Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001243 <br /> <br />After establishing the likelihood of shortages under the Most Reliable provisions, model runs <br />were designed which gradually increased the availability of surplus and tested for effects. <br /> <br />INITIAL MODEL RUNS <br /> <br />'lnitial CRSS Model runs used the old CAP schedule which assumed CAP required full <br />depletions by year 1994. These runs included: <br /> <br /> MODEL SURPLUS PROVISION SHORTAGE <br /> RUN # THRESHOLD <br /> 1 No Surplus Diversion Allowed 910 <br /> 2 Flood Control Surplus 910 <br /> ( 0 percent Assurance ) <br /> 3 90 percent Capacity 910 <br /> 4 , 80 percent Capacity 910 <br /> . <br />- 5 70 percent Capacity 910 <br /> 6 60 percent Capacity 910 <br /> <br />BASE CASE RUNS <br /> <br />I. NO SURPLUS: No provision for surplus. Surplus determination <br />schedules caused by flood control were turned off, thus showing flood <br />control releases totally flowing to Mexico. Graphs depicted the minimum <br />number of shortage events that would occur under the most reliable <br />assumptions. <br /> <br />2. FLOOD CONTROL SURPLUS: Surplus provisions set at 0 percent <br />assurance of avoidance of excess. This run was more reasonable than the <br />NO SURPLUS run and was used as the most reliable run for making <br />comparisons with alternate surplus strategies. Under this run, while the <br />surplus provision was set at 0 percent assurance, surplus diversions were <br />allowed when flood control releases were required. <br /> <br />15 <br />