BOARD01355 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . f Agenda Item 27 - Coordinated Facilities May 19-20, 2003 Board Meeting Page11of12 DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS The Executive Committee of the Coordinated Facilities Operation Study (CFOPS) recommends the following: 1. Implement the Coordinated Reservoir Augmentation Program with an Insurance Pool. 2. Study the feasibility of constructing a new multi-purpose reservoir to accomplish the 20,000 acre-foot peak flow augmentation goal and the water users' commitment to provide 10,825 acre-feet of base flow augmentation. The recommendation is to implement the voluntary Coordinated Reservoir Augmentation Program with an insurance pool of water to protect reservoirs against losing yield, while also pursuing the feasibility of a multi-purpose reservoir that will provide a firm 20,000 acre-foot spring peak supply as well as providing the 10,825 acre-foot base flow supply committed by the water users. Coordinated Reservoir Augmentation Program with an Insurance Pool In the near term, the ability to provide 20,000 acre-feet of water for augmenting the spring peak flows would be contingent upon the size of an Insurance Pool designated by the USFWS. Each year, the USFWS would determine whether peak flow augmentation in the spring or low flow augmentation in the fall was the best use of water from the USFWS's Environmental Pools in Ruedi and Wolford Mountain reservoirs. If the USFWS decided in March April 1 st of a year that peak flow augmentation was the best use of a portion or all of water from the Environmental Pools, the USFWS would designate up to 20,000 acre-feet ofthe water as the Insurance Pool to allow preemptive releases from existing reservoirs to augment peak flows in the spring. The Insurance Pool assures that preemptive releases from a reservoir will not jeopardize that reservoir's water supply yield. For example, in a year that the USFWS designated no water for the Insurance Pool, the ability to provide 20,000 acre-feet of peak flow augmentation would be severally restricted. In fact, there would not be additional water available to augment peak flows beyond what would be provided through the present Coordinated Reservoir Operations (CROP} effort, because reservoir operators would not be willing to risk losing yield. This "no-insurance-water" situation would provide the least certainty that the peak flows would be augmented. However, ifthe USFWS designated 20,000 acre-feet from the Environmental Pools for use as insurance against lost yield, it is highly likely that reservoir operators would be willing to augment the peak flows by 20,000 acre-feet through preemptive releases. If the reservoirs that preemptively released the 20,000 acre-feet eventually fill during the runoff season, the USFWS could use the 20,000 acre-feet of insurance water to augment the low flows in the fall, Conversely, if the reservoirs did not replenish during the spring runoff season the amount of water preemptively released, the issuance water would be used to pay the shorted reservoirs back. Under this latter situation, the USFWS' s ability to augment the fall low flows would be severely restricted. Unlike Green Mountain, Wolford, and Williams Fork reservoirs, an insurance pool of water in Ruedi or Wolford Mountain Reservoirs could not provide a payback mechanism for Lake Granby. The only way this might work for Lake Granby would be by constructing a pump facility to physically get the insurance water into Lake Granby. This type of pump facility was not studied. Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Finance. Stream and Lake Protection Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning