Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002992 <br /> <br />Another constraint which may affect the feasibility of this alternative, is the restricted channel <br />capacity downstream from Kremmling on the Colorado River. The quantitative effect of this <br />constraint will be analyzed in Phase 2. <br /> <br />3.2.1.1 Reduced Winter Power Operations. This alternative explores the possibility of <br />reducing winter power releases from Green Mountain Reservoir to allow releases from storage <br />during the peak spring runoff hydro graph. The release of water from storage would be in <br />addition to the bypass ofreservoir inflow as contemplated in Coordinated Reservoir Operations. <br /> <br />In many years there is an opportunity to reduce winter power releases from Green Mountain and <br />carry that water over for release on the ensuing peak. Green Mountain would enter the fill <br />season at slightly higher target storage levels than the historical 50,000 to 80,000 acre-feet. To <br />enhance peak flows, power releases of up to 1,726 cfs would be supplemented by outlet works <br />releases of up to 1,500 cfs. This 3,200 cfs is within the safe channel capacity below the reservoir <br />but may cause flooding on the Colorado River near Kremmling. <br /> <br />In addition to the issues identified above, the Coordinated Reservoir Operations team identified <br />other issues that must be addressed. <br /> <br />. Shoshone power operations may not be reduced, but the Shoshone water rights call may <br />extend to more water rights than historically, thereby resulting in the need for upstream <br />entities to release more augmentation water in the winter than they did historically. <br /> <br />. The net power production at Green Mountain would be reduced. Power interference <br />charges for lost power revenues at Green Mountain Reservoir may need to be considered. <br /> <br />. Power production would be shifted from an historical high power demand period to a low <br />power demand period with a consequent effect on revenues. <br /> <br />. The ongoing controversy regarding the Reclamation's authority to release water from <br />Green Mountain Reservoir for piscatorial purposes must be resolved before this <br />alternative could be implemented. The Federal Government asserts that Senate <br />Document No. 80 and the Green Mountain Reservoir water rights give the Reclamation <br />the necessary authority to release water for endangered fish. The state of Colorado and <br />various water users submit that releases for piscatorial purposes are not allowed under the <br />Green Mountain Reservoir water rights decree. Changes to the Green Mountain <br />ReserVoir water rights decree may be necessary. <br /> <br />. The additional water in storage in the spring due to reduced winter power operations <br />could alter determination of fill requirements for Green Mountain Reservoir under the <br />Blue River Decree. The overall effects on reservoir operation must be further <br />investigated. <br /> <br />. This alternative may increase the risk that Green Mountain Reservoir will not achieve a <br />physical fill (Division 5 fill) under its first fill water right. This alternative may also <br />increase Denver's risk of releasing water from Dillon Reservoir to assure a Green <br />Mountain Reservoir fill under the Blue River Decree and subsequent agreements among <br /> <br />L.. <br /> <br />Ii <br /> <br />p:\data\gen\Ocwcb\ 18 I 33\report\phase-l \chap- 3.doc <br /> <br />3-6 <br />