Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0018~3 <br /> <br />Both distributions were used in conjunction with the full weather mod- <br />ification increases. The increased flows were balanced by adding CAP <br />at annual rate of 1.8 million acre-feet, distributed using the percent- <br />ages of Table XV. All other inputs including ~n~D and target flows at <br />Impcrial arc identical to those for Base Run No. 32. <br /> <br />Results are given in Table XII where U denotes the uniform and SR <br />the spring runoff distributions. As should be expected, the flow- <br />weighted concentration of the Lake Powell inflows is identical while <br />the time-weighted values are significantly different. Progressing <br />downstream, it is seen that Lake POI~ell effectively dampens the var- <br />iations, yielding identical concentrations and only slightly greater <br />variances. By the time flows pass through Lake Mead, results are iden- <br />tical in all respects. For future runs involving weather modification, <br />the spring runoff distributions were used. <br /> <br />Initial Salinity Control Projects <br /> <br />Three initial salinity control projects have been proposed to improve <br />quality of the Colorado River at Imperial Dam. These involve the <br />Paradox and Grand Valleys which are expected to reduce the salinity of <br />the Colorado River at Cisco by 300,000 tons/year and LaVerkin Springs <br />in the Lake Head reach which is expected to decrease salinity inflows <br />by 100,000 tons/year. The annual values were divided into 12 parts <br />and applied each month. All other inputs are identical to Base Run <br />No. 32. Results indicate a mean monthly decrease of 37 ppm at Imperial <br />Dam. <br /> <br />Salinity Control Measures, Augmentation, and Development <br /> <br />The addition of salinity control measures and augmentation to the <br />future development runs already made was previously noted. These <br />runs are identified as (3b) and (3c) (for full Upper Basin develop- <br />ment) runs. Project developments are identical to those used in the <br />previous runs, except for minor differences for Lake Mead M. and I. <br />as shown in Tables IX and X. Salinity control measureS and augmen- <br />tation included in the runs are given in Table XVI, while the corre- <br />sponding annual values and distributions are given in Table XVII. <br />Details of the various control measures are contained in the Biennial <br />Report. [1, Part IX, pp 58-69] Only the 2-ton/acre pickup rate was <br />used. <br /> <br />(3b) - 1980 - Irrigation management services, certain salinity <br />projects, and partial weather modification on the Colorado and <br />San Juan Rivers are added. <br /> <br />(3b) - 1990 - The regional figures are used as a base, Run No. 58. <br />CAP is identical to that run and Imperial flows are increased to <br />offset the additional supply. <br /> <br />33 <br />