measures <br />? <br />Regulation Performance Measures <br />? <br />Planning performance measures help evaluate the large scale, long-term (period of record) impacts of <br />new facilities, changes in water allocation, or changes in operating policy. In part because planning <br />deals with the long term, the evaluation of these measures will most often involve the use of a simulation <br />model, such as the USBR?s PROSIM or the Department of Water Resources? DWRSIM. These models <br />produce time series estimates of system performance; that is, output that traces how the water resources <br />system might change month by month (or other time step) for a long period. The hydrologic state <br />variables (storages and flows) from these models are the basis for most other performance measures, and <br />may serve as input to many other analytical tools. <br />Operations performance measures display the expected short-term (1 to 2 years) consequences of current, <br />large-scale operating rules and policies for the coming year. These performance measures are intended <br />to be used by all types of water users to schedule their own operations for the short-term. In addition, <br />operations performance measures provide advance warning of drought and surplus supplies. When they <br />show extraordinary conditions, these performance measures may also be used to trigger short-term <br />adjustments in operations. <br />4 <br />A275 01.09.95 1-19.2 Sheer <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.