Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />e. <br /> <br />At a point upstream of the pipeline's point of <br /> <br />-diversion, but downstream of the Rangely Dam. <br /> <br />4. The actual rate of diversion required by the pipeline. <br /> <br />For this study three rates of diversion were considered: <br /> <br />a. 125.2 cfs, as decreed; <br /> <br />b. A maximum rate of diversion of 30 cfs; and <br /> <br />c. A rate of diversion which, with storage, would <br /> <br />result in a continuous rate of supply equal to <br /> <br />30 cfs. <br /> <br />Table 1 shows the range of the esti~zted average annual reduction in <br /> <br />yield of the Rangely Project for various situations. Operation of <br /> <br />the pipeline at a diversion capacity greater than 30 cfs and with <br /> <br />storage to provide a firm continuous supply of 30 cfs would result <br /> <br />in a reduction of the Rangely Project yield somewhat larger than <br /> <br />that shown in T~ble I for a ~O cfs demand. <br /> <br />0253 <br /> <br />,~0 <br />'t\~, <br />