Laserfiche WebLink
Mountain Reservoir evaluation can be assessed with the assistance of the Bureau of Reclamation, or <br />with the use of modeling results from the existing PACSIM model. <br />The amount of water potentially delivered through a Fryingpan River Pipeline (Ruedi to Basalt) will <br />be assessed with the daily Fry-Ark/ Ruedi Reservoir simulation model currently used by the Bureau of <br />Reclamation. Grand River Consulting initially developed this model in the late 1990's, and the Bureau <br />has subsequently updated the tool to include recent study years. <br />4.6.2 Non-Structural Alternatives <br />The assessment of water supplies related to non-structural alternatives (operational) will be more <br />complex. For a stand-alone Ruedi Reservoir alternative, the daily Fry-Ark/Ruedi Reservoir model will <br />be utilized to assess project operation. However, for those alternatives that contemplate the re-operation <br />of existing facilities in the headwaters of the Colorado River watershed (Williams Fork Reservoir, <br />Wolford Mountain Reservoir, CBT storage, ect.), water availability assessments may require the use of <br />additional tools. Also, if the Stakeholder group selects to consider the relaxation of the Shoshone Call, a <br />more complex basin-wide analysis of water right operations may be required. <br />We do not propose to undertake significant basin-wide modeling efforts for the Phase 2 study. First, it is <br />not possible to complete the study within the proposed schedule or budget if significant basin-wide <br />modeling occurs. More importantly, we do not believe that this level of analysis is required to meet the <br />objectives of the Phase 2 study, i.e. to provide suffcient information to allow the stakeholders to make a <br />fully informed selection of a 10825 alternative(s). <br />We understand that limited resources of Denver Water and other stakeholders are available to assist with <br />the assessment of reservoir re-operation alternatives. For example, one potential 10825 alternative <br />would "trade" a portion of Denver Water's substitution release obligation from Williams Fork Reservoir <br />and/or Wolford Mounta.in Reservoir, to a substitution release from Ruedi Reservoir. In return, a portion <br />of the 10825 water may be supplied from Denver Water's upstream facilities. This scenario could <br />potentially be assessed in the following manner: <br />Denver Water provides a schedule of total substitution requirements derived from existing <br />output from its PACSIM model. This schedule would include monthly or daily substitution <br />demands for a representative historical period. <br />2. Preliminary operational scenarios are developed that supply a portion of this substitution <br />obligation from Ruedi Reservoir, and a portion of the 10825 obligations from upstream <br />facilities. These scenaxios are developed with the assistance of key stakeholders, with the <br />understanding that the yield of Denver's system cannot be reduced. A specific schedule of <br />substitution releases and 10825 releases is developed for each storage facility involved, for <br />the historical study period. These operational schedules may vary between types of years <br />(wet or dry) and during the time of year. <br />3. The affect of these re-operation scenarios on Ruedi Reservoir and the Fryingpan River is <br />assessed with the existing Ruedi Reservoir model. <br />10825 Phase 2 Scope of Work Revised May 25, 2007 per CWCB request Page 13 <br />