7748 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

For evaluation purposes, hydrographs of the average monthly flows for three "dry" years, three "average" years and three "wet" years and for the minimum year and maximum year are also shown in Appendix D. Comparisons for Scenario 1, 1A and 1B are shown on Figures D-1 through D-15. 4.2 SCENARIO NO. 2 IMPACTS Scenario No. 2 was the same as Scenario No. 1 with the addition of the consolidated Three Forks Reservoir Project to the system. All reservoirs were modeled assuming one-fill operations. The main modeling assumptions used for the Three Forks Project are discussed in Section 3.2.3 of this report. Anticipated industrial demands on Three Forks Reservoir storage water is unknown at this time. To quantify realistic demands the reservoir could meet every month of the study period, WWC performed a firm yield study with WIRSOS. A previous study by WWC (SWEC, November 1984) indicated a firm yield of about 90,000 acre-feet per year or a constant demand of 123 c.f.s. Therefore, the initial run of Scenario No. 2 used the constant industrial demand of 123 c.f.s. upon the reservoir. Modeling results showed that this industrial demand was not met approximately 13 percent of the time. The reservoir was in dead storage during these times and storage water was not available for industrial diversion. Therefore, additional runs were performed with lower demands until the reservoir could satisfy these demands about every month. The last WIRSOS run made utilized an industrial storage demand of 80 c.f.s. This demand was met more than 99 39