My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC07347
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
19000-19999
>
WSPC07347
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:10:30 PM
Creation date
10/9/2006 6:25:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.39.C
Description
Colorado River Threatened-Endangered - RIPRAP - CFOPS - Water Availability
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
9/1/2000
Author
Brown and Caldwell
Title
Phase 1 Coordinated Facilities Water Availability Study for the Endangered Fishes of the Upper Colorado River - 09-01-00
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
117
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />002975 <br /> <br />CHAPTER 2 <br /> <br />GROUND RULES AND ASSUMPTIONS <br /> <br />2,1 INTRODUCTION <br /> <br />The Executive Committee and the consultant team established ground rules under which this <br />preliminary feasibility investigation of alternatives for supplying an annual average of 20,000 <br />acre-feet of water in those years when the forecast spring peak flows are between 12,900 cfs and <br />26,600 cfs would proceed. The Executive Committee and the team also identified assumptions <br />that are necessary to facilitate the study. The purpose of this section is to detail the ground rules <br />and assumptions that have been made for this investigation and to provide explanation, and <br />justification for these ground rules and assumptions. The frequency and certainty with which the <br />average annual 20,000 acre-feet will be made available is detailed in the Flow Targets section <br />below. <br /> <br />2,2 GROUND RULES <br /> <br />2,2.1 Administration <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />Recommended alternatives from this investigation do not need to include recommendations for a <br />mechanism for administration or legal prot"djon of water released or otherwise supplied during <br />theSPring peak to the head of the 15-Mile Reach, This is because there is unappropriated water <br />available during the spring peak in years when flows at the head of the 15-Mile Reach are in the <br />range of 12,900 t026,600 cfs. From an administrative standpoint, the river is under "free river" <br />conditions, and therefore administration of flows past intervening water rights is currently <br />unnecessary. As specified in the PBO, any new depletion during this period of the year may be <br />covered under the PBO. For the same reason, the conversion of water rights to instream flows in <br />order to protect and convey flows to the head of the 15- Mile Reach during the spring peak will <br />not be considered further. <br /> <br />iJ <br /> <br />With regard to the secondary study purpose of providing flows in the late irrigation season, <br />potential administrative mechanisms will need to be identified to protect the water to and through <br />the 15-Mile Reach because the river is generally on call during that time of the year. <br /> <br />This report raises issues with regard to the propriety of releasing water from, or bypassing water <br />at, storage facilities as it relates to specific water rights, project authorization or accounting of <br />individual projects, These issues are further discussed below and under each alternative. <br /> <br />During Phase I, the issue of how bypassed diversions to storage would be administered has been <br />discussed. Several alternatives for administration exist: <br /> <br />p:\dara\gen\Ocwcb\ 18133\report\phase.) \chap.2.doc <br /> <br />2-1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.